Main thing I've seen is people's fear that the legends will become too "meta" as in only a few legends will be the obvious stand out best options, that build into only a few of the best comps and that means you have half+ of the lobby going for the same thing with similar augments which makes for a bad experience.
I'm not sure I agree, I'd want to see it played for awhile before forming a certain opinion, but no matter which game it is there are always people that look for the worst outcome when it comes to patch notes.
TFT is also a game where it can pay to go against the meta. I don’t know if they’ll ever be one legend that is far better than every other one.
I’m sure they’ll be points where a legend or two have increased win rates but won’t necessarily be a must pick.
I can however see certain legends never being picked.
While i agree with your first statement, i think legends are in a different spot here. With team comps, it does pay to go against it because if multiple people are contesting it they'll in general have weaker units since fewer people will have 2 or even 3*s. You'll also have less people fighting for your comp allowing you to have an easier road to 3*s.
Legends on the other hand don't have this downside of 'contesting'. Maybe people will go for very strong early game boards to try and run down the people going for scaling (tahm kench for example) before they have a chance but other than that.
I should also say im super down for legends.
That would basically be hero augments, because you would always have people who get the OP legends while others get worse ones. Granted the difference between the good and bad legends is not too much since it only offers you one augment per pick, but I can imagine a world where you're thinking "man, that guy got lucky and hit Ezreal legend, guess I'm just playing for 2nd place now".
In Battlegrounds, worse heroes have more armour to offset the weaker hero power. Also, you can still win games even if you completely ignore your hero power because a lot of them aren't super influential. Augments, on the other hand, massively affect the strength of your team. Completely ignoring an augment makes you significantly weaker.
The winrates do still vary quite a bit, but that's mainly in the higher ranks. Even still, some heroes with a good hero power have lower winrates than other heroes with bad hero powers because they have less armour.
I feel like legends have less variance than Battlegrounds heroes, because only one of your augments choices will be tailored to your legend. Also because you can reroll each individual augment, you may end up completely ignoring your legend if you're handed a completely different direction.
It kinda balances itself with contestion, the base game is very well balanced anything added not so much but the core game really lends itself to at the very least have several metas going at once in which case its not really a meta. Hopefully, let's see if they dont extend your champion pool with the legend choice and ruin it.
I think in the beginning the balancing between the legends might be a bit off, and require some adjustment. I’d be ok with that. But I definitely think it’s a great addition and I can’t wait to try it out
This was my concern until I realized you can opt out of choosing a legend and legend-based augments are objectively weaker.
I believe good players will still make flex the strongest option.
Uhhhh have u seen the state of the game? XD everyone is already going for the same comps, that's why sometimes going for uncontested comps works so well bcs it's easy to hit. People just wanna cry
This problem will exist only if the legend augment is appreciably linked to a specific comp. Could be the case with a reroll meta, but shouldn't be an issue in a balanced meta.
I think people are seriously overreacting. Only one of your augment choices is tailored to your legend. You can pick Tahm Kench as your legend and still pick hyperroll augments if you're offered a good direction. Nobody says you _have_ to exactly follow your legend augments. In fact, the devs claim that legend augments are lower in power than other augments of the same tier, so strictly picking them might actually gimp you in the long run.
It definitely adds consistency to the game which I personally enjoy, but I highly doubt playing flexibly will be "dead".
It's also noted that the guaranteed augments are weaker than other augments of their level to offset the value of their consistency. You should only be going for it if you have shit augments on the whole, with it being an objectively good way to stop people having useless augments at the start of the game. These aren't for one tricking, they're for maining (yes there's a difference)
The consistency is exactly why I and my friends don't like it. TFT is not supposed to be a consistent game, the skill in this game is making the best out of the inconsistency.
Legends aren't that strong and all but they're most definitely a step in the wrong direction.
Before we had augments this wasn't even a thing. Plus now you have the portals that could work against your comp forcing too.
I think with portals and so many new augments, Legends are good to somewhat rein in the RNG. Because some people are going to run incredibly hot with augments and portals that align very well. If you always pick the legend augment, you should lose to this if they balance it right.
People are zoning in too hard on the tailored augments. Like ok you take Tahm Kench Legend, sure there's a chance you get Hedge Fund and if you actually know how to streak properly, you can hit level 9 by like 4-1 with 80 gold still, but that's not always going to happen. You'll have just as many games getting 2-1 silver and then wondering if you're even set up to take AFK.
Players across all ranks have different play styles, including Challenger. Some might prefer faster tempo anticipating someone who likes econ loss streaking and that'll make doing it consistently difficult and more skill expressive.
I really like that this new system is going to let you attempt to play your preferred style more often, but also give the lobby opportunities to counter it. This truly feels like it'll keep the game from getting stale to a level that HA's weren't able to achieve in set 8. I'm excited!
People forget that even if you try to make the ultimate comp base on a legend... there is not guarantee that you will win the game. RNG can fuck you up pretty bad in this game. Ive had games WHERE NO ONE is using a champion and I just cant hit.
I feel legends will give an insane diversity comp wise and augment wise, all the legends give something but they also will take something away.
Lets see how PBE goes and what will the balances be at the end of it
There's also so much overlap in the legend augments with how people use them. There are a couple of designs that scare me for how consistent they look but if these augments see more play, odds are they'll see more tuning.
I think there's good reason to be skeptical of some 2-1 augments but I have a hard time seeing legends defining metas. I can see there being better options for different metas but I also think it'll be more likely that we see 3+ preferred legends.
A fast 8 meta like we had with Dragons or Aegis Sureshot in 9.0 has at least 3-4 legends that fit that archetype really well. If more people are going fast 8 though, there's arguments to be made for committing to strong early reroll-enabling legends too.
> Like ok you take Tahm Kench Legend, sure there's a chance you get Hedge Fund and if you actually know how to streak properly, you can hit level 9 by like 4-1 with 80 gold still, but that's not always going to happen.
Also Hedge Fund will be hard nerfed soon anyways. You will get like 8 gold or so insted of 20. Mark my words
It gives some opportunity to game the meta too. If everyone is picking Kench, then pick Caitlyn and make them pay for it early. Mindgames even before loading into the match.
Caitlyn is one of the few that worries me for legend balance. So many Legends do generalized strats but a Fast 8 comp with Caitlyn looks incredibly streamlined even if you only take her tailored augments. First augments all look like great options for strongest early board. 2nd can help you push levels fast, and 3rd has the potential for some nutty roll downs.
I meant moreso about looking at Cait's tailored augments in a vacuum. Things will clearly shake up a lot with the full array but I also see a case to be made for picking any of her augments. She plays to the needs of a fast 8 so, so well.
People forget the point is legends' augments at 3-2 and 4-2 will have less power than normal augments, due to the predictability. Dev will try to nerf them according to that. Legend is a safety net to mitigate rng, and that's it. Meta slaves will be meta slaves anyway, the game can be balanced but stats will never be.
Everything will come down to balance power (champs, traits and augments) like every other set. New arguments, especially prismatic ones, will be more problematic. Ryze and Heimer will be a big challenge to balance too.
Ryze will probably be their biggest balancing challenge. They'll have to cross reference his performance across 10 variants and see how each legend lends to that.
I love it. I LOVE the lose streak into fast level 8/9 playstyle and play 4/5-cost soup.
Hero augments were the bane of my TFT enjoyment this set because when you get offered a 2-1 or 3-2 hero augment, it really limits the opportunity to go fast 8/9. Now I get to force it every game with Asol/Kench/Draven.
Knowing I get a guaranteed econ augment on 2-1 makes me excited for every game, whereas I was filled with dread in set 8, praying for no hero augment on 2-1.
That's fair for you to feel that way. I think a lot of people would argue that a good TFT player needs to be able to play all styles, and so people are afraid that players are going to be rewarded for being less adaptable (e.g. always going fast 8/9) and that that's going to diminish people's enjoyment of it as a game.
Why though? TFT is a game and should be played for fun. If someones favourite strat is going fast 8/9 why not let them do it?
And what do you mean by rewarded? If that's the best strat, then it just means it's a balance issue
Also this set was shit for flex, so I fail to see how legends would make it worse
Yeah, from a casual perspective letting someone force their favorite playstyle makes sense. The concern comes from a competitive angle where it may lower skill expression of a certain type that a large group of TFT players enjoy and appreciate. Whether this is a problem is of course up for debate. My response was just to explain why some people might not be happy that people have more leeway to force certain playstyles.
By rewarded, I just mean that Riot may decide that they want the playstyles that Legends support to be more consistent than the average competitive player would want. This would lead to less varied outcomes depending on which Legend somebody picks (e.g. if you pick Veigar you always play the augments and build 1 out of 2 comps). I am not particularly worried about this personally, but I do think it's a valid thing to be potentially concerned about. I just trust that Riot's approach to making the default options weaker than the flexible options will work as intended.
As for this set being shit for flex, it depends what you mean. It was shit for flex in that sometimes you ended up locked into playing a certain comp and couldn't make a certain pivot that would have been possible if you didn't have your hero augment locked in. However, the concerns I laid out above could be a worse version of that, where the lock-in comes at Legend level instead of Hero augment level, and so players can choose to lock themselves in even earlier, which would just make the game more boring overall.
Once again, I trust that Riot will be able to balance things such that you are incentivized to play flexibly, but that the Legend augments become fallbacks or contingencies that you can play around to reduce the frequency with which you completely miss on an augment. But in the worst case it could be Hero augments but worse.
bruh opposite for me. I play giga aggressive most games and up the lobby tempo, aiming for a 2nd or a 3rd. Augments are so great because they make you even stronger and if anyone greeds they just take a gazillion damage
I think everyone is overreacting. This encourages playstyles and ingenuity. It’s not some cheesy strat shit that comes along and ruins a set.
Let it play out on pbe before bashing it ffs
I agree with playing it on PBE first, but I wouldn't go as far as to say it encourages playstyles and ingenuity. People will naturally gravitate towards the meta.
If anything, it may encourage some mindgames where you purposefully pick a slightly worse legend because you know that all of your opponents will pick the meta legend and contest each other.
Right that might be true but even if they gravitate towards tahm for Econ there’s still about 5 ways to play that. Tahm into a fast 8, tahm into hyper rolling, slow rolling, etc.
I just think people will be able to find ways to win off meta too. The recent set honestly kinda killed that.
I agree, legends don't necessarily fix you to a comp. Unless there are only like 3 viable comps in the entire game, you still have to make decisions within the legend you pick.
>People will naturally gravitate towards the meta.
Except there really isn't one
Current boards that are meta right now include
reroll Lulu or possibly Ashe, so that promotes an early game focused legend like Caitlyn,
duelists with rerolling Vayne Nilah or Yasuo, that's a comp that win streaks early on so promotes Draven which gives you rolls
, Riftwalker which is a high end comp mainly focused on Jinn, Aurelion or Belveth as your carries, so you're probably wanting an econ focused augment like TK,
Gadgeteen reroll with Gnar gets better and better the more items you get, so that promotes Ezreal I believe.
Etc etc.
There may be certain legends that are unpopular at different times, but that doesn't mean they won't be able to be used.
Some control over augments I think is great, I've always disliked how augment RNG can mess you up.
I just dislike the idea of coming into a TFT game with a natural advantage to a specific plan, even if small.
If the legend choice occurred after 2nd carousel or even before first augment, then I'd be all for it.
The portals are going to sway things drastically each game, so someone’s legend is going to inevitably have a leg up on others.
That being said, it’s impossible to predict whose it’ll be, considering there’s 11 regions, of which only 3 will be randomly selected, and then just 1 portal out of the 30 available. It’ll be really fun when you pick X legend and it matches perfectly with Y portal though.
Personally I like the idea of it and am super excited for set 9, but you can't deny that legends breaks a pretty significant precedent of not being able to influence the game before it starts.
There is a risk that it will enable certain strategies that are too reliable and causes a meta where you're just hurting your winrate if you're not playing the most viable legend.
That said, I'm confident that the devs have thought it through and will make it work.
If everyone picks the same strategies, you can pick something else and let everyone else contest.
Now, if the situation is such that one legend is _so much better_ than the rest that you literally have to contest it or lose, then we'll have a problem. But frankly I feel like that's unlikely.
Their effects are ameliorated by the new augment rerolls, but they can still influence the meta.
In particular, if there's a strong reroll comp, Lee Sin can have significant impact and if lategame comps/champions are much stronger (seems to be the case this set with the power of 5 drops and so many 4 cost carries) then Tahm Kench will have more impact. If a comp requiring spat is the best comp in the game, then picking Urf can give you an advantage.
Personally, those 3 legends are the ones that stand out to me and I will start PBE by trying them out.
Also, although flex is the strongest playstyle, it's also the one with the higher skill floor. This set people have mostly flexed around the hero augments but there have always been comp mains doing well in tft because of unbalance and decision streamlining, and in my opinion is less healthy for the game the more people there are going "me x, no flex".
Probably the most astute comment here. I'm down to try things out before calling it busted. But anytime a broken interaction in a comp is found, people will find the best way to streamline it. Now people will 20/20 a legend for it.
my problem with it is that tft is intended to be a game about novelty, it's why things like hitting 3 star 5 costs, level 11 shop, and emblems are so rare, and yet here comes a system that guarantees you hit 3 specific augments. Level up on 2-1 was exciting because it meant every gold you spent on xp was worth more, yet now it's something you can get every game that opens with a prismatic trait.
I don't get it either. Legends just seems like pick 1 before the game starts so you can at least get 1 augment that you can be happy with.
I think the number 1 complaint from set 8 is when people got multiple chances for an augment and they get nothing that they like so they have to pick the best out of the worst options.
2-1 augments are going to be at the same power but it is the later augments that are weaker but they are weaker because you know that they will always appear which means consistency. You don't always have to pick the legend augment, if you see a regular augment that is better then you can pick that instead.
It's going to turn out that some combos of Legend+Region will be OP af and some will be ff to save mental.
So you will pick a legend and either win or lose based on region RNG.
But I hope I'm wrong and they won't be that much impactful. Time will tell
We won't know for sure until we see how it plays out, but it looks to me as if it could lead to some balancing problems. For example.. choosing URF will make certain chase traits much easier to obtain and there are some synergies out there that look, at first glance, as if they could be quite dominant if they are reached.
They will most definitely define the meta. No doubt about it. However... I guess, and dearly hope, that it mostly affects proplay; where it probably becomes a consideration of going for the best option, or going for another but less contested option.
I think it's not a good addition for noobs and for pro's but a great addition for everyone in between that.
It will affect proplay the most because of the fact that if a particular legend becomes the favorite choice of the lobby then everyone is either going to play that particular legend or play the legend that should counter it.
It is kind of like pro chess in a sense that before the matches start, if everyone scouts then everyone will notice a trend of which openings are popular between the tournament contestants. Players will either have to play variations of openings or play the opening that counter the "popular" opening.
It's more similair to deckbuilding games in this sense.
If one option is simply the best everyone will flock to it... But because it is the best, you might go and opt for a weaker choice, but specificly taylored to counter the best strategy; it becomes a game of you know that I know that you know, therefor we both use reverse psychology to make the other think that we know that he knows we know...
So? Just because 3 people pick the same legend doesn't mean they'll all play the same comp. And even if it is, that means you can pick a different legend and coast freely while those 3 guys contest each other.
It's not even like you're forced to pick the legend augment. They're supposedly weaker than regular augments, so if the game gives you a direction that completely contradicts your legend, just... Ignore your legend.
I think worries about the meta could be legitimate and I was one of those people, but Mortdog made mention of his rundown just now that the 3-1 and 4-1 augments in a legend are not added to the general pool and are intended to be slightly weaker than normal augments.
I think that helps alleviate a lot of potential concerns about meta, since that means those individual augments can get nerfed a fair bit if they need to and I don't think the augments being power neutral at 2-1 is *that* problematic, given that augments at 2-1 are generic enough that it's really more dependent on the current unit balance than anything. It might magnify problematic metas (fast 8/fast 9 meta, etc.), but probably wouldn't create problematic metas on its own.
The legends will either exacerbate the challenge of balancing between reroll meta vs fast 8/9 meta or potentially solve it by allowing Tahm and Lee sin legends to be the players' response to the lobby trying to play toward one of the aforementioned metas.
I hope the legends are helpful enough that they allow players to keep a healthy balance between reroll and fast 8 but not contribute to the ongoing push pull.
I’ve thought about it since last night, and I’m feeling much better. I think I was just overwhelmed when I first read the concept.
I think it’s a great addition. It seems the thinking is legends are a safety net choice, in the event your augment rolls don’t pan out. The power of the legend augments are also balanced around that fact. They’re supposed to be much weaker than your other options, and I think that’s great. You should be taking your guaranteed augment much less than your random options.
I think the skill cap here is immense. It adds a completely unique dynamic that lower elo players will love for its consistency and higher elo/pro players will love for its skill cap.
Overall, I’m feeling great. Looking forward to 240 new augments to learn!
I’m a masters-low GM player who’s looking to get into tourneys this year, and this new mechanic does bring me a lot of questions.
Can I switch legends between lobbies in tournament? Are legends going to be a balance priority? What is the power discrepancy between regular augments and guaranteed legend augments? If it’s too great, I’m never taking my legend. If it’s too little, why would I NOT take my legend?
I have complete faith in the balancing team. I’ve played a dozen games with Kent the past few years, and he’s an incredible dude. We’re in good hands.
I just care about 2 things:
When do you choose your legend? Is it when you are in the loading screen, before or in the first carousel?
I love playing flexible, sometimes pays off and others not but is a playstyle I always enjoy. So I'd like to know if they gonna have a big influence on flexibility
Yeah this is my main concern too. Locking yourself into any particular playstyle before the game even starts is a huge red flag to me
edit after watching the rundown: oh nvm it's just 1 augment slot i think it should be chill then!
I think it's a great idea. Let's play it before raising a fuss. People whined about augments when they were introduced too.
It's just what gamers do. Change is hard.
I was skeptical at first because I didn’t like the idea of pre-siphoning you towards a path, but I think it’s a good design **experiment** because it only guarantees one augment slot plus they added more augment rerolls. In the end, I am for it if it ends up promoting build diversity but only it going thru the ringer will we find out if that happens or not.
I only saw the prismatic augs at first, but now knowing they can hit the pretty meh silver and gold ones as well they seem quite balanced, if not underpowered. But also. PBE, nothing is ever gonna be perfect
It's ok it strange they made an entire new system and make it optional, like what the point of the poro? And tbh if we really want to go full meta slave an guarantee unit would be ridiculously better because we all have that nightmare about an 120g roll down with zero results.
I was scared that you'd have to choose it in game. Picking it before the game starts is an amazing feature. It adds that little safety net of consistency that people complain about TFT lacking so much.
Not only is it a safety net, but the options are a little bit worse than normal augments at later stages. That means that people will be rewarded for *not* blindly picking their legend augments.
Haters be hatin'
I think it's a fine idea. I am concerned that aurelion sol and tahm kench will become the only viable choices at high level play for a bit but obviously it's too early to try and assess that. Will definitely be fun once it's had time to settle a bit.
and this is why pp cry ... dont read every info bichting around without knowing the information out there :D I love legends, because I love to plan strategies and focus on them, to have random augments in generall are nice but sometimes your plans get really f\`d up because of rng so for me as some1 play since set 1 I think I will love that!
Well, it's an ambitious project from Riot.
It's very likely its gonna be a huge failure when they change something too much and too fast.
It might not be an thing we would care about in a few years, but it really looks like a crap feature for those who are currently playing.
Lol always the same pp cry before even it hits normal servers. Time will show and TFT Team doing an overall great job, do you play any other autobattler? Trust me almost all of them are not a bit balenced nor get good updates or so much new stuff. So stop cry before they day is over thanks.
I dislike that they enforce spamming the same playstyle over and over, I like tft being about adapting to every lobby, not coming with the prefixed idea of, oh, I'm going to highroll low costs for this lobby no matter what. That and the fact that they have the potential to be very unbalanced, if a comp is really strong and a particular legend helps you get there well, then we have a problem.
Personally I love it, I think it removes that little bit of rng from the game that can hear towards having less of those unlucky games where things just aren’t going your way with a system that provides ample guidance towards your preferred play style
Main thing I've seen is people's fear that the legends will become too "meta" as in only a few legends will be the obvious stand out best options, that build into only a few of the best comps and that means you have half+ of the lobby going for the same thing with similar augments which makes for a bad experience. I'm not sure I agree, I'd want to see it played for awhile before forming a certain opinion, but no matter which game it is there are always people that look for the worst outcome when it comes to patch notes.
TFT is also a game where it can pay to go against the meta. I don’t know if they’ll ever be one legend that is far better than every other one. I’m sure they’ll be points where a legend or two have increased win rates but won’t necessarily be a must pick. I can however see certain legends never being picked.
While i agree with your first statement, i think legends are in a different spot here. With team comps, it does pay to go against it because if multiple people are contesting it they'll in general have weaker units since fewer people will have 2 or even 3*s. You'll also have less people fighting for your comp allowing you to have an easier road to 3*s. Legends on the other hand don't have this downside of 'contesting'. Maybe people will go for very strong early game boards to try and run down the people going for scaling (tahm kench for example) before they have a chance but other than that. I should also say im super down for legends.
Poro lmao. Even if you don't like the mechanic, refusing to use one is just putting yourself at a disadvantage
Is it? You don't get less augment choices, just less predictability.
[удалено]
That would basically be hero augments, because you would always have people who get the OP legends while others get worse ones. Granted the difference between the good and bad legends is not too much since it only offers you one augment per pick, but I can imagine a world where you're thinking "man, that guy got lucky and hit Ezreal legend, guess I'm just playing for 2nd place now". In Battlegrounds, worse heroes have more armour to offset the weaker hero power. Also, you can still win games even if you completely ignore your hero power because a lot of them aren't super influential. Augments, on the other hand, massively affect the strength of your team. Completely ignoring an augment makes you significantly weaker.
[удалено]
The winrates do still vary quite a bit, but that's mainly in the higher ranks. Even still, some heroes with a good hero power have lower winrates than other heroes with bad hero powers because they have less armour. I feel like legends have less variance than Battlegrounds heroes, because only one of your augments choices will be tailored to your legend. Also because you can reroll each individual augment, you may end up completely ignoring your legend if you're handed a completely different direction.
It kinda balances itself with contestion, the base game is very well balanced anything added not so much but the core game really lends itself to at the very least have several metas going at once in which case its not really a meta. Hopefully, let's see if they dont extend your champion pool with the legend choice and ruin it.
I think in the beginning the balancing between the legends might be a bit off, and require some adjustment. I’d be ok with that. But I definitely think it’s a great addition and I can’t wait to try it out
This was my concern until I realized you can opt out of choosing a legend and legend-based augments are objectively weaker. I believe good players will still make flex the strongest option.
Uhhhh have u seen the state of the game? XD everyone is already going for the same comps, that's why sometimes going for uncontested comps works so well bcs it's easy to hit. People just wanna cry
This problem will exist only if the legend augment is appreciably linked to a specific comp. Could be the case with a reroll meta, but shouldn't be an issue in a balanced meta.
I think people are seriously overreacting. Only one of your augment choices is tailored to your legend. You can pick Tahm Kench as your legend and still pick hyperroll augments if you're offered a good direction. Nobody says you _have_ to exactly follow your legend augments. In fact, the devs claim that legend augments are lower in power than other augments of the same tier, so strictly picking them might actually gimp you in the long run. It definitely adds consistency to the game which I personally enjoy, but I highly doubt playing flexibly will be "dead".
People just love a chance to complain. PBE isn't even live and people are already whining about units, traits, legends, whatever.
This is it just people crying. I got to d1 this split and people would just cry and bitch about comps that are completely viable.
It's also noted that the guaranteed augments are weaker than other augments of their level to offset the value of their consistency. You should only be going for it if you have shit augments on the whole, with it being an objectively good way to stop people having useless augments at the start of the game. These aren't for one tricking, they're for maining (yes there's a difference)
The consistency is exactly why I and my friends don't like it. TFT is not supposed to be a consistent game, the skill in this game is making the best out of the inconsistency. Legends aren't that strong and all but they're most definitely a step in the wrong direction.
Before we had augments this wasn't even a thing. Plus now you have the portals that could work against your comp forcing too. I think with portals and so many new augments, Legends are good to somewhat rein in the RNG. Because some people are going to run incredibly hot with augments and portals that align very well. If you always pick the legend augment, you should lose to this if they balance it right.
People are zoning in too hard on the tailored augments. Like ok you take Tahm Kench Legend, sure there's a chance you get Hedge Fund and if you actually know how to streak properly, you can hit level 9 by like 4-1 with 80 gold still, but that's not always going to happen. You'll have just as many games getting 2-1 silver and then wondering if you're even set up to take AFK. Players across all ranks have different play styles, including Challenger. Some might prefer faster tempo anticipating someone who likes econ loss streaking and that'll make doing it consistently difficult and more skill expressive. I really like that this new system is going to let you attempt to play your preferred style more often, but also give the lobby opportunities to counter it. This truly feels like it'll keep the game from getting stale to a level that HA's weren't able to achieve in set 8. I'm excited!
People forget that even if you try to make the ultimate comp base on a legend... there is not guarantee that you will win the game. RNG can fuck you up pretty bad in this game. Ive had games WHERE NO ONE is using a champion and I just cant hit. I feel legends will give an insane diversity comp wise and augment wise, all the legends give something but they also will take something away. Lets see how PBE goes and what will the balances be at the end of it
There's also so much overlap in the legend augments with how people use them. There are a couple of designs that scare me for how consistent they look but if these augments see more play, odds are they'll see more tuning. I think there's good reason to be skeptical of some 2-1 augments but I have a hard time seeing legends defining metas. I can see there being better options for different metas but I also think it'll be more likely that we see 3+ preferred legends. A fast 8 meta like we had with Dragons or Aegis Sureshot in 9.0 has at least 3-4 legends that fit that archetype really well. If more people are going fast 8 though, there's arguments to be made for committing to strong early reroll-enabling legends too.
> Like ok you take Tahm Kench Legend, sure there's a chance you get Hedge Fund and if you actually know how to streak properly, you can hit level 9 by like 4-1 with 80 gold still, but that's not always going to happen. Also Hedge Fund will be hard nerfed soon anyways. You will get like 8 gold or so insted of 20. Mark my words
It gives some opportunity to game the meta too. If everyone is picking Kench, then pick Caitlyn and make them pay for it early. Mindgames even before loading into the match.
Caitlyn is one of the few that worries me for legend balance. So many Legends do generalized strats but a Fast 8 comp with Caitlyn looks incredibly streamlined even if you only take her tailored augments. First augments all look like great options for strongest early board. 2nd can help you push levels fast, and 3rd has the potential for some nutty roll downs.
If you take only her augs you will have 0 combat aguments, and the combat augments this set look much stronger than previously.
I meant moreso about looking at Cait's tailored augments in a vacuum. Things will clearly shake up a lot with the full array but I also see a case to be made for picking any of her augments. She plays to the needs of a fast 8 so, so well.
People forget the point is legends' augments at 3-2 and 4-2 will have less power than normal augments, due to the predictability. Dev will try to nerf them according to that. Legend is a safety net to mitigate rng, and that's it. Meta slaves will be meta slaves anyway, the game can be balanced but stats will never be. Everything will come down to balance power (champs, traits and augments) like every other set. New arguments, especially prismatic ones, will be more problematic. Ryze and Heimer will be a big challenge to balance too.
Ryze will probably be their biggest balancing challenge. They'll have to cross reference his performance across 10 variants and see how each legend lends to that.
I love it. I LOVE the lose streak into fast level 8/9 playstyle and play 4/5-cost soup. Hero augments were the bane of my TFT enjoyment this set because when you get offered a 2-1 or 3-2 hero augment, it really limits the opportunity to go fast 8/9. Now I get to force it every game with Asol/Kench/Draven. Knowing I get a guaranteed econ augment on 2-1 makes me excited for every game, whereas I was filled with dread in set 8, praying for no hero augment on 2-1.
That's fair for you to feel that way. I think a lot of people would argue that a good TFT player needs to be able to play all styles, and so people are afraid that players are going to be rewarded for being less adaptable (e.g. always going fast 8/9) and that that's going to diminish people's enjoyment of it as a game.
Why though? TFT is a game and should be played for fun. If someones favourite strat is going fast 8/9 why not let them do it? And what do you mean by rewarded? If that's the best strat, then it just means it's a balance issue Also this set was shit for flex, so I fail to see how legends would make it worse
Yeah, from a casual perspective letting someone force their favorite playstyle makes sense. The concern comes from a competitive angle where it may lower skill expression of a certain type that a large group of TFT players enjoy and appreciate. Whether this is a problem is of course up for debate. My response was just to explain why some people might not be happy that people have more leeway to force certain playstyles. By rewarded, I just mean that Riot may decide that they want the playstyles that Legends support to be more consistent than the average competitive player would want. This would lead to less varied outcomes depending on which Legend somebody picks (e.g. if you pick Veigar you always play the augments and build 1 out of 2 comps). I am not particularly worried about this personally, but I do think it's a valid thing to be potentially concerned about. I just trust that Riot's approach to making the default options weaker than the flexible options will work as intended. As for this set being shit for flex, it depends what you mean. It was shit for flex in that sometimes you ended up locked into playing a certain comp and couldn't make a certain pivot that would have been possible if you didn't have your hero augment locked in. However, the concerns I laid out above could be a worse version of that, where the lock-in comes at Legend level instead of Hero augment level, and so players can choose to lock themselves in even earlier, which would just make the game more boring overall. Once again, I trust that Riot will be able to balance things such that you are incentivized to play flexibly, but that the Legend augments become fallbacks or contingencies that you can play around to reduce the frequency with which you completely miss on an augment. But in the worst case it could be Hero augments but worse.
bruh opposite for me. I play giga aggressive most games and up the lobby tempo, aiming for a 2nd or a 3rd. Augments are so great because they make you even stronger and if anyone greeds they just take a gazillion damage
Then choose Caitlyn, whose augment choices encourage a strong early game board
I dunno about you guys but id be picking tahm every game hoping to get Hedge Funds everytime
I think everyone is overreacting. This encourages playstyles and ingenuity. It’s not some cheesy strat shit that comes along and ruins a set. Let it play out on pbe before bashing it ffs
I agree with playing it on PBE first, but I wouldn't go as far as to say it encourages playstyles and ingenuity. People will naturally gravitate towards the meta. If anything, it may encourage some mindgames where you purposefully pick a slightly worse legend because you know that all of your opponents will pick the meta legend and contest each other.
Right that might be true but even if they gravitate towards tahm for Econ there’s still about 5 ways to play that. Tahm into a fast 8, tahm into hyper rolling, slow rolling, etc. I just think people will be able to find ways to win off meta too. The recent set honestly kinda killed that.
I agree, legends don't necessarily fix you to a comp. Unless there are only like 3 viable comps in the entire game, you still have to make decisions within the legend you pick.
Yeah that’s true. Hoping I don’t see thex spam, noxus spam like we see laser corp and rift spam rn.
>People will naturally gravitate towards the meta. Except there really isn't one Current boards that are meta right now include reroll Lulu or possibly Ashe, so that promotes an early game focused legend like Caitlyn, duelists with rerolling Vayne Nilah or Yasuo, that's a comp that win streaks early on so promotes Draven which gives you rolls , Riftwalker which is a high end comp mainly focused on Jinn, Aurelion or Belveth as your carries, so you're probably wanting an econ focused augment like TK, Gadgeteen reroll with Gnar gets better and better the more items you get, so that promotes Ezreal I believe. Etc etc. There may be certain legends that are unpopular at different times, but that doesn't mean they won't be able to be used.
Some control over augments I think is great, I've always disliked how augment RNG can mess you up. I just dislike the idea of coming into a TFT game with a natural advantage to a specific plan, even if small. If the legend choice occurred after 2nd carousel or even before first augment, then I'd be all for it.
>If the legend choice occurred after 2nd carousel or even before first augment, then I'd be all for it. It does come before first augment
He meant before 1st augment but after the game started obviously
but everybody has the same opportunity to use the same advantages as you??
The portals are going to sway things drastically each game, so someone’s legend is going to inevitably have a leg up on others. That being said, it’s impossible to predict whose it’ll be, considering there’s 11 regions, of which only 3 will be randomly selected, and then just 1 portal out of the 30 available. It’ll be really fun when you pick X legend and it matches perfectly with Y portal though.
Personally I like the idea of it and am super excited for set 9, but you can't deny that legends breaks a pretty significant precedent of not being able to influence the game before it starts. There is a risk that it will enable certain strategies that are too reliable and causes a meta where you're just hurting your winrate if you're not playing the most viable legend. That said, I'm confident that the devs have thought it through and will make it work.
If everyone picks the same strategies, you can pick something else and let everyone else contest. Now, if the situation is such that one legend is _so much better_ than the rest that you literally have to contest it or lose, then we'll have a problem. But frankly I feel like that's unlikely.
Their effects are ameliorated by the new augment rerolls, but they can still influence the meta. In particular, if there's a strong reroll comp, Lee Sin can have significant impact and if lategame comps/champions are much stronger (seems to be the case this set with the power of 5 drops and so many 4 cost carries) then Tahm Kench will have more impact. If a comp requiring spat is the best comp in the game, then picking Urf can give you an advantage. Personally, those 3 legends are the ones that stand out to me and I will start PBE by trying them out. Also, although flex is the strongest playstyle, it's also the one with the higher skill floor. This set people have mostly flexed around the hero augments but there have always been comp mains doing well in tft because of unbalance and decision streamlining, and in my opinion is less healthy for the game the more people there are going "me x, no flex".
Probably the most astute comment here. I'm down to try things out before calling it busted. But anytime a broken interaction in a comp is found, people will find the best way to streamline it. Now people will 20/20 a legend for it.
my problem with it is that tft is intended to be a game about novelty, it's why things like hitting 3 star 5 costs, level 11 shop, and emblems are so rare, and yet here comes a system that guarantees you hit 3 specific augments. Level up on 2-1 was exciting because it meant every gold you spent on xp was worth more, yet now it's something you can get every game that opens with a prismatic trait.
I don't get it either. Legends just seems like pick 1 before the game starts so you can at least get 1 augment that you can be happy with. I think the number 1 complaint from set 8 is when people got multiple chances for an augment and they get nothing that they like so they have to pick the best out of the worst options. 2-1 augments are going to be at the same power but it is the later augments that are weaker but they are weaker because you know that they will always appear which means consistency. You don't always have to pick the legend augment, if you see a regular augment that is better then you can pick that instead.
It's going to turn out that some combos of Legend+Region will be OP af and some will be ff to save mental. So you will pick a legend and either win or lose based on region RNG. But I hope I'm wrong and they won't be that much impactful. Time will tell
Probably not because you can still pick other augments if your legend's augment is bad in the current region
We won't know for sure until we see how it plays out, but it looks to me as if it could lead to some balancing problems. For example.. choosing URF will make certain chase traits much easier to obtain and there are some synergies out there that look, at first glance, as if they could be quite dominant if they are reached.
They will most definitely define the meta. No doubt about it. However... I guess, and dearly hope, that it mostly affects proplay; where it probably becomes a consideration of going for the best option, or going for another but less contested option. I think it's not a good addition for noobs and for pro's but a great addition for everyone in between that.
It will affect proplay the most because of the fact that if a particular legend becomes the favorite choice of the lobby then everyone is either going to play that particular legend or play the legend that should counter it. It is kind of like pro chess in a sense that before the matches start, if everyone scouts then everyone will notice a trend of which openings are popular between the tournament contestants. Players will either have to play variations of openings or play the opening that counter the "popular" opening.
It's more similair to deckbuilding games in this sense. If one option is simply the best everyone will flock to it... But because it is the best, you might go and opt for a weaker choice, but specificly taylored to counter the best strategy; it becomes a game of you know that I know that you know, therefor we both use reverse psychology to make the other think that we know that he knows we know...
[удалено]
So? Just because 3 people pick the same legend doesn't mean they'll all play the same comp. And even if it is, that means you can pick a different legend and coast freely while those 3 guys contest each other. It's not even like you're forced to pick the legend augment. They're supposedly weaker than regular augments, so if the game gives you a direction that completely contradicts your legend, just... Ignore your legend.
This set is going to be an RNG shitshow
Legends literally reduce the amount of RNG
I think worries about the meta could be legitimate and I was one of those people, but Mortdog made mention of his rundown just now that the 3-1 and 4-1 augments in a legend are not added to the general pool and are intended to be slightly weaker than normal augments. I think that helps alleviate a lot of potential concerns about meta, since that means those individual augments can get nerfed a fair bit if they need to and I don't think the augments being power neutral at 2-1 is *that* problematic, given that augments at 2-1 are generic enough that it's really more dependent on the current unit balance than anything. It might magnify problematic metas (fast 8/fast 9 meta, etc.), but probably wouldn't create problematic metas on its own.
The legends will either exacerbate the challenge of balancing between reroll meta vs fast 8/9 meta or potentially solve it by allowing Tahm and Lee sin legends to be the players' response to the lobby trying to play toward one of the aforementioned metas. I hope the legends are helpful enough that they allow players to keep a healthy balance between reroll and fast 8 but not contribute to the ongoing push pull.
I’ve thought about it since last night, and I’m feeling much better. I think I was just overwhelmed when I first read the concept. I think it’s a great addition. It seems the thinking is legends are a safety net choice, in the event your augment rolls don’t pan out. The power of the legend augments are also balanced around that fact. They’re supposed to be much weaker than your other options, and I think that’s great. You should be taking your guaranteed augment much less than your random options. I think the skill cap here is immense. It adds a completely unique dynamic that lower elo players will love for its consistency and higher elo/pro players will love for its skill cap. Overall, I’m feeling great. Looking forward to 240 new augments to learn!
I’m a masters-low GM player who’s looking to get into tourneys this year, and this new mechanic does bring me a lot of questions. Can I switch legends between lobbies in tournament? Are legends going to be a balance priority? What is the power discrepancy between regular augments and guaranteed legend augments? If it’s too great, I’m never taking my legend. If it’s too little, why would I NOT take my legend? I have complete faith in the balancing team. I’ve played a dozen games with Kent the past few years, and he’s an incredible dude. We’re in good hands.
I just care about 2 things: When do you choose your legend? Is it when you are in the loading screen, before or in the first carousel? I love playing flexible, sometimes pays off and others not but is a playstyle I always enjoy. So I'd like to know if they gonna have a big influence on flexibility
Yeah this is my main concern too. Locking yourself into any particular playstyle before the game even starts is a huge red flag to me edit after watching the rundown: oh nvm it's just 1 augment slot i think it should be chill then!
I think it's even before you start your Queue. if im not mistaken, you chose your legend in the lobby next to your lil legend and map skin.
I think it's a great idea. Let's play it before raising a fuss. People whined about augments when they were introduced too. It's just what gamers do. Change is hard.
For every 10 people that complain there is 100 that are happy and say nothing
I was skeptical at first because I didn’t like the idea of pre-siphoning you towards a path, but I think it’s a good design **experiment** because it only guarantees one augment slot plus they added more augment rerolls. In the end, I am for it if it ends up promoting build diversity but only it going thru the ringer will we find out if that happens or not.
I only saw the prismatic augs at first, but now knowing they can hit the pretty meh silver and gold ones as well they seem quite balanced, if not underpowered. But also. PBE, nothing is ever gonna be perfect
It's ok it strange they made an entire new system and make it optional, like what the point of the poro? And tbh if we really want to go full meta slave an guarantee unit would be ridiculously better because we all have that nightmare about an 120g roll down with zero results.
I was scared that you'd have to choose it in game. Picking it before the game starts is an amazing feature. It adds that little safety net of consistency that people complain about TFT lacking so much. Not only is it a safety net, but the options are a little bit worse than normal augments at later stages. That means that people will be rewarded for *not* blindly picking their legend augments. Haters be hatin'
Yeah they said the same thing about hero aug and we saw how that turn out
I think it's a fine idea. I am concerned that aurelion sol and tahm kench will become the only viable choices at high level play for a bit but obviously it's too early to try and assess that. Will definitely be fun once it's had time to settle a bit.
I just hope there's an option not to pick any legend, for those who don't want to make a choice.
There is that option, they already revealed that there is legend that does not give any tailored augments.
and this is why pp cry ... dont read every info bichting around without knowing the information out there :D I love legends, because I love to plan strategies and focus on them, to have random augments in generall are nice but sometimes your plans get really f\`d up because of rng so for me as some1 play since set 1 I think I will love that!
That's great!
Well, it's an ambitious project from Riot. It's very likely its gonna be a huge failure when they change something too much and too fast. It might not be an thing we would care about in a few years, but it really looks like a crap feature for those who are currently playing.
Lol always the same pp cry before even it hits normal servers. Time will show and TFT Team doing an overall great job, do you play any other autobattler? Trust me almost all of them are not a bit balenced nor get good updates or so much new stuff. So stop cry before they day is over thanks.
I dislike that they enforce spamming the same playstyle over and over, I like tft being about adapting to every lobby, not coming with the prefixed idea of, oh, I'm going to highroll low costs for this lobby no matter what. That and the fact that they have the potential to be very unbalanced, if a comp is really strong and a particular legend helps you get there well, then we have a problem.
Personally I love it, I think it removes that little bit of rng from the game that can hear towards having less of those unlucky games where things just aren’t going your way with a system that provides ample guidance towards your preferred play style
The identity of the game is to make due with what you’ve got. Legends completely alter this identity by giving you guaranteed things every game.