Reign of Gaming

Is it a troll post or what?really qqs to counter zed ulty?Really?!??!?!?!?

100% troll....yeah waste ur gold only for the active(MR useless).You can just buy zhonya +armor+ap and u can counter his ulty.Troll else where plz.

Edit:Oh sorry Zed is AP now my fault -_-

Of course, Roit willfully ignoring why Zed's Q is generally ignored. It's not the damage. IT'S THE FLIPPING INCREASING ENERGY COST PER RANK.

Why is he the only ninja that gets punished for ranking up an ability? Why?

It decreases by 5 per rank, unless the LoL wiki is incorrect: Razor Shuriken, COST: 75 / 70 / 65 / 60 / 55 Energy

I play Zed a lot, and my gut says that's correct, but I couldn't tell you with 100% accuracy unless I was in game.

Well, they also had a Hitler themed restaurant in China (they had to close it ofc), so in comparison this is not that big of a deal, and hardly surprising, really.

LOL.

Zed is in a fine place. As someone who has ~150 games on the character, I'm still learning new ways to manage my shadows, and figuring out all the nuances of his kit. I'm an e-w maxer myself, because I love to push the wave and go roam, and I love to have my w off cooldown as much as possible, but I can see the benefits of maxing q second (but it is a bit expensive energy-wise). Qss and cleanse are good ways to counter his ult, but if you rely on your ult to make all your plays, you're playing zed wrong. Zed is a fantastic early game fighter against a majority of opponents with his super low CD e, and his clone slow. His clone being his escape and his pushing tool makes learning when and where to do certain things all the more necessary to mastering Zed.

His Q doesn't need to be easier to hit, if anything at all, they should reduce the energy cost on it by 5 or so, so against a bad lane, you can keep up the q farming and not fall behind.

Knowing when to use your ult is another thing. So many times a see zed's go in on a 100% health opponent with death mark, and I just have to facepalm. Outside of Blade of the ruined king, and ignite, AND their escapes being down, you simply should not be trying to 100-0 enemy toplaners unless they're sufficiently behind before level 11. A lot of zed's also don't buy blade of the ruined king. To each his own, but, don't skip over probably his biggest snowball item sans BT and go around calling him weak, he is FAR from weak, and wholly viable for competitive play.

His skillcap is insanely high, and it's probably one of the reasons why I'll continue to play him, because every game could be a new learning experience.

Also, the blade changes on the beta are actually pretty good for zed, even though i cried at the attack speed introduction, it actually allows me to brawl it out with bruisers without using my ult in more situations. The cutlass change hurts though, I'll probably start rushing brut over cutlass now, but good job nonetheless riot.

Have you considered the item Ravenous Hydra on Zed. It sky rockets his single target damage to incredible amounts in consideration with his other items.

I still prefer BotRK to Hydra. Specifically, we're probably comparing actives. Hydra gives you around 100-90% of your AD for the active, whereas BotRK gives you 150 + 50%. That makes BotRK better until you get 300 AD (which I'd say is pretty late in the game), some movespeed, and it gives you that passive which is super-useful in the League of Warmog's. 

They're both pretty much similar, though. AoE vs. single target, I guess. I just generally don't get Hydra unless I'm against a super-pusher like Singed or Rumble where I want to counter-push. 

The news of LoL themed restaurant opening brings a big smile to my face. Can't imagine what this means to Riot. Props and keep up the great work!

"LoLKing data is highly inaccurate -- it's a fun site, but please do not quote it as evidence for Zed's power level (in either direction, it's entirely possible for a champion to show at 53% on LoLKing and be fine or weak)."

This is where you have to call bullshit on riots response again. While I do agree that lolking data is inaccurate but not as inaccurate as riot says. From what I remember reading, riot says lolking is off by 5% in most cases. Again I call bullshit. If this were the case, before shacos nerf we all would of seem dips and ups on his win % every week. But we never seen that. I always seen his win % consistently at 54 to 56 (Avg. 55). Its not very often when you see huge swings in % falls/ups on lolking. And when you do its around 3% at most. If you play alot and check lolking daily/weekly, you can tell that lolking is a reliable source to quote. With less than half of LoL champs viable for high tourney play, riot has to sprout bullshit to keep the community calm.

Quote from RoGLegend »

"LoLKing data is highly inaccurate -- it's a fun site, but please do not quote it as evidence for Zed's power level (in either direction, it's entirely possible for a champion to show at 53% on LoLKing and be fine or weak)."

This is where you have to call bullshit on riots response again. While I do agree that lolking data is inaccurate but not as inaccurate as riot says. From what I remember reading, riot says lolking is off by 5% in most cases. Again I call bullshit. If this were the case, before shacos nerf we all would of seem dips and ups on his win % every week. But we never seen that. I always seen his win % consistently at 54 to 56 (Avg. 55). Its not very often when you see huge swings in % falls/ups on lolking. And when you do its around 3% at most. If you play alot and check lolking daily/weekly, you can tell that lolking is a reliable source to quote. With less than half of LoL champs viable for high tourney play, riot has to sprout bullshit to keep the community calm.

+1 Lolking is FAR more accurate and "quotable" than waht riot says....Riot always spam number we can't verify by any mean and says "we re doing right cuz we have these numbers" but we have numbers based on GAMES PLAYED and are REAL numbers that says what Riot says is wrong... and it is... seems Riot wants to nerf Garen in the next patch (popularity of that champ is like 15% with a win rate like 54% but ONLY if you do WELL) but they will not nerf SINGED (pop 10% and win RATE 57% DESPITE WHAT YOU DO IN LANE) who will FACEROLL ANYONE even if he exits lane phase 1/15  cause he become immortal/ungankable/unkitable/ridiculous. plz... Riot guys... dont say things that will make us angry. Keep on working BUT DON't SAY lolking is inaccurate cause ANY serius lol player take more into account lolking vs what Riot says. BTW what are your arguments saying lolking is inaccurate? you can't simply say "lolking is inaccurate cause you can see one fine/weak cahmp at 53%" it's not like this.. and if it is TELL US WHY... u cant say lolking says false things without proving any of your words man...

(used those two chap to make an example i don't want to generate a flame about gare/singed nerfs/tweaks)

I doubt serious players (pros) take into account what lolking says whatsoever.

LoLKing takes into account all games, all matchups, all levels of skill (this one can be reglated though). There are so many things that can change a champions winrate.

The most obvious example is Orianna, she has like a 44% winrate, and anyone who says she is UP is...pretty stupid. If a champion is hard to play, but viable at top level, it is balanced. If a champion is niche, but good in the right circumstances, it is viable. If a champion is deemed as very strong, but has very strong counters, it is balanced (Darius).

Players, however, are better with some champions than with others, and may pick those even when they are sub-optimal. That will inevitably decrease the winrate of that champion compared to the more all-around safe picks who work in most games (both singed and garen are part of this club imo)

As for Zed, he both have some really bad matchups and is hard to play, which will reduce his winrate, but against the right teamcomp and in the right hands he is viable, hence he won't get buffed (or at least that's my assumption)

Quote from CoolRoot »

I doubt serious players (pros) take into account what lolking says whatsoever.

LoLKing takes into account all games, all matchups, all levels of skill (this one can be reglated though). There are so many things that can change a champions winrate.

The most obvious example is Orianna, she has like a 44% winrate, and anyone who says she is UP is...pretty stupid. If a champion is hard to play, but viable at top level, it is balanced. If a champion is niche, but good in the right circumstances, it is viable. If a champion is deemed as very strong, but has very strong counters, it is balanced (Darius).

Players, however, are better with some champions than with others, and may pick those even when they are sub-optimal. That will inevitably decrease the winrate of that champion compared to the more all-around safe picks who work in most games (both singed and garen are part of this club imo)

As for Zed, he both have some really bad matchups and is hard to play, which will reduce his winrate, but against the right teamcomp and in the right hands he is viable, hence he won't get buffed (or at least that's my assumption)

I repeat saying "I doubt serious players (pros) take into account what lolking says whatsoever." does not mean they aren't. It means only the YOU think they are not on a "zero fact" basis.

Also Singed and Garen have amongst the highest win rates so saying players that play them bad lower their win rate is pretty stupid... players that play champions bad lowers ANY champion win rate. Also looking ONLY at platinum level and higher (where improper use of the champion is much less reliable) u see the same win rates % so what is your point here?  

Also the point if NOT if hte champ is viable in lane (almost any champ is with little exceptions like karma) but if the champ has a viable kit to WIN the game.

The point here is Riot making nerfs on a "zero fact" basis like your argument before.. and saying things that in their mind justifies their work on the same basis.

Orianna should not be nerfed since while she is pretty strong in lane (farming) and alsohas great utility only the 47%(and NOT 44%) of the game played with her is a winning game... so why NERF her?  Seems they re going to nerf Darius now... darius need nerfs(in 5vs5) ? NO ... ha is a stupid champ? yes obviously but he offers BIG counterplay against him. He cannot harrass without pushing lane, if he does not get kills he become a roaming useless mass of mud... but they re still not nerfing singed who can end is lane 0/15 and win the game alone... u can face stomp him givng him a 6/0 on his face and on level 11 he will dive u under tower (u re same level or higher with 6 kills and more farm and gear) with no fear of CCs, Tower hits(btw i think Riot MUST  augment the increasing dmg in consecutive tower shots cause now it s RIDICULOUS) or any of your dmg skill, Simply for a reason . He is Singed. A stupid champ who can uber lose the lane , feed like bastard and then win the game alone anyway. This is pretty embarassing for Riot in my opinion.Having a champ so BAD thinked that anyone who use him wins every game unless ALL his team is feeding like there is no tomorrow to feed more(and somethimes u win even in this situation).

My poit was that Riot makes OFTEN (not ALWAYS but OFTEN) RANDOM nerfs/buffs to champs basing that fact on UNREALISTIC numbers that they re saying to us when we have complete different, realistic and verifiable numbers.

This is my point i will be glad if one Rioter answers me cause, even if i take in big account any answer by anyone who has a brain and can make his arguments clear like you, i'm not searching a players fight on opionions but i'm searching an answer by a Riot employee on these "numbers" they got that are so different from ours. I also wanna make you see that Riot is a pretty obscure and NOT transparent company when it comes to THEIR numbers. Look with elo equations. Tehy says we have the equations (omg really ? i thought u can make elo system run without having them... ) but we DON'T WANT you all to know how it works... WHY??? it's a so stupid thing. 

You misunderstood me on one point. I am saying Singed and Garen have HIGH winrates because they are relatively EASY. They may be slightly strong aswell, but so is Orianna who is at a 47% winrate and played at least as often as any of those in tournaments.

You're saying that a high winrate means a champion is strong. Thus, conversely, a low winrate must mean a champion is weak, and we both agree Orianna is NOT weak, thus winrates are not a good measure of a champions strengh.

As for the zero fact basis, pros are pros for a reason. Do you think they pick based on some winrates, or based on what they think their team needs (a champion fitting a matchup does not only mean in lane, but in teamfights aswell)?

Quote from CoolRoot »

You misunderstood me on one point. I am saying Singed and Garen have HIGH winrates because they are relatively EASY. They may be slightly strong aswell, but so is Orianna who is at a 47% winrate and played at least as often as any of those in tournaments.

You're saying that a high winrate means a champion is strong. Thus, conversely, a low winrate must mean a champion is weak, and we both agree Orianna is NOT weak, thus winrates are not a good measure of a champions strengh.

As for the zero fact basis, pros are pros for a reason. Do you think they pick based on some winrates, or based on what they think their team needs (a champion fitting a matchup does not only mean in lane, but in teamfights aswell)?

for this "You're saying that a high winrate means a champion is strong. Thus, conversely, a low winrate must mean a champion is weak, and we both agree Orianna is NOT weak, thus winrates are not a good measure of a champions strengh." No that is not what i said. I obviously know that a champ like orianna is "strong" (i don't think she is strong but i think she can be used in a nice way in a combo team like some team did in tournaments) but she is balanced by his "trickness" so she has no high winrate. So sha needs nerfs? NO, simple. if lot of player lears how to use her and her win rate GROWS UP like hell then you need to nerf her. That 's what i said. 

Also for this "As for the zero fact basis, pros are pros for a reason. Do you think they pick based on some winrates, or based on what they think their team needs (a champion fitting a matchup does not only mean in lane, but in teamfights aswell)?"

You answer make little sense since i NEVER said u must nerf or not nerf something based on what PROS pick.. NEVER said that. I said that HE told us that lolking is inaccurate WITHOUT telling us WHY he thinks so. So maybe we will be glad if he says us WHY lolking is inaccurate since he says that it is. Also telling us some of the "magic numbers" Rios has that are so different from the ones quoted from lolking would be nice. This is what i said.. Not what you said i said.