Honestly, if I were to cut anything, it would be Zap - your allegiance is pretty crucial, so you probably want to limit yourself to only 3x TF and no other Bilgewater cards at all. I'd go so far as to say this is one of those decks that just loses immediately if you whiff on allegiance.
We're not done with reveals - there is very likely some other card in Shurima that fits as well as Zap.
I'm not always perfect at interpreting things like this, but it says they are recasting the voice acting. Pretty sure that means they are changing both the voice and the art.
Well, apparently no one else is allowed to play landmarks anymore. Shurima has two different ways to kill any landmark, one free (and upside if it's your own) and one a way to kill a landmark with a body attached (and upside if it's your own) - and they have buckets of landmarks that they don't care if they die and may even want to kill them.
So, good luck, Aphelios, with your Temple dreams. Pretty sure the days of the Temple's dominance are numbered.
Targon's main problem for me is it's versatility, The region have access to buffs, debuffs, protection, removal, healing. I know It's not the only versatile region, Ionia is also versatile but it's units tend to be lackluster stats wise, a weakness not shared by Targon. Not to mention that they also have both overwhelm and elusive units so we can add good finishers to the list.
Just wait til they give Targon a one-sided board wipe. Er, I mean, besides the one they already have ...
I don't hate that targon is good now, it literally took 3 mini expansions to get there and an event.
We're getting another region in march I think
So I expect a similar pattern.
It's fine for a region to be the best region, obviously. There will always be a best region. But Targon is very definitely over the top right now. Hush is probably fine in its current form. Bastion is probably fine as well.
Honestly, the biggest mistake by far was giving Targon (a region that is very weak in direct removal) the most efficient removal spell in the game at this point (Calibrum). So, just run Aphelios (or even DON'T run Aphelios and run Gifts from Beyond instead), and you can shore up your biggest region weakness, while also having exclusive access to silences and spellshields. And obliterates.
A card I underestimated on a broad scale (because I play decks with a lot of ping effects) is Zoe. I think Zoe lives from the exeptional ability of targon to protect units, a level of protection that would make even Teemo viable ...
Also I thought Riven and Viktor were good but... what buff card would ever be good in a silence meta?
Btw I really would want to know from you if think that silence made the game better or worse?
Definitely worse for me, silence counter anything that isn't spell shield and only one region has reliable access to that. I see lots of well deserved complain about Hush but I find Equinox to be just as obnoxious.
And this is why Targon has been the most played region - they have the silences and they also have the counters to the silences. No other region has spellshield at all, unless you count Shroud of Darkness and Captain Arrika (and yes, those are literally the only cards outside of targon that have it).
For me, it was Zoe. I was 100% convinced that she would be removed absurdly easily and never have an impact.
While it's true that, in a vacuum, she's really easy to remove, it turns out that requiring your opponent to remove a unit, whether they want to or not, is very powerful, and it opens the way for other things to not get removed later. It forces the opponent to expend resources on her, so even when she's bad and gets killed early, she still did her job.
Yeah so a lot of that stuff is under 5 percent and that's kind of what I was talking about.
With the top winrate lists not being as over represented as people are saying
You do have to keep in mind that some decks are hard to play optimally, so their winrate is artificially deflated. Zoe/Lee is one example. TF/Aphelios is probably another. TF/Fizz probably also in that camp as well. Those decks have a lot of moving parts, and it's easy to misplay. In the hands of experienced players, those decks are absolute powerhouses, but in the hands of less-skilled players (or players new to the deck), they are much worse.
So, you can't really go by raw winrate. The top player on SEA has like 1800 LP and specializes in Zoe/Lee - just destroys everyone with it. But your average player could never do that.
Yes, but nearly every other stat is "matches played ..."
And then there's battlegrounds - "Player hours spent ..."
It begs the question of why they reported battlegrounds differently from all of the other stats. It's literally the only stat that says anything about hours at all.
Things like this are never done at random - there is a deliberate reason for every single stat on that graphic and the way they reported them. I just wonder what the reason is in this case.
Did anyone else notice the mathematical sleight of hand on the Battlegrounds numbers?
Just looking at the number, you think "Wow, if you added up the length of all of the battlegrounds matches, they add up to 669 million hours," but that's not accurate.
There are 8 players in every battlegrounds match. Obviously, not all 8 players stay for the entire match, but they reported it as "player hours." They are counting each person separately, so that number is inflated significantly, compared to the idea of total length of matches.
Now, I'm not saying they are dishonest or anything, because they said it's player hours - but it's still the largest possible number they could report for how much battlegrounds was played.
It's 2 spells for Lee Sin, and has a decent chance to give him overwhelm as well. This could be very disgusting
Honestly, if I were to cut anything, it would be Zap - your allegiance is pretty crucial, so you probably want to limit yourself to only 3x TF and no other Bilgewater cards at all. I'd go so far as to say this is one of those decks that just loses immediately if you whiff on allegiance.
We're not done with reveals - there is very likely some other card in Shurima that fits as well as Zap.
I'm not always perfect at interpreting things like this, but it says they are recasting the voice acting. Pretty sure that means they are changing both the voice and the art.
This is a big deal all over the subreddit right now. Yes, she has been "white-ified." Or "Lux-ified," whichever you prefer to call it.
Thanks for pointing that out.
Well, apparently no one else is allowed to play landmarks anymore. Shurima has two different ways to kill any landmark, one free (and upside if it's your own) and one a way to kill a landmark with a body attached (and upside if it's your own) - and they have buckets of landmarks that they don't care if they die and may even want to kill them.
So, good luck, Aphelios, with your Temple dreams. Pretty sure the days of the Temple's dominance are numbered.
Where did those pictures of German Aphelios come from? The new one is on a white background, and the old one is on a black background.
Just wait til they give Targon a one-sided board wipe. Er, I mean, besides the one they already have ...
It's fine for a region to be the best region, obviously. There will always be a best region. But Targon is very definitely over the top right now. Hush is probably fine in its current form. Bastion is probably fine as well.
Honestly, the biggest mistake by far was giving Targon (a region that is very weak in direct removal) the most efficient removal spell in the game at this point (Calibrum). So, just run Aphelios (or even DON'T run Aphelios and run Gifts from Beyond instead), and you can shore up your biggest region weakness, while also having exclusive access to silences and spellshields. And obliterates.
I agree, though I think their shape needs work. It probably should be a circle to match the mana cost circle - symmetry matters in aesthetics.
Thank you!
For the SEA shard, I assume that is Singapore Standard Time (SST)? Can anyone confirm that?
And this is why Targon has been the most played region - they have the silences and they also have the counters to the silences. No other region has spellshield at all, unless you count Shroud of Darkness and Captain Arrika (and yes, those are literally the only cards outside of targon that have it).
For me, it was Zoe. I was 100% convinced that she would be removed absurdly easily and never have an impact.
While it's true that, in a vacuum, she's really easy to remove, it turns out that requiring your opponent to remove a unit, whether they want to or not, is very powerful, and it opens the way for other things to not get removed later. It forces the opponent to expend resources on her, so even when she's bad and gets killed early, she still did her job.
You do have to keep in mind that some decks are hard to play optimally, so their winrate is artificially deflated. Zoe/Lee is one example. TF/Aphelios is probably another. TF/Fizz probably also in that camp as well. Those decks have a lot of moving parts, and it's easy to misplay. In the hands of experienced players, those decks are absolute powerhouses, but in the hands of less-skilled players (or players new to the deck), they are much worse.
So, you can't really go by raw winrate. The top player on SEA has like 1800 LP and specializes in Zoe/Lee - just destroys everyone with it. But your average player could never do that.
I was asking mostly because there is a site that reports the previous week, based on both winrate AND playrate. https://www.lorguardian.com/app/decks-library
If we sort for popularity on that site, the top played decks, in descending order are (rounding off some numbers):
1. Fiora Shen - 62% WR, 6% playrate
2. Anivia control (misnamed as having endure in there, when it doesn't) - 55% WR, 6% playrate
3. Discard Aggro - 60.5% WR, 5% playrate
4. TF/Fizz - 55% WR, 5% playrate
5. Go Hard - 59% WR, 3% playrate
6. Pirate Aggro - 58% WR, 2.5% playrate
7. TF/Aphelios - 56.5% WR, 2.5% playrate
8. Ez/Draven - 60.5% WR, 2% playrate
The rest after that are less than 2% playrate.
Where is the data coming from, for those playrates? Just curious.
Yes, but nearly every other stat is "matches played ..."
And then there's battlegrounds - "Player hours spent ..."
It begs the question of why they reported battlegrounds differently from all of the other stats. It's literally the only stat that says anything about hours at all.
Things like this are never done at random - there is a deliberate reason for every single stat on that graphic and the way they reported them. I just wonder what the reason is in this case.
Did anyone else notice the mathematical sleight of hand on the Battlegrounds numbers?
Just looking at the number, you think "Wow, if you added up the length of all of the battlegrounds matches, they add up to 669 million hours," but that's not accurate.
There are 8 players in every battlegrounds match. Obviously, not all 8 players stay for the entire match, but they reported it as "player hours." They are counting each person separately, so that number is inflated significantly, compared to the idea of total length of matches.
Now, I'm not saying they are dishonest or anything, because they said it's player hours - but it's still the largest possible number they could report for how much battlegrounds was played.
You might want to run a check on your antivirus software to make sure you didn't pick up a keylogger at some point.