Check the original post again; I edited it with examples since you pointed this out.

Also, something worth noting is that Runaan's Hurricane is actually a very gimmicky item. It sounds good on paper, but when you think about it there are several issues you run into.

Furthermore, Black Cleaver was nerfed because it was too good on too many champions. This means that it significantly strengthened characters that were already strong to begin with provided that they had some benefit of purchasing this item. Prior to the nerf, Bruisers/AD casters were noticeably stronger than any other role in the game.

Also, how was the change of Ionic Spark to Statik Shiv a nerf to Ezreal exactly? Even then, that item is extremely gimmicky too. I wouldn't buy it unless I was a split-pushing ADC. The only one that comes to mind is Sivir and she already does a good job at split pushing with PD and BT.

The way I see it: more itemization was added for characters that already had a lot of strengths to begin with, whereas the characters that were weak to begin with weren't so lucky.

Here is an example of what I mean when I say that the current itemization only serves to make the strong even stronger. Seraph's Embrace is really strong on champions like Singed, Karthus, Swain, Anivia, etc... largely due to the fact that it is so easy to get mana with the item now. This made characters that were already strong even stronger. Don't even get me started on Muramana on Ryze.

So to answer your question, yes, my thesis does hold water in the face of recent evidence as the increase in champion diversity has been largely marginal whereas the increase in item diversity has shot up.

Probably because there are less champions to begin with.

Only a handful less.


All I know is, supporting in DotA is faaar more fun than in LoL. Actually I also think trees/fog and the way sight lines work in Dota adds so much more depth to the game that LoL will never have. But LoL is great for its own reasons as well. I love them both

DotA is not LoL.

/thread

Dota 2 has like 95 heroes compared to LoL's soon to be 108, if I'm not mistaken.

I thought this was about Australian servers

Listen to Nome. He was once the lead content designer for HoN.

HoN has a different set of balance to it that sets it apart from both LoL and DotA. Although it bears a strong resemblance to DotA having originally been a DotA port, there are different items, champions, as well as other things that you might not know such as the first rune spawning at 2:00 rather than DotA's 0:00.

Worthwhile addition. Do you think there are downsides to making items so strong? Do you think adding such items would benefit League, whose champions are built around lower power levels than DotA's?

I'm quite familiar with the issues Runaan's faces. Personally, I think they need to rebalance the single-target case a tad, but those are numbers balance issues, not design issues.

Stacking Cleavers was nerfed hard for the same reason Sunfire stack and Revolver/Gunblade stack were removed. AD caster viability has been all over the place, from Pantheon at one end to Jayce at the other, so it's inappropriate to treat them as one bloc. Bruisers similarly go from the never-seen Udyr to perennial ban material like Irelia.

I also strongly disagree with the assertion that those two roles were stronger than the others in any significant way. It's a common misconception, especially at Elos where players know how to initiate but not how to position to avoid initiations, how to chase but not how to kite, that bruisers are OP. By the end of S2, junglers were supports with beef, and bruisers and AD casters were fighting mages for time in top lane. Mid mages were getting fat way faster than top laners, and the importance of top lane was in the snowbally lane mechanics and difficulty of avoiding ganks, rather than the absolute power of tops. The reworked Black Cleaver and armor pen rules completely changed the equation, literally...for about two weeks. It's not going to last, and bruisers/AD casters won't remain on top of the heap for long.

Ionic spark changes mainly hurt Irelia and Shen. I didn't mean to imply that every item on that list nerfed every champ on the list. Ez and Jax were hurt by the Phage and Trinity changes; Irelia and Shen were hurt by the Trinity, Wit's, and Ionic changes.

What champs would you say were weak that weren't served by the changes? Heck, even Udyr gets more meaning from his jungle sustain post-patch.

I'll agree that the Muramana change seems like misdesign. However, I don't see the existence of changes that benefit the strong champs as good evidence of the ubiquity of such changes.

I apologize if i'm mistaken or have taken things that have been said incorrectly; but here's what I feel regarding the design decisions regarding itemization. (as well as I believe riot's design decisions overall)

First off I understand what you mean in the main post; league seems to lack "wow" type items with unique effects that dont necessarily need to be used by the type of characters that need the accompanied stats. (like shadow blade on CM as you mentioned) But I believe League's item focus disregarded these types of fun effects for a reason. Dota and LoL are both extremely different. In dota, while some items might have really strong effects, there are always items that exist to counter other items. Sytche can be countered by black king bar, (or a friendly force staff sort of) satanic can be countered with sytche, butterfly can be countered with monkey king bar and so on.

However, in LoL, (and at least what i believe i've read from riot members) its believed these types of items end up becoming "must have" items that easily gain dominance over others; this as well as one of riot's approaches to LoL's design. That being, instead of having every item have an item based counter that must (yeah i know you dont HAVE to buy bkb to counter a sycthe, but youll have a good advantage to do so) be gotten, instead, have these mechanics be something that can (mostly) be countered by the player's own skill. This is mostly why you dont see many sort of overly powerful actives on items, such as stunning or silencing and the like, instead LoL opts for mostly stats and damage that help fit playstyles rather than for intentionally countering mechanics. (In other words, instead of needing bkb to counter sytche, I'm able to do something physically without the need of a certain ability or item to counter sycthe)

I feel the same design is aimed champion abilities as well; for example the "dota fanboys" (not that im implying you are one or that im intentionally trying to rile people up) like to complain about how "oh this champions ability is like so and so's but its more CASUAL." For example; Karthus's Ultimate versus Zues's ultimate. Karthus's has a cast time; Zues doesnt. This I believe was intentional; the cast time is to give player's a chance to react to the ability, and perhaps maybe try and counteract the damage by say maybe lifestealing off creeps, or trying to heal quickly with a potion. Though there are obvious champions that have abilities that give them an advantage toward Karthus's ult (ie, champions with shields or heals) all other champions without such abilities still have a chance to try and do something to try and save themselves. This opens up counterplay options that aren't necessarily reliant on items, and allows players to react against something they'd otherwise be helpless against.

And this sort of design is implemented in several other champions; Morgana's Ultimate (puck) allows you a chance to try and get away from the tether, Caitlyn's Ultimate (Sniper) allows a teammate to block the shot to try and save you and etc. Meanwhile dota focuses more on direct counters to champions. As an example, (this is likely a **** example but I hope you understand the idea at least) lets say the enemy team has a slardar and bounty hunter; you play as Riki. Once they hit level 6, youre likely not going to be able to depend on your ultimate invisibility much. In lane theyll just hit you with their track abilities, and youll likely be unable to farm and die alot. Now obviously it doesnt ALWAYS play out like that, and there are things you can do to avoid slard and bh, such as ganking other lanes or having bkb to become immune to the track, but as far as laning goes you'll feel rather hard countered without really anything you can do against them. Thus, the "counter" for this sort of situation is to simply not pick Riki against that sort of team. I believe Riot doesn't want these sorts of situations; while some champions will obviously always have some advantages over others, they dont want complete dominance in lane from hard counters without the countered player feeling like there's nothing he can do.

Granted with all that said and all the examples I gave, I feel league still delivers much less in execution than in what it strives for. (The karthus example for example; while the channel time helps give players time to save themselves, there's little they can do by themselves if they dont have the right items or abilities) I think overall though it really just comes down to personal preference. I believe this is what LoL's focus is in their design as opposed to dota's.