MOBAFire's second Mini Guide Contest of Season 14 is here! Create or update guides for the 30 featured champions and compete for up to $200 in prizes! 🏆
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
@Scrax
I apologise for my behaviour. I did try to respond reasonably and asked to stay on topic twice. I just get upset when someone comes to a forum, filled with people who want to play LoL better, and tells us to play worse. It makes absolutely no sense and is really offensive.
If you go to a martial artist and tell them they should just fight the way they feel like and ignore their master's advice because they'll never reach 10th dan (or whatever the top belt is), you'll just get your face punched in. Why should this be any different? I mean, excluding the fact that he's on another continent and I can't punch him through my screen.
@Trojan
I actually know the fallacies pretty well and that does not apply. If I wanted to blindly follow them I can easily do it, I know their builds. I am asking why those builds are good, which is a perfectly reasonable argument and question. It's not about the build being good because X person uses it, which would be a fallacious argument, but about why is the build used and the reasoning behind it.
Furthermore, the fallacy is not applicable in this case because it has been proven through experience that the builds do work. Those builds were used on the biggest LoL tournament by pretty much every single contestant and proven to be very effective. It is not about who plays with those builds, but about why the builds work. The build and playstyle itself is void of any authority, so the fallacy is not applicable.
Moreover, the appeal to authority fallacy is only valid if the only argument for the statement to be correct is the fact that it was said by an authoritative person. My argument is that the builds are good because they were used, competitively, and came out on top, regardless of who used them. There is no authority here. The reason that I said the pros used them is only to identify the builds. I also specified the time and place.
Regarding the situational items or different builds used on the same champion by professionals, it does not apply on the support case. More specifically, Janna and Sona. The builds used throughout the tournament by the several competing teams were very consistent and all included a shurelya's reverie, either CDR boots or mercury's (mostly CDR boots) and from 1 to 3 HoG.
@Summoner
I know the support doesn't need the same amount of gold, but having a final build of shurelya's + CDR boots + 2 HoG will leave the support very weak, right?
Also, the support is mean to stay near the team, no matter which champ you are playing.
I checked all the games above and including the top branch semi-finals, and Sona only used aegis once and Janna used it twice at the semi-final, not even once on higher-tier matches.
Apart from that I think I saw it once on Nunu and twice on Amumu.
Why isn't aegis good any more? I always thought it was awesome. It provides 177 resistances to your whole team for just 2k gold. Is it because the support does not need the survivability and so most of it is wasted? Probably.
So my biggest doubt right now is why do the supports have such low survivability?
I apologise for my behaviour. I did try to respond reasonably and asked to stay on topic twice. I just get upset when someone comes to a forum, filled with people who want to play LoL better, and tells us to play worse. It makes absolutely no sense and is really offensive.
If you go to a martial artist and tell them they should just fight the way they feel like and ignore their master's advice because they'll never reach 10th dan (or whatever the top belt is), you'll just get your face punched in. Why should this be any different? I mean, excluding the fact that he's on another continent and I can't punch him through my screen.
@Trojan
I actually know the fallacies pretty well and that does not apply. If I wanted to blindly follow them I can easily do it, I know their builds. I am asking why those builds are good, which is a perfectly reasonable argument and question. It's not about the build being good because X person uses it, which would be a fallacious argument, but about why is the build used and the reasoning behind it.
Furthermore, the fallacy is not applicable in this case because it has been proven through experience that the builds do work. Those builds were used on the biggest LoL tournament by pretty much every single contestant and proven to be very effective. It is not about who plays with those builds, but about why the builds work. The build and playstyle itself is void of any authority, so the fallacy is not applicable.
Moreover, the appeal to authority fallacy is only valid if the only argument for the statement to be correct is the fact that it was said by an authoritative person. My argument is that the builds are good because they were used, competitively, and came out on top, regardless of who used them. There is no authority here. The reason that I said the pros used them is only to identify the builds. I also specified the time and place.
Regarding the situational items or different builds used on the same champion by professionals, it does not apply on the support case. More specifically, Janna and Sona. The builds used throughout the tournament by the several competing teams were very consistent and all included a shurelya's reverie, either CDR boots or mercury's (mostly CDR boots) and from 1 to 3 HoG.
@Summoner
I know the support doesn't need the same amount of gold, but having a final build of shurelya's + CDR boots + 2 HoG will leave the support very weak, right?
Also, the support is mean to stay near the team, no matter which champ you are playing.
I checked all the games above and including the top branch semi-finals, and Sona only used aegis once and Janna used it twice at the semi-final, not even once on higher-tier matches.
Apart from that I think I saw it once on Nunu and twice on Amumu.
Why isn't aegis good any more? I always thought it was awesome. It provides 177 resistances to your whole team for just 2k gold. Is it because the support does not need the survivability and so most of it is wasted? Probably.
So my biggest doubt right now is why do the supports have such low survivability?
I sometimes get Aegis + Ga which fills out my resistances if i'm being focused and i'm to squishy. But I pretty much always sell it late game because that amount of resistances just isnt that good late, its better to buy a health item or 1 good mr/armor item. Mind you most of the time I play Udyr.
+rap to Trojan and Summoner.
Aegis is a great item. Full stop. Just because the pros don't buy it doesn't mean you shouldn't be.
Shurelya's Battlesong is just a core item for support. It gives CDR, health and mana. The movement speed active is also great.
I don't see the problem/point to this thread?
Aegis is a great item. Full stop. Just because the pros don't buy it doesn't mean you shouldn't be.
Shurelya's Battlesong is just a core item for support. It gives CDR, health and mana. The movement speed active is also great.I don't see the problem/point to this thread?
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
Canoas wrote:
- Why isn't aegis that good any more?
Aegis is good. It's fantastic. The games just didn't go long enough for the supports to buy it after Shurelya's.
Quoted:
- Should the support be the only one buying wards?
No, supports shouldn't be the only ones to buy wards in normal and ranked games. Everyone should buy wards. By everyone I mean everyone besides the DPS carry who is being baby sat by the support. Mid and solo top and jungler - they buy wards. The only member that shouldn't need to buy wards is the person who is not support bot lane.
Quoted:
- Why does the support not need survivability?
? Aegis, Shurelya's, Soul Shroud - they all give survivability.
Canoas
<Member>
<Member>
Trojan995 wrote:
Additionally, often times pros will insist on buying
Last Whisper on certain champs (just check solomid), despite Searz proving that champs who use auto-attacks as a main source of damage will benefit far more from Black Cleaver. So, do we listen to the pros? Or do we listen to math? Which is right? Authority or proof?Exactly the thing I was thinking of too ^_^
Quoted:
- pros aren't always right, only believe a pro if they can argue their case just as anyone else can.
This.
You need to log in before commenting.
I've probably spent thousands of gold on Wards and Oracles - this means that the thousands of gold I've spent isn't forced to be spent by other people on the team. If our carry is spending 500 gold on wards, that's 500 gold behind some item they could be buying. However, because I don't need items as much as a carry does as a support, I can invest heavily in wards yet not get punished for it.
On Aegis: It is not as good as it once was. The only two champions you will probably see running it are Amumu (sometimes) and Sona (but I probably wouldn't build it on Sona). These two champions are currently designed to run it because these champions are designed to be with their team in some form. Sona has strong Auras to help whoever is near her, and Amumu synchronizes well with Melee champions, which allows him to build Aegis if needed. It's more of a tank/support hybrid item, and because it gives mediocre stats compared to other late game items, you should only build it if you're investing in it early game, which is why it is a strong item choice for Amumu - especially since you run 2 GP5/10 items - who can invest in it but still grab farm and pay off the Aegis as the game goes on. Of course, you can build it on many champions, but there are way more beneficial items for them to run.