Get an Epic Experience with Premium
  • posted a message on Why AD Casters Suck

    Hello there, Mr Gustaf.

    I might be late on the party but I stumbled upon your analysis, and I raise for you one of my old threads from the dead:



    See, I perfectly understand the difference between Tristana and Graves, one has utility AP scaling spells, the other has AD scaling burst damage, and sometimes, you want your AD carries / bruisers to hurt with spells aswell to open new gameplay possibilities right ?

    Problem is, you kind of pigeonhole their builds into building AD. That's a race to the scaling and everytime you neglect attack damage, you fall behind. As a consequence, most of your "alternative" itemization becomes a burden. Item diversity just got hit as a repercussion of this "good idea". You would buy a Sheen because your kit allows you to proc constantly, but...
    None of your spells scale AP. You lost a considerable 435 gold value, aswell as putting your damage behind.

    Let's check the armory for a little moment and list stuff that actually uses "different" methods of damage:

    -Sheen
    -Tiamat
    -On-hit (Wits end, Ionic spark, Madred)
    -Debuff application (Mallet, Black cleaver, Red buff)
    -Special (Youmu)
    -Lifesteal

    The latter aside, I guess none of these really suit our Graves, right ? Nor does it suit Varus or Caitlyn or Vayne.

    This is where attack modifiers come into play. Just like Parrley gives Gankplank a reliable damage spell which also procs all the items mentionned previously.
    If we can find a reliable way to link Autoattack to spells, we might actually solve the problem.
    Shyvana's twin bite, for example, is really good at doing this. It attacks twice, and resets your autoattack timer; which means you can hit 3 times in less than a second, that implies applying 3 on-hits, proc a Sheen, and, in her dragon form, apply those in a AoE.

    Now, all we have to do is find a way to create new forms of "attack modifiers" that would act like spells. Caitlyn's ultimate used to work such a way; it applied Sheen procs and other debuffs, but was reworked. She could not build Trinity again, which drastically limited her itemization possibilities.

    Back to Graves; tinkering with buckshot. Imagine this:
    Graves fires three bullets in a cone, dealing physical damage to all enemies in their path. Enemies at close range can be hit by multiple projectiles, but each bullet beyond the first will deal only 35% damage.
    Now, consider each of the bullets an extension of your autoattack: it deals a percentage (could be below or above 100%) of your current autoattack damage and applies on-hit effects. Think Twitch's ultimate in 3 directions.
    Miracle: you got Sheen procing directly on your spell, but also a wide Debuff application (each projectile applying Frozen mallet for example), and a triple on-hit application whithin melee range. Not only that, but a potentially ridiculous close-range Tiamat build strategy.

    Once you get this done, you are free to add AP ratios on top of that (because it already depends of your autoattack damage), making AP/Hybrid builds somehow viable and further improving diversity.
    Also, Sheen's AP is not lost.

    As a final note, I know crits are also part of the problem since they scale exponentially with AD. But that is another story and I can't really think of a solution right now.

     

    Another example: Compare MF's E and Varus E:

    Varus has around 85 less base damage and catches up with 141 bonus AD. Late in the game (say +200 AD) it will do 35 more damage than MF's E, which is ridiculously unnoticeable compared to his other sources of damage. Draven has 0.5 on his E aswell, with 210 base damage... The question is; Why would you remove an AP ratio to add weak base damage and inconsistent AD ratios ?

     

    The AD casters and AD scaling champions in general try too hard to fit in a game where AD was not designed to make skills scale.

    Adding more AD-caster friendly items would sure solve the problem, but at the cost of hurting Hybridation which is a long-forgotten art. It was meant for hybrids to have both decent autoattacks and spells, AD casters merely stole this role

     

    What would have been the not-so-lazy answer to this problem was to reconsider AD scaling as a whole, and considerable change the mechanics of AD caster's abilities.

    Posted in: Gentleman Gustaf
  • posted a message on Proposed Smite rework; need pros insight about it

    Quote from Zquickly »

    Smite should stay the way it is. What would stop anyone from taking Flash and Smite as apposed to Flash and Ignite/Exhaust? Giving Smite an increase damage debuff would make it too strong in lane, Especially since its on a 25 second cooldown. 

    "And the jungle a bit more of a battlefield; I could see teams running AD/Support mid with a second smite helping/protecting his jungle and roaming to steal/gank"

    I have a few problems with this sentence.

    1. Lanes should be aware where their jungler is, and help out when they need it. Always. (Leashes, Getting Invaded, Invading, ect.)

    2. The way I see it, Unless drastic changes happen in Season 3, you will not see the meta change. Why? Because its the best thing the community has come up with so far, and we can't/haven't thought of anything that could be better yet, so forcing changes to that meta isn't necessarily the best idea. The lanes have stayed the way there are because those lanes fit best into what the roles need. AP carries need fast levels, so they put them into the shortest lane. AD carries need gold to be as dangerous as possible, so they're put in one of the safest lanes with someone who can protect them. So even if these changes happened to Smite, you probably would not see AD/Support mid lanes in competitive play.

    tl;dr Smite is fine the way it is and changing it won't guarantee a change in the meta.


    Smite is for monsters; I'm not trying to make it the new exhaust...

     


    I'm pretty sure 99% of players are oblivious why AP goes mid. For me it's blue buff, the "fastest lane" argument doesn't hold

    Posted in: Ask the Pros
  • posted a message on Why Executioner's Calling Even Exists: A Theory

    You forgot that Wriggle has... wards. Which is part of the tremendous cost efficiency of the item.

    The bruiser with Wriggle wins because he sees the gank coming.

     Seriously though, I tried to like the item really hard. It's still bad because it brings multiplicative stats; while Wriggles bring you basic stats. You cannot rush EC.

    Posted in: OldManEyebrows
  • posted a message on Proposed Smite rework; need pros insight about it

    Quote from wes3449»

    So while this change would help to "shift the meta" and "make things interesting" I believe that smiting early is simply an unnecessary risk that most junglers would forgo except for very specific cases (the enemy jungler is very slow/has a weak early game).


    Thanks for the insight.

    My concern now is that stealing becomes *too* easy; but to keep in mind it already is right now since both sides have an equally high true damage burst; you would secure/steal buffs through spells rather than Smite; which could be more interesting as you sometimes have to blow your highest burst on monsters instead of players (right now it is "who smites better"), and steals would not hamstring your jungling quite as much with reduced CD (another question being, are buffs too essential ?). As for the balance concerns, gotta think of it, especially smite stacking (dimnishing returns ?). Some single targets junglers would have a huge buff, but then again AoE kinda dominate right now.

    And the jungle a bit more of a battlefield; I could see teams running AD/Support mid with a second smite helping/protecting his jungle and roaming to steal/gank

     

    Posted in: Ask the Pros
  • posted a message on Proposed Smite rework; need pros insight about it

    Quote from Dub_Rio »

    This just seems unnecessary. It would also allow for drastically earlier barons. I think it would be a huge mistake personally. 

    Baron is quite a brute early on...


    You can hardly rush it during minutes 15 to 20.

    Then you can *try*, but as I said it's also easier to contest

    Posted in: Ask the Pros
  • posted a message on Proposed Smite rework; need pros insight about it

    Or any regular jungle player.

    Smite changed:
    Damage starts at 300, up to a maximum of 450 damage
    Cooldown reduced to 25 seconds
    Target monster deals -40% and takes 20% increased damage from your team for 5 seconds
    (numbers to be tweaked)

    Goal:

      Changing the meta, mostly. While still allowing your team to have a jungler, Smite is less of a buff secure tool and more of a tactical jungling tool. The reduced damage makes it harder to instantly secure buffs but still hurts big monsters, and the debuff creates a choice: Do I save smite to secure, or do I help my deal killing that Baron/Dragon by smiting early and risk a steal ? Baron/Dragon contests are therefore easier, rewarding clutch steals and team positionning. It is also less punishing to use in many situations as the reduced cooldown could help in teamfights smiting summons or minions blocking skillshots. It might also open routes for junglers as they can use smite to clear medium camps and save their buffs for later

    So, would the theory be any true ? How could it change jungling, and junglers in the meta in general ?

     Could we see more double jungle, or supports taking smite to speed up their junglers ?

    Try to visualize the thing, and, well, think about the results

     

     

    Posted in: Ask the Pros
  • To post a comment, please login or register a new account.