The only time that a team without Smite should be losing a buff is to an extremely well-landed ultimate from another champion that deals more damage than Smite does. Even so, that ultimate has to hit within the precise interval that it can kill Baron, but Baron still has more health than the smiteable range.
I played a game recently as Nunu. I was like, "oh hey, dragon's up."
I pinged dragon, a few of my teammates were coming, we were going to grab dragon fsat before the enemy noticed.
Lo and behold, Shen and Lee Sin are taking dragon! Oh noes! Lucky for me, Lee Sin was laning that game and the enemy team had no jungler (thus, no smite). Kaboom, I run in, smite the dragon the second I get there, and run away with my 425 move speed because I'm nunu and I steal all the dragons I want.
Take smite, kids.
Oh, and @ Jun Support regarding buff control:
Smite might not guarantee buff control, but I can guarantee you that buff control will be a hell of a lot harder without smite.
I pinged dragon, a few of my teammates were coming, we were going to grab dragon fsat before the enemy noticed.
Lo and behold, Shen and Lee Sin are taking dragon! Oh noes! Lucky for me, Lee Sin was laning that game and the enemy team had no jungler (thus, no smite). Kaboom, I run in, smite the dragon the second I get there, and run away with my 425 move speed because I'm nunu and I steal all the dragons I want.
Take smite, kids.
Oh, and @ Jun Support regarding buff control:
Smite might not guarantee buff control, but I can guarantee you that buff control will be a hell of a lot harder without smite.
tinolas wrote:
@B-Wong:
I never said not to take Smite if you were refering to me. I just wanted to know if you could smite while being stunned or silenced? Where's the big deal?
It's not directed towards anyone in specific. The fact that I see anyone arguing against having at least 1 smite on a jungler just baffles me.
You need to log in before commenting.
<Retired Moderator>