endstep

It's possible, I recall when we were working on them there was discussion around things like this. I'm not up to date on whether there's still followup happening or not though, that would be on the Live pod which is more Phreak's area.

I believe Varus R uses a different system but I'll take a look at it later today and see if it could be improved

good summary, thanks

Zac Q tether range change is part of a larger set of tether changes, it's now an edge check rather than center check. This PBE deploy has a bug where the initial check on Zac Q is still center rather than edge but that will hopefully be fixed in the next deploy. (Also the tether changes are only partially on PBE, and subject to further changes).

edited for clarity

BasicAttack exclusion on Malignance comes from original testing without it where a number of cases were technically correct, but violated expectations. For example, should formswapper attacks in their alternate forms create Malignance pools? What about if they have damage attached to their ultimate swapping like Jayce R? Without the BasicAttack exclusion it's hard to intuit why Jayce R > AA can trigger Malignance but Elise can't trigger Malignance at all (or even decide whether Spiderlings should have the ultimate tag or not). The current version is the set of rules that generally aligned with people's expectations (though I agree there are some cases in the current ruleset that aren't the most intuitive - at some point I might revisit and see if there's not a better ruleset out there that matches player expectations closer than this one).

If it were designed to exclude pet attacks that's a whole separate tag that, as mentioned, could easily be excluded (and there's no int...

Malignance's damage was originally not tagged properly (didn't have the "proc" tag) which is what caused it to count for Eclipse. The tag is fixed in this patch, meaning anything that disregards proc damage will no longer register Malignance damage as a contributor.

It does, but as with all crit damage modifiers on Shadowflame, it only applies to the bonus damage from the crit, not the original damage.

So if you deal 100 magic damage and it's amped 20% by Shadowflame to 120, Randuin's doesn't decrease the entire 120 magic damage, just the 20 bonus being added by Shadowflame. In this case Randuin's would reduce the damage to 114.

This is a bug we're aware of, it is purely visual however - the gameplay works, but the visuals on the healthbar don't always properly represent the status of the shield. We'll hopefully have a solution for this soon regardless.

probably 14.2

me fix

no problemo

Thanks for the thoughts - (maybe) helpful quick answers to these in case I never get around to another video:

General thoughts on how we structure classes - a lot of this comes down to power budgeting classes as a whole and deciding what to trade off when looking to shift a class strength or weakness to a different spot. Using a (somewhat incomplete, but hopefully illustrative) example here with mages, compared to other classes, mages generally have the most AoE and high teamfight impact as strengths, with immobility and meaningful resource costs as weaknesses. By making them less target-agnostic by removing some of their anti-tank outputs, we then generate room to add more AP which is the most satisfying stat we can give mages and this has the side effect of raising the variance of the mage class (since they are now sharper, dealing and taking more damage overall due to the loss of HP + haste and higher AP) which is generally a positive in this case considering that they ...

Yep, sounds like the stream I did with Phlox last month. Thanks for watching, I had a lot of fun on that one.

Quick answers to these questions:

• It's definitely possible jungle will need further adjustments, but we expect that with the changes to the jungle and there being more objectives in the earlygame to take that there will still be a lot of earlygame power in the jungle.
• It's definitely too early to tell on diversity goals - to be clear here, the type of diversity we're looking for is quite different from the goals of the mythic system, where we are much more accepting of champions being bound to specific items or combination of items when appropriate (e.g. Rumble buying Liandry's first every game is not a failure, but an expectation). We do still want to provide some variety, but it doesn't have to be in every slot in this system, and it's simply too early to tell what the actual long-term structure looks like, especially given there's balanc...

Hey, that's me!

I'd be happy to make more videos if people are interested (probably shorter ones though), but I found myself in a weird spot on the Seasonal pod where we don't ship content very often so I don't have frequent content drops to talk to players about in the same way that the Live pod does (e.g. Phreak) or like I did when I was on Wild Rift, so I'm not sure what kind of topics/discussion/thoughts people would want to hear. Besides talking about new patches, are there topics people have in mind?

hey, that's me

This statline isn't real - please disregard. The actual statline is pure AP + armor.

behold my masterpiece

The meeting where we made the calls on which concepts we would present for voting was pretty tame, but there have since been some heated debates around what exactly the Eerie Invitation is inviting you to and what yordle bagpipes sound like

Mandatory pro changes are part of the balance framework (I think this is the most recent dev blog about it, but it's a few years old and I don't work on the Live pod so it's possible there's a more recent post or a more recent version). There are other scenarios where champions are changed for pro purposes (e.g. the framework doesn't suggest champions to buff for pro, only champs to nerf), but the must-nerfs come from there.

Using K'Sante as an example case, looking at top 5 regions, on 13.12 he was nerfed and fell to 70% presence (from 80% on the previous patch). 13.13 saw him drop again to 56% presence, and limite...

This is not true in any real sense - I imagine this line of thinking probably originates from people talking about Elementalist Lux requiring the loading of a large number of different models (which is true), but from a gameplay perspective things like different skins, a champion in different modes, etc., are all the same, as it should be. There are of course some minor exceptions (e.g. in the past there was a logic fork for Zz'rot that would modify its functionality if the gamemode was Urf to prevent people from spamming infinite portals and pushing), but for the case that's being discussed here it's simply not true - if you want to modify, say, a champion's base damage on a spell, that's literally just changing a number in one file. All the tooltips will pull from that value, and you change it in one place and you're good to go (there are exceptions of course, some calculations are hard to show for tooltips for example so in some cases it will be two values you need to change, bu...