UPSB v4
Off-topic / Why I Hate Leauge of Legends.
-
Date: Thu, Sep 29 2011 04:28:20
This is mainly @TheAafg but anyone else can read this, by the way this isn't an attempt to bring back my trolling days, this is how I actually feel. That's where you're wrong, if you had played since the beta like I did then you would have seen it, in the beta it was a great game besides the 1 unbalanced hero and the other one that just didn't work. It was when they launched that they started forgetting about their heroes they would make a new hero that would be overpowered, enough people would complain, said hero would be nerfed while making 2-3 other heroes stronger to combat this new hero. It kept going on like this because they decided to make a new hero every 2 weeks or so and eventually all the characters that I knew and loved were vastly outdated to these newer heroes and the game became lame in that sense because they were alienating their older players. (run on sentence ftw) Because you have all these heroes in need of constant balancing and re-balancing you create this vacuum of obnoxiously good heroes. The meta game, using these heroes, creates these teams, where all you have to do is pick the right heroes and win. You have a clear advantage just based on your heroes. Granted when you're faced against this super team with your not so super characters you can still win, you just have to not play like shit and hope that the other team plays like shit. God damnit I can't think right now, anyway line up your rebuttals. EDIT: I decided to change the title for nostalgia's sake.
-
Date: Thu, Sep 29 2011 04:58:02
sangara wrote: This is mainly @TheAafg but anyone else can read this, [B]by the way this isn't an attempt to bring back my trolling days, this is how I actually feel. [/B](run on sentence ftw)
Yeah, a lot of run-on sentences :?. U trolled before? I heard. -
Date: Thu, Sep 29 2011 05:01:46
Escorpio123 wrote: Yeah, a lot of run-on sentences :?. U trolled before? I heard.
I'm attributing my terrible grammar to my lack of sleep, but yeah the sangara of v.4 is very different than the sangara of v.3. Anyways back to LoL being shitty. -
Date: Thu, Sep 29 2011 05:04:02
I'm not too awfully familiar with the LoL metagame, but if you can understand any metagame well enough to craft a perfect team, then you should be winning every game. Edit: Isn't the theory of a perfect team countered by draft pick mode? If the other team can't put together a team that can in some way counter yours, they don't deserve to win.
-
Date: Thu, Sep 29 2011 05:21:23
all of your points are true and well backed, but its not the GAME thats bad, the actual game and gameplay is fine. Riot Games is a really, really bad company. they have no consideration for their players and their planning on the game can all correlate directly to your reasons. i dont blame the game, i blame the makers.
-
Date: Thu, Sep 29 2011 05:37:02
sangara wrote: That's where you're wrong, if you had played since the beta like I did then you would have seen it, in the beta it was a great game besides the 1 unbalanced hero and the other one that just didn't work. It was when they launched that they started forgetting about their heroes they would make a new hero that would be overpowered, enough people would complain, said hero would be nerfed while making 2-3 other heroes stronger to combat this new hero. It kept going on like this because they decided to make a new hero every 2 weeks or so and eventually all the characters that I knew and loved were vastly outdated to these newer heroes and the game became lame in that sense because they were alienating their older players. (run on sentence ftw) Because you have all these heroes in need of constant balancing and re-balancing you create this vacuum of obnoxiously good heroes. The meta game, using these heroes, creates these teams, where all you have to do is pick the right heroes and win. You have a clear advantage just based on your heroes. Granted when you're faced against this super team with your not so super characters you can still win, you just have to not play like shit and hope that the other team plays like shit. God damnit I can't think right now, anyway line up your rebuttals. EDIT: I decided to change the title for nostalgia's sake.
I have no idea what the game was like in beta, since I started playing pretty recently, so everything I say will be based on my own experiences. You say that overpowered characters are constantly coming out, but exactly how overpowered are these characters? I don't know of any character that can single-handedly win you the game if you pick him/her. Even if you get an entire team of these overpowered champs, you won't necessarily have the best team since they might not work together optimally. In addition, every pick has a counter pick, so creating a team that is simply so much better than the other team that you can win based on just your team composition is very difficult, considering draft mode is used in every competitive game. Also, even if you were to get a superior team with overpowered champions, you still have to play at least to the level of your opponent since there are many ways to shut down champions so they don't get the chance to become ridiculously powerful. Jungler presence is huge in LoL, so even if you have an overpowered champion, you can still easily lose in lane. Ahhh my thoughts are all over the place right now, there are probably a lot of things I'm forgetting here. -
Date: Thu, Sep 29 2011 05:45:50
I like LoL. It are first MOBA I play. I doesn't like Dota or HoN. Discuss.
-
Date: Thu, Sep 29 2011 06:42:52
Until ~2000+ ELO, it's how you play your champions that matters most and not the strength of the champion itself. Even if you play one of the slightly underpowered champions extremely well you should have no problem whatsoever.
-
Date: Thu, Sep 29 2011 13:42:00
op heroes just get banned in draft...
-
Date: Thu, Sep 29 2011 13:56:55
Unless you're playing at the highest level you shouldn't really talk about balance or meta game because you likely don't understand it. This isn't directed at you personally sangara but you can see this in every game where balance is an issue. People with half-knowledge (or less) of the game complain about balance when in fact they just don't know how to play right. I believe it is possible to win with every champion in this game, it's a team effort and no champion is so utterly useless that he can't contribute at all. It is easier on some champions and some champions allow a huge margin of error and still are successful but that doesn't make them unbalanced, they're just easier to play. For example people saying Mordekaiser is OP, you can see this particularly among newer players, well he's in fact not OP not even pre-nerf. You just need to play against him differently than you would against most other champs, it's what makes it a bit interesting.
-
Date: Thu, Sep 29 2011 20:28:57
i main tristana and play yi, fiddlesticks, ryze, and veigar they all honestly feel just as powerful if you play them right. Well, except maybe yi.
-
Date: Fri, Sep 30 2011 09:04:43
sangara wrote: This is mainly @TheAafg but anyone else can read this, by the way this isn't an attempt to bring back my trolling days, this is how I actually feel. That's where you're wrong, if you had played since the beta like I did then you would have seen it, in the beta it was a great game besides the 1 unbalanced hero and the other one that just didn't work. It was when they launched that they started forgetting about their heroes they would make a new hero that would be overpowered, enough people would complain, said hero would be nerfed while making 2-3 other heroes stronger to combat this new hero. It kept going on like this because they decided to make a new hero every 2 weeks or so and eventually all the characters that I knew and loved were vastly outdated to these newer heroes and the game became lame in that sense because they were alienating their older players. (run on sentence ftw) Because you have all these heroes in need of constant balancing and re-balancing you create this vacuum of obnoxiously good heroes. The meta game, using these heroes, creates these teams, where all you have to do is pick the right heroes and win. You have a clear advantage just based on your heroes. Granted when you're faced against this super team with your not so super characters you can still win, you just have to not play like shit and hope that the other team plays like shit. God damnit I can't think right now, anyway line up your rebuttals. EDIT: I decided to change the title for nostalgia's sake.
what a fucking pussy. -
Date: Fri, Sep 30 2011 22:42:40
You go girl
-
Date: Sat, Oct 1 2011 00:21:40
i disagree.
-
Date: Sat, Oct 1 2011 00:25:05
i hate it cause its stupid. no one asked me so it doesnt matter
-
Date: Sat, Oct 1 2011 02:34:48
What I find particularly interesting about your post is the comment about releasing new chars that outdate older heroes. I read a post with a similar stance on Reign of Gaming, a blog run by CLG support player and famous tier-list maker Elementz. Basically, the author wrote that he thought that Riot was basically releasing completely new champs just for the money and were purposefully making them essentially 2.0 versions of old champs. When people see the new "op char that is better than x champ in every way" they rush out to buy with RP and what not and that's money in Riot's pockets. They can neglect the older champs since the newer ones still fill their role and that Riot doesn't care about them because they can't make money off of the old champs anymore. While I agree some of the newer champs outdate older ones (Trist with all AP ratios vs all new ranged carries with AD ratios) and some seem strictly better in every way (Talon vs Katarina), they have breathed new life in previously outdated and UP champs. Morgana was for the longest time under the radar and considered a little weak, but with a few tweaks here and there, she's become one of the new OPs again. Panth's new changes have made him much stronger than he was before. There are definitely champs who haven't seen major play in a long time (Sivir lol), but through tweaks, nerf/buff cycles, and maybe even new ways of looking at champs (SUPPORT GP???), even previously "useless" champs can be considered worthy of high level play again. Nerf/buff cycles change the game a ton. Upon release, Caitlyn and Lee Sin were considered UP and garbage (I bought both on release and have loved them since the beginning). But as everyone else was nerfed, they were buffed, and people learned how to play them, they're now considered top picks in their respective roles. (Lee Sin is getting nerfed next patch and it this makes me feel two sads)
-
Date: Sat, Oct 1 2011 05:45:19
Tkal wrote: What I find particularly interesting about your post is the comment about releasing new chars that outdate older heroes. I read a post with a similar stance on Reign of Gaming, a blog run by CLG support player and famous tier-list maker Elementz. Basically, the author wrote that he thought that Riot was basically releasing completely new champs just for the money and were purposefully making them essentially 2.0 versions of old champs. When people see the new "op char that is better than x champ in every way" they rush out to buy with RP and what not and that's money in Riot's pockets. They can neglect the older champs since the newer ones still fill their role and that Riot doesn't care about them because they can't make money off of the old champs anymore. While I agree some of the newer champs outdate older ones (Trist with all AP ratios vs all new ranged carries with AD ratios) and some seem strictly better in every way (Talon vs Katarina), they have breathed new life in previously outdated and UP champs. Morgana was for the longest time under the radar and considered a little weak, but with a few tweaks here and there, she's become one of the new OPs again. Panth's new changes have made him much stronger than he was before. There are definitely champs who haven't seen major play in a long time (Sivir lol), but through tweaks, nerf/buff cycles, and maybe even new ways of looking at champs (SUPPORT GP???), even previously "useless" champs can be considered worthy of high level play again. Nerf/buff cycles change the game a ton. Upon release, Caitlyn and Lee Sin were considered UP and garbage (I bought both on release and have loved them since the beginning). But as everyone else was nerfed, they were buffed, and people learned how to play them, they're now considered top picks in their respective roles. (Lee Sin is getting nerfed next patch and it this makes me feel two sads)
cool story bro? -
Date: Sun, Oct 2 2011 00:36:57
Very cool. Would tell again.
-
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 00:11:10
hoiboy;138797]I'm not too awfully familiar with the LoL metagame, but if you can understand any metagame well enough to craft a perfect team, then you should be winning every game. Edit: Isn't the theory of a perfect team countered by draft pick mode? If the other team can't put together a team that can in some way counter yours, they don't deserve to win.[/QUOTE] When I was back playing with my friends if we picked the right heroes then we would win every game, all we had to do was pick Akali, Morgana, Garen, Signed and some other random hero (like Nasus or Azreal... is it Ezreal?) and we would win. That got boring as shit so then we decided to play heroes that were (at the time) old and out dated and we would lose to the stupidest shit. Sure we would win a few but it's not like it was easy or fun. I actually I take that back, it was really fun winning with random ass heroes it made you feel good on the inside. [QUOTE=browndog12;138802]all of your points are true and well backed, but its not the GAME thats bad, the actual game and gameplay is fine. Riot Games is a really, really bad company. they have no consideration for their players and their planning on the game can all correlate directly to your reasons. i dont blame the game, i blame the makers.[/QUOTE] I give you example one: DotA: Allstars [QUOTE=AwonW;138803]I have no idea what the game was like in beta, since I started playing pretty recently, so everything I say will be based on my own experiences. You say that overpowered characters are constantly coming out, but exactly how overpowered are these characters? I don't know of any character that can single-handedly win you the game if you pick him/her. Even if you get an entire team of these overpowered champs, you won't necessarily have the best team since they might not work together optimally. In addition, every pick has a counter pick, so creating a team that is simply so much better than the other team that you can win based on just your team composition is very difficult, considering draft mode is used in every competitive game. Also, even if you were to get a superior team with overpowered champions, you still have to play at least to the level of your opponent since there are many ways to shut down champions so they don't get the chance to become ridiculously powerful. Jungler presence is huge in LoL, so even if you have an overpowered champion, you can still easily lose in lane. Ahhh my thoughts are all over the place right now, there are probably a lot of things I'm forgetting here.[/QUOTE] For some reason I really can't construct anything from this. [QUOTE=Tkal;138805]I like LoL. It are first MOBA I play. I doesn't like Dota or HoN. Discuss.[/QUOTE] I like you. [QUOTE=Erirornal Kraione;138813]Until ~2000+ ELO, it's how you play your champions that matters most and not the strength of the champion itself. Even if you play one of the slightly underpowered champions extremely well you should have no problem whatsoever.[/QUOTE] If what you mean by "how you play your champions" you mean how easy it is to play your champion then I agree. I like pressing 3 buttons and getting a kill too. This is prevalent in every game though, I don't know what there is to argue or anything, I might as well not even post but I'll keep it. [QUOTE=Zombo;138909]op heroes just get banned in draft...[/QUOTE] Hi, I'm Zombo, no one actually cares about my opinion. I'm just pointing that out, but this feels very old sangara, but you know what? I'm gonna roll with it. [QUOTE=neXus;138916]Unless you're playing at the highest level you shouldn't really talk about balance or meta game because you likely don't understand it. This isn't directed at you personally sangara but you can see this in every game where balance is an issue. People with half-knowledge (or less) of the game complain about balance when in fact they just don't know how to play right. I believe it is possible to win with every champion in this game, it's a team effort and no champion is so utterly useless that he can't contribute at all. It is easier on some champions and some champions allow a huge margin of error and still are successful but that doesn't make them unbalanced, they're just easier to play. For example people saying Mordekaiser is OP, you can see this particularly among newer players, well he's in fact not OP not even pre-nerf. You just need to play against him differently than you would against most other champs, it's what makes it a bit interesting.[/QUOTE] I agree with a lot of the things you are saying and I'm not saying it's impossible to win with some of the heroes in this game it's just stupid and annoying that some of the heroes are clearly not as good as other heroes. There was never any of that in DotA, all heroes were equally equipped in the game. No one ever felt under powered or just not ready for the game, of course we had the occasional OP hero when they first came out but within a week they were on the same playing field as everyone else. I think the other big thing is, and this isn't really a problem but more just a personal thing, is that LoL is so based on synergy of heroes it's a little ridiculous. Back in DotA sure there were two heroes that were good together, like double targetable stuns were always fun, but I've never felt the need to really think through my hero choice as much as I did with LoL. I could make a team of 5 with the most random heroes and win. I really miss that. [QUOTE=Stare;138986]i main tristana and play yi, fiddlesticks, ryze, and veigar they all honestly feel just as powerful if you play them right. Well, except maybe yi.[/QUOTE] Woo Hoo. [QUOTE=AoD1;139128]what a fucking pussy.[/QUOTE] You know I actually didn't expect you here [QUOTE=Ohayo;139259]You go girl[/QUOTE] Oh I'm only getting started. [QUOTE=VendettaBF;139282]i disagree.[/QUOTE] I agree with your ability to disagree [QUOTE=funnky;139283]i hate it cause its stupid. no one asked me so it doesnt matter[/QUOTE] I really don't like you. [QUOTE=Tkal;139314]What I find particularly interesting about your post is the comment about releasing new chars that outdate older heroes. I read a post with a similar stance on Reign of Gaming, a blog run by CLG support player and famous tier-list maker Elementz. Basically, the author wrote that he thought that Riot was basically releasing completely new champs just for the money and were purposefully making them essentially 2.0 versions of old champs. When people see the new "op char that is better than x champ in every way" they rush out to buy with RP and what not and that's money in Riot's pockets. They can neglect the older champs since the newer ones still fill their role and that Riot doesn't care about them because they can't make money off of the old champs anymore. While I agree some of the newer champs outdate older ones (Trist with all AP ratios vs all new ranged carries with AD ratios) and some seem strictly better in every way (Talon vs Katarina), they have breathed new life in previously outdated and UP champs. Morgana was for the longest time under the radar and considered a little weak, but with a few tweaks here and there, she's become one of the new OPs again. Panth's new changes have made him much stronger than he was before. There are definitely champs who haven't seen major play in a long time (Sivir lol), but through tweaks, nerf/buff cycles, and maybe even new ways of looking at champs (SUPPORT GP???), even previously "useless" champs can be considered worthy of high level play again. Nerf/buff cycles change the game a ton. Upon release, Caitlyn and Lee Sin were considered UP and garbage (I bought both on release and have loved them since the beginning). But as everyone else was nerfed, they were buffed, and people learned how to play them, they're now considered top picks in their respective roles. (Lee Sin is getting nerfed next patch and it this makes me feel two sads)[/QUOTE] The point is there shouldn't be so much useless balancing and unbalancing, Riot is absolutely terrible. There's no point in making so many changes, I really don't understand why they can't just make a balanced game. [QUOTE=AoD1;139372]cool story bro?[/QUOTE] Twice? [QUOTE=Tkal wrote: Very cool. Would tell again.
Yeah I still like you. -
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 01:36:43
sangara wrote: When I was back playing with my friends if we picked the right heroes then we would win every game, all we had to do was pick Akali, Morgana, Garen, Signed and some other random hero (like Nasus or Azreal... is it Ezreal?) and we would win. That got boring as shit so then we decided to play heroes that were (at the time) old and out dated and we would lose to the stupidest shit. Sure we would win a few but it's not like it was easy or fun. I actually I take that back, it was really fun winning with random ass heroes it made you feel good on the inside. I give you example one: DotA: Allstars For some reason I really can't construct anything from this. I like you. If what you mean by "how you play your champions" you mean how easy it is to play your champion then I agree. I like pressing 3 buttons and getting a kill too. This is prevalent in every game though, I don't know what there is to argue or anything, I might as well not even post but I'll keep it. Hi, I'm Zombo, no one actually cares about my opinion. I'm just pointing that out, but this feels very old sangara, but you know what? I'm gonna roll with it. I agree with a lot of the things you are saying and I'm not saying it's impossible to win with some of the heroes in this game it's just stupid and annoying that some of the heroes are clearly not as good as other heroes. There was never any of that in DotA, all heroes were equally equipped in the game. No one ever felt under powered or just not ready for the game, of course we had the occasional OP hero when they first came out but within a week they were on the same playing field as everyone else. I think the other big thing is, and this isn't really a problem but more just a personal thing, is that LoL is so based on synergy of heroes it's a little ridiculous. Back in DotA sure there were two heroes that were good together, like double targetable stuns were always fun, but I've never felt the need to really think through my hero choice as much as I did with LoL. I could make a team of 5 with the most random heroes and win. I really miss that. Woo Hoo. You know I actually didn't expect you here Oh I'm only getting started. I agree with your ability to disagree I really don't like you. The point is there shouldn't be so much useless balancing and unbalancing, Riot is absolutely terrible. There's no point in making so many changes, I really don't understand why they can't just make a balanced game. Twice? Yeah I still like you.
good for you dude. i dont give a fuck if you like me or not. so deal with it -
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 01:52:26
I'm an admin for Team EpikGamer's community and balance issues gets thrown around a LOT in chat and on forums. I'm going to just info dump everything I've picked up, discussed, etc. on the issue. The character initially comes out and it's UP/OP so it needs tweaking. It's really, really hard to release a balanced champ, especially when they're trying to incorporate new skill sets and unique quirks specific to that champion. That said, I believe they do a good job of nerfing/buffing champions. Their tweaks are based around how the high elo (2000+) players fare with that character. Considering the small player base at such high elos, using them as test subjects upon champion releases is highly consistent. So for anyone below 2k elo to complain about game balance isn't their place. That said, there are champs with ratio issues upon release such as Lee and Orianna, but those get fixed over time. I don't know why you're complaining about them being slow when it's such a complicated process as I'll go over below. You'll notice upon entering Season 2 players like PhantomL0rd are climbing the elo ladder very fast by going Revive + Teleport Karthus. He just reached Rank 1 yesterday night queuing with Dyrus who went Revive + Teleport Yorick. How is it they're winning so much with such gimmicky strategies? It's because they aren't being put against higher elo players that know how to play against it. If the "Tanky DPS es OP" metagame works for low-mid elo but isn't effective in high, then by default it isn't OP. Lastly, all characters have their counters. New characters naturally counter others and are countered by others as well. Twitch isn't underpowered, he's situational. Gangplank is strong yet there are champs that can beat him. Game balance revolves around COUNTER-PICKING, something that just doesn't happen in low-mid elo. Really, the only champ I see as under-powered is Evelynn and that's just because she's waiting for the stealth rework. My main, Ezreal, was considered underpowered to all hell after his long set of nerfs yet I play him and dominate other AD carries. Now you see him practically everywhere, especially in high elo. Orianna got the exact same nerfs that Ezreal did and now she's underplayed. It's about finding the right metagame that suits each character. Every champ has a role. But this is where it gets tricky. If everything counters everything if a new champ is introduced EVERYTHING changes. It isn't about the balance of one champion. While you can nerf/buff durations and ratios, you can't nerf/buff the existence of a skill set unless you rework the character. So how do you find the balance of "this champ is good against x amount of champions while terrible against x amount of champions"? If the champ is fantastic against the FotM metagame, then people will cry OP. We don't need to change the champ, we need to change how we play against it. Unfortunately, the LoL population is so fixated on the traditional metagame being the only correct way to play that we don't know how to evolve around the game. Do you NEED a tank? Is a ranged AD absolutely necessary? It depends on the enemy team. tl;dr: Riot doesn't NEED to balance champs if we can evolve the metagame to counter "op" champs. If the ratios or w/e are too high, they do a good job changing it. There is ALWAYS a way to counter ANY team comp. It's all about counter-picking which contradicts today's metagame.
-
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 04:20:03
sangara wrote: The point is there shouldn't be so much useless balancing and unbalancing, Riot is absolutely terrible. There's no point in making so many changes, I really don't understand why they can't just make a balanced game.
But in a game with so many heroes, so many aspects, and just such a large plethora of factors that affect gameplay, it's almost impossible to keep a game fully ensure universal balance. Balance itself is almost a subjective term. What does true balance mean? For what I've seen, it really depends on who you ask. Xin, Trynd, pre-nerf Morde, and Poppy are perceived as terrifying monsters in lower Elo, but we almost never see them in higher ranked play. Champions like Ashe, pre-nerf TF, and in the EU Miss Fortune are all considered great picks, but in a normal game they are considered average or even bad (many people complained that TF was useless because of his low attack range) Why is this? You could attribute it to maybe some core aspects of each of the above listed champs such as the ability to snowball incredibly hard against inexperienced players/the incredible effectiveness you get when a team is well coordinated, but overall I don't think it's very cleanly cut what makes something "OP" or at least a strong pick. I suppose one could say that for a balanced game, for every strategy, team comp, champion, and build, there should be a reasonable counter. However having said that, I still think there will always be emergent strategies that high level teams can forge out. Right now we're seeing the AD carry/support bot lane which seems to be almost perfect. Have a taric/cait and it's basically gg for the other team in that lane unless you have incredibly powerful gank pressure. However is this the best strategy? At the moment, it seems like it would be. Are there counter to it? There haven't been any major ones that have emerged. Does that make it OP? Only time will tell. Riot, like any other company developing an incredibly dynamic and complex game, has an incredibly onerous task of trying to decide whether or not these emergent strategies are truly gamebreaking or completely unbeatable. From that, nerfs will probably be given out and that old strategy will be less viable. What does this do? It opens up the possibility for tons of new options to be the "new OP". Again, the best examples I can think of that echo this buff/nerf phenomenon are Lee Sin and Caitlyn. Lee Sin: On release, his Q was slow and the indicator was off. His ratios were pretty low and he ran out of energy pretty quick. He was regarded an almost un-useable champ for any serious play. A hotfix and a two patches later, we basically have the Lee Sin we have today. By this time, Lanewick, Lanedyr, Irelia, and J4 were still the kings of tanky DPS. Lee Sin was still regarded as a gimmicky, semi-viable champ only because of his double tempest bug. His jungle was deemed pretty good even at that point, but this was also at the time of the release of GPs mega OP passive and E rework that made him a total monster. Nunu was also still considered the king of junglers, being able to invade and gank at a top level. A few patches later, just about every one of the above champs got nerfed while Lee Sin remained untouched. J4 was not even considered for competitive play, Nunu disappeared from the jungle, and Udyr and Lanewick, although still strong, were now not picked in every single game. People finally realized that Lee Sin is a beast. Amazing mobility, harsh ganks, great ability to invade and clear jungle, good sustain, decent CC, solid dueling capabilities, and a Q that hits for a ton of damage. Why did I stick with him in the early phases of his release? He was fun and still remains my favourite champ after they desecrated Shen. Caitlyn: Long story short, she got tons of buffs, every other carry got nerfs, she basically instawins bot lane. Now considered "OP". Why did I play her in her early stages? Because I found her fun. Although her ult was pretty gimmicky and not actually that useful compared to other ranged carries, it was really satisfying to kill with. Also I think her voice is pretty hot. -
Date: Mon, Oct 3 2011 04:21:52
God damn it @Storm, you stole my thunder >.>
-
Date: Tue, Oct 4 2011 21:11:23
sangara wrote: by the way this isn't an attempt to bring back my trolling days, this is how I actually feel EDIT: I decided to change the title for nostalgia's sake.
I got way too excited when I read this. -
Date: Wed, Oct 5 2011 08:50:59
Every character has different playstyle. Just need to learn by lots of games, trial and error,