If i am not mistaken, predict only shuffles the deck AFTER the effect resolves. In this case, HEXITE CRISTAL isn't as exciting as the name suggests: it requires at least 2 predictions to show up
Yes they literally could have done anything and chose to do nothing until the next mini expansion. There is no possitive light to represent this choice in.
Think as a company for a moment. If they release a big balance patch before the expansion 3 outcomes are possible:
1- The meta gets worse; 2- The meta stays the same; 3- The meta gets better.
Destiny 1- Now they just shot themselves in the foot. Players will get angry and they will sell less when the expansion is out. Terrible idea. Destiny 2- Riot will be perceived as incompetent since those huge changes did nothing. Players again get angry wich translates in less revenue. Terrible as well. Destiny 3- This is the desireble outcome... or is it? The meta will be fresh and nice for 2 weeks... until the expansion hits and either throws everything done right out of the window or the new cards turn out irrelevant
Releasing a patch right now is a lose-lose-lose situation. Waiting for the exp to balance is the correct decision.
Not going to downvote but this quote is literally the first thing you get out of your own link:
Patch 2.10.0 is our final minor update before the debut of the Rise of the Underworlds expansion in patch 2.11.0, releasing on June 30, as well as a large batch of card updates for both champion and non-champion cards!
I think waiting for the next set to kick in before making any hasty decisions that could backfire is the correct move now
Its not hard to build a deck to beat Irelia/Azir The real problem that stagnates the meta is to find a deck that consistently beats Irelia/Azir that also has a fair chance against those other 2: Thresh/Nasus, Zoe/Aurelion Sol
It was indeed a bug, just has been fixed in this patch
I understand maybe for some of you guys this fix may not seem like a lot, but for the deck i am playing its the difference between 0x copies and 3x Nullifying Spell Shields and also Predict for just 1 mana is that good
This post is mostly directed to Nifty but i think it could enlight other people as well and spark some interesting discussion along the way
How tier works:
Every deck starts equal at 0% winrate. The decks then face each other and the ones who perform best get to be placed at higher ranks, while the worst ones go to the botton. So the botton of the chain food will be filled with the most unique but terrible ideas: excess of extremely greedy cards, wacky wacky combos, not optimized aggro, Yasuo decks, etc Those "slow" and/or unrefined decks are terrible against any optimized aggressive startegy, even the worst ones; but given enough time they may win sometimes against control decks, even the best ones.
So here comes the first big distinction between aggro and control: Aggressive strategies will ALWAYS perform better then control against the botton spectrum of the range. As long recreational players exist, any current meta isn't relevant at all.
Why the 50% winrate equals balance is a fallacy:
In a theorical ideal perfect balanced game, every card should have a winrate close to 50%. In the real world that will never happen, even if the game is balanced for several reasons: 1- Skill gap between players -> The best players know the best time to play each card to increse its effectiveness 2- Skill gap between cards -> Some cards like Legion Rearguard are easier to play then others The Ruination 3- Metagame -> Some champions/deck/cards have better mechanics while facing other specific ones, which directly changes the winrate 4- Synergy -> Some cards perform much better alongside other cards, so those would never see play without their respective synergy 5- Its boring -> Perfect balance means no further optimiztion for decks. So any change translates into negative winrate.
Metrics and Winrate by tiers:
We already conclude that even bad aggro strategies perform better at low ranks and they should get less and less effective in the face of more optimized decks along the way. For instance, an extremely fast Darius deck will be very good choice to climb lower elos in ladder and it gets more even as it goes up.
So lets say Darius is balanced sitting at 50% winrate and assume those numbers just an example: Platinum + -> 1000 games -> 47% winrate Silver/Gold -> 1000 games -> 50% winrate Iron/Bronze -> 1000 games -> 53% winrate Average winrate / game = 50%
Now, imagine some time passed, the game gets older and players got smarter enough to understand when to properly play Darius. The metrics now would be something like this: Platinum + -> 10 games -> 47% winrate Silver/Gold -> 100 games -> 50% winrate Iron/Bronze -> 1000 games -> 53% winrate Average winrate / game = 52,68%
Notice that Darius had its winrate increased WITHOUT A SINGLE CHANGE in the game
Overall Winrate is a useless stat:
Here is where the overall winrate metric over all tiers together falls appart.
There are many more players bellow gold then anywhere else, so in short, any agressive card should have a winrate over 50%, and every skill intensive card should have a winrate under 50%. Every single agressive champion like Darius should show an overall winrate over 50% winrate. If an aggressive champiom sits at 50% winrate over all tiers he is not balanced; he is thrash tier.
I strongly believe trying to measure cards/decks winrates without taking the tier in which they are played into consideration is extremely stupid and not helpfull to anything outside spoting very obvious imbalances that are either broken or unplayable.
I'm guessing it's a bug, but it's because Scrying Sands is a weird card since it's you can use it without a target for the Predict. Idk man, I don't make the spaghetti code.
That makes sense because otherwise the spellshield could counter the Predict effect as well
I agree Irelia is very strong to the point she is shaping the current meta but your report is already outdated
The decks that have the highest winrate right now at top ranks are control decks just like you predicted it would be: Aurelion Sol, followed by Thresh/Nasus, Soraka/Than and only then Irelia
While powerfull in the right situation, Atrocity comes with a REALLY big risk: If the sacrifice gets untargetable (killed, returned to the hand, stasis, etc) before Atrocity resolves, not only it becomes a 6 mana tempo loss for that player but also a 1-2 trade.
How is this post-worthy? It's just a random opinion piece. If someone like Kibler or another person who had weight their words said this, I would be shocked.
TLDR: OldManSanns plays taunt, me still go face ;)
I have noticed too. I suits me fine as I only use Lab of Legends to gain an extra 400 and 200 XP "PvP" win. However, it takes away the challenge and it wasn't even that hard to begin with.
I set challenges for myself Example: never attacking until the oponnent decks out
Looking at those cards i predict (Pun intended) the aggro meta will shift back to Noxus due abundance of cheap burns
If that's a good thing or not only time will tell. Elise Burn was already a solid deck and its getting more toys to play with
If i am not mistaken, predict only shuffles the deck AFTER the effect resolves.
In this case, HEXITE CRISTAL isn't as exciting as the name suggests: it requires at least 2 predictions to show up
Think as a company for a moment. If they release a big balance patch before the expansion 3 outcomes are possible:
1- The meta gets worse;
2- The meta stays the same;
3- The meta gets better.
Destiny 1- Now they just shot themselves in the foot. Players will get angry and they will sell less when the expansion is out. Terrible idea.
Destiny 2- Riot will be perceived as incompetent since those huge changes did nothing. Players again get angry wich translates in less revenue. Terrible as well.
Destiny 3- This is the desireble outcome... or is it? The meta will be fresh and nice for 2 weeks... until the expansion hits and either throws everything done right out of the window or the new cards turn out irrelevant
Releasing a patch right now is a lose-lose-lose situation. Waiting for the exp to balance is the correct decision.
Not going to downvote but this quote is literally the first thing you get out of your own link:
Patch 2.10.0 is our final minor update before the debut of the Rise of the Underworlds expansion in patch 2.11.0, releasing on June 30, as well as a large batch of card updates for both champion and non-champion cards!
I think waiting for the next set to kick in before making any hasty decisions that could backfire is the correct move now
Just checked the ladder games and you are right about Fiora, its now removed from my prior post, ty
Its not hard to build a deck to beat Irelia/Azir
The real problem that stagnates the meta is to find a deck that consistently beats Irelia/Azir that also has a fair chance against those other 2: Thresh/Nasus, Zoe/Aurelion Sol
After this patch i am inclined to believe they want players to stay in the Lab rather then normal games
It was indeed a bug, just has been fixed in this patch
I understand maybe for some of you guys this fix may not seem like a lot, but for the deck i am playing its the difference between 0x copies and 3x
Nullifying Spell Shields and also Predict for just 1 mana is that good
Always pick Zoe as your second champion unless you are playing Riven then Shen is superior due Spirit's Refuge
Little Buddies + Yipp’s Genius + Yipp’s Genius is the best combination possible. Yes, its possible to get 2x Yipp’s Genius.
Lucian works very well alongside "Out of the gates" power
![]()
That also makes sense, thank you
This post is mostly directed to Nifty but i think it could enlight other people as well and spark some interesting discussion along the way
How tier works:
Every deck starts equal at 0% winrate. The decks then face each other and the ones who perform best get to be placed at higher ranks, while the worst ones go to the botton.
So the botton of the chain food will be filled with the most unique but terrible ideas: excess of extremely greedy cards, wacky wacky combos, not optimized aggro, Yasuo decks, etc
Those "slow" and/or unrefined decks are terrible against any optimized aggressive startegy, even the worst ones; but given enough time they may win sometimes against control decks, even the best ones.
So here comes the first big distinction between aggro and control:
Aggressive strategies will ALWAYS perform better then control against the botton spectrum of the range.
As long recreational players exist, any current meta isn't relevant at all.
Why the 50% winrate equals balance is a fallacy:
In a theorical ideal perfect balanced game, every card should have a winrate close to 50%. In the real world that will never happen, even if the game is balanced for several reasons:
1- Skill gap between players -> The best players know the best time to play each card to increse its effectiveness
2- Skill gap between cards -> Some cards like Legion Rearguard are easier to play then others The Ruination
3- Metagame -> Some champions/deck/cards have better mechanics while facing other specific ones, which directly changes the winrate
4- Synergy -> Some cards perform much better alongside other cards, so those would never see play without their respective synergy
5- Its boring -> Perfect balance means no further optimiztion for decks. So any change translates into negative winrate.
Metrics and Winrate by tiers:
We already conclude that even bad aggro strategies perform better at low ranks and they should get less and less effective in the face of more optimized decks along the way.
For instance, an extremely fast Darius deck will be very good choice to climb lower elos in ladder and it gets more even as it goes up.
So lets say Darius is balanced sitting at 50% winrate and assume those numbers just an example:
Platinum + -> 1000 games -> 47% winrate
Silver/Gold -> 1000 games -> 50% winrate
Iron/Bronze -> 1000 games -> 53% winrate
Average winrate / game = 50%
Now, imagine some time passed, the game gets older and players got smarter enough to understand when to properly play Darius.
The metrics now would be something like this:
Platinum + -> 10 games -> 47% winrate
Silver/Gold -> 100 games -> 50% winrate
Iron/Bronze -> 1000 games -> 53% winrate
Average winrate / game = 52,68%
Notice that Darius had its winrate increased WITHOUT A SINGLE CHANGE in the game
Overall Winrate is a useless stat:
Here is where the overall winrate metric over all tiers together falls appart.
There are many more players bellow gold then anywhere else, so in short, any agressive card should have a winrate over 50%, and every skill intensive card should have a winrate under 50%.
Every single agressive champion like Darius should show an overall winrate over 50% winrate. If an aggressive champiom sits at 50% winrate over all tiers he is not balanced; he is thrash tier.
I strongly believe trying to measure cards/decks winrates without taking the tier in which they are played into consideration is extremely stupid and not helpfull to anything outside spoting very obvious imbalances that are either broken or unplayable.
That makes sense because otherwise the spellshield could counter the Predict effect as well
Someone explain to me why Scrying Sands bypass spellshield while Quicksand does not
I agree Irelia is very strong to the point she is shaping the current meta but your report is already outdated
The decks that have the highest winrate right now at top ranks are control decks just like you predicted it would be:
Aurelion Sol, followed by Thresh/Nasus, Soraka/Than and only then Irelia
There is even a Twisted Fate / Zilean among the top 50 rank that run no win conditions other then Twisted Fate himself
Guess your wish was granted: Cost nerfed to 7 mana
This change means its now impossible to combo Atrocity and They Who Endure in the same turn.
Its also impossible to chain 1 Atrocity into another one.
So yeah, i think its safe to say They Who Endure finally could not endure anymore
While powerfull in the right situation, Atrocity comes with a REALLY big risk:
If the sacrifice gets untargetable (killed, returned to the hand, stasis, etc) before Atrocity resolves, not only it becomes a 6 mana tempo loss for that player but also a 1-2 trade.
No
But funny enough, even with a strong effect like that, she still would not see competitive play by herself
TLDR: OldManSanns plays taunt, me still go face ;)
Because thats what she does in the moba
I set challenges for myself
Example: never attacking until the oponnent decks out