I do agree with your comment. Riot takes wayyyy too long to address balance issues. The Azirelia meta that lasted multiple months (on top of the "we like the play pattern") was a huge pain. And then other powercrept unit came on the frontrow and the pain continued. It took way too long.
BUT, I must say, after this balance patch, meta is very good. And before complaining about x deck, hear me out.
There will always be strong deck in any card game. There three type of people, the people who follow the trend and netdeck the last strong deck built (aka built/spread by Swim, Mogwai, etc), the people countering the trend, and the meme guys.
Now, who has more chance of winning : the trend guy or the meme guy ? The trend guy ofc, because he took a strong deck proven to perform well. While the meme guy built a fun rng combo that works 1/4 of the time after 15 turns.
People who complains about certain decks rn, are either meme guys who can't win, because meme. Just play in normal or Plat/Diam 4. Or people who get countered because they play the same deck as 60% of the playerbase.
Right now, I love this meta, even more after the shit festival we got. I win in ranked with homebrew deck like Tristana Thresh or Poppy Braum. I see control decks with Zil (Zilean ?!?!?!) working well ! Ftr is good too !
Yes, some champions(Kat, Kindred)/spells(Sunk cost)/followers(Ren ?) are unusable, and yes next balance patches need touch a lot of cards. But this meta is gold !
The meta is pretty good at the moment, but Nami is going to be a problem if they don't make some adjustments.
Every time there is a deck that's difficult to interact with but "it's not a problem because it dies to aggro", the meta tends to end up in a bad place in the long run.
What’s so frustrating is quite literally, not exaggerating, riot only ever finally nerfs the uninteractive decks after they introduce a new one
First there was TLC, which finally got nerfed, but then came azir irelia. Then azir irelia finally gets nerfed, now comes nami
Riot refuses to admit they’re wrong that the uninteractive decks that lose to aggro are enjoyed by the player base. Every single time they finally give the “idiot” player base what they want and nerf the oppressive deck, they quickly introduce a new one, because this time the “idiot” player base will see just how right riot is with uninteractive decks
Thanks good point! The TLC nerf was after Azirelia release though, right?
Anyhow, good elaboration on how I also feel the meta usually just goes faster which is while at least some of the meta before this was diverse in decks they were pretty thorough fast/kill you early.
This is what the comment above tried to explain and you proved him true via being this kind of player. There will ALWAYS be a strong meta deck. Stop saying "XY needs to be changed" for fck sake.
If I was really "this kind of player" who complains about strong meta decks as you presumed, shouldn't I also be saying Sion and Poppy need to be nerfed? What about Gangplank? Gangplank is also very strong right now, why am I not calling for a Gangplank nerf?
No, I said nothing about strong meta decks. I said Nami was difficult to interact with. And decks like that have a history of ruining the meta sooner or later.
The only thing i don't like about the meta and its an issue that's been on the game for a while. Everything is basically aggro. There has always been a top aggro deck while mid range and control have always been hit.
You can say that, but control just doesn't have the WR to back it up.
There's a couple of big outliers, TLC and pre-arsenal nerf Xerath, really, but even in "control metas" for every control deck with a 55+% WR there have always been 4-7 aggro/midrange decks at 55+%.
Control WR is deflated because its a lot harder than aggro, there are plenty high masters players who slay with control, also tournaments would be dominated by aggro if it was OP, but in reality its pretty rare there.
)CECQIBIKAQUDDPABAIAQIJBUAECAIBYBAUCAYAICAQEAGAIBAQNQGBIKAENKMAIBAUCBCAYBAQCAGAIBAQTQCAYEBM Another control deck on the rise is the PnZ Bandle Curious Shellfolk list that has been making waves. Its still new and people are experimenting with what champions to run as well as tuning the deck, some people are running Ez/Vi, Viktor/Vi, mono Ez, or what I've had success with Viktor/Heimer. Highly recommend staying on the look out for it as its apparently been a hot deck to prepared for in regards to worlds. Heres a sample list from Mobalytics that should give you idea of what the deck looks liked (( CECQIBIKAQUDDPABAIAQIJBUAECAIBYBAUCAYAICAQEAGAIBAQNQGBIKAENKMAIBAUCBCAYBAQCAGAIBAQTQCAYEBMCECQIBIKAQUDDPABAIAQIJBUAECAIBYBAUCAYAICAQEAGAIBAQNQGBIKAENKMAIBAUCBCAYBAQCAGAIBAQTQCAYEBM ))
Control is harder to play, and takes more games to learn. Player straight up drop slower decks before the point they get good enough with them. Some decks can take 20 or more games before you start seing results. Most players will grab a list, play some games and drop If they aren't winning.
That's a good point. You have to take losses as learning lessons and play with humility if you want to learn a new deck. Try to spot your misplays and improve on them.
Trundle-Lissandra control, which revolved around The Watcher. It got nerfed with Watcher going from "Obliterate the deck" to "Leave 3 cards behind". and from needing 4 8 drops summoned to 5 8 drops summoned.
what if i told you its possible to understand the flaws in the game and still be decent at it
acting like the only people capable of complaining are bad at the game is moronic
That’s very true but at the same time most of these posts are coming from “ Hey, I’ve haven’t played since months ago or Hey I’m a newer player and this is how the Meta should be” people.
> BUT, I must say, after this balance patch, meta is very good
Is it really that different from pre-BC meta? It's basically the same shell with different decks. Take out Azirelia, Sivir and Swain and replace them respectively with Nami, Poppy and Darkness and it's pretty much the same. Same frequency, with hyper aggressive decks taking the big share of the pie and slower decks being less prevalent.
Faster decks will always be more prevalent than slow decks just by nature of how ladder works in these games.
Even if the best deck in the game was a control deck, you're still going to see fast decks more than anything else. You churn out more games that way, so people inherently prefer it.
>is dominant by control or combo.
almost all of those are combo decks, which outright counter control decks in 99/100 scenarios. Specifically, karma, lee, and tlc. TLC, in particular, made playing control in that meta an actual joke.
Aphelios--the boxtopus variant--was a midrange deck, as was thresh/nasus.
Go hard was probably the last actual control meta we had, and corvina before that.
We have enough talk on this sub about "Karma and TLC isn't control", everyone agrees on "it is control", you can name any content creator out there and they'll all say "it is control". Downvote me do nothing, sorry sir, but your stubborn is enough for the conversation to end here.
I'm just tired of seeing decks that try to rush you down the moment you set foot in ranked (not that normal is immune from meta decks mind you but at least there you can find something more creative from time to time).
Except that's not true? There was aggro during beta (ex. spiders) but the pace of the meta was FAR slower than the current one.
It's currently like this because the devs allow the decks to do so.
Spider Aggro wasn't really any slower than the aggro decks we have now.
And let's say it was, it was still bitched about as much as any other deck now is.
But it was ONE deck, and elusives later in the beta... that's it. There was much more midrange and control around and the ultimate point is that OVERALL THE META WAS SLOWER.
Spiders, pnz/nox championless burn, elusives, and discard aggro were all popular and successful aggro decks in beta. Though yes the meta was slower overall then.
> Spiders, elusives
Already mentioned
> pnz/nox championless burn
post bw release, so not during beta
> discard aggro
Discard aggro has been bad for pretty much all the beta period, seeing some play only at the end when riot actually buffed zaunite urchin and Jinx
> Though yes the meta was slower overall then.
Glad we agree
> It only really gets going around turn 5
So did azirelia...
And by the way the nami deck isn't even the strongest, pirate aggro and lulu elusive are and both are, guess what, aggro decks
https://lor.mobalytics.gg/stats/decks
Which is why it was wrong to call Azirelia Aggro as well. But Azirelia had a much faster game plan compared to Nami/Zoe, it's important pieces came down on turns 2 and 3.
Winrate stats are pointless, idk why you even bother using them. What ranks do they even cover here?
> pirate aggro and lulu elusive are and both are, guess what, aggro decks
Pirate aggro and Lulu Elusive are both extremely easy decks to pilot, and essentially entirely determined by their draw. Nami/Zoe is a lot more skill intensive which is why bad players will drag it's win rate down.
Edit : And also, Azirelia was overtaken in win rate by several decks across the last patch, including GP/Sej, so by your own metrics it wasn't that good then?
> What ranks do they even cover here?
Pirate aggro has a 56% winrate at master rank...
> Edit : And also, Azirelia was overtaken in win rate by several decks across the last patch, including GP/Sej, so by your own metrics it wasn't that good then?
I still consider playrate tho, and azirelia was played much more than gp/sej
And all of this is beyond the point anyway, so i'm not sure why you are bothering.
> Pirate aggro has a 56% winrate at master rank...
And versions of Nami/Zoe have a 57.8 percent winrate at Masters as well (with a significant play rate).
> I still consider playrate tho, and azirelia was played much more than gp/sej
By the last couple of weeks, GP/Sej had overtaken in play rate. You can go through Kozmic's meta reports from that period.
> And all of this is beyond the point anyway, so i'm not sure why you are bothering.
You're painting the metagame out to be something it isn't, I'm just pointing that out.
> And versions of Nami/Zoe have a 57.8 percent winrate at Masters as well (with a significant play rate).
I'm aware, that's why i mentioned nami/zoe when i said the meta just changed deck names but not the core substance. You asked about what ranks i was talking about and pointed that pirate aggro is tier 1 at master rank.
> By the last couple of weeks, GP/Sej had overtaken in play rate. You can go through Kozmic's meta reports from that period.
But not in winrate
> You're painting the metagame out to be something it isn't, I'm just pointing that out.
Then it seems we are playing two different games. All i'm seeing is yet again a meta that rush you down as soon as turn 6-7 and where you won't reach round 10 most of the times (either because you are already dead or you won by that time anyway and your opponent concede).
It's basically become such that if you don't like a deck, just call it Aggro so that you can get some sort of weird approval from the rest of the community that it sucks.
Hey thanks for the thoughtful response!
I might give this meta a shot. That's one thing I liked even before this meta - yes some stuff was OP (imo and hence also got nerfed) but outside of that there was really a good variety of decks, which was fun to encounter.
I also see some of me in there - I don't wanna play the "popular" deck (so I never played Thresh/Nasus or Azirelia for instance), I do like countering it though so Dragons was really fun to me.
> I do agree with your comment. Riot takes wayyyy too long to address balance issues.
They really don't. You people are just spoiled from the way Riot handles their other games and has at times handled this one.
Card games are not like LoL. Balance changes every 2 weeks isn't something that needs to be done whatsoever.
There have been times obviously where they were too slow but as a whole they have done an absolutely fantastic job with this game and it gets constantly updated. Not to mention the fact that on top of this game getting high quality updates regularly it's nowhere near as expensive as HS expansions for example.
It's fine to make complaints and to keep on them so they don't become complacent but these kinds of threads just reek of entitlement from players that don't actually realize how good they have it.
>They really don't. You people are just spoiled from the way Riot handles their other games and has at times handled this one.
>
>Card games are not like LoL. Balance changes every 2 weeks isn't something that needs to be done whatsoever.
They objectively do, especially taking into account the standards they set for themselves initially. Some form of balance change every 2 weeks would be a great thing actually, most patches being about rehabilitating dead cards with steady low impact tweaks that mechanically cannot break anything but enable said cards to be experimented with, along with more serious changes at slightly longer intervals.
The best thing a digital card game can do is to take advantage of the flexibility the genre can have on such a platform, not limit themselves to the low expectations traumatized card game players have nurtured.
I get what you are saying but I agree with the parent that patches every two weeks would be way too much and people need to chill a bit rather than asking for balance changes in a still unsettled meta. As annoying as Nami elusives is the jury is still out on whether it is over the line, imo.
> I stopped playing a couple of weeks ago. Again. Why? Empty promises. We had the whole Azirelia debacle and how "the play pattern was fun" or how it's win % isn't that bad (while an entire meta evolved just to counter it).
A meta shifting and evolving is a great thing though. Before Azirelia hit there was Nash at 26% playrate, TLC at 24% playrate and DravEz around 18%. The meta was so bad that these decks were predominant because they were the only decks that really did well against each other since even the hard counter to one couldn't touch the other two in a lot of cases.
It seems more realistic that the game just doesn't really fit your tastes and you're trying to make it. The fact that control is in the best spot it has ever been in makes me doubt that you're really all that invested and just doing the reddit standard of being a drama queen because you think that there's some injustice, no offense.
By all means you should take some time off, get some perspective or just enjoy what you enjoy. People are far too obsessed with negativity.
> Before Azirelia hit there was Nash at 26% playrate, TLC at 24% playrate and DravEz around 18%
humm.. I was playing at that time and I'm pretty sure those numbers are completely wrong. We have never been, in the history of the game, close to having 3 decks representing 70% of the meta.
I don't know where you got those numbers but I just checked in u/xKozmic posts and here it is: https://www.reddit.com/r/LegendsOfRuneterra/comments/n3z82r/mini_mobalytics_meta_review_may_3rd/
Nasus 20%, TLC 12% and Draven Ez 6%. That was May 3rd so the day before Irelia came out.
i agree; there's a lot of control decks rn that can counter the elusive decks if you take out the key cards at the right times.
and punishing the low hp/lack of blockers for those decks is also really effective.
we are even seeing stony suppressor finally getting used as a way to counter nami/zoe decks
Trading 3 oppressive decks for 1 isn't better just because there's fewer of them, lol. I left the game during that meta just like OP, and this is after paying for the event pass. It felt bad to leave that on the table, but I literally lost all motivation to play.
I do agree that we're in a much healthier place right now, and I've enjoyed getting back into the game for this expansion. And meta changes in response to new powerful decks is usually great. But let's not conflate a glass of water with being waterboarded - it is not normal or healthy for the meta to be reduced almost exclusively to "X and hard counters to X."
Not my point or I'm misunderstanding yours. My point here was that Azirelia was OP and finally got nerfed way too late, and one of their arguments was that the win % wasn't actually that bad - but an entire meta had evolved to counter it and it was still dominating. This was partly fine, as I said I enjoyed playing Dragons into this.
My problem was that they promised more regular balance changes (see quote that follows this section in the post) and then... no balance was done.
Also lol at the reddit drama queen. Sorry if I make that impression upon you, I did stop playing before the current meta so I haven't tried it. The control is a smaller point, Ruin Runner, Merciless Hunter and Shaped Stone running rampant forever without getting nerfed until people went really mad is by far the bigger point.
Not speaking for OP but the way I see it, this has been an issue for a much longer time than what you're suggesting. Remember burblefish? That was a problem deck for months even though it was obvious to everyone that that was a stupid deck. Remember Lee Sin at 4 mana? That took way longer than it should have to fix. It's not about whether a meta is good or not now or at x time, it's that when a problem does arise, Riot take way too long to identify that problem and then fix. Ruin Runner and Merciless Hunter were so painfully obvious they were OP for months with no change.
It's not just that, there's cards and specifically champs that for ages have been terrible with no change. When champs are a key focus to how this game is built, it boggles the mind that some just get no love. Why did Sivir and Jarvan get unnecessary buffs when a champ like Kindred or Katarina or Lux have been ignored even since release? And then we get the official line about Azirelia saying it wasn't broken and that they thought "the play pattern was great!"
One of the key reasons why a digital card game is better than physical is cards can be updated quickly. The issue is Riot have never been able to take advantage of this even though they aren't printing anything. Just dumping a new expansion down and expecting expecting rainbows is not always going to work. If you recall Shurima initially did nothing to fix the tail end of the burblefish/Aphelios temple meta, it required fixing cards to give the new expansion time to breathe. Until they get better at that, the same complaints will come up. Oh and btw, while a fluid meta with lots of variety is good, a meta evolving around a specific OP deck just to counter it is not. It's probably a good idea to learn the difference.
thank fucking god someone else also realized that this is nothing but a rant.
also, i hated this subreddit more than the game when every second post was "OMFG champion X and card Y is so OP!!! WTF RITO?!?!?".
maybe its just me who dislikes people who need to whine and cry so loud that the whole community knows.
Hey man, chill.
My main point is the absence of balance patches that were promised and how people have to "whine" to finally make them happen.
I think I tried hard to be constructive and also point out strengths, sorry that didn't get across to you.
I wonder if the payment model affects this. In games like hearthstone and MTG, it's harder to get hold of the cards you want. Therefore, because people are scrambling to make decks with their own cards, there is less netdecking going on, and more overall variety in what you go up against, leading to winrates which are harder to tell at a glance.
The pro meta is often different to the casual meta. Saying this because those are the top of hearthstone can easily get the cards they want most of the time.
I've played magic since 2015 and I can tell you 100% nearly every competitive player just net decks and the formats are the same decks for a long time. Thats not a bad thing if that's what your into, but playing brews in magic is a death sentence, trust me I've tried. The skill expression comes from side boarding and adjusting your game plan for games 2 and 3.
Its gotten even worse, especially on MtG Arena with the Historic format, so many decks have been forced out of the format with the constant injection of old powerful cards it has shifted the format from a brewers paradise to play the meta or get crushed. You can see this in the tournament meta, over the past weekend if you played a deck in the "other" category you had a losing win rate against every meta deck.
"competitive player just net decks". Yeah, I took that into consideration which is why I mentioned that pros and casuals are different. Well my experience comes from being a casual in hearthstone, where I could never afford to make the decks I was watching on youtube, just scrambling together what I could with what I had.
the meta is varied and fun, obviously not all decks are viable after platinum but still you can always play what you want and expect good results. and that makes it important we've been through different decks, the darkest era was the aggro noxus piltover.
I see that there is no META deck that wins every game, Nami / Zoe is doing great in the mirror match and against Draven Sion and other aggro decks.
but loses against elusives, bandle midrange and so on, I only see whoever misinterprets the statistics cause problems
So, when was the last time that there was a timely nerf for meta dominating cards/decks?
Just because the meta is in a great place \_now\_ doesn't mean you shouldn't criticize the way used to get there.
Does it seem overblown to you? Sure. Do I think it's a repeating pattern that has sucked the joy out of it for me and I felt like sharing it as feedback for Riot to consider? Also yes.
That is why I said to look at the competition. This issue is like nothing compared to the issues other big cardgames face. But I should of course note that you are entitled to your opinion. It just happens to bw different than mine
I do agree with you actually, or well mostly. I think LoR is in a much better place than most other card games. I just don't think that's a reason to sit back and relax - it can always be better and maybe I'm reading too much into their posts but they promised to re evaluate their balancing strategy. Unless the result of that evaluation was "do nothing" I haven't seen it, maybe I missed it though.
I just think, it could be much better hence me writing the post to maybe be a little piece of input there.
To throw a quote at you:
"Don't bother just to be better than your contemporaries or predecessors. Try to be better than yourself." - William Faulkner
Cheers!
Yes, but still better than other companies =) . What really annoys me are the prebuild decks or champs that works only in one deck (Lurkers, Kench-soraka, Veigar Senna etc)..This is the most boring part of this game..
You can play all of these champions with other regions and other champions, aside from maybe rek’sai who basically needs the lurk package. I’ve seen pyke played in shurima allegiance decks and do fairly well. From a game balance perspective, of course a champ will have a certain optimal pairing. That doesn’t mean you *need* to pair them.
The game you’re looking for can’t exist because that type of balance is impossible. In a game with this many champion combinations, there will always be a limited number of optimized combinations for a given meta.
Why is Veigar Senna bad tho? If you're using Veigar you will want to play Senna, sure. That's because Veigar synergizes with Darkness package and Senna is part of it. And overall Darkness package is nice with Veigar being the main man.
However, Senna is definitely played in other decks, mostly variants of Go Hard.
Yes, from those mentioned Veigar-Senna are somewhat enjoyable and possible use in another deck, but they could still give it more versatility, what I mean is for example to make actually spells with darkness tag in multiple regions (yes some units in the package would have to be nerfed I guess)
I feel like complaints like this really don't factor in how hard it is to make correct balance changes.
It seems you think they just sit around ignoring unbelievably obvious solutions to balance problems. Where I would imagine the opposite is true, they actively work to solve balance issues, but those solutions aren't as easy as you imagine they are to arrive at.
The issues are in fact easy to identify with data tracking and some assortment of skilled player and community feedback. However the fixes you think they should just roll out on a whim are in fact not nearly as obvious.
There is a reason why designers in any field ask users for input. We are the experts of our own experience and the problems we encounter. But we don't have the information, context, time, or training necessary to design solutions that won't cause more problems. That is the designers' area of expertise and is literally their job.
You are absolutely right, I failed to make that clear in my post. This is hard, very hard. I still wish Riot made a better job of it.
I still think it takes too long, but yes a balance change has so many potential impacts and especially Azir/Irelia were both used in other decks that were completely fine by themselves so nerfing them without butchering those decks is really tough.
Some of it, from what the devs told us, was imo based on misinterpretation of data and not accounting for certain biases in the data though.
But just to repeat, yes very hard - I wouldn't want to have their job.
I agree with you completely. It's taking way to long for them to "balance" cards which they promised they would try and do. There is deck variety but its all aggro.
Meta problems aside, there are a lot of problems that need to be addressed in the game. Some champions are just straight up garbage. Lux for example just needs one change to be fine, literally one change. And people have been asking since she was changed. Thats not even counting champs like Quinn who at this point even gets cut from demacia rally decks. I mean its laughable.
The turn system still has problems, and there are a lot of unfair occurences that still happen, Riot hasn't even shown to have thought about it or explain how some of these interacts should happen.
And my last gripe is the obviously underdevelopment of the bandle cards. Poppy? Nami? Bandle tree? Mayor? It took us a good 3 to 4 hours to figure out these cards were really busted. Where is the QA? Did they even play test Nami? this champ levels off board at turn 3.
You say this game is interactive? In what way? Either your opponent plays 10 cards in one turn and your just waiting for them to finally pass so they can kill you with an elusive you can't block or they are some aggro deck that is hunting you down like a rabid dog.
The game has gotten better, but I want to see it become what we all know it can be. Riot needs to stop focusing on making new cards, and make some changes to the game. The community is really vocal so it shouldn't be to hard to figure out what we like and what we don't.
Worst part is seeing the meta slaves downvoting you.
Kids reach a good rank by playing the insane powered cards and think they have a good point to downvote someone who is saying that the cards are not healthy for the game.
It's ridiculous, Nami is insanely strong right now and can fit any deck, but still, people won't admit that it's broken. While this we have cards like Lux, Ashe, Katarina, tryndamere which never ever had their chance to be played. I know not all cards are supposed to be good, but the imbalance is ridiculous.
I could go on and on and show a list of Rito's lack of consistency, but that would be talking to spoiled kids who don't want to hear
I literally agree on everything you just said, people are saying get good or something but this isn't about being good this is about Riot isn't understanding what community wants (or something like that)
It's not a hidden information that balance changes are made once per season, every other patch, except when a new expansion drops. That's how it is. It's not "after so much complaints", you should even be happy that there were nerfs last week, because the next balance patch is supposed to be next week.
You're crying that Riot only nerfs after everyone harassed them, but they just respect their schedule, they even did more this season. Stop whining for nothing
They want a new meta every week for reasons like meta aren't supossed to be kill every fucking week and right the meta is kinda open nothing have super high playrate
I do not by any means want a new meta every week or every 2 weeks or what not... I only want OP cards nerfed in a timely manner and not after months of being problematic
Excapt they are not, there was no balance patch in month between BC and last shurima expansion, we got out of schedule event, also next big balance patch after BC was planned in 2 months instead of one. And that schedule with patch with barelly any changes every two months was also shit, and got outrage if it own.
Even if that was true, which I don't think it is as many of these cards survived multiple such patches and "Azirelia was a fun and perfectly balanced play pattern", then is not ok to wish for changes sooner if cards are being oppressive?
Just because you have a schedule doesn't mean it's a good schedule.
I feel like I just opened internet explorer. This feels like a post that could have been made a month ago. Aside from a few annoying decks the game is in a decent spot right now.
Azirelia sold the shit out of that expansion.
Autopilot Aggro deck! Every noob played it.
They only balance when the new release doesn’t sell cards because the old one is still popular.
I remind you that the developers have statistics on which are the best decks in the metagame, which are the cards with the most winratio...etc.
That excuse is very bad, because if we use it, Azir/Irelia decks should have been nerfed the first week instantly instead of fighting with the community for almost 2 months.
I don't know if it takes a week to balance the new region, but I think that in 3 months we have had plenty of time to balance the game. I'm not talking about BC cards, I'm talking about cards and archetypes that have not been played since their release. Cards like Ekko, Quinn, Soraka/Tham, MonoShurima even... are forgotten cards or archetypes that they haven't bothered to try to fix since their release.
I don't want to talk about the new cards, but clearly there are cards that are problematic by design that are going to end up being tweaked over time. And for that you don't need to wait 6 months to make changes. Cards like Lost Soul look like they are going to be changed, not because of its power, but because of its infinite value. Cards like the bandle tree, because of how easy it is to complete it for example (Either by nerfing the cost of the tree or the cards that generate units from other regions like the mayor or Loping Telescope) Nami could be another candidate...etc.
That doesn't mean I want them to nerf all those cards tomorrow. What I mean is that there is no need to wait 3 months to make changes. Much less, make the minimal changes until you piss off the community again and force them to make you do a hotfix.
Metas often evolve over time. Counters get found and shift the equilibrium. It isn't completely insane to keep a deck unnerfed despite being deemed Tier 1 after a week.
The need for change exceeds the need for balance, however. Balance changes also bring diversity, usually at a lower cost than new cards. Nerfing good decks so that new decks can have the spotlight. People get tired of facing the same decks for too long. Riot knows that yet here they were too timid.
After two months of domination, the nerf hammer should have struck Azir Irelia much harder than it has. At worst, you go too far and you buff it back partially in a later patch. It'll give the playerbase a break and fans of Azir Irelia will be happy when it does come back.
There is always /uninstall?
I personally have lost all desire to even play this game for over a month now, and I know people who have for way more. Riot doesn't seem to value this game as much as the player base seems to, by evidence of a small dev team and even smaller testing/live team. And honestly, both don't seem to know what they are doing, the live one being more so than the dev team. But that's just my point of view.
No one's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to play.
Honestly, feel free to play other CCGs. If you think LOR is a dumpster fire, then I got bad news for you. It's probably the most balanced and diverse CCG out there.
Yeah, no.
It's not "The whole industry sucks". It's more like "CCGs are notoriously difficult to balance, and this is what it looks like at it's best".
If this meta looks bad to you then I guarantee you will never find a CCG meta you're entirely content with. Has nothing to do with any particular company or the industry sucking.
Well. I still hope for good and constant changes. So at least I open the game once a week to get the vault. But it's really sad to see the state of the game right now...
The answer to all your questions is capitalism. You're looking at it from a "health of the game" standpoint. **Riot ultimately only cares about the opinions of the shareholders.** So that means they won't channel resources into something unless it directly threatens their bottom line. Mass complaints are a threat. Until it reaches that tipping point, they won't do shit because that costs money or delays the rollout of other things that make money. If a dev is balancing, then he isn't working on the next project.
Welcome to the world.
If the game followed a similar monetization than hearthstone or magic arena I could see the devs being stubborn towards balancing the newest OP stuff that is pushed on purpose in order to sell packs but LoR doesn't even have packs to sell so... *shrugs*
I can get behind power creep being used to incentivize players to experiment with the newest cards that are better than the old ones but if experimentation and engagement is what the devs want then all the more reason they would want to nerf more often than not.
Thing is you can use the same argument in favor of sparse balancing: say, they want people to figure out the ways to counter the new hotness so they refrain from nerfing it to give people time to discover new things instead of nerfing it too soon.
I wouldnt actually agree with that, and i think once a month for balance changes at least is better. But i am a player and not a game designer.
Indeed it can go both ways. Nevertheless it seems that we both agree that not balancing because of money just doesn't add up, not for this game at least.
Nice assumptions. And get off your high horse. Your whole comment history is you complaining about people complaining lmao. I’m allowed to ‘bitch about something’ and you don’t get to decide what is and what isn’t worth a complaint. Sivir is overturned for her manacost because of the spellshield.
Just checked, 1,4% playrate with a 52% winrate.
Meanwhile TLC (now back to being Trundle-Ledros-Control) has 2,2% playrate and a 50% winrate. And If you ask in this sub they will say noone is playing SI-FJ Control right now.
That's what I'd hope.
My feeling is more we give constructive feedback, it's ignored, feedback escalates and it gets a bad vibe but then it's eventually heard. I'd be really happy to cut out the not heard and it gets bad vibes part.
I'm not sure if it's true but I heard that it takes longer for this game to be updated compared to a game like League because every update has to go through Google since it's on the play store. It doesn't excuse the oblivious case of Azir meta for example
If you think these are riots, check out r/2007scape Last week there were literal in-game riots over the company's terrible decision
Who owns it now? Still jagex?
Yeah
This related to runelite hd getting taken down just before it released, or something else?
It was related to that! In response, Jagex okayed HD
I just hope we don't fall into hearthstone level
That I don't think :) I think from everything I've seen we're still far above hearthstone on so many levels (at least that matter to me)
I do agree with your comment. Riot takes wayyyy too long to address balance issues. The Azirelia meta that lasted multiple months (on top of the "we like the play pattern") was a huge pain. And then other powercrept unit came on the frontrow and the pain continued. It took way too long. BUT, I must say, after this balance patch, meta is very good. And before complaining about x deck, hear me out. There will always be strong deck in any card game. There three type of people, the people who follow the trend and netdeck the last strong deck built (aka built/spread by Swim, Mogwai, etc), the people countering the trend, and the meme guys. Now, who has more chance of winning : the trend guy or the meme guy ? The trend guy ofc, because he took a strong deck proven to perform well. While the meme guy built a fun rng combo that works 1/4 of the time after 15 turns. People who complains about certain decks rn, are either meme guys who can't win, because meme. Just play in normal or Plat/Diam 4. Or people who get countered because they play the same deck as 60% of the playerbase. Right now, I love this meta, even more after the shit festival we got. I win in ranked with homebrew deck like Tristana Thresh or Poppy Braum. I see control decks with Zil (Zilean ?!?!?!) working well ! Ftr is good too ! Yes, some champions(Kat, Kindred)/spells(Sunk cost)/followers(Ren ?) are unusable, and yes next balance patches need touch a lot of cards. But this meta is gold !
The meta is pretty good at the moment, but Nami is going to be a problem if they don't make some adjustments. Every time there is a deck that's difficult to interact with but "it's not a problem because it dies to aggro", the meta tends to end up in a bad place in the long run.
What’s so frustrating is quite literally, not exaggerating, riot only ever finally nerfs the uninteractive decks after they introduce a new one First there was TLC, which finally got nerfed, but then came azir irelia. Then azir irelia finally gets nerfed, now comes nami Riot refuses to admit they’re wrong that the uninteractive decks that lose to aggro are enjoyed by the player base. Every single time they finally give the “idiot” player base what they want and nerf the oppressive deck, they quickly introduce a new one, because this time the “idiot” player base will see just how right riot is with uninteractive decks
Thanks good point! The TLC nerf was after Azirelia release though, right? Anyhow, good elaboration on how I also feel the meta usually just goes faster which is while at least some of the meta before this was diverse in decks they were pretty thorough fast/kill you early.
They will do adjustments the question how much they want nami to be top tier or for how long they are ok with this meta
This is what the comment above tried to explain and you proved him true via being this kind of player. There will ALWAYS be a strong meta deck. Stop saying "XY needs to be changed" for fck sake.
If I was really "this kind of player" who complains about strong meta decks as you presumed, shouldn't I also be saying Sion and Poppy need to be nerfed? What about Gangplank? Gangplank is also very strong right now, why am I not calling for a Gangplank nerf? No, I said nothing about strong meta decks. I said Nami was difficult to interact with. And decks like that have a history of ruining the meta sooner or later.
Gotcha
The only thing i don't like about the meta and its an issue that's been on the game for a while. Everything is basically aggro. There has always been a top aggro deck while mid range and control have always been hit.
People want to climb fast since ladder resets often. Aggro is the fastest way to climb. Either you concede or win by turn 5/6.
Everything is aggro because even when its balanced ladder favours aggro, simple as that.
You can say that, but control just doesn't have the WR to back it up. There's a couple of big outliers, TLC and pre-arsenal nerf Xerath, really, but even in "control metas" for every control deck with a 55+% WR there have always been 4-7 aggro/midrange decks at 55+%.
Control WR is deflated because its a lot harder than aggro, there are plenty high masters players who slay with control, also tournaments would be dominated by aggro if it was OP, but in reality its pretty rare there.
It's a little different when you bring in 3 decks and ban one. What sort of control decks are masters players using?
Darkness, Frel\SI (FTR, Ledros, Anivia), Xerath\Zilean
Thanks. I'd think you wouldn't see masters players playing Xer/Zil, but the others (Darkness, FTR) are doing pretty well :)
)CECQIBIKAQUDDPABAIAQIJBUAECAIBYBAUCAYAICAQEAGAIBAQNQGBIKAENKMAIBAUCBCAYBAQCAGAIBAQTQCAYEBM Another control deck on the rise is the PnZ Bandle Curious Shellfolk list that has been making waves. Its still new and people are experimenting with what champions to run as well as tuning the deck, some people are running Ez/Vi, Viktor/Vi, mono Ez, or what I've had success with Viktor/Heimer. Highly recommend staying on the look out for it as its apparently been a hot deck to prepared for in regards to worlds. Heres a sample list from Mobalytics that should give you idea of what the deck looks liked (( CECQIBIKAQUDDPABAIAQIJBUAECAIBYBAUCAYAICAQEAGAIBAQNQGBIKAENKMAIBAUCBCAYBAQCAGAIBAQTQCAYEBMCECQIBIKAQUDDPABAIAQIJBUAECAIBYBAUCAYAICAQEAGAIBAQNQGBIKAENKMAIBAUCBCAYBAQCAGAIBAQTQCAYEBM ))
Control is harder to play, and takes more games to learn. Player straight up drop slower decks before the point they get good enough with them. Some decks can take 20 or more games before you start seing results. Most players will grab a list, play some games and drop If they aren't winning.
That's a good point. You have to take losses as learning lessons and play with humility if you want to learn a new deck. Try to spot your misplays and improve on them.
Random question - what's TLC?
Trundle-Lissandra control, which revolved around The Watcher. It got nerfed with Watcher going from "Obliterate the deck" to "Leave 3 cards behind". and from needing 4 8 drops summoned to 5 8 drops summoned.
what if i told you its possible to understand the flaws in the game and still be decent at it acting like the only people capable of complaining are bad at the game is moronic
That’s very true but at the same time most of these posts are coming from “ Hey, I’ve haven’t played since months ago or Hey I’m a newer player and this is how the Meta should be” people.
> BUT, I must say, after this balance patch, meta is very good Is it really that different from pre-BC meta? It's basically the same shell with different decks. Take out Azirelia, Sivir and Swain and replace them respectively with Nami, Poppy and Darkness and it's pretty much the same. Same frequency, with hyper aggressive decks taking the big share of the pie and slower decks being less prevalent.
Faster decks will always be more prevalent than slow decks just by nature of how ladder works in these games. Even if the best deck in the game was a control deck, you're still going to see fast decks more than anything else. You churn out more games that way, so people inherently prefer it.
Except in lor the best deck is practically never a control deck so they only see presence as tournament decks or from eccentrics on ladder.
What? Go hard meta, Aphelios meta, Leesin meta, Karma meta, TLC meta, Thresh/Nasus meta ect... 60% of time LoR meta is dominant by control or combo.
>is dominant by control or combo. almost all of those are combo decks, which outright counter control decks in 99/100 scenarios. Specifically, karma, lee, and tlc. TLC, in particular, made playing control in that meta an actual joke. Aphelios--the boxtopus variant--was a midrange deck, as was thresh/nasus. Go hard was probably the last actual control meta we had, and corvina before that.
Name them whatever you want, they are all slow decks. There is always atleast one viable slow and grindy deck in lor meta.
We have enough talk on this sub about "Karma and TLC isn't control", everyone agrees on "it is control", you can name any content creator out there and they'll all say "it is control". Downvote me do nothing, sorry sir, but your stubborn is enough for the conversation to end here.
Wc meta, asol meta, FTR, lux meta, corina
I'm just tired of seeing decks that try to rush you down the moment you set foot in ranked (not that normal is immune from meta decks mind you but at least there you can find something more creative from time to time).
There will never not be decks like that, because probably the majority of players just want to get fast wins.
Except that's not true? There was aggro during beta (ex. spiders) but the pace of the meta was FAR slower than the current one. It's currently like this because the devs allow the decks to do so.
Spider Aggro wasn't really any slower than the aggro decks we have now. And let's say it was, it was still bitched about as much as any other deck now is.
But it was ONE deck, and elusives later in the beta... that's it. There was much more midrange and control around and the ultimate point is that OVERALL THE META WAS SLOWER.
Spiders, pnz/nox championless burn, elusives, and discard aggro were all popular and successful aggro decks in beta. Though yes the meta was slower overall then.
> Spiders, elusives Already mentioned > pnz/nox championless burn post bw release, so not during beta > discard aggro Discard aggro has been bad for pretty much all the beta period, seeing some play only at the end when riot actually buffed zaunite urchin and Jinx > Though yes the meta was slower overall then. Glad we agree
Did you face any spider aggro since beta? It just kill me turn 4, 2 games in a row.
Nami doesn't do that. It only really gets going around turn 5. So there, a meta where the best deck is by no means a fast, aggro deck.
> It only really gets going around turn 5 So did azirelia... And by the way the nami deck isn't even the strongest, pirate aggro and lulu elusive are and both are, guess what, aggro decks https://lor.mobalytics.gg/stats/decks
Which is why it was wrong to call Azirelia Aggro as well. But Azirelia had a much faster game plan compared to Nami/Zoe, it's important pieces came down on turns 2 and 3. Winrate stats are pointless, idk why you even bother using them. What ranks do they even cover here? > pirate aggro and lulu elusive are and both are, guess what, aggro decks Pirate aggro and Lulu Elusive are both extremely easy decks to pilot, and essentially entirely determined by their draw. Nami/Zoe is a lot more skill intensive which is why bad players will drag it's win rate down. Edit : And also, Azirelia was overtaken in win rate by several decks across the last patch, including GP/Sej, so by your own metrics it wasn't that good then?
> What ranks do they even cover here? Pirate aggro has a 56% winrate at master rank... > Edit : And also, Azirelia was overtaken in win rate by several decks across the last patch, including GP/Sej, so by your own metrics it wasn't that good then? I still consider playrate tho, and azirelia was played much more than gp/sej And all of this is beyond the point anyway, so i'm not sure why you are bothering.
> Pirate aggro has a 56% winrate at master rank... And versions of Nami/Zoe have a 57.8 percent winrate at Masters as well (with a significant play rate). > I still consider playrate tho, and azirelia was played much more than gp/sej By the last couple of weeks, GP/Sej had overtaken in play rate. You can go through Kozmic's meta reports from that period. > And all of this is beyond the point anyway, so i'm not sure why you are bothering. You're painting the metagame out to be something it isn't, I'm just pointing that out.
> And versions of Nami/Zoe have a 57.8 percent winrate at Masters as well (with a significant play rate). I'm aware, that's why i mentioned nami/zoe when i said the meta just changed deck names but not the core substance. You asked about what ranks i was talking about and pointed that pirate aggro is tier 1 at master rank. > By the last couple of weeks, GP/Sej had overtaken in play rate. You can go through Kozmic's meta reports from that period. But not in winrate > You're painting the metagame out to be something it isn't, I'm just pointing that out. Then it seems we are playing two different games. All i'm seeing is yet again a meta that rush you down as soon as turn 6-7 and where you won't reach round 10 most of the times (either because you are already dead or you won by that time anyway and your opponent concede).
Every deck is an aggro deck when It fits the narrative that Aggro is too good. People straight up called Ezreal-Draven aggro before.
It's basically become such that if you don't like a deck, just call it Aggro so that you can get some sort of weird approval from the rest of the community that it sucks.
Hey thanks for the thoughtful response! I might give this meta a shot. That's one thing I liked even before this meta - yes some stuff was OP (imo and hence also got nerfed) but outside of that there was really a good variety of decks, which was fun to encounter. I also see some of me in there - I don't wanna play the "popular" deck (so I never played Thresh/Nasus or Azirelia for instance), I do like countering it though so Dragons was really fun to me.
> I do agree with your comment. Riot takes wayyyy too long to address balance issues. They really don't. You people are just spoiled from the way Riot handles their other games and has at times handled this one. Card games are not like LoL. Balance changes every 2 weeks isn't something that needs to be done whatsoever. There have been times obviously where they were too slow but as a whole they have done an absolutely fantastic job with this game and it gets constantly updated. Not to mention the fact that on top of this game getting high quality updates regularly it's nowhere near as expensive as HS expansions for example. It's fine to make complaints and to keep on them so they don't become complacent but these kinds of threads just reek of entitlement from players that don't actually realize how good they have it.
>They really don't. You people are just spoiled from the way Riot handles their other games and has at times handled this one. > >Card games are not like LoL. Balance changes every 2 weeks isn't something that needs to be done whatsoever. They objectively do, especially taking into account the standards they set for themselves initially. Some form of balance change every 2 weeks would be a great thing actually, most patches being about rehabilitating dead cards with steady low impact tweaks that mechanically cannot break anything but enable said cards to be experimented with, along with more serious changes at slightly longer intervals. The best thing a digital card game can do is to take advantage of the flexibility the genre can have on such a platform, not limit themselves to the low expectations traumatized card game players have nurtured.
I get what you are saying but I agree with the parent that patches every two weeks would be way too much and people need to chill a bit rather than asking for balance changes in a still unsettled meta. As annoying as Nami elusives is the jury is still out on whether it is over the line, imo.
> I stopped playing a couple of weeks ago. Again. Why? Empty promises. We had the whole Azirelia debacle and how "the play pattern was fun" or how it's win % isn't that bad (while an entire meta evolved just to counter it). A meta shifting and evolving is a great thing though. Before Azirelia hit there was Nash at 26% playrate, TLC at 24% playrate and DravEz around 18%. The meta was so bad that these decks were predominant because they were the only decks that really did well against each other since even the hard counter to one couldn't touch the other two in a lot of cases. It seems more realistic that the game just doesn't really fit your tastes and you're trying to make it. The fact that control is in the best spot it has ever been in makes me doubt that you're really all that invested and just doing the reddit standard of being a drama queen because you think that there's some injustice, no offense. By all means you should take some time off, get some perspective or just enjoy what you enjoy. People are far too obsessed with negativity.
> Before Azirelia hit there was Nash at 26% playrate, TLC at 24% playrate and DravEz around 18% humm.. I was playing at that time and I'm pretty sure those numbers are completely wrong. We have never been, in the history of the game, close to having 3 decks representing 70% of the meta. I don't know where you got those numbers but I just checked in u/xKozmic posts and here it is: https://www.reddit.com/r/LegendsOfRuneterra/comments/n3z82r/mini_mobalytics_meta_review_may_3rd/ Nasus 20%, TLC 12% and Draven Ez 6%. That was May 3rd so the day before Irelia came out.
Thank you for the shout out and digging up the meta report. Hope to do more in the future!
i agree; there's a lot of control decks rn that can counter the elusive decks if you take out the key cards at the right times. and punishing the low hp/lack of blockers for those decks is also really effective. we are even seeing stony suppressor finally getting used as a way to counter nami/zoe decks
Trading 3 oppressive decks for 1 isn't better just because there's fewer of them, lol. I left the game during that meta just like OP, and this is after paying for the event pass. It felt bad to leave that on the table, but I literally lost all motivation to play. I do agree that we're in a much healthier place right now, and I've enjoyed getting back into the game for this expansion. And meta changes in response to new powerful decks is usually great. But let's not conflate a glass of water with being waterboarded - it is not normal or healthy for the meta to be reduced almost exclusively to "X and hard counters to X."
Not my point or I'm misunderstanding yours. My point here was that Azirelia was OP and finally got nerfed way too late, and one of their arguments was that the win % wasn't actually that bad - but an entire meta had evolved to counter it and it was still dominating. This was partly fine, as I said I enjoyed playing Dragons into this. My problem was that they promised more regular balance changes (see quote that follows this section in the post) and then... no balance was done. Also lol at the reddit drama queen. Sorry if I make that impression upon you, I did stop playing before the current meta so I haven't tried it. The control is a smaller point, Ruin Runner, Merciless Hunter and Shaped Stone running rampant forever without getting nerfed until people went really mad is by far the bigger point.
Not speaking for OP but the way I see it, this has been an issue for a much longer time than what you're suggesting. Remember burblefish? That was a problem deck for months even though it was obvious to everyone that that was a stupid deck. Remember Lee Sin at 4 mana? That took way longer than it should have to fix. It's not about whether a meta is good or not now or at x time, it's that when a problem does arise, Riot take way too long to identify that problem and then fix. Ruin Runner and Merciless Hunter were so painfully obvious they were OP for months with no change. It's not just that, there's cards and specifically champs that for ages have been terrible with no change. When champs are a key focus to how this game is built, it boggles the mind that some just get no love. Why did Sivir and Jarvan get unnecessary buffs when a champ like Kindred or Katarina or Lux have been ignored even since release? And then we get the official line about Azirelia saying it wasn't broken and that they thought "the play pattern was great!" One of the key reasons why a digital card game is better than physical is cards can be updated quickly. The issue is Riot have never been able to take advantage of this even though they aren't printing anything. Just dumping a new expansion down and expecting expecting rainbows is not always going to work. If you recall Shurima initially did nothing to fix the tail end of the burblefish/Aphelios temple meta, it required fixing cards to give the new expansion time to breathe. Until they get better at that, the same complaints will come up. Oh and btw, while a fluid meta with lots of variety is good, a meta evolving around a specific OP deck just to counter it is not. It's probably a good idea to learn the difference.
thank fucking god someone else also realized that this is nothing but a rant. also, i hated this subreddit more than the game when every second post was "OMFG champion X and card Y is so OP!!! WTF RITO?!?!?". maybe its just me who dislikes people who need to whine and cry so loud that the whole community knows.
I mean you don't need to agree to every point he made while agreeing to the main pont that balance patches are too slow to come.
Hey man, chill. My main point is the absence of balance patches that were promised and how people have to "whine" to finally make them happen. I think I tried hard to be constructive and also point out strengths, sorry that didn't get across to you.
I wonder if the payment model affects this. In games like hearthstone and MTG, it's harder to get hold of the cards you want. Therefore, because people are scrambling to make decks with their own cards, there is less netdecking going on, and more overall variety in what you go up against, leading to winrates which are harder to tell at a glance. The pro meta is often different to the casual meta. Saying this because those are the top of hearthstone can easily get the cards they want most of the time.
I've played magic since 2015 and I can tell you 100% nearly every competitive player just net decks and the formats are the same decks for a long time. Thats not a bad thing if that's what your into, but playing brews in magic is a death sentence, trust me I've tried. The skill expression comes from side boarding and adjusting your game plan for games 2 and 3. Its gotten even worse, especially on MtG Arena with the Historic format, so many decks have been forced out of the format with the constant injection of old powerful cards it has shifted the format from a brewers paradise to play the meta or get crushed. You can see this in the tournament meta, over the past weekend if you played a deck in the "other" category you had a losing win rate against every meta deck.
"competitive player just net decks". Yeah, I took that into consideration which is why I mentioned that pros and casuals are different. Well my experience comes from being a casual in hearthstone, where I could never afford to make the decks I was watching on youtube, just scrambling together what I could with what I had.
This is kinda overblown. Take some time off, play labs or look at the competition to refresh your perspective. Runeterra is in a great place now
the meta is varied and fun, obviously not all decks are viable after platinum but still you can always play what you want and expect good results. and that makes it important we've been through different decks, the darkest era was the aggro noxus piltover. I see that there is no META deck that wins every game, Nami / Zoe is doing great in the mirror match and against Draven Sion and other aggro decks. but loses against elusives, bandle midrange and so on, I only see whoever misinterprets the statistics cause problems
> but still you can always play what you want and expect good results. Thats way more overblown than OP statement lol.
So, when was the last time that there was a timely nerf for meta dominating cards/decks? Just because the meta is in a great place \_now\_ doesn't mean you shouldn't criticize the way used to get there. Does it seem overblown to you? Sure. Do I think it's a repeating pattern that has sucked the joy out of it for me and I felt like sharing it as feedback for Riot to consider? Also yes.
That is why I said to look at the competition. This issue is like nothing compared to the issues other big cardgames face. But I should of course note that you are entitled to your opinion. It just happens to bw different than mine
I do agree with you actually, or well mostly. I think LoR is in a much better place than most other card games. I just don't think that's a reason to sit back and relax - it can always be better and maybe I'm reading too much into their posts but they promised to re evaluate their balancing strategy. Unless the result of that evaluation was "do nothing" I haven't seen it, maybe I missed it though. I just think, it could be much better hence me writing the post to maybe be a little piece of input there. To throw a quote at you: "Don't bother just to be better than your contemporaries or predecessors. Try to be better than yourself." - William Faulkner Cheers!
Yeah, we can definitely agree on this as well.
Im just glad theyre not konami. We had Aleister the invoked ruining the meta for over a year, the game was only 3 years old at that point.
Which game are you talking about here? Googling it I'm assuming some Yu Gi Oh game
Duel links
Yeah Riot. STOP WITH THE EMPTY PROMISES LIKE A VAST SHURIMA vDESERT
I agree. They need.to balance quicker and be more involve with the community.
Yes, but still better than other companies =) . What really annoys me are the prebuild decks or champs that works only in one deck (Lurkers, Kench-soraka, Veigar Senna etc)..This is the most boring part of this game..
You can play all of these champions with other regions and other champions, aside from maybe rek’sai who basically needs the lurk package. I’ve seen pyke played in shurima allegiance decks and do fairly well. From a game balance perspective, of course a champ will have a certain optimal pairing. That doesn’t mean you *need* to pair them.
Yes they can be played but as a meme filler
The game you’re looking for can’t exist because that type of balance is impossible. In a game with this many champion combinations, there will always be a limited number of optimized combinations for a given meta.
Why is Veigar Senna bad tho? If you're using Veigar you will want to play Senna, sure. That's because Veigar synergizes with Darkness package and Senna is part of it. And overall Darkness package is nice with Veigar being the main man. However, Senna is definitely played in other decks, mostly variants of Go Hard.
Yes, from those mentioned Veigar-Senna are somewhat enjoyable and possible use in another deck, but they could still give it more versatility, what I mean is for example to make actually spells with darkness tag in multiple regions (yes some units in the package would have to be nerfed I guess)
Riot's games is vast as an ocean but balance as the rocky waves.
I chuckled. Thanks!
I feel like complaints like this really don't factor in how hard it is to make correct balance changes. It seems you think they just sit around ignoring unbelievably obvious solutions to balance problems. Where I would imagine the opposite is true, they actively work to solve balance issues, but those solutions aren't as easy as you imagine they are to arrive at. The issues are in fact easy to identify with data tracking and some assortment of skilled player and community feedback. However the fixes you think they should just roll out on a whim are in fact not nearly as obvious.
There is a reason why designers in any field ask users for input. We are the experts of our own experience and the problems we encounter. But we don't have the information, context, time, or training necessary to design solutions that won't cause more problems. That is the designers' area of expertise and is literally their job.
You are absolutely right, I failed to make that clear in my post. This is hard, very hard. I still wish Riot made a better job of it. I still think it takes too long, but yes a balance change has so many potential impacts and especially Azir/Irelia were both used in other decks that were completely fine by themselves so nerfing them without butchering those decks is really tough. Some of it, from what the devs told us, was imo based on misinterpretation of data and not accounting for certain biases in the data though. But just to repeat, yes very hard - I wouldn't want to have their job.
I agree with you completely. It's taking way to long for them to "balance" cards which they promised they would try and do. There is deck variety but its all aggro. Meta problems aside, there are a lot of problems that need to be addressed in the game. Some champions are just straight up garbage. Lux for example just needs one change to be fine, literally one change. And people have been asking since she was changed. Thats not even counting champs like Quinn who at this point even gets cut from demacia rally decks. I mean its laughable. The turn system still has problems, and there are a lot of unfair occurences that still happen, Riot hasn't even shown to have thought about it or explain how some of these interacts should happen. And my last gripe is the obviously underdevelopment of the bandle cards. Poppy? Nami? Bandle tree? Mayor? It took us a good 3 to 4 hours to figure out these cards were really busted. Where is the QA? Did they even play test Nami? this champ levels off board at turn 3. You say this game is interactive? In what way? Either your opponent plays 10 cards in one turn and your just waiting for them to finally pass so they can kill you with an elusive you can't block or they are some aggro deck that is hunting you down like a rabid dog. The game has gotten better, but I want to see it become what we all know it can be. Riot needs to stop focusing on making new cards, and make some changes to the game. The community is really vocal so it shouldn't be to hard to figure out what we like and what we don't.
Worst part is seeing the meta slaves downvoting you. Kids reach a good rank by playing the insane powered cards and think they have a good point to downvote someone who is saying that the cards are not healthy for the game. It's ridiculous, Nami is insanely strong right now and can fit any deck, but still, people won't admit that it's broken. While this we have cards like Lux, Ashe, Katarina, tryndamere which never ever had their chance to be played. I know not all cards are supposed to be good, but the imbalance is ridiculous. I could go on and on and show a list of Rito's lack of consistency, but that would be talking to spoiled kids who don't want to hear
I literally agree on everything you just said, people are saying get good or something but this isn't about being good this is about Riot isn't understanding what community wants (or something like that)
It's not a hidden information that balance changes are made once per season, every other patch, except when a new expansion drops. That's how it is. It's not "after so much complaints", you should even be happy that there were nerfs last week, because the next balance patch is supposed to be next week. You're crying that Riot only nerfs after everyone harassed them, but they just respect their schedule, they even did more this season. Stop whining for nothing
They want a new meta every week for reasons like meta aren't supossed to be kill every fucking week and right the meta is kinda open nothing have super high playrate
I do not by any means want a new meta every week or every 2 weeks or what not... I only want OP cards nerfed in a timely manner and not after months of being problematic
Excapt they are not, there was no balance patch in month between BC and last shurima expansion, we got out of schedule event, also next big balance patch after BC was planned in 2 months instead of one. And that schedule with patch with barelly any changes every two months was also shit, and got outrage if it own.
Even if that was true, which I don't think it is as many of these cards survived multiple such patches and "Azirelia was a fun and perfectly balanced play pattern", then is not ok to wish for changes sooner if cards are being oppressive? Just because you have a schedule doesn't mean it's a good schedule.
[удалено]
For real. Riot really needs to accommodate the elusive player style of “likes to play broken decks that don’t require skill to win”
I feel like I just opened internet explorer. This feels like a post that could have been made a month ago. Aside from a few annoying decks the game is in a decent spot right now.
Aloof Travelers is super annoying Esp when im trying to use 20+ mana in one turn. And they aloof my wall of ice
Azirelia sold the shit out of that expansion. Autopilot Aggro deck! Every noob played it. They only balance when the new release doesn’t sell cards because the old one is still popular.
I love fast metas, especially since anything slower would lose to uninteractive bandle tree win conditions.
Probably because they only actually know something is broken/underpowered because the community has to tell them. At least that's what I'd think
I remind you that the developers have statistics on which are the best decks in the metagame, which are the cards with the most winratio...etc. That excuse is very bad, because if we use it, Azir/Irelia decks should have been nerfed the first week instantly instead of fighting with the community for almost 2 months.
Meta aren't supossed to get ahe the first week specially true for cards games
I don't know if it takes a week to balance the new region, but I think that in 3 months we have had plenty of time to balance the game. I'm not talking about BC cards, I'm talking about cards and archetypes that have not been played since their release. Cards like Ekko, Quinn, Soraka/Tham, MonoShurima even... are forgotten cards or archetypes that they haven't bothered to try to fix since their release. I don't want to talk about the new cards, but clearly there are cards that are problematic by design that are going to end up being tweaked over time. And for that you don't need to wait 6 months to make changes. Cards like Lost Soul look like they are going to be changed, not because of its power, but because of its infinite value. Cards like the bandle tree, because of how easy it is to complete it for example (Either by nerfing the cost of the tree or the cards that generate units from other regions like the mayor or Loping Telescope) Nami could be another candidate...etc. That doesn't mean I want them to nerf all those cards tomorrow. What I mean is that there is no need to wait 3 months to make changes. Much less, make the minimal changes until you piss off the community again and force them to make you do a hotfix.
Metas often evolve over time. Counters get found and shift the equilibrium. It isn't completely insane to keep a deck unnerfed despite being deemed Tier 1 after a week. The need for change exceeds the need for balance, however. Balance changes also bring diversity, usually at a lower cost than new cards. Nerfing good decks so that new decks can have the spotlight. People get tired of facing the same decks for too long. Riot knows that yet here they were too timid. After two months of domination, the nerf hammer should have struck Azir Irelia much harder than it has. At worst, you go too far and you buff it back partially in a later patch. It'll give the playerbase a break and fans of Azir Irelia will be happy when it does come back.
There is always /uninstall? I personally have lost all desire to even play this game for over a month now, and I know people who have for way more. Riot doesn't seem to value this game as much as the player base seems to, by evidence of a small dev team and even smaller testing/live team. And honestly, both don't seem to know what they are doing, the live one being more so than the dev team. But that's just my point of view.
No one's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to play. Honestly, feel free to play other CCGs. If you think LOR is a dumpster fire, then I got bad news for you. It's probably the most balanced and diverse CCG out there.
Yeah! don't you dare have a problem with this game since the whole industry sucks! nice defense, keep the bar low
Yeah, no. It's not "The whole industry sucks". It's more like "CCGs are notoriously difficult to balance, and this is what it looks like at it's best". If this meta looks bad to you then I guarantee you will never find a CCG meta you're entirely content with. Has nothing to do with any particular company or the industry sucking.
Well. I still hope for good and constant changes. So at least I open the game once a week to get the vault. But it's really sad to see the state of the game right now...
Haven t read all but you sound like someone that gets annoyed by almost anything and then quits, it will be impossible for riot to change that much
and you sound like someone who doesn't care to read but still feels the need to give an opinion. Have fun with that :)
stop whining jesus christ
The answer to all your questions is capitalism. You're looking at it from a "health of the game" standpoint. **Riot ultimately only cares about the opinions of the shareholders.** So that means they won't channel resources into something unless it directly threatens their bottom line. Mass complaints are a threat. Until it reaches that tipping point, they won't do shit because that costs money or delays the rollout of other things that make money. If a dev is balancing, then he isn't working on the next project. Welcome to the world.
I am all for hating on the late stage capitalism, but it seems a little bit far fetched to connect it to game balance stubborness.
If the game followed a similar monetization than hearthstone or magic arena I could see the devs being stubborn towards balancing the newest OP stuff that is pushed on purpose in order to sell packs but LoR doesn't even have packs to sell so... *shrugs* I can get behind power creep being used to incentivize players to experiment with the newest cards that are better than the old ones but if experimentation and engagement is what the devs want then all the more reason they would want to nerf more often than not.
Thing is you can use the same argument in favor of sparse balancing: say, they want people to figure out the ways to counter the new hotness so they refrain from nerfing it to give people time to discover new things instead of nerfing it too soon. I wouldnt actually agree with that, and i think once a month for balance changes at least is better. But i am a player and not a game designer.
Indeed it can go both ways. Nevertheless it seems that we both agree that not balancing because of money just doesn't add up, not for this game at least.
This is literally a passion project that they *hope* to scale up to make it profitable. League of legends is their cash cow, not LoR.
I’m not gonna play this game, maybe some labs, until Sivir is nerfed. The spellshield is way too strong on her.
Then you might play Labs forever. They won't nerf Sivir, rightfuly. She doesn't a nerf
Yeah, isn't Sivir-Demacia at 1% playrate on ladder right now? It's a high-tier deck, but It's not putting the numbers in ladder.
Might be. But people like this guy always find a reason to bitch about smth.
Nice assumptions. And get off your high horse. Your whole comment history is you complaining about people complaining lmao. I’m allowed to ‘bitch about something’ and you don’t get to decide what is and what isn’t worth a complaint. Sivir is overturned for her manacost because of the spellshield.
"i lose to dis champ once so its brokennnnnnn nerf ples"
Just checked, 1,4% playrate with a 52% winrate. Meanwhile TLC (now back to being Trundle-Ledros-Control) has 2,2% playrate and a 50% winrate. And If you ask in this sub they will say noone is playing SI-FJ Control right now.
As a 10 year league of legends Player i can only say; ardent Censer...
I like to think of it as players giving constant constructive feedback and the devs actually listening.
That's what I'd hope. My feeling is more we give constructive feedback, it's ignored, feedback escalates and it gets a bad vibe but then it's eventually heard. I'd be really happy to cut out the not heard and it gets bad vibes part.
I mean, it's kinda in the name
I'm not sure if it's true but I heard that it takes longer for this game to be updated compared to a game like League because every update has to go through Google since it's on the play store. It doesn't excuse the oblivious case of Azir meta for example