Obviously, runes are designed for higher level of play. They add a bit of strategy to building your champ before the game starts. It wasn't designed to give a disadvantage; at top levels everyone has runes. What it does do is add versatility as well as another model to get you to play more. If runes costed money I would have an issue with that. But since they don't I have no problem with their implementation. Just play more so that you can get them; use them as you master the character that you want to use most in ranked or make a overall generac runepage. Until later levels in ranked it is pretty easy to get by with just two rune pages.
Lol, please. The least meaningful 'strategy' ever. I like LoL, detest runes. SO much. I'm a casual ranked player, play in plat. Can easily play with 2 rune pages at this level...
yeah but realistically, the way NA and EU ranking breaks down is like low bronze- bad high bronze-high silver: roughly the same high silver-high gold: roughly the same high gold-high plat: roughly the same diamond better diamond challenger (then better challenger but really now cmon) not to say that high bronze=high plat, although in some cases i'd pick the bronze player over the plat (vanishingly few ones). also not to say that diamond is straight better than plat, though by and large it will be (not always by hugely noticeable amounts till you get to "better diamond" tier also, i don't see the point of runes if the game is meant to be competitive just because the time it takes to become fully competitive is ridiculous, and the notion of priced runes prohibits customization and experimentation too much- if you know that a set of runes is going to cost at least as much as the next champion you want to buy, if not more, won't you just stop buying runes as soon as you can? instead of actually trying different builds? and if not, you'll be gimping your champion pool on a risk, on a whim. and let's not forget that for a third page you could have at the least one of the newer champs, if not a bunch of the old- why bother with a third page when you can make do with iffy runes it's just a bad setup imo. i'm all for customization, but not when it's nonoptional, not free, and affects gameplay.
I just don't have the time to commit to play another game at the moment.... otherwise I might give DOTA a shot so that I can accurately assess which game I think is better. So I'll stick with LoL for the time
Eh, its what people thought about quite a few of Hi-Rez's games, and look what happened (RIP Tribes franchise), I enjoyed what I player of Smite, but its small time, Heroes of the Storm is more likely to compete. Hell, even Dawngate, but from what I've seen of Hi-Rez, they lack both the drive and passion to make a big E-sport or even casual game to stand up to current MOBAs.
Eh. Depends on lot of things. You could play on challenger level with just your two basic 15AD mr/armor and your 15ap/7mpen/armor/mr, but it all depends on your skill level. I mean, you can play poppy in challenger, doesn't mean she's challenger level champ. I mean, froggen could get away with doing whatever the Firk he wants on anivia because Firk you im froggen. Doesn't mean that it's a decent build or good to copy. There's so many variables. Also, smite is a failure, let's just face it. Dota seems cool enough, just not my taste after I started playing league first, idk.
Just about league rank, it doesn't mean anything. Ive met diamond 'only wukongs' that are absolutely terrible, or only X role. And they're not good players, they don't understand the game or strategy, they just grind the same X and get good with it while skipping the other aspects of the game
I love this dota thread was taken over by lol. It is the better game after all. I started with the original wc3 dota and then lol and then tried the "improved" dota and LoL is definitely the better experience.
It was inevitable. Nothing to do which is better (ps your ignorance is showing), just that this forum has a lot more active LoL players.
LoL just has more active players in general, so yes it is pretty inevitable. The whole dota vs lol is better is largely preference based anyhow imo
I thought about 1/3rd of all players was bronze, 1/2 was bronze + half silver. Inb4we need a new plague?
The only argument for playing Lol over Dota that I accept as reasonable, is that you either don't have the time or the will to learn Dota. Anyone who says anything else simply has not enough experience with both games to see what a shitty designed game Lol is (compared to Dota).
Care to explain why you think lol is a shitty game compared to Dota? I am interested in hearing..... like what specifically makes dota better
A lot of things. I will try to mention as much as I can, though maybe I will miss some. 1. In Dota heroes fit certain strategies, while in Lol they fit archetypes. What this means is that in Lol you will always have 5 heroes. The solo lane, the jungler, the mid and the duo-lane. They vary a little in terms of their abilities, but they are all designed to accomplish the same goal. Either to mid, solo, AD carry, support or jungle. Which means that strategically you only have 5 roles to play with, which will automatically be filled with the best available heroes. This is why so many heroes in Lol are underpicked/never picked. Meanwhile in Dota, the heroes are not designed to fill a template, but are actually designed to provide something to a team and to fit a certain strategy. Which is why you have a lot more laning options in Dota, whatever suits your team the most. Also pretty much every champion in Dota is competitive right now (maybe around 3 are not), the balance is the best it has been since I started playing Dota. 2. Runes and masteries are Bane Shift. I hear a lot of Lol players crying ''artificial difficulty'' when talking about Dota, when Lol has it much more. The masteries and runes in Lol are just that, artificial difficulty. You either read up and farm the best setup for your champion or you are gimping yourself. This was made painfuly obvious to me when I once locked in Jarvan with AP runes. I couldn't do anything for the whole game. 3. Securing kills is a lot harder in Lol. In Dota a bad player getting caught out of position is punished by death. In Lol stuns are very weak compared to Dota, so you can't really burst down someone during a stun. This means that the player can flash away. Since kills are a lot harder to get, in Lol players have to fight for advantages by securing the dragons/barons. Which leads to really low killscores and wierd dancing around the dragon/baron pits. I have no idea how people can still watch that. It has been the same for the past 3-4 years. 4. Abilities scale in Lol. While this was supposed to be some revolutionary Bane Shift, it is actually terrible for the game. This is probably the main reason why Lol is so snowbally, because abilities scale with money. So the team who gets a small advantage first will much more likely win the next fight. And then the next one etc... Meanwhile in Dota you can be 10k gold behind and still win the game with turtling with a Magnus + Sven. If you get a 3 man RP and Sven gets a crit or two on them, you won the fight. Even if you are 10k behind. So basically it is much more possible to outplay in Dota then in Lol. In Lol you can outplay the opponents during the laning stage, after that it gets hard. Also the argument that Dota doesn't have ''spellcaster carries'' is terrible, when it has heroes like Storm Spirit, Invoker, Necrolyte, Outworld destroyer,.... I am sure I've missed a lot of things but these are just the basics that came to my mind right now.
