@Xypherous: How to fix Warmog's without nerfing the regen to 1% because of laning...

  • Hello all,

    Xypherous recently stated...

    Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> * Regeneration lowered to 1% from 1.5%.

    We're mostly concerned at the moment with the early laning snowball case of this item, rather than the teamfight potential...
    ... the majority of the pain point of Warmog's should be how well it allows you to win the lane by mere stubborness and be immune to ganks. </td></tr></table>
    In short, it's too powerful early game because of the large amount of health and the sustain given. There is an easy and simple solution...

    Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> Warmog's Armor
    Stats +640 health
    Passive: Gain 20 x Current Level in Maximum Health
    Unique Passive: You gain health regeneration equal to 1.5% of your maximum health every 5 seconds. </td></tr></table>
    What does this mean?
    • At level 1, the champion will have 660 health from Warmog's. (640 + 20x1 = 640 + 20 = 660 health)
    • At level 10, the champion will have 840 health from Warmog's. (640 + 20x10 = 640 + 200 = 840 health)
    • At level 18, the champion will have 1000 health from Warmog's (640 + 20x18 = 640 + 360 = 1000 health)

    Why do this?
    1. If bought early, it still gives a HUGE chunk of health, but not as much as the LIVE version.
    2. Early game, there are probably more efficient items in terms of total price paid. Late game, still very efficient and cost effective
    3. It still keeps the 1.5% regen passive.
    4. There is little to no late game sacrifice in terms of maximum health or regen.
    5. It solves the laning phase problem of being stubborn or ungankable because champion health and regen will be lower.
    6. It is still possible to buy multiple Warmog's for HUGE health pools because the health gain is not UNIQUE. (Regen stays unique)

    What are your thoughts??

    Cheers,
    Danage

    EDIT: Another possible change adapted from Cronovey. Change the regen such that it isn't as strong early game as well, but slightly stronger than live late game.
    Unique Passive: You gain health regeneration equal to (0.1% * Level) of your maximum health every 5 seconds.

    At level 1, you get 0.1% regen
    At level 10, you get 1.0% regen
    At level 18, you get 1.8% regen (live is currently 1.5%)

    EDIT 2: Don't let this point overshadow my main post, but can we get Warmog's added to Dominion?? It was removed because of the minion passive it had in Season 2. Now it doesn't have that passive but it is still missing from Dominion. Thank you.
  • This particular idea reduces down to:

    Punish players for finishing an item early - by making it so that the earlier you finish the item, the weaker this is and the more gold-inefficient it is.

    To be perfectly fair, it is a path that works on certain statistics, particularly late-game statistics like % penetration - in which the disincentive is to gently guide people into realizing when the item is truly good.

    However, this is a case where you are taking an item that is already not cost-efficient for raw health - punishing players that finish it early by making it even less cost-efficient thereby merely making anyone who finishes Warmog's armor before the health-break even point into an ineffective build. The problem is compounded by that fact that it is Health that you are gating so the most desirable early game statistic is not available by finishing the item - thus what is most likely going to happen is that players will merely stack Giant's Belts to get around your attempted fix.

    While this will nerf the item, most definitely - it does so merely by making it a foolish option to upgrade the item until the numbers pan out. Did you buy Warmogs before level 15 to 18? Congratulations, you made a mistake. You should have bought another Giant's Belt because you have tricked players into buying an item with negative gold efficiency until you deem it to be "correct."

    Players should be rewarded for finishing items that they want to buy - That is intrinsically the point of items - This change effectively "solves" rushed Warmogs by giving rushed Warmogs negative reward - punishing players who are doing well rather than solve the gameplay that a rushed Warmogs presents. Don't get me wrong, this tactic is certainly valid in some games - if you want to be really heavy handed about it - but at a certain point, you should just say "Warmog's Armor - Level Requirement: 15" and be done with it. It's a much cleaner way of accomplishing what you want innately. It's no real surprise that most RPGs do use the idea of level restrictions for this very purpose.

    However, level restricting an item doesn't really fit into what we want for itemization.
  • Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;">
    Warmog's Armor
    Stats +1000 health
    Unique Passive: You gain health regeneration equal to (0.1% * Level) of your maximum health every 5 seconds. </td></tr></table>
    It suffers from a similar problem to the original one in terms of punishing you for statistics that you don't want to see early - but since the magnitude isn't as big, it's not *as* bad.

    However, structurally - it follows the same pattern - just on a much much smaller order of magnitude.
  • Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> Why DID they get rid of that?

    (minion stacking) </td></tr></table>
    It's mostly due to the fact that this particular mechanic only opens up Warmog's as a good defensive option if you are already winning.

    Let's say Warmog's was the best option to win games - by putting a farm and stack mechanic on it - you effectively negate the ability of the opponent to stabilize the game by buying the same item. Intuitively, if you have the same build as your opponent - you should be able to fight them to a stalemate.

    Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> Cool. So basically you want people rushing warmogs because health is fun, right? </td></tr></table>
    The ideal goal that we're tweaking towards is to make items more fluid. Frozen Heart or Randuin's Omen, for example, is an excellent counter to the version of BoRK that is going up now. Which are in turn destroyed by Black Cleaver and Last Whisper. Which are in turn are destroyed by Warmog's Armor - which in turn is destroyed by Torment/BoRK.

    The problem is that currently, the cycle is "stuck" on Warmog's Armor - so clearly the wheel needs further grouping so that it flows more continuously. You should feel fine sticking to your preferred item build of choice defensively - but your 2nd or 3rd item will prove much more effective if you react to your opponent's build and if, in turn, they react to yours.

    Obviously, it's not quite there yet - but we're going to keep grinding until it is.
  • Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> Just make it out of combat regen only? </td></tr></table>
    I tried this before - What I discovered was that it makes matchups incredibly swingy. For a default item to cause wildly varying swings in matchups was rather odd.

    That is, champions who could farm from afar and stay safe benefits from the item the most - while characters that need to be active in lane are punished. You worsen some of the worse cases (Cho'Gath, for example) while weakening some of the ideal cases - A heavy trade champion like Lee-Sin.

    Unfortunate - Kind of hoped it would work.

    Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> It's still a "stronger mechanic" than Rod of Ages, which uses "hard time" rather than a "soft time" like level. </td></tr></table>
    The key difference is: Rod of Ages rewards you for rushing it, because you get the stats earlier the earlier you rush it.

    This version punishes you for rushing it, because rushing it only gives you negative stat valuation.

    Recall, the two items still have to be balanced by the end-game somewhat - RoA self-balances in the end-game, because it always has a time requirement - thus we can make RoA's base statistics crazy and still have it balanceable for end-game - because there's always an additional cost.
  • Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> Then what is the logic behind Bloodthirster? Yes it's easier to stack, but at the same time it is much more probable that the person already winning will have it fully stacked and therefore has a much easier time preventing you from doing the same. </td></tr></table>
    Bloodthirster is interesting because it only indirectly helps you out in terms of preserving the stacks. While the person winning is far more likely to have full stacks - they are quite frequently killable with only a Bloodthirster.

    Seeker's and Bloodthirster also mitigate their snowball advantage by having a relatively small max stack cap - 30 minions is roughly 5 waves, which can be accumulated in 1 or 2 minutes, rather than 100 of the old. So, while the patterns are flawed in the same respect - the small stack caps make it a small flaw rather than a large one.

    Finally, Seeker's has the release-valve of, the upgrade to the item essentially gives you maximum stacks - thus giving an alternate to needing to farm it out.

    Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> That said, there are so many options for other stats, but very few options to counter health stacking. % health damage isn't the only way to take out health, AD/AP are there however I personally think that there should at least be more options than Liandry/BoTRK. </td></tr></table>
    DFG is also an option - as well as more indirect methods such as raw lifesteal tanking.

    Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> So you want to turn itemization into rock/paper/scissors style gameplay? </td></tr></table>
    It's not exactly rock paper scissors - right? You start with Rock - but as the game goes on, you get like Rock Scissors. In the extreme extreme case, you probably have Papery Rocky Scissors of Paper.

    However, the enemy starts with Scissors - Oops - but then he can get up to Rocky Scissors of Paper Scissors.
  • Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> Punishing players for bad decisions is not always bad. And in this case, it is actually a buff from the 1.0% HP regen. By the time Warmog's is bought, the player usually reaches level 9-10 -- reaching approximately 1.0% HP regen. It scales past the previous Warmog after 15, and in this way we can have that late-game regen item. </td></tr></table>
    The thing about the late-game regen item is that ideally, I would like it to exclusively be a tank late-game regen item, as I think tanks without sustain are the class of characters that a late-game sustain item should support.

    For example, Leona, Amumu, Nautilus etc. - These are the characters that need a heavy late-game regeneration option - not Xin Zhao, Irelia, Jax.

    It may be that it might be impossible to create one without it being supplanted by bruisers - unsure - but I know that, if we created a high regen item, we'd want it to be more tailored towards true tanks like Leona / Mummy rather than Fighters.
  • Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> So I suppose my question is; is that where you want itemization to be? You want a cookie cutter build for certain roles that really only changes one, maybe two, items a game? </td></tr></table>
    I suppose the answer to this is very champion specific. Some champions are going to have cookie-cutter builds. They have certain requirements that they *need* to have in order to function - and for the most part, that's kind of fine.

    However, some champions should be able to build with far more flexibility - like supports or mages - because their jobs tend to be far more flexible. The carry should also be able to build with far more flexibility to his needs - because his needs tend to shift the most depending on the enemy compositions.

    However - for fighters, their job/role doesn't change much. They are heavy divers that try to get to the backline. They don't have as much conditionals - and I don't really expect their items to diverge too much - as opposed to every other class who actually have shifting priorities. This may be a problem with the Fighter class as a whole, perhaps - but that's something we'll also have to solve on a more champion specific basis as well.

    Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> So, all i have to do is buy Spock and I win? </td></tr></table>
    Lizard.
  • Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> So, in your opinion, the current 'League of bruisers' is actually a problem and you are trying to balance the items to make their role not so... I'm tempted to say dominant, but their job IS to be dominant, so I'm going to say not so snowbally/beefy/unkillable if fed? </td></tr></table>
    So, I'm not going to lie - the vast majority of champions that are crazy now are bruisers with free resistances or resistance shreds of their own. I kind of knew this going in - that shifting baseline itemization was going to cause a lot of the things we did in the past to bite us back.

    Like for example, Kayle, Xin Zhao, Jarvan. Notice a trend? Shreds. A lot of free damage. A lot of free resistances. Why did they need it? Because they couldn't actually deal damage in S2 or live in S2 without a bunch of free statistics - but now that the classes are more balanced around each other - those free things that made them function are the same things that are making them crazy.

    In the end - I think we'll get there slowly, by either taking away offensive power and keeping the resistances, or taking away the resistances and keeping their power - but in many ways taking away a lot of the unnecessary tools they have now that they desperately needed in S2.
  • Quote:
    <table cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="100%"> <tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset; padding:10px;"> Uh oh, Xyph just suggested that Jarvan IV might be imbalanced. Everyone panic and freak out over nothing! </td></tr></table>
    Well, right now there's that bug that makes his jungle speed crazy. Let's fix that first. XD

    (Oh, apparently we got this already last patch. Well, Jarvan might be fine now.)