Both of the sightstones are great new items, imho. However, while they are extremely useful, by late game, usually 4/5 of the team justify not buying wards because they can fill that last spot with "something better."

How about making "sightstone" a boot enchantment, like the other ones? This way, it might see more use and also clear up an item slot. Having the health would be nice, but even if it's just a warding active, that would be a great boot upgrade.

Yeah, I'd like something like this.

if they have the sightstone before a certain point in the game this would be good a addition for it to go in to boots. if players didn't buy a sightstone before that point then they can't put it in to boots otherwise people would all get it and wards will be everywhere.

just a thought but i do like the idea

Would be a completely overpowered boot upgrade. I'm all for more convenient ward slots, but that's not the way to fix it.

Sightstone is a **** item imho atm. Cost doesn't justify any gains. Limited number of wards that can be placed. A slight boost in HP (100 hp really?, common now). You're using up a slot to hold this limited use item.

It would be worth it if the price was right, stats were a lil different. Currently though it's an overpriced item for what you get.

People argue this but play games where you buy it, and others where you don't. You'll stop buying the Sightstone. Most people don't seem to upgrade it anymore too because that's not worth it at all people have found it seems.

People bought Heart of Gold and used the GP10 it provided, in tandem with Philo, to mainly buy wards and occasionally buy items.

Global GP5 got increased.

Sightstone and Ruby Sightstone provide an effective minimum GP10 of 8.4 and 10.4,towards wards, Health, ~and~ make it very undesirable for your enemy to buy pinks to get rid of your wards. (Only worth 10g, and it costs you almost nothing to simply replace them.)

How are they a bad thing again? 2/3 wards (150/225g) value at a time, and you can still buy more wards if you feel you need more coverage (Which you shouldn't, if you're rationing properly and pick up the occasional pink for major objectives)

Inb4 not only the support will build this item and the map will be totally warded if it becomes a boot enchantement. Taking a slot is why other roles don't normally build it.

It does become a bit of a problem if the rest of the team ditches wards for "something better", leaving only the support with a Ruby Sightstone to handle all the warding. Still, if everyone was able to buy wards at that point in the game, map vision would become ridiculous, since all the extra gold after finishing your build would be spent on wards (and elixirs, but there's enough excess for both). With that many wards, you could ward the entire map.

It's actually very useful. You're paying for free wards; 1300 gold = 17.3 wards. You will use more than that per game as a support. It also allows you to carry 2 additional, free, circumstantial wards. You may only have 3 placed at a time, but if you suddenly need to ward Baron quickly, it costs almost nothing to just throw another ward down. You only cost yourself an older ward which will most likely fade soon anyways. If you need more than 3 wards on the map, then you can just buy individual wards.

Also, the sightstone(s) make pink wards fairly useless. Your wards are free, while enemy pink wards are 125g (100g if you're counter-warding). If they pink one of your wards, you can just put a new one outside of the pink's vision. It may be a slightly worse position, but generally it will accomplish the same thing at the opponent's expense.

I would agree with this, but even if the "sightstone" were an enchantment, I feel like many players wouldn't build it until they have done their full build, maybe at the very end-game. Even now, when it comes to choosing wards vs. saving up to get your IE or RD faster, few players opt for the wards (at least at my elo).

Perhaps if it was cost-prohibitive... an expensive boot enchantment with only the sightstone's active functionality?