|
Miss Fortune, The Bounty Hunter
Introduction: Hi, I'm speKter. I am a long-time TL follower, and this guide is my first attempt at contributing something lasting and meaningful to the community. I am a North American LoL player, currently 2012 ELO rated, and this guide is about my favorite LoL champion Miss Fortune. I decided to write this guide because I feel as though MF is greatly underrated by a majority of the community. I utilize her with great success and feel she is currently the strongest AD champion in the game ATM, and would love to see more advocates of this champion out there. She has gained recent attention after being re-popularized by Chaox as part of his "snowball meta" theory, and I would encourage everyone to check out his guide here. I hope to expand more thoroughly on some of his key concepts, explain areas in which I differ with his opinion, and open up a thread on thoughtful discussion of this awesome champ.
+ Show Spoiler [Stats] + Damage 46.5 (+3 / per level) Health 435 (+85 / per level) Mana 212 (+38 / per level) Move Speed 300 Armor 15 (+3 / per level) Spell Block 30 (+0 / per level) Health Regen 1.02 (+0.13 / per level) Mana Regen 1.39 (+0.13 / per level)
Abilities:
Passive - Strut: Miss Fortune gains an additional 25 movement speed after 7 seconds of not being attacked, increasing each second up to 70 maximum bonus speed.
Extremely strong passive at all stages of the game, this passive gives MF 370 movespeed at level 1 without boots or 419 movespeed with Tier 1 boots. Expect to have anywhere from 470-500 movespeed end game. This is a very versatile passive, with benefits including but not limited to: - ease of last hitting/lane harassment - lane presence (passive in conjunction with her ultimate makes it extremely easy for MF to shove lanes, shop and be back in lane with losing minimal or no CS) - unexpected ganking potential - late game map mobility, allowing for stronger baron control and split pushing - chasing down / picking off weaker opponents during or after teamfights This passive is critical for MF because her biggest weakness is a lack of any escape spells. Good map awareness and responsiveness are key traits to avoid death with MF.
Double Up: Miss Fortune fires a shot at an enemy target, dealing 25/60/95/130/165 (+) physical damage and 115% of that damage to another enemy target behind the first. Applies on-hit effects.
Cost: 70 / 75 / 80 / 85 / 90 mana Cooldown: 9 / 8 / 7 / 6 / 5 seconds
An effective tool to ensure you will always win trades during laning phase, the biggest mistake Miss Fortune players often make is maxing this skill first. This skill is simply too mana intensive and too unreliable to be maxed first. Synergizes beautifully with impure shots, applying both the stacking passive damage and the passive healing reduction. I typically avoid trying to be cute with the shot mechanics and aim directly for my intended target, rather than relying on the bounce effect. Note that this skill resets the autoattack timer, and should be used immediately following an autoattack for maximum DPS.
Impure Shots: Passive: Miss Fortune deals 6/8/10/12/14 (+0.05) magic damage to her target with each attack, cumulatively stacking up to 4 times on the same target.
Active: Miss Fortune's attack speed is increased by 30/35/40/45/50% for 6 seconds and causes her attacks to lower healing received and health regeneration by the target by 50% for 3 seconds.
Cost: 50 mana Cooldown: 16 seconds
There is so much to say about this skill. I absolutely love this skill and it is the defining aspect of what makes Miss Fortune a BEAST throughout the early/midgame. Taking it at level 1 it makes you stronger than any other AD in the game, period. At a flat cost of 50 mana at all ranks, it is easily spammable and the damage adds up very, very fast. Mastering the art of attack-moving with this skill to snowball your damage against a single target into unmanageable amounts is a key aspect of mastering MF. Use it in conjunction with Double Up to apply the healing debuff to multiple targets and quickly stack the passive damage. Max this first and use it to shred any lane opponent - more on this later.
Make It Rain: Miss Fortune fires hundreds of bullets into the air that rain down at a location after 0.5 seconds, dealing 90/145/200/255/310 (+0.8) magic damage over 2 seconds and slowing enemies hit by 20/25/30/35/40% for 1 second.
Cost: 80 / 85 / 90 / 95 / 100 mana Cooldown: 15 seconds
Miss Fortune's throwaway skill. Does marginal damage at exorbitant (and scaling) mana costs, this is a 1-point wonder which I typically will take at either level 4 (vs. aggressive junglers) or level 8. Useful for slowing runners or checking bushes, not much else.
Bullet Time: Miss Fortune channels a barrage of bullets into a cone in front of her for 2 seconds, dealing 65/95/125 (+ ) (+0.2) magic damage per bullet.
Cost: 150 mana Cooldown: 120 / 110 / 100 seconds
Very strong early/midgame ultimate. It has been compared to Graves's ult, but is actually quite different. Due to the channeling component, Bullet Time can be one of the most punishing ultimates in the game, but requires keen judgment on where and when to use. The later the game goes, the less beneficial this skill becomes when compared to autoattack DPS and should primarily be used as a long-range poke, or under perfect conditions when you can safely channel this against 4 or 5 opponents. Early game, it is favorable to use this as opposed to autoattack DPS.
Summoner Skills:
Recently this has become the go-to standard for AD summoners. The nature of heal scalability / increased effectiveness on oneself makes it a natural choice for the AD, as 90% of the time he will be the focus target in bot lane. Tell your support to grab exhaust. Cleanse can also be used situationally, but I would not recommend it, as a caught MF has a very difficult time escaping and heal is almost always a better option from a pure survivability perspective. I would consider cleanse against only the most CC-intensive teams (Fid/Amu comps, etc.)
Masteries: 21-9-0 21-9-0 is optimal - 9 in defense to maximize health, the rest into offense since your role is damage dealer. MF has no need of utility using my guide (minimal mana requirements).
Runes: Marks: Armor Penetration Seals: Flat Armor Glyphs: Scaling MRes Quints: Flat AD
I use this setup 100% of the time on MF. Scaling MRes carries far greater value than flat into the late game when you will likely start encountering your opponent's AP carry. The other choices have been discussed and justified in detail in other threads.
Skill Order: W, Q, W, E or Q, W, R for levels 1-6 R > W > Q > E Levelling W first is optimal for many reasons. At level 1, it makes you probably the best duelist in the game. An additional +6 damage upon first hit makes last hitting that much easier, in addition to ensuring you win every autoattack trade vs the opposing AD. By level 9 and max stacks, you are doing an additional 56 damage PER HIT to your target. It also double dips on your Q damage, effectively buffing your Q damage without increasing its mana cost. Q is next to further increase your burst, E is practically worthless after 1 point so ignore it until the end.
Support Synergy Tier 1 - - These champions syngergize beautifully with MF. Taric stun/armor debuff combo ensures you will always get an auto+Q+auto combo off for massive damage. Nunu gives you even MORE bonus movespeed, bonus attack speed which is the best-scaling stat on MF until lategame, and slows your opponent to boot, quickly turning slight positioning blunders into a nightmare for their team.
Tier 2 - - These champions are all viable in the hands of competent players, and can situationally be better for your team than the Tier 1 picks, but in my experience they don't lead to the same degree of laning steamroll as the Tier 1. Playing them aggressively is essential to success and you should instruct your lanemates to prioritize their aggressive skills over the defensive.
Tier Never - - Cannot stress this enough. Never, ever, EVER run this combo, it is doomed to a miserable failure. Soraka provides no initiation for MF to follow up on, and the mana boost is completely wasted. You will see the tables turned as your opponent pushes you to your tower and you are completely unable to use your combos without taking twice the damage in return.
Items: Starting
+x3 - I use this most of the time, boots snowball your early game movespeed advantage even further and allow you to poke more often/get more last hits/shoot one more time against a retreating opponent (remember, that's anywhere from another 18-42 damage if you prioritize W!) - Against aggro burst cheese comps only - Ali/Trist and Nunu/Trist come to mind. The extra HP will allow you to survive the burst and win the trade afterwards. +x5 - Use this setup with a support Nunu, as it's imperative you win your trades and can outsustain any team. His buff makes up for the loss of early movespeed.
First back
x2
Wriggles is essential to snowballing your early game. You want greaves as well, and a total of 1-2 dblades. 1 Dblade gives you a steeper power curve later (you will be able to fit both a pickaxe and BF sword into your inventory on the way to IE), but 2 Dblades gives you more immediate strength and a flatter curve later until IE is complete. Choose appropriately based on how the game is going.
It's worth noting that I almost always take my first back at level 6. I take R and ult a fresh enemy creep wave, giving me 30 seconds before more enemy creeps reach the lane. This is usually enough time to B, grab the items, and get back to lane before you've lost any XP or CS... OP! Your opponent will inevitably fall behind at this point, as there is no other AD carry in the game that can shove their lane this hard this early to buy their own gear without losses.
Next
PD and IE, in that order. PD components are very cheap and ensure a continued power curve. MF benefits very highly from AS, as it allows you to stack your W just that much faster. This item, in conjunction with wriggles makes you significantly stronger than every other AD during the midgame, and you will notice with an average team (meaning, on average your other 4 players have performed adequately when compared with your opponents) that you will begin to win objective teamfights and rack up kills. IE is the natural next step, to make you a damage powerhouse and synergize with the crit you've received from PD.
Final Build
Fairly standard. The final itemization choice essentially comes down to GA or LW first. I would choose GA if comfortably ahead, and LW if the team is struggling and a gamble is necessary to win. You can also opt for against heavy suppression teams (WW, Malz, Skarner), but I feel like GA is stronger in most cases.
Mentality of the Miss Fortune player: You are the Pantheon of bottom lane, you put the D(cup) in AD, and your job is to make your opponent's life miserable. In range of your opponent? Activate W and attack+Q+attack. You've just outbursted just your opponent. Now do it again, and again. Make sure you coordinate with your support's CC mechanisms to get even more mileage out of your combos. Be careful not to extend too far too early, or you may find yourself taking excessive creep damage. You must also take care that your lane is well warded at all times, as you will invariably lose your passive movespeed during these trades. This puts MF at high risk of being ganked, as Flash is your only escape tool when Strut is down. Fortunately, with a support ward buddy in your pocket, you can afford to be recklessly aggressive most of the time.
One of the greatest laning strengths of MF is the ability to harass without pushing the lane. You will oftentimes find the creep line closer to YOUR side of the lane than theirs, especially against champs that have to push to counterharass (Graves, Cait) - this should set your mind even more at ease about ganks. Fortunately, you also have the ability to shove the lane hard (with R) on demand to buy safely.
During teamfights, stay back and let your tanks engage. R if you see a good opportunity, or else just run in (remember, you can join the fight very quickly thanks to your passive), hit W, and focus a target. Range is not MF's strongpoint, so I would prioritize anything close by rather than sacrificing position to hit a juicy target. Use your Q in conjunction with W to apply a healing debuff to 2 targets, but make sure you pick a good target and STICK TO THEM. MF loses a good deal of DPS when switching targets, due to her W passive falling off. My favorite targets are short-range AP bruisers like Swain and Vlad, who incidentally also suffer from the healing debuff. Do not waste time throwing down an E. Save it only for runners after the main engage is over.
Abuse your movespeed into the lategame. You can usually afford to shove bot lane out in baron standoffs and still get back to your team in time if the enemy team starts doing baron. In this way MF can play the role of the split pusher.
Finally, do not be afraid to fight at any point in the game. With equal farm to your AD opponent, you will win a trade. With worse farm than your opponent, you will still usually win a trade. Although MF is classified as an "early game" champion, she maintains her edge from abilities and item prioritization well into the late game, and only really starts falling off in comparison to champions like kog/trist/vayne once those champions have hit the 5+ end-game item mark. Even then, you can often win simply because you debuff their lifesteal by 50%! She is also exceptionally good at kiting and taking down bruisers once LW is complete. With W up, she remains one of the highest-DPS champions in the game even at the very end.
Final Thoughts I hope you guys have enjoyed my first guide, and first big post on this forum. I will respond to all questions on this thread and try to add additional input here and there. I will also add a Q&A section to this original post once I start getting the questions. I also plan to add a guide on specific AD matchups, as well as some VODs once I can find them in my stream history. Using this playstyle I continue to see unprecedented success with MF even at my current ELO, and I hope you will too. Happy hunting!
|
Hey man, good guide. There already is an MF guide up but yours is more recent. Maybe ask Neo to close the other one. Or maybe just post yours to that thread, idk. Kind of weird having 2 guides on here. Great guide though
|
On March 12 2012 16:07 HazMat wrote: Hey man, good guide. There already is an MF guide up but yours is more recent. Maybe ask Neo to close the other one. Or maybe just post yours to that thread, idk. Kind of weird having 2 guides on here. Great guide though I think multiple champions have more than 1 thread in LoL subforums, so no biggy.
Good guide. Keep contributing!
|
Nice guide, makes me want to play MF. I think Panth of bot lane was the key word.
<_<
|
United States37500 Posts
On March 12 2012 16:07 HazMat wrote: Hey man, good guide. There already is an MF guide up but yours is more recent. Maybe ask Neo to close the other one. Or maybe just post yours to that thread, idk. Kind of weird having 2 guides on here. Great guide though
Thanks for giving him the head's up.
speKter PM'ed me earlier and I said he could started a new MF thread. The old one was started in 2010 and it had very few posts. Since speKter mains AD, I might have him write other AD Champion threads at a later date.
Surprisingly, there are no threads for Graves, Trist, Twitch, etc.
Like Shake said, this is a good guide. Nicely done~
|
Hey guys, thanks for the feedback. I was indeed aware of the older thread but a glance over there and seeing adjectives like weak outdated and horrible directed towards the champ made me think it was time for a revamp! And yes, as Neo mentioned there are many unwritten AD guides out there. I think this may have to do with philosophy around ADs being somewhat similar with regards to passivity / last hitting.
However, I do think bot lanes can be won with detailed knowledge of the match-ups and the correct strategy, just the same as mid/top.
|
Hey, this guide is great. Really good insight on the mentality in playing MF, and the not-so-obvious choices for an AD (dblade AND wriggle, or PD before BF).
Now if they would only switch her christmas skin to the Chinese version, I'd play her every game...
|
Why armour pen marks over ad marks?
EDIT* What do you do to replace Wriggles with after you get your 6 items.
|
AD marks are generally used to help last hit. I forgot the exact math but iirc armor pen is slightly better vs champions until much later in the game. You have W passive to help last hit, and armor pen is better in early trades when the other guy has only ~30 armor (LOL if you come to lane without armor yellows vs MF).
If you were really maxed I'd replace wriggle with BT, and boots with a second PD, but prioritizing triple pots over replacing the items. I doubt you'll have many games where you can afford 3 pots + a full PD that late in the game, especially since someone else probably needs farm.
|
On March 14 2012 04:06 Sandster wrote: AD marks are generally used to help last hit. I forgot the exact math but iirc armor pen is slightly better vs champions until much later in the game. You have W passive to help last hit, and armor pen is better in early trades when the other guy has only ~30 armor (LOL if you come to lane without armor yellows vs MF).
If you were really maxed I'd replace wriggle with BT, and boots with a second PD, but prioritizing triple pots over replacing the items. I doubt you'll have many games where you can afford 3 pots + a full PD that late in the game, especially since someone else probably needs farm.
Sandster answered your questions perfectly Mementoss. AD marks are really not worth it on MF, as you have W to make last hitting a breeze, and arpen is noticeably more damage on champions (and minions too after a few minutes into the game).
|
Really awesome guide, makes me wanna play MF now. And I don't even like playing AD carries (except ezreal, but he's different).
|
Really interesting guide. I enjoyed playing MF when she was free recently. Definitly my next buy after this guide.
Where do you put the put in masteries exactly? In offense, is ad per level worth it, just to get the extra crit damage?
I noticed in his guide Chaox recommends leveling Q first (it's not a mistake when making the guide as he does it in the video) but I'll try W first. I've done the same with Sivir recently, leveling W before Q because of mana cost and more reliable damage.
|
Great guide.
You should add manacosts + cooldowns on skills.
|
On March 15 2012 06:12 NpG)Explosive wrote: Really interesting guide. I enjoyed playing MF when she was free recently. Definitly my next buy after this guide.
Where do you put the put in masteries exactly? In offense, is ad per level worth it, just to get the extra crit damage?
I noticed in his guide Chaox recommends leveling Q first (it's not a mistake when making the guide as he does it in the video) but I'll try W first. I've done the same with Sivir recently, leveling W before Q because of mana cost and more reliable damage.
If you check out the numbered link next to the masteries section, it takes you to a talent page that has everything filled out.
And yeah, I'm aware Chaox does max Q first, obviously I'm not in a place to say he's wrong, but it does lead to a very different style of laning. You tend to poke more rather than bulldog in their face with autoattack pressure. I like my way better just because it's easy and effective, why resort to mana constraints and pseudo-skillshots when you can straight up attack move and still come out ahead? Chaox tends to be a passive laner since he knows he can come out ahead that way just from superior last hitting ability - I'm just choosing to take an alternate route to late game dominance.
|
On March 15 2012 08:05 Wala.Revolution wrote: Great guide.
You should add manacosts + cooldowns on skills.
Done
|
Bot lane with Soraka isn't bad if you max Q. You can easily spam them out of lane.
|
United States37500 Posts
On March 16 2012 01:37 GranDim wrote: Bot lane with Soraka isn't bad if you max Q. You can easily spam them out of lane.
I agree with this. Hard to have a bad lane when you have no mana issues for spamming spells. Just per usual, you'll have to lane more passively with a Soraka since she has close to nil on offensive abilities.
Only except is Ashe/Soraka, due to Ashe's extremely shitty CD on Volley during the first few levels.
|
I do think Soraka should be addressed in the guide. MF/Soraka isn't ideal, but if you end up with the lane you have to max Q and abuse it. Q spam is still very strong if done properly; the problem with Q-first any other support is you oom in 3-4 casts and have to run 21/0/9, which greatly limits your ability to trade early in lane.
|
i prefer q max miss fortune - i know chauster does as well. it plays differently but your burst exchange is far stronger - if your opponent allows you to constantly be shooting them with W (which is difficult if the enemy has a strong counterburst threat or slick peel e.g. leona or janna lanes)they are going to lose the lane ofc, not to mention doing so is difficult levels 1-3 unless you have the creep advantage
good guide
|
The main reasons I don't prefer Q spam (and therefore Soraka) are due to its range and the way its mechanics work. It's quite difficult to get the bounce effect to land on an opponent that knows how to position against MF. If you choose to ignore the bounce effect and get in range to Q directly on your intended target, you're basically in autoattack range anyway, which is why I advocate W.
It is worth noting though that my tier support list is entirely under the assumption of maxing W. You need an aggressive support who sets you up to get a chain of autoattacks off - Soraka has no way to do this. She would probably be one of the stronger supports from a Q-poke style of play, I just have never enjoyed that route. I'll try to get some VODs up of my laning with W soon.
|
I learned MF back when she was a solo mid champ so maxing Q as always been my preferred build. I can still land reliable Q bounces at 1800 elo. Looking forward to vids of the W build.
|
Good guide, i like guides that write more on the playstyle and tips to win your lane than just regurgitating basic information.
|
Just played a game as MF + Janna vs Soraka Graves.
I initially followed Chaox's TSM guide where he advocates maxing Q instead of W because the harass is superior.
I find that I can usually dominate the lane / push them out with Q harass if it's NOT Soraka as the bot lane support.
Graves passive + Soraka = 2gewd and I couldn't push him out after maxing W > Q.
How would I go about beating this lane, or do I just out fear him?
(Disclaimer: exp is 1400-1500 range, Q resetting the swing timer was a big clue in your guide, maybe MF will be my new AD)
|
In MF/X vs. Graves/Soraka, you must utilize your superior trading ability to win the lane early. Attempt to force trades early and often - it is extremely easy to force Graves into a defensive position, since W/Q and a couple outattacks will outburst anything graves can counter with in the early game. Soraka can do very little to prevent the damage, since the W active will cut her healing (this forces Soraka to choose between applying the armor buff to Graves during the trade, thus making the heal only 50% effective, or applying the heal AFTER the W debuff has worn off, but ensuring he takes full damage during the trade). I don't mean to trivialize this lane - it is difficult to beat, but extreme aggression is the right way to go. Being passive / not trading often enough heavily favors the Soraka/Graves combo, as they will inevitably heal up any damage you deal and then outscale you in the late game.
Generate note - I realize I still owe the community some VODs. This is my project for this weekend
|
|
yup just rush BT dont even need boots on her. Start either Dblade or longsword + 2 pots and get vamp asap then save up for BF. this could change if they rebuff black cleaver though, since its strong on her
|
I've been playing her a lot lately and I had an 86% win rate at 1300 ELO. I found it great to start flask/4/3 (4 red pots 3 blue). You can lane forever and get boots dorans vamp or boots bf on first back. I then get BT -> zeal -> LW. I tried starting BC but I didnt feel i did much damage.
|
you put the D(cup) in AD
huehuehue
|
The best build is still BT -> LW with zeals as needed, MF's ult in teamfights is absolutely insane since the cast time removal.
|
wat's the best skill order for mf?
|
On January 03 2013 11:27 Ryuu314 wrote: wat's the best skill order for mf? I know most people max E last, but idk i usually skill up W then Q myself. R whenever possible obv
|
On December 31 2012 08:32 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: The best build is still BT -> LW with zeals as needed, MF's ult in teamfights is absolutely insane since the cast time removal.
This. It doesn't really take skill. If you are not too far behind BT -> LW -> Cleaver is just too strong. Midgame melting everything.
|
On January 03 2013 11:52 arb wrote:I know most people max E last, but idk i usually skill up W then Q myself. R whenever possible obv Depends on how soon you think teamfights are starting and how you think lane phase is going to go. In lanes where you're going to be trading in longer exchanges or when you think teamfights will break out skill w and in lanes where you're going to be harassing a lot skill q. I used to go wqwewr R>W>E>Q always but nowadays I'm doing QWQEQR R>Q>W>E a lot more. Start leveling w as soon as you think teamfights are going to break out soon.
|
What does everyone think of this no-crit MF build? I seem to have no problem destroying an entire team without crit. Having those extra armpen from cleaver and 2 BT works really well with mf's kit imo. This would probably be even more effective if the other team stacked armor instead of health.
|
With that itembuild (or similar itembuilds) you are simply an ultimate bot nothing else, nothing more. Besides the CDR boots that is one if the builds which is/was used by MF players. Your ultimate is devastating but with that advantage, you also have a weakness, your ultimate is pretty much your only source of damage you have no crit you dont have AS. You will probably do ~400 dmg/hit which is just really really really low.
So I would suggest you only taking this itembuild if your team has a lot of aoe lockdown (amumu, sona, sejuani and so on) In the game you linked I think a standart itembuild would have been better, the opposing team should have been able to jump you with Nautilus, Veigar and Jayce + your team doesnt have that much/easy to hit lockdown
|
On March 15 2013 10:52 Ente wrote: With that itembuild (or similar itembuilds) you are simply an ultimate bot nothing else, nothing more. Besides the CDR boots that is one if the builds which is/was used by MF players. Your ultimate is devastating but with that advantage, you also have a weakness, your ultimate is pretty much your only source of damage you have no crit you dont have AS. You will probably do ~400 dmg/hit which is just really really really low.
So I would suggest you only taking this itembuild if your team has a lot of aoe lockdown (amumu, sona, sejuani and so on) In the game you linked I think a standart itembuild would have been better, the opposing team should have been able to jump you with Nautilus, Veigar and Jayce + your team doesnt have that much/easy to hit lockdown
i think that's a very solid team for that build, that front line is extremely protective and none of the diving threats they have should be able to get through it. The only thing he had to fear was nautilus ult or a flash taric stun interrupt really.
|
The only AS item really worth building now imo are botrk, nashor, sotd, and trinity force, all of which are terrible on MF. I really find it hard to justify purchasing berserker, pd, or shiv because they are ~400g for a mere +12%. Berserker is the only item I know that gets less cost-efficient after upgrade (900g for 20%) so you are better off just getting a zephyr in place of it. Even the traditional PD-rushers like Vayne are giving up PD in favor of botrk. This build is a little dependent on her ult but you are also underestimating her auto which deals just as much as any AS stacking champs due to the armor pen and significantly higher AD.
|
On March 15 2013 23:28 AsianEcksDragon wrote: The only AS item really worth building now imo are botrk, nashor, sotd, and trinity force, all of which are terrible on MF. I really find it hard to justify purchasing berserker, pd, or shiv because they are ~400g for a mere +10%. Even the traditional PD-rushers like Vayne are giving up PD in favor of botrk. This build is a little dependent on her ult but you are also underestimating her auto which deals just as much as any AS stacking champs due to the armor pen and significantly higher AD. Going to have to disagree. If you have an IE, PD is VERY GOOD. Like, beyond good. BORK has a major caveat of not scaling super well with multiplicative stats. It's good, but it's mostly good in a vacuum - on 6 item builds, unless the opponent has a downright silly amount of health, BT will look better because it multiplies better with IE+PD.
On March 15 2013 09:36 AsianEcksDragon wrote:What does everyone think of this no-crit MF build? I seem to have no problem destroying an entire team without crit. Having those extra armpen from cleaver and 2 BT works really well with mf's kit imo. This would probably be even more effective if the other team stacked armor instead of health. I really think your second BT has no reason to NOT be an infinity edge instead. You're stacking tons of % ArPen when the only armor items on the entire enemy team are a Zhonya's, an Aegis, and a now-nerfed Taric aura. You could have crushed just as hard if you just got the BC or the LW (pick one) while also crushing harder with your autoattacks (though, that team is so squishy you probably nearly 100->0 them just with your ult.)
Also, what's your hatred of berserker greaves? I really don't think 15% CDR can match up to 20% AS, especially early game when MF likes to look for fights in lane, and remember that she fights most effectively by quickly stacking up to 4 stacks of impure shots (even if you're maxing Q first) and abusing her high damage like that.
Furthermore, MF is limited more by mana than by CDR for her lane-harass with Double-up. CDR isn't going to accomplish much as far as Double-up harass goes. Your ult isn't one you're just going to blow on cooldown either - it takes some patience to get those good ults that will actually result in kills / secured objectives.
For reference, boots1-> greaves is 550 gold for 20% AS (and the increased MS of having boots2) Boots2 is MUCH more movespeed than Zephyr (it's not even close), and if you're getting Furor, you clearly seem to value movespeed for kiting? So why would you touch CDR boots with a 10 foot pole if you find it hard to justify the 900g pricetag of greaves?
|
So, been going on a rampage with MF in soloq.
She seems to be incredibly strong in lane, incredibly strong in teamfights, can build pure armor shred so can damage tanks, and can still do damn good damage to tanks with just ad/arp items.
I don't get it, why isn't she in every single game. You literally go into lane with a stupidly strong champion, then if you land r in teamfights you usually win.
(currently 11-2 with MF in Diamond 1) Edit: I think the 2 loses were when I just bought her and q max
I've been going flash barrier, skill order r>e>w>q with q or e level 1, w level 4.
Max e first for stupidly strong e>r combos at 6, and great waveclear/farming potential, + its good in trades, forces them to back off while slowed, sets up stuff for your support, and in general is just a 3 second duration 52% huge aoe slow that does good damage.
When I tried q max couldnt sustain the mana, e max way easier on your mana pool, just using q/w when your engaged hard,
Build is just dorans or longsword 2 start, then just bt/lw/bc/defensive item/bt, get tier 1 boots when you have the gold and don't bother upgrading them for a long time.
21/9/0 masteries, 15 ad/armor/mr runes.
MF just seems broken in soloq atm, massive impact on game, safe laning, and very easy to get kills and capitalize on mistakes in lane to snowball it, and just press r to win mid to late game.
Edit: for what tier 2 boots to get the choice is really inconsequential, mercs or tabis or lucidity or zerks are all decent.
|
Are you really maxing E in lane? When do you use it, only during trades? It seems a lot harder to justify than q (and doesn't it cost more?) but I see the point. I've never done E max before but if you're winning like that I might try it.
|
On March 18 2013 14:20 dae wrote:+ Show Spoiler +So, been going on a rampage with MF in soloq.
She seems to be incredibly strong in lane, incredibly strong in teamfights, can build pure armor shred so can damage tanks, and can still do damn good damage to tanks with just ad/arp items.
I don't get it, why isn't she in every single game. You literally go into lane with a stupidly strong champion, then if you land r in teamfights you usually win.
(currently 11-2 with MF in Diamond 1) Edit: I think the 2 loses were when I just bought her and q max
I've been going flash barrier, skill order r>e>w>q with q or e level 1, w level 4.
Max e first for stupidly strong e>r combos at 6, and great waveclear/farming potential, + its good in trades, forces them to back off while slowed, sets up stuff for your support, and in general is just a 3 second duration 52% huge aoe slow that does good damage.
When I tried q max couldnt sustain the mana, e max way easier on your mana pool, just using q/w when your engaged hard,
Build is just dorans or longsword 2 start, then just bt/lw/bc/defensive item/bt, get tier 1 boots when you have the gold and don't bother upgrading them for a long time.
21/9/0 masteries, 15 ad/armor/mr runes.
MF just seems broken in soloq atm, massive impact on game, safe laning, and very easy to get kills and capitalize on mistakes in lane to snowball it, and just press r to win mid to late game.
Edit: for what tier 2 boots to get the choice is really inconsequential, mercs or tabis or lucidity or zerks are all decent.
You make a strong case. Any idea why she isn't more popular?
|
mf is the 4th most popular champion atm and has the 6th highest winrate. she is like the taric of ad carries. allways picked, allways wins. never banned.
|
On March 18 2013 17:04 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: Are you really maxing E in lane? When do you use it, only during trades? It seems a lot harder to justify than q (and doesn't it cost more?) but I see the point. I've never done E max before but if you're winning like that I might try it.
Upsides of leveling Q - More base damage on it, lower cooldown.
Downsides of leveling Q - More mana cost, less cooldown means even more mana used.
E is flat 80 mana at all levels.
(q is 70->90 mana)
I use it whenever I want to push the lane,or just punish them for going for a cs, or set something up for my support. That slow makes it WAY easier for pretty much any support to hit stuff, even like Taric where it helps him get into range.
It shines when you want to push the lane fast, b/c E + a supports aoe ability, is almost enough to 1 shot the wave, and E + 1 auto on each ranged creep kills them at almost all levels. Also when you just want to push out and kill 3-4 waves in a row it is amazing, as Q and W don't really help with that.
Also in teamfights it's really nice to peel people.
One thing to note, mf E is one of the few spells I don't smartcast as the exact positioning of it seems to matter alot, and using it at exactly max range is important.
I think E is also alot more damage/utility per mana, while maxing Q is a tad more sustain damage, but it kills your mana using q more then once in trades.
If people are <50% often a perfectly landed e then just ulting them is enough to kill them.
|
E first, huh? It sounds like one of those things people will think you're 'doing it wrong' but you make a strong case - especially the idea of comboing the strong slow with your support's CC abilities.
|
On March 19 2013 03:51 sylverfyre wrote: E first, huh? It sounds like one of those things people will think you're 'doing it wrong' but you make a strong case - especially the idea of comboing the strong slow with your support's CC abilities. Its actually pretty retarded strong. Tried it earlier, if your lane partner has a slight slow past lvl 6, they eat the entire e + her ult unless they blow flash. pretty good
|
I have to agree that E-max sounds interesting, I suppose a lot of the power of Q comes from being an auto-reset (also AD ratio) which doesn't scale with ranks anyway, but gets relatively worse with higher mana cost (although the mana cost increase is pretty negligible imo).
|
So, an update.
Currently 15-2 with MF in ranked, and at 96 LP in diamond 1.
E max is just so safe and strong in lane, and the MF just ults well in teamfights and does more then their ad carry. Build still BT/LW/BC/defensive item/BT, with only getting boots 1, usually start dorans.
Mf going to carry me to challenger >.<.
+ Show Spoiler + Note: Bad scores are because I'm playing people that are probably better then I am.
|
I've been trying to play the E max mf and I prefer w-q-e-e-e. E when you don't have other abilities to chain into it isn't that good so level 1 or 2 is pretty meh plus it auto pushes wave.
|
On March 20 2013 14:31 dae wrote:So, an update. Currently 15-2 with MF in ranked, and at 96 LP in diamond 1. E max is just so safe and strong in lane, and the MF just ults well in teamfights and does more then their ad carry. Build still BT/LW/BC/defensive item/BT, with only getting boots 1, usually start dorans. Mf going to carry me to challenger >.<. + Show Spoiler +Note: Bad scores are because I'm playing people that are probably better then I am.
Do you rush bruta before BT? Why don't you rush BC for mass ult armor shredding? Why LW before BC as well?
Maxing E seems questionable. Less guaranteed damage, magic damage not physical, lower CD on Q. But I don't value wave clearing that much bottom.
|
On March 20 2013 16:40 Complete wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 14:31 dae wrote:So, an update. Currently 15-2 with MF in ranked, and at 96 LP in diamond 1. E max is just so safe and strong in lane, and the MF just ults well in teamfights and does more then their ad carry. Build still BT/LW/BC/defensive item/BT, with only getting boots 1, usually start dorans. Mf going to carry me to challenger >.<. + Show Spoiler +Note: Bad scores are because I'm playing people that are probably better then I am. Do you rush bruta before BT? Why don't you rush BC for mass ult armor shredding? Why LW before BC as well? Maxing E seems questionable. Less guaranteed damage, magic damage not physical, lower CD on Q. But I don't value wave clearing that much bottom. The slow + lane partner CC = they eat the entire E which is still like 260 damage or something I think, + your entire ult because of how high the slow is.
its pretty strong i think tbh.
|
k so probably pretty strong with people like taric/leona with hard CC and not a good idea with sona/soraka
|
Hm, i'll have to try this, i usually duo with a Lulu, and it sounds like this is the kind of thing, that would really benefit the lane. Using it offensively seems to make a lot of sence, however, besides your movespeed, it's the only defensive tool you got on MF. Is it really worth trading the availabe slow for a bit more damage? Also, with your build, you seem to loose a lot of sustained damage by building no as/crit at all. So, if your ult does not win the fight, you just lost, cause you will be autoattacking for a while. Why not change lw for a PD if you build BC after it anyway?
|
On March 20 2013 16:40 Complete wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 14:31 dae wrote:So, an update. Currently 15-2 with MF in ranked, and at 96 LP in diamond 1. E max is just so safe and strong in lane, and the MF just ults well in teamfights and does more then their ad carry. Build still BT/LW/BC/defensive item/BT, with only getting boots 1, usually start dorans. Mf going to carry me to challenger >.<. + Show Spoiler +Note: Bad scores are because I'm playing people that are probably better then I am. Do you rush bruta before BT? Why don't you rush BC for mass ult armor shredding? Why LW before BC as well? Maxing E seems questionable. Less guaranteed damage, magic damage not physical, lower CD on Q. But I don't value wave clearing that much bottom.
I pretty much just straight rush bt, then get either lw or bc depending on how much physical damage my team has, and whether I want the hp from BC. Lw is more straight up damage then BC per cost. I get BT first for lane sustain, and that + low mana usage means I can stay in lane for long periods of time farming, and don't get forced back often.
In addition, just E'ing their ad carry when they are about to have a couple last hits they have to go for forces them to either miss the CS or sit in the E.
|
On March 21 2013 00:37 Broetchenholer wrote: Hm, i'll have to try this, i usually duo with a Lulu, and it sounds like this is the kind of thing, that would really benefit the lane. Using it offensively seems to make a lot of sence, however, besides your movespeed, it's the only defensive tool you got on MF. Is it really worth trading the availabe slow for a bit more damage? Also, with your build, you seem to loose a lot of sustained damage by building no as/crit at all. So, if your ult does not win the fight, you just lost, cause you will be autoattacking for a while. Why not change lw for a PD if you build BC after it anyway?
I get both LW and BC because MF ult has ALOT of base damages on it, especially if you hit 16 relatively fast. I've found that by maxing w 2nd, I still have enough AS when combined with Q AA reset to kill tanks, especially with how much armor pen I have, and this build doesnt have that bad gap between getting crit/as up and getting lw so you can actually damage tanks.
|
On March 20 2013 16:22 NovaTheFeared wrote: I've been trying to play the E max mf and I prefer w-q-e-e-e. E when you don't have other abilities to chain into it isn't that good so level 1 or 2 is pretty meh plus it auto pushes wave.
Pushing wave early is almost never a bad thing, unless you support doesn't have wards to cover for it. Pushing them under tower makes them lose cs, and makes you have an exp lead in lane making it hard for them to fight, plus you stack of creeps is larger.
Honestly I don't know what the best lvl1-3 skill order is, I've been going e q e, but I generally play pretty passive early, and not having q/w at level 1 has hurt me a few times.
|
On March 20 2013 22:42 Complete wrote: k so probably pretty strong with people like taric/leona with hard CC and not a good idea with sona/soraka
It's pretty good with sona, since at 6 e-> sona ult -> mf ult is pretty much a free kill. Soraka I think Q max is better, as you have the mana to spam it all day.
Pretty much the only time I've maxed q was vs a morgana support, and even them throughout the early midgame I missed the waveclear and utility of e, but it was needed as maxing e vs black shield is just stupid.
|
On March 21 2013 01:05 dae wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 16:22 NovaTheFeared wrote: I've been trying to play the E max mf and I prefer w-q-e-e-e. E when you don't have other abilities to chain into it isn't that good so level 1 or 2 is pretty meh plus it auto pushes wave. Pushing wave early is almost never a bad thing, unless you support doesn't have wards to cover for it. Pushing them under tower makes them lose cs, and makes you have an exp lead in lane making it hard for them to fight, plus you stack of creeps is larger. Honestly I don't know what the best lvl1-3 skill order is, I've been going e q e, but I generally play pretty passive early, and not having q/w at level 1 has hurt me a few times.
Generally speaking yeah you want the lane pushing early but only slightly. When you have such a strong level 1-3 champ like MF I don't think it's good to immediately shove them to the safety of their turrets. AoEing the wave too hard early just makes it farmfest. And W and Q are better to bully with super early. Obviously later on in the early game the side pushing has a big advantage but I don't like slamming the wave from L1-2 with a bunch of Es, and if you can't make use of the ability it might be better to take it a little later than from L1.
I think E max is quite creative, I would never have thought to do this.
|
E max, wow, works great. Really awesome with Zyra support, tons of CC and damage. Can snare them in plants + E + doubleult. Probably also great with Lux.
|
hey dae is your name dae in game with an accent? your name looks familiar and i feel like i played with you before :3
|
Stupid question
Impure shots, by stacking 4x does it mean at level 5 it will end up doing 56 extra attack damage after you AA a target 4x? What happens if you switch targets? What happens if you activate it for the attack speed?
|
On March 21 2013 05:27 wussleeQ wrote: hey dae is your name dae in game with an accent? your name looks familiar and i feel like i played with you before :3
Daì
|
Honestly I don't know what the best lvl1-3 skill order is, I've been going e q e, but I generally play pretty passive early, and not having q/w at level 1 has hurt me a few times. I dunno why do you pick mf if you want to play passive but interesting thought might try it out once I get enough IP on my smurf (I just dont want to wait so long for games first world problems )
For the record: I actually usually skill r> w > q > e at the moment (I get e either not at all or at 8 or 10) but I pretty much used every skillorder used r > w > e>q before the q buffs and also tried q max first ^.^
|
On March 20 2013 14:31 dae wrote:So, an update. Currently 15-2 with MF in ranked, and at 96 LP in diamond 1. E max is just so safe and strong in lane, and the MF just ults well in teamfights and does more then their ad carry. Build still BT/LW/BC/defensive item/BT, with only getting boots 1, usually start dorans. Mf going to carry me to challenger >.<. + Show Spoiler +Note: Bad scores are because I'm playing people that are probably better then I am.
i used to play any role but adc, but once i noticed adc wasn't that popular anymore i decided to pick it up. at first i only owned ashe so it was a little tricky, but i picked up MF shortly after and i had a similar "omgeasy" experience (though only through silver->gold)
i always went r>q>w. for a while i was doing dorans->bt->cleaver->shiv, but recently i've really been digging rushing the statikk shiv straight awaywith the optional second dorans en route. maxing e first sounds interesting, i look forward to trying it out.
|
On March 21 2013 05:43 Complete wrote: Stupid question
Impure shots, by stacking 4x does it mean at level 5 it will end up doing 56 extra attack damage after you AA a target 4x? What happens if you switch targets? What happens if you activate it for the attack speed? If you activate you get the AS + the healing debuff(if thats still on there) i think it stops when you switch targets though. and yes it stacks up to 4 times, so you'll do an extra 56 magic damage(before resists)
|
On March 21 2013 11:22 arb wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 05:43 Complete wrote: Stupid question
Impure shots, by stacking 4x does it mean at level 5 it will end up doing 56 extra attack damage after you AA a target 4x? What happens if you switch targets? What happens if you activate it for the attack speed? If you activate you get the AS + the healing debuff(if thats still on there) i think it stops when you switch targets though. and yes it stacks up to 4 times, so you'll do an extra 56 magic damage(before resists) the impure shots thing is a stacking debuff placed onto whatever you're attacking. So if you stack it up on target A and start attackign target B, you won't get the bonus damage on B, but then if you go back to attacking target A you'll still get the bonus damage on A assuming the debuff hasn't worn off. The debuff doesn't last very long though (it's somethign like 5 seconds).
|
On March 21 2013 08:01 Ente wrote:Show nested quote +Honestly I don't know what the best lvl1-3 skill order is, I've been going e q e, but I generally play pretty passive early, and not having q/w at level 1 has hurt me a few times. I dunno why do you pick mf if you want to play passive but interesting thought might try it out once I get enough IP on my smurf (I just dont want to wait so long for games first world problems ) For the record: I actually usually skill r> w > q > e at the moment (I get e either not at all or at 8 or 10) but I pretty much used every skillorder used r > w > e>q before the q buffs and also tried q max first ^.^
Passive is the wrong word for it I think.. It's more like I play safe and don't take many risks. Also, E max isn't that strong until level 5 or so, as it's too easy getting out of rank 1/2 of e, so forcing fights is a bad idea that early(unless you have like a leona support).
I pick MF b/c a good E->R in a teamfight wins it, and shes good against people that stack armor early due to not having to build crit/as to be effective, which smooths out her power curve.
Also maxing E gives her 3 really good skills to use, where as maxing anything else gives only 2, as E without many points in it sucks, where as q gives alot for just 1 point.
|
On March 21 2013 13:20 dae wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 08:01 Ente wrote:Honestly I don't know what the best lvl1-3 skill order is, I've been going e q e, but I generally play pretty passive early, and not having q/w at level 1 has hurt me a few times. I dunno why do you pick mf if you want to play passive but interesting thought might try it out once I get enough IP on my smurf (I just dont want to wait so long for games first world problems ) For the record: I actually usually skill r> w > q > e at the moment (I get e either not at all or at 8 or 10) but I pretty much used every skillorder used r > w > e>q before the q buffs and also tried q max first ^.^ Passive is the wrong word for it I think.. It's more like I play safe and don't take many risks. Also, E max isn't that strong until level 5 or so, as it's too easy getting out of rank 1/2 of e, so forcing fights is a bad idea that early(unless you have like a leona support). I pick MF b/c a good E->R in a teamfight wins it, and shes good against people that stack armor early due to not having to build crit/as to be effective, which smooths out her power curve. Also maxing E gives her 3 really good skills to use, where as maxing anything else gives only 2, as E without many points in it sucks, where as q gives alot for just 1 point.
The MF E max build is one of the best "new" builds I've ever used. I'm currently 6-0 with it, thanks so much. There's just so much utility, and it just autowins your lane for you. Preventing jungler ganks, stopping the other adc from running away in a fight- since no one but Draven can duel MF with E-W. Really really solid. Then once you get 6, you can shred people with E-R... it's just awesome.
I have been deviating slightly, and building Cutlass->BT->BotRK. Makes her a real pain, and the active is nice for trapping people in E-R. Since Q-Auto is two procs of BotRK, it helps with mitigating the burst loss of not maxing Q.
|
Played a couple games with E max, and I fail to see the distinct advantage over other buildpaths.
Sure, it's ez win lane, but that's all of MF, so meh.
Maybe good with leona, proc them passives 24/7 Also less manaintesive from my experience.
It's decent I guess.
|
On March 22 2013 00:20 Dandel Ion wrote: Played a couple games with E max, and I fail to see the distinct advantage over other buildpaths.
Sure, it's ez win lane, but that's all of MF, so meh.
Maybe good with leona, proc them passives 24/7 Also less manaintesive from my experience.
It's decent I guess.
I believe you might be downplaying how good "ez win lane" is. Of course mid and lategame are important, but what I really enjoy about the build is how far ahead you can get of the opposing adc. This is extra awesome against champs that have a harder time playing from behind, like Ashe or Kog.
|
On March 22 2013 00:20 Dandel Ion wrote: Played a couple games with E max, and I fail to see the distinct advantage over other buildpaths.
Sure, it's ez win lane, but that's all of MF, so meh.
Maybe good with leona, proc them passives 24/7 Also less manaintesive from my experience.
It's decent I guess.
When you have a BT, or even vamp and dorans, there are 2 main things that can cause you to back. 1, you have low hp and its too risky to lifesteal, and 2, you are oom, which can lead to 1. If you don't run out of mana its pretty safe to always be autoing, so you rarely get pushed out of lane, which is huge.
|
On March 21 2013 09:01 mockturtle wrote:Show nested quote +On March 20 2013 14:31 dae wrote:So, an update. Currently 15-2 with MF in ranked, and at 96 LP in diamond 1. E max is just so safe and strong in lane, and the MF just ults well in teamfights and does more then their ad carry. Build still BT/LW/BC/defensive item/BT, with only getting boots 1, usually start dorans. Mf going to carry me to challenger >.<. + Show Spoiler +Note: Bad scores are because I'm playing people that are probably better then I am. i used to play any role but adc, but once i noticed adc wasn't that popular anymore i decided to pick it up. at first i only owned ashe so it was a little tricky, but i picked up MF shortly after and i had a similar "omgeasy" experience (though only through silver->gold) i always went r>q>w. for a while i was doing dorans->bt->cleaver->shiv, but recently i've really been digging rushing the statikk shiv straight awaywith the optional second dorans en route. maxing e first sounds interesting, i look forward to trying it out.
after one try i'm confident in saying that this is genius and i'm embarassed never having tried it without being prompted. also i think it synergizes well with rushing statikk shiv (or should i say, rushing statikk shiv isn't hurt by it) since it doesn't scale with AD.
|
On March 22 2013 01:16 mockturtle wrote:Show nested quote +On March 21 2013 09:01 mockturtle wrote:On March 20 2013 14:31 dae wrote:So, an update. Currently 15-2 with MF in ranked, and at 96 LP in diamond 1. E max is just so safe and strong in lane, and the MF just ults well in teamfights and does more then their ad carry. Build still BT/LW/BC/defensive item/BT, with only getting boots 1, usually start dorans. Mf going to carry me to challenger >.<. + Show Spoiler +Note: Bad scores are because I'm playing people that are probably better then I am. i used to play any role but adc, but once i noticed adc wasn't that popular anymore i decided to pick it up. at first i only owned ashe so it was a little tricky, but i picked up MF shortly after and i had a similar "omgeasy" experience (though only through silver->gold) i always went r>q>w. for a while i was doing dorans->bt->cleaver->shiv, but recently i've really been digging rushing the statikk shiv straight awaywith the optional second dorans en route. maxing e first sounds interesting, i look forward to trying it out. after one try i'm confident in saying that this is genius and i'm embarassed never having tried it without being prompted. also i think it synergizes well with rushing statikk shiv (or should i say, rushing statikk shiv isn't hurt by it) since it doesn't scale with AD.
I don't know about SS rush- great for lane clearing, but you already have E max for that. With SS rush, I feel like you'll be super weak in trades, with low Q damage and no AA damage. If you want aspd ASAP, try my botrk build
Edit: I'm going to try playing MF mid with a trolly Aspd/AP build, similar to a Diana or Kayle. E gets a .8 AP ratio for the full duration, might be pretty good. W has really crappy scaling, which sucks, because if it was better you could run a malady/nashor/wit's end build like Teemo.
|
Shiv already seems like an item that MF doesn't typically care about building - you're going to want to be a serious threat with your ulti in teamfights, and Shiv just doesn't give anything in that respect. BT + something with ArPen probably come before AS or Crit for MF.
|
So the AP thing actually kinda worked. It was dumb and gimmicky, but I couldn't really tell its strength because I got so fed so quickly. E->R combo was freaking awesome with AP though. As a note, Emax MF was an amazing mid as AD or AP- her movespeed allows easy roaming, her E-R ganks are great, and she can waveclear like a boss. Something to experiment with for sure.
Edit: After additional testing, the AP thing is dumb. Sure with Nashor/Rabby/Lichbane your E-AA-R can pretty much solo an entire team, but I think if you got behind you'd be in serious trouble.
My current favorite build is still: Cutlass-t1-BF-t2-BT-BotRK-LW
|
Here's why E > Q is better than Q > E.
Q scales with AD but has low base damage. When you level Q, you are upgrading mostly its CD, gain a little base damage but at the cost of higher mana. Regardless of whether or not you level it, it will scale as you build more AD.
E scales with AP which you probably won't get but also has high base damage. When you level E, you're getting significantly more damage and a lot of utility from the AOE slow. Which of course always allows you to land a few more autoattacks. The marginal advantage is much higher it doesn't scale as you build AD, and you get less than half of the MS slow with a level 1 E.
|
I have no idea why people are saying BotRK on MF sucks. With bork, BT, LW you can really chew up bruisers, given her W and zerker's. The active also adds some nice burst for when you wanna just trash someone with 1QER.
|
On March 29 2013 04:17 Crownlol wrote: I have no idea why people are saying BotRK on MF sucks. With bork, BT, LW you can really chew up bruisers, given her W and zerker's. The active also adds some nice burst for when you wanna just trash someone with 1QER.
BotRK and BT are close to mutually exclusive items, I'd say. An AD carry can't build 3 offensive items and still have no crit chance and expect to do much damage.
|
On March 29 2013 06:31 Alzadar wrote:Show nested quote +On March 29 2013 04:17 Crownlol wrote: I have no idea why people are saying BotRK on MF sucks. With bork, BT, LW you can really chew up bruisers, given her W and zerker's. The active also adds some nice burst for when you wanna just trash someone with 1QER.
BotRK and BT are close to mutually exclusive items, I'd say. An AD carry can't build 3 offensive items and still have no crit chance and expect to do much damage.
Don't discount the amount of lifesteal from the two stacked. Unless an assassin can really stick to you, you are tough to bring down.
|
I think BC is a very viable second option on MF. The passive of BC with MF's ult is very powerful (-25% armor reduction on most of their team!). Also, if you get an early kill you can go Bruta (if you don't have enough for a BF) and then Vamp / boots, etc.
|
So, I've been testing MF lately after her tweak.
She hasn't lost much of her laning presence and her 6 item ultimate feels a little stronger than before. The mana cost reduction is very nice, too.
However, I don't think it will cause her popularity to increase significantly (just like Graves who got a small buffs). Lacking the steroids (besides her W) that other current top ADs have and being very reliant on Flash, it doesn't look like she's going to be the beast she was.
|
On April 13 2014 03:27 little fancy wrote: So, I've been testing MF lately after her tweak.
She hasn't lost much of her laning presence and her 6 item ultimate feels a little stronger than before. The mana cost reduction is very nice, too.
However, I don't think it will cause her popularity to increase significantly (just like Graves who got a small buffs). Lacking the steroids (besides her W) that other current top ADs have and being very reliant on Flash, it doesn't look like she's going to be the beast she was.
Her laning is STRONGER now because of the reduction on Q CD, flat buff to W and mana-cost reductions across the board. Ult took an early game hit but feels just as strong in the late game, if not stronger because you can follow up on targets who already have impure stacks on them.
Lack of an escape will always be her drawback, but her passive makes it easier to keep safe to begin with. Diving assassins and tanks will continue to be the bane of her existence.
|
Roffles
Pitcairn19291 Posts
At the end of the day, you're still playing MF lol. The moment someone dives at you, you die.
|
On April 15 2014 04:20 Roffles wrote: At the end of the day, you're still playing MF lol. The moment someone dives at you, you die. With the heal change making double heal significantly weaker she might work well with exhaust as protection against assassins. Personally I've always enjoyed mf simply because her ult lets her contribute something usefull from a safe distance during the early stages of a teamfight (where other ADCs have to position far closer to have an influence), and her passive does make running down people at the end of a teamfight a breeze.
|
should i be maxing q or e first now? the Q mana cost reduction seems like it would be easier to spam in lane than before, but i love playing a waveclear ad style and a 65% slow on your level 5 seems pretty strong.
she seems pretty strong though, i just bought her and played her for the first time ever outside of an aram and it only took a few levels before the opposing ad couldn't even leave the safety of their tower.
|
On May 01 2014 12:36 chalice wrote: should i be maxing q or e first now? the Q mana cost reduction seems like it would be easier to spam in lane than before, but i love playing a waveclear ad style and a 65% slow on your level 5 seems pretty strong.
she seems pretty strong though, i just bought her and played her for the first time ever outside of an aram and it only took a few levels before the opposing ad couldn't even leave the safety of their tower.
I always max W first; the attack speed is too sick to neglect. I've been favoring R>W>E>Q, simply because mid-game your only "escape" is your E and it helps to have a hefty slow. Waveclearing with your E can get you OOM pretty fast, though, so I try not to do it during laning phase.
I'm not the best of players, though. If you can land your Qs consistently, I can understand putting a higher priority on maxing it. Personally, I just use it for level 1-3 bullying, a bit of poking and as an autoattack reset for more burst. The rebound angle is also more restrictive than before, which throws me off a bit.
|
On May 01 2014 16:08 scFoX wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 12:36 chalice wrote: should i be maxing q or e first now? the Q mana cost reduction seems like it would be easier to spam in lane than before, but i love playing a waveclear ad style and a 65% slow on your level 5 seems pretty strong.
she seems pretty strong though, i just bought her and played her for the first time ever outside of an aram and it only took a few levels before the opposing ad couldn't even leave the safety of their tower. I always max W first; the attack speed is too sick to neglect. I've been favoring R>W>E>Q, simply because mid-game your only "escape" is your E and it helps to have a hefty slow. Waveclearing with your E can get you OOM pretty fast, though, so I try not to do it during laning phase. I'm not the best of players, though. If you can land your Qs consistently, I can understand putting a higher priority on maxing it. Personally, I just use it for level 1-3 bullying, a bit of poking and as an autoattack reset for more burst. The rebound angle is also more restrictive than before, which throws me off a bit.
Why would you max W over anything...yeah its a fine skill but each point in it gives you 10%AS...thats it. No CD reduction, no impure shots damage, nothing. There is no way you should be maxing that first.
1 point in:
Q: 1 second cd from 7 to 3, 15 primary damage and 30 secondary
W: 10% AS
E: 55 magic damage over 3s and 10% slow, 1 second cd from 14-10
|
with the way W and to a lesser extent Q get most of their damage from your ad scaling, not their base damage from leveling, the added utility of the increased slow E first seems really nice as your first maxed skill.
one thing you can do to hit more Q bounces is use it after an auto attack, the bounce prioritizes champions with a stack of impure shots on them.
wondering if i'm crazy for trying her out in the jungle, obviously she is vulnerable to invades like any non-standard jungler but she smashes camps to stack a FF quickly and red buff + E ganks don't seem that terrible. her passive is fairly useful for moving around the map too.
|
if only her passive weren't stopped by minions/jungle creeps we can dream
|
On May 01 2014 17:01 sob3k wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 16:08 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 12:36 chalice wrote: should i be maxing q or e first now? the Q mana cost reduction seems like it would be easier to spam in lane than before, but i love playing a waveclear ad style and a 65% slow on your level 5 seems pretty strong.
she seems pretty strong though, i just bought her and played her for the first time ever outside of an aram and it only took a few levels before the opposing ad couldn't even leave the safety of their tower. I always max W first; the attack speed is too sick to neglect. I've been favoring R>W>E>Q, simply because mid-game your only "escape" is your E and it helps to have a hefty slow. Waveclearing with your E can get you OOM pretty fast, though, so I try not to do it during laning phase. I'm not the best of players, though. If you can land your Qs consistently, I can understand putting a higher priority on maxing it. Personally, I just use it for level 1-3 bullying, a bit of poking and as an autoattack reset for more burst. The rebound angle is also more restrictive than before, which throws me off a bit. Why would you max W over anything...yeah its a fine skill but each point in it gives you 10%AS...thats it. No CD reduction, no impure shots damage, nothing. There is no way you should be maxing that first. 1 point in: Q: 1 second cd from 7 to 3, 15 primary damage and 30 secondary W: 10% AS E: 55 magic damage over 3s and 10% slow, 1 second cd from 14-10
Gneh, for some reason, I thought W still upped the damage on your autoattacks with each rank. Serves me right for not reading the rework notes carefully. -_-
I might start maxing it second then...
|
On May 02 2014 00:48 scFoX wrote:Show nested quote +On May 01 2014 17:01 sob3k wrote:On May 01 2014 16:08 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 12:36 chalice wrote: should i be maxing q or e first now? the Q mana cost reduction seems like it would be easier to spam in lane than before, but i love playing a waveclear ad style and a 65% slow on your level 5 seems pretty strong.
she seems pretty strong though, i just bought her and played her for the first time ever outside of an aram and it only took a few levels before the opposing ad couldn't even leave the safety of their tower. I always max W first; the attack speed is too sick to neglect. I've been favoring R>W>E>Q, simply because mid-game your only "escape" is your E and it helps to have a hefty slow. Waveclearing with your E can get you OOM pretty fast, though, so I try not to do it during laning phase. I'm not the best of players, though. If you can land your Qs consistently, I can understand putting a higher priority on maxing it. Personally, I just use it for level 1-3 bullying, a bit of poking and as an autoattack reset for more burst. The rebound angle is also more restrictive than before, which throws me off a bit. Why would you max W over anything...yeah its a fine skill but each point in it gives you 10%AS...thats it. No CD reduction, no impure shots damage, nothing. There is no way you should be maxing that first. 1 point in: Q: 1 second cd from 7 to 3, 15 primary damage and 30 secondary W: 10% AS E: 55 magic damage over 3s and 10% slow, 1 second cd from 14-10 Gneh, for some reason, I thought W still upped the damage on your autoattacks with each rank. Serves me right for not reading the rework notes carefully. -_- I might start maxing it LAST then...
|
On May 02 2014 00:52 chalice wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2014 00:48 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 17:01 sob3k wrote:On May 01 2014 16:08 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 12:36 chalice wrote: should i be maxing q or e first now? the Q mana cost reduction seems like it would be easier to spam in lane than before, but i love playing a waveclear ad style and a 65% slow on your level 5 seems pretty strong.
she seems pretty strong though, i just bought her and played her for the first time ever outside of an aram and it only took a few levels before the opposing ad couldn't even leave the safety of their tower. I always max W first; the attack speed is too sick to neglect. I've been favoring R>W>E>Q, simply because mid-game your only "escape" is your E and it helps to have a hefty slow. Waveclearing with your E can get you OOM pretty fast, though, so I try not to do it during laning phase. I'm not the best of players, though. If you can land your Qs consistently, I can understand putting a higher priority on maxing it. Personally, I just use it for level 1-3 bullying, a bit of poking and as an autoattack reset for more burst. The rebound angle is also more restrictive than before, which throws me off a bit. Why would you max W over anything...yeah its a fine skill but each point in it gives you 10%AS...thats it. No CD reduction, no impure shots damage, nothing. There is no way you should be maxing that first. 1 point in: Q: 1 second cd from 7 to 3, 15 primary damage and 30 secondary W: 10% AS E: 55 magic damage over 3s and 10% slow, 1 second cd from 14-10 Gneh, for some reason, I thought W still upped the damage on your autoattacks with each rank. Serves me right for not reading the rework notes carefully. -_- I might start maxing it LAST then...
I guess -- but she'll feel so sluggish. Maxing an attack steroid last. What has this world come to.
|
On May 02 2014 01:20 scFoX wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2014 00:52 chalice wrote:On May 02 2014 00:48 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 17:01 sob3k wrote:On May 01 2014 16:08 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 12:36 chalice wrote: should i be maxing q or e first now? the Q mana cost reduction seems like it would be easier to spam in lane than before, but i love playing a waveclear ad style and a 65% slow on your level 5 seems pretty strong.
she seems pretty strong though, i just bought her and played her for the first time ever outside of an aram and it only took a few levels before the opposing ad couldn't even leave the safety of their tower. I always max W first; the attack speed is too sick to neglect. I've been favoring R>W>E>Q, simply because mid-game your only "escape" is your E and it helps to have a hefty slow. Waveclearing with your E can get you OOM pretty fast, though, so I try not to do it during laning phase. I'm not the best of players, though. If you can land your Qs consistently, I can understand putting a higher priority on maxing it. Personally, I just use it for level 1-3 bullying, a bit of poking and as an autoattack reset for more burst. The rebound angle is also more restrictive than before, which throws me off a bit. Why would you max W over anything...yeah its a fine skill but each point in it gives you 10%AS...thats it. No CD reduction, no impure shots damage, nothing. There is no way you should be maxing that first. 1 point in: Q: 1 second cd from 7 to 3, 15 primary damage and 30 secondary W: 10% AS E: 55 magic damage over 3s and 10% slow, 1 second cd from 14-10 Gneh, for some reason, I thought W still upped the damage on your autoattacks with each rank. Serves me right for not reading the rework notes carefully. -_- I might start maxing it LAST then... I guess -- but she'll feel so sluggish. Maxing an attack steroid last. What has this world come to. well, MF, at least until the late game when damage item scaling really becomes insane, is honestly all about hitting that ult on as many people as possible. Not having as strong auto-attacking isn't that big a deal.
|
On May 02 2014 01:20 scFoX wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2014 00:52 chalice wrote:On May 02 2014 00:48 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 17:01 sob3k wrote:On May 01 2014 16:08 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 12:36 chalice wrote: should i be maxing q or e first now? the Q mana cost reduction seems like it would be easier to spam in lane than before, but i love playing a waveclear ad style and a 65% slow on your level 5 seems pretty strong.
she seems pretty strong though, i just bought her and played her for the first time ever outside of an aram and it only took a few levels before the opposing ad couldn't even leave the safety of their tower. I always max W first; the attack speed is too sick to neglect. I've been favoring R>W>E>Q, simply because mid-game your only "escape" is your E and it helps to have a hefty slow. Waveclearing with your E can get you OOM pretty fast, though, so I try not to do it during laning phase. I'm not the best of players, though. If you can land your Qs consistently, I can understand putting a higher priority on maxing it. Personally, I just use it for level 1-3 bullying, a bit of poking and as an autoattack reset for more burst. The rebound angle is also more restrictive than before, which throws me off a bit. Why would you max W over anything...yeah its a fine skill but each point in it gives you 10%AS...thats it. No CD reduction, no impure shots damage, nothing. There is no way you should be maxing that first. 1 point in: Q: 1 second cd from 7 to 3, 15 primary damage and 30 secondary W: 10% AS E: 55 magic damage over 3s and 10% slow, 1 second cd from 14-10 Gneh, for some reason, I thought W still upped the damage on your autoattacks with each rank. Serves me right for not reading the rework notes carefully. -_- I might start maxing it LAST then... I guess -- but she'll feel so sluggish. Maxing an attack steroid last. What has this world come to. if you really hate her auto attack go with some AS quints.
|
On May 02 2014 04:59 chalice wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2014 01:20 scFoX wrote:On May 02 2014 00:52 chalice wrote:On May 02 2014 00:48 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 17:01 sob3k wrote:On May 01 2014 16:08 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 12:36 chalice wrote: should i be maxing q or e first now? the Q mana cost reduction seems like it would be easier to spam in lane than before, but i love playing a waveclear ad style and a 65% slow on your level 5 seems pretty strong.
she seems pretty strong though, i just bought her and played her for the first time ever outside of an aram and it only took a few levels before the opposing ad couldn't even leave the safety of their tower. I always max W first; the attack speed is too sick to neglect. I've been favoring R>W>E>Q, simply because mid-game your only "escape" is your E and it helps to have a hefty slow. Waveclearing with your E can get you OOM pretty fast, though, so I try not to do it during laning phase. I'm not the best of players, though. If you can land your Qs consistently, I can understand putting a higher priority on maxing it. Personally, I just use it for level 1-3 bullying, a bit of poking and as an autoattack reset for more burst. The rebound angle is also more restrictive than before, which throws me off a bit. Why would you max W over anything...yeah its a fine skill but each point in it gives you 10%AS...thats it. No CD reduction, no impure shots damage, nothing. There is no way you should be maxing that first. 1 point in: Q: 1 second cd from 7 to 3, 15 primary damage and 30 secondary W: 10% AS E: 55 magic damage over 3s and 10% slow, 1 second cd from 14-10 Gneh, for some reason, I thought W still upped the damage on your autoattacks with each rank. Serves me right for not reading the rework notes carefully. -_- I might start maxing it LAST then... I guess -- but she'll feel so sluggish. Maxing an attack steroid last. What has this world come to. if you really hate her auto attack go with some AS quints.
mf has the smoothest auto animation in the game imo
|
You max Q first, without question. It shouldn't even be a debate. It's her primary source of damage outside of Autos, and it's an Auto attack reset. In reality, your primary source of damage is Q-Auto (Auto-Q-Auto technically). You should really almost never be landing just a Q on a target, it should be Q-Auto 90% of the time. Maxing Q lowers the CD and raises the damage on it, so it's obvious and non-debatable that you would max it first. Anything else simply shows a lack of experience on the champion.
As to what you should be maxing SECOND, there's a real discussion to be had. Is a slow and DOT for 80 mana worth more than extra attack speed and grievous wounds for 50? What will net you more landed auto attacks, the slow? Or more AS? Is the slow enough to net you an extra Q-Auto?
I can tell you from my experience that maxing W second is what feels strongest on MF. The increased attack speed allows you to build BT->Greaves->Pickaxe (Sometimes I even finish LW) before even starting your Zeal. This is important, because it really emphasizes MF's burst potential and beefs up her ult during the early and mid-game which is important, because you HAVE to snowball to be successful on MF (She has no escape, your goal is to be able to blick that incoming assassin or chip away at diving tanks during the mid game, and an early BT-Greaves-LW build allows for it). W gives you the AS you need to get away with building more AD in place of Zeal.
I've experimented with E second, and what I've found is that it works fairly well in lane (although I couldn't say that it's netted me any kills I wouldn't have gotten with W second), but you're crying for more AS once the mid-game arrives. W is just that much more useful in teamfights, and knocking out turrets, and I can't justify putting more than one point in E before Q and W are both maxed out.
|
On May 02 2014 03:43 Ryuu314 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 02 2014 01:20 scFoX wrote:On May 02 2014 00:52 chalice wrote:On May 02 2014 00:48 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 17:01 sob3k wrote:On May 01 2014 16:08 scFoX wrote:On May 01 2014 12:36 chalice wrote: should i be maxing q or e first now? the Q mana cost reduction seems like it would be easier to spam in lane than before, but i love playing a waveclear ad style and a 65% slow on your level 5 seems pretty strong.
she seems pretty strong though, i just bought her and played her for the first time ever outside of an aram and it only took a few levels before the opposing ad couldn't even leave the safety of their tower. I always max W first; the attack speed is too sick to neglect. I've been favoring R>W>E>Q, simply because mid-game your only "escape" is your E and it helps to have a hefty slow. Waveclearing with your E can get you OOM pretty fast, though, so I try not to do it during laning phase. I'm not the best of players, though. If you can land your Qs consistently, I can understand putting a higher priority on maxing it. Personally, I just use it for level 1-3 bullying, a bit of poking and as an autoattack reset for more burst. The rebound angle is also more restrictive than before, which throws me off a bit. Why would you max W over anything...yeah its a fine skill but each point in it gives you 10%AS...thats it. No CD reduction, no impure shots damage, nothing. There is no way you should be maxing that first. 1 point in: Q: 1 second cd from 7 to 3, 15 primary damage and 30 secondary W: 10% AS E: 55 magic damage over 3s and 10% slow, 1 second cd from 14-10 Gneh, for some reason, I thought W still upped the damage on your autoattacks with each rank. Serves me right for not reading the rework notes carefully. -_- I might start maxing it LAST then... I guess -- but she'll feel so sluggish. Maxing an attack steroid last. What has this world come to. well, MF, at least until the late game when damage item scaling really becomes insane, is honestly all about hitting that ult on as many people as possible. Not having as strong auto-attacking isn't that big a deal.
It's also important to note that Q works as a steroid in its own right because it's an auto attack reset. Every time your Q is off CD it's like having 2.5 Autos for one.
|
Yeah auto q auto is bread and butter, maxing it first then W when you're about to get enough damage for it to matter is standard imo. E is basically just to slow down people while you all-in them, you're not so much worried about the damage because if you're getting a full E off on someone you're probably doing ok regardless of what you're maxing.
Also E drains your mana really fast, that shit costs 80 mana. Using it for damage can put you into spots where you have no escape tools because it's on cd or you're out of mana.
Oh and even more importantly your build on MF is going to be pure damage, Thirster into LW kinds of builds, because your main goal in a fight is to get a good ult off and then pick stragglers. Having that extra aspd when you build pure dmg is pretty crucial and it scales to 60% at rank 5.
|
On May 06 2014 07:02 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: Yeah auto q auto is bread and butter, maxing it first then W when you're about to get enough damage for it to matter is standard imo. E is basically just to slow down people while you all-in them, you're not so much worried about the damage because if you're getting a full E off on someone you're probably doing ok regardless of what you're maxing.
Also E drains your mana really fast, that shit costs 80 mana. Using it for damage can put you into spots where you have no escape tools because it's on cd or you're out of mana.
Oh and even more importantly your build on MF is going to be pure damage, Thirster into LW kinds of builds, because your main goal in a fight is to get a good ult off and then pick stragglers. Having that extra aspd when you build pure dmg is pretty crucial and it scales to 60% at rank 5.
Oh shit, a Diamond player agrees with me.
Irrefutable proof that it's my feeding noob teammates holding me back.
GG no re.
|
On May 06 2014 08:00 Nemireck wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2014 07:02 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: Yeah auto q auto is bread and butter, maxing it first then W when you're about to get enough damage for it to matter is standard imo. E is basically just to slow down people while you all-in them, you're not so much worried about the damage because if you're getting a full E off on someone you're probably doing ok regardless of what you're maxing.
Also E drains your mana really fast, that shit costs 80 mana. Using it for damage can put you into spots where you have no escape tools because it's on cd or you're out of mana.
Oh and even more importantly your build on MF is going to be pure damage, Thirster into LW kinds of builds, because your main goal in a fight is to get a good ult off and then pick stragglers. Having that extra aspd when you build pure dmg is pretty crucial and it scales to 60% at rank 5. Oh shit, a Diamond player agrees with me. Irrefutable proof that it's my feeding noob teammates holding me back. GG no re. i think 5hit is stuck in like plat 5 or somethin l0l.
|
do you have enough mana to really take advantage of the decreased cd on an early maxed Q?
|
On May 06 2014 09:19 chalice wrote: do you have enough mana to really take advantage of the decreased cd on an early maxed Q?
Yes, the mana cost was also lowered by about 40% with her re-work.
70/75/80/85/90 ⇒ 43/46/49/52/55.
|
Well, I've been testing the max Q and holy crap can you chunk people with it. If their bottom lane isn't smart with their positioning they can be bullied pretty hard. The mana cost reduction makes all the difference. Somehow, I want Bloodthirster + Trinity Force to work so hard on this champion.
|
On May 07 2014 02:29 scFoX wrote: Well, I've been testing the max Q and holy crap can you chunk people with it. If their bottom lane isn't smart with their positioning they can be bullied pretty hard. The mana cost reduction makes all the difference. Somehow, I want Bloodthirster + Trinity Force to work so hard on this champion.
I haven't tried it out yet, but I've been considering replacing PD in my build with TriForce. Just been busy getting my smurf account up to level 20 lately. I think something like BT - Greaves - Pickaxe (or LW depending on how the game is going otherwise build LW after Zeal then finish Triforce) - Zeal - TriForce would be the ideal build. The chunk from a Triforced Q-Auto should replace the lowered chance of Critting your target. If you try it before I do, report back here.
|
imp was going bt-shiv-lw on miss fortune in the ogn semi-finals. it feels like a nice and simple standard build that isn't dependent on getting ahead but still benefits timing wise if you do.
you could pick up a zeal and then decide whether to get statikk shiv or triforce based on how ahead/behind you are if you're looking to get a tf in your build.
for runes he went ad marks, hp seals, 2 armor 1 AS quints and i think 4 AS glyphs to give him 7% attack speed.
Q-W-E
|
On May 07 2014 05:34 chalice wrote: imp was going bt-shiv-lw on miss fortune in the ogn semi-finals. it feels like a nice and simple standard build that isn't dependent on getting ahead but still benefits timing wise if you do.
you could pick up a zeal and then decide whether to get statikk shiv or triforce based on how ahead/behind you are if you're looking to get a tf in your build.
for runes he went ad marks, hp seals, 2 armor 1 AS quints and i think 4 AS glyphs to give him 7% attack speed.
Q-W-E Does Triforce even proc on her Q? I don't see it being worth it if it doesn't tbh.
|
On May 07 2014 08:06 arb wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2014 05:34 chalice wrote: imp was going bt-shiv-lw on miss fortune in the ogn semi-finals. it feels like a nice and simple standard build that isn't dependent on getting ahead but still benefits timing wise if you do.
you could pick up a zeal and then decide whether to get statikk shiv or triforce based on how ahead/behind you are if you're looking to get a tf in your build.
for runes he went ad marks, hp seals, 2 armor 1 AS quints and i think 4 AS glyphs to give him 7% attack speed.
Q-W-E Does Triforce even proc on her Q? I don't see it being worth it if it doesn't tbh.
It does, but only on the first hit.
|
On May 07 2014 08:06 arb wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2014 05:34 chalice wrote: imp was going bt-shiv-lw on miss fortune in the ogn semi-finals. it feels like a nice and simple standard build that isn't dependent on getting ahead but still benefits timing wise if you do.
you could pick up a zeal and then decide whether to get statikk shiv or triforce based on how ahead/behind you are if you're looking to get a tf in your build.
for runes he went ad marks, hp seals, 2 armor 1 AS quints and i think 4 AS glyphs to give him 7% attack speed.
Q-W-E Does Triforce even proc on her Q? I don't see it being worth it if it doesn't tbh.
If you're using Q properly it shouldn't even matter, because every Q should be accompanied by a near-instant Auto (as in, the auto should land only a split second after the Q, much faster than an auto after Ezreal Q). If you aren't using Q-Auto properly, you aren't playing MF properly.
|
Although if you want to maximise your damage, you'd want to auto someone, then Q a target in front of them (the bounce prioritises champions marked with Impure Shots), and in this case you'd lose the Sheen passive. So the "ideal" pattern would change depending on if you have Sheen or not.
|
|
On May 06 2014 08:46 arb wrote:Show nested quote +On May 06 2014 08:00 Nemireck wrote:On May 06 2014 07:02 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: Yeah auto q auto is bread and butter, maxing it first then W when you're about to get enough damage for it to matter is standard imo. E is basically just to slow down people while you all-in them, you're not so much worried about the damage because if you're getting a full E off on someone you're probably doing ok regardless of what you're maxing.
Also E drains your mana really fast, that shit costs 80 mana. Using it for damage can put you into spots where you have no escape tools because it's on cd or you're out of mana.
Oh and even more importantly your build on MF is going to be pure damage, Thirster into LW kinds of builds, because your main goal in a fight is to get a good ult off and then pick stragglers. Having that extra aspd when you build pure dmg is pretty crucial and it scales to 60% at rank 5. Oh shit, a Diamond player agrees with me. Irrefutable proof that it's my feeding noob teammates holding me back. GG no re. i think 5hit is stuck in like plat 5 or somethin l0l. Plat 2 right now, getting +25 per win... swear to god if I had time to play more than 2 ranked games a week I'd be diamond by next month
But anyway yeah I think MF is my new staple adc, bye bye cait
[edit] Oh, I totally got diamond by the end of the month LOL [/edit]
|
On May 07 2014 03:55 Nemireck wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2014 02:29 scFoX wrote: Well, I've been testing the max Q and holy crap can you chunk people with it. If their bottom lane isn't smart with their positioning they can be bullied pretty hard. The mana cost reduction makes all the difference. Somehow, I want Bloodthirster + Trinity Force to work so hard on this champion. I haven't tried it out yet, but I've been considering replacing PD in my build with TriForce. Just been busy getting my smurf account up to level 20 lately. I think something like BT - Greaves - Pickaxe (or LW depending on how the game is going otherwise build LW after Zeal then finish Triforce) - Zeal - TriForce would be the ideal build. The chunk from a Triforced Q-Auto should replace the lowered chance of Critting your target. If you try it before I do, report back here.
I feel like, because of MF's Q, and W interactions you shouldn't really be buying crit or attack speed on her. Triforce has enough of both. Auto-Q-Auto has basically no attack speed interaction. W's bonus damage on total AD negates the value of buying critical strike compared to buying straight AD. She spends so much time not getting any benefit from attack speed that doesn't come when she has her W up its almost pointless. In a team fight she might auto-q-auto->ult ->Auto->Q->auto->W. For about 10 seconds of team fight with either her attack speed buff up, or no need for her AS buff.
I mean think about BT->PD. It gives +100 AD, +55% attack speed, + 30% Crit. Total stats at level 11 are roughly 200 AD, +125% attack speed, +30% crit
Compare to BT->BT. +200 AD. Total stats at level 11 are roughly 300 AD, +85% attack speed.
BT->PD attacks 21% faster but BT->BT just plain does more damage on every aspect of her kit. Double Up can't crit so at the very least the BT->BT has a full 85 damage advantage on that. Plus 30-48 damage once W is stacked up plus 30-48 damage/wave once W is stacked up on her ult.
If you don't think BT->BT works as a comparison due to price then BT->LW should still be more damage than BT->BT for cheaper (not totally due to magic damage on W and ult [through W] but close enough to matter).
Due to the AP scaling on Q(and ease of applying sheen procs) if there is any one attack speed item you should get it should be triforce. But even then i feel like BT stacking should give it a run for its money.
Also Sorc Shoes due to the W magic damage super stronk.
|
On May 09 2014 08:37 Goumindong wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2014 03:55 Nemireck wrote:On May 07 2014 02:29 scFoX wrote: Well, I've been testing the max Q and holy crap can you chunk people with it. If their bottom lane isn't smart with their positioning they can be bullied pretty hard. The mana cost reduction makes all the difference. Somehow, I want Bloodthirster + Trinity Force to work so hard on this champion. I haven't tried it out yet, but I've been considering replacing PD in my build with TriForce. Just been busy getting my smurf account up to level 20 lately. I think something like BT - Greaves - Pickaxe (or LW depending on how the game is going otherwise build LW after Zeal then finish Triforce) - Zeal - TriForce would be the ideal build. The chunk from a Triforced Q-Auto should replace the lowered chance of Critting your target. If you try it before I do, report back here. I feel like, because of MF's Q, and W interactions you shouldn't really be buying crit or attack speed on her. Triforce has enough of both. Auto-Q-Auto has basically no attack speed interaction. W's bonus damage on total AD negates the value of buying critical strike compared to buying straight AD. She spends so much time not getting any benefit from attack speed that doesn't come when she has her W up its almost pointless. In a team fight she might auto-q-auto->ult ->Auto->Q->auto->W. For about 10 seconds of team fight with either her attack speed buff up, or no need for her AS buff. I mean think about BT->PD. It gives +100 AD, +55% attack speed, + 30% Crit. Total stats at level 11 are roughly 200 AD, +125% attack speed, +30% crit Compare to BT->BT. +200 AD. Total stats at level 11 are roughly 300 AD, +85% attack speed. BT->PD attacks 21% faster but BT->BT just plain does more damage on every aspect of her kit. Double Up can't crit so at the very least the BT->BT has a full 85 damage advantage on that. Plus 30-48 damage once W is stacked up plus 30-48 damage/wave once W is stacked up on her ult. If you don't think BT->BT works as a comparison due to price then BT->LW should still be more damage than BT->BT for cheaper (not totally due to magic damage on W and ult [through W] but close enough to matter). Due to the AP scaling on Q(and ease of applying sheen procs) if there is any one attack speed item you should get it should be triforce. But even then i feel like BT stacking should give it a run for its money. Also Sorc Shoes due to the W magic damage super stronk.
These are almost exactly my thoughts on this as well. I just haven't tried it yet. In THEORY the thought process is logical and makes sense. Also, building TF more closely matches my own auto-pilot MF build, so I'm prepared to say it's definitely worth doing.
I think you're comparing the wrong items though. BT-Greaves-LW-Zeal are MF's mid-game core. You're not comparing BT-PD to BT-LW or BT-BT. You're comparing BT-LW-PD to BT-LW-TF, which I THINK works out in TriForce's favour, but I can only theorize before actually playing the build.
We're talking about:
BT-Greaves-LW-Zeal-BF-PD-IE
being replaced with
BT-Greaves-LW-Zeal-TF-BF-IE
TF build seems MUCH smoother than PD, provides more raw AD, a guaranteed damage burst, AND still has a bit of attack speed and crit chance thrown in... I just don't see a situation where it wouldn't be perfect for MF, I just haven't actually tried it out to compare it to my current build in practice.
|
I always believe that BT -> Cleaver -> LW is the best build on MF because she has a channeling ult that tends to have no interactive with attack speed or crit. I'm not saying she should be an ult bot but people seem to believe that if she doesn't build AS or crit, her autoattacks or Q deals no damage which is not true. Trinity Force is acceptable because of spellblade and 30 AD + 30 AD = Tons of Damage on every abilities. The Zeal component does not synergize well with her kit but it's less of a wasteful buy than PD/Shiv/Zephyr/Hurricane.
|
I don't like cleaver personally. It's too expensive for something that's not always useful. A full channel ult should end the teamfight regardless of shred, and if you have no backup physical damage then LW is just plain better. Bruta can fit into the build, but upgrading it before LW isn't really my style.
|
Also... someone mentioned sorc shoes but I think Double Up is still considered physical damage even though it has an AP ratio. I tried dual pen in my last game and didn't feel it. I don't think it's worth it .
|
The problem I have with cleaver is the post-bruatlizer build up. You have to save 400 for the ruby crystal, then another ~1.2k gold for the combine cost. That's an entire bf sword in cost and can really set you back for a reasonably long time while you farm up the gold. Plus, the cleaver passive is great, but not as game changing as you'd really want it to be for the time/gold cost.
|
On May 09 2014 19:19 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:Also... someone mentioned sorc shoes but I think Double Up is still considered physical damage even though it has an AP ratio. I tried dual pen in my last game and didn't feel it. I don't think it's worth it . Its not the double up its her W passive stacks. This means that 6 to 48% of your auto attack damage comes in as magic depending on stacks.
On your ult this means that somewhere between 30 to 60% of your damage will come in as magic damage as the entire AD scaling portion is applied through impure shots stacks. At the very least you should not be picking up Greaves. Better to get defensive boots or CDR
You pick anything else over Greaves because attack speed is worth roughly nothing when your combo is auto-q-auto-ult-auto-q-auto-w-auto-auto-auto-q-auto. The extra 25% attack speed doesn't accelerate your Q resets and the only time you're auto'ing without resets is when you have your W buff up.
I agree with you about Cleaver. It was really good before the change because MF was basically 100% base damage in her kit with very little scaling. (So you went BT->Brut->LW or Brut->LW then finish cleaver or IE). But new MF has a lot of scaling damage due to impure shots.
Maybe BT->LW->IE->Executioners Calling
or BT->LW->IE->Ghostblade
or BT->LW->IE->IE
or BT->Triforce->LW->IE
|
Ghostblade instead of Cleaver? the active will be nice during W downtime.
|
On May 10 2014 01:26 Duvon wrote: Ghostblade instead of Cleaver? the active will be nice during W downtime. and the crit synergizes with IE as your 3rd/4th offensive item
|
What about just stay with Brutalizer and rush lw as your second completed item? for the 3rd, I think a second bt, triforce, or even a gunblade would be better than upgrading into ghostblade.
|
On May 10 2014 00:19 Ryuu314 wrote: The problem I have with cleaver is the post-bruatlizer build up. You have to save 400 for the ruby crystal, then another ~1.2k gold for the combine cost. That's an entire bf sword in cost and can really set you back for a reasonably long time while you farm up the gold. Plus, the cleaver passive is great, but not as game changing as you'd really want it to be for the time/gold cost. I feel like if mid is your only source of ap damage(besides support obv) then cleaver is a good investment tbh. shredding armor for your top/mid/jungle(whichever) is really good imo. especially since top will probably have 1 damage item at max it'll help them tons in that department, jungle is obviously depending on who it is tho.
|
I've been going Dorans+pot -> Vamp -> BF/BT -> Bruta -> LW with Sorc Shoes lately. You play more like old twitch and try to find good ER spots in teamfights than getting really close. I use dual pen reds and 2 lifesteal/1 AD quint. Might swap the AD quint for either a dual pen quint or an armor quint just so I penetrate rune armor at level 1.
I outdueled a level 11 vayne when I was level 10 after she jumped out of the bush and bork active'd me then condemned me into a wall. No idea how, I wasn't even looking and didn't expect to win, but BT + bruta + sorc shoes at that point plus a full duration make it rain kinda wrecked her.
Only thing is that with this build it's actually really hard to last hit, the lack of AD is pretty noticeable at early levels.
|
E max with dual pen is so much stronger than Q max against immobile ADCs
|
Don't you have any mana issues spamming E?
|
well i mean, that was against draven, you don't need to spam it, just e where his axe is going to land and then go in on him
|
I honestly don't have any mana issues because A) I'm not spamming it, I'm just using it to punish B) Double Up costs a bit less when you don't level it and C) It's only 80 mana at all ranks anyway. I was mainly using it on Thresh that game when he overextended to punish not realizing I was E maxing. We crushed the fuck out of that lane. My Morg was a boss, though.
Also I play a bluepill heavy style on all of my champs, I believe heavily in shoving waves and buying then coming back with full resources and better items while your opponents either freeze and play from a disadvantage or do the same. I think a lot of people don't know how to control waves correctly, even progamers.
|
I love that the first post hasn't been updated in so long it's recommending Wriggles...feels like forever ago that was viable.
I'm thinking about picking up MF again because I've been loving immobile spellcaster carries like Varus recently and MF was my original ADC when I started maining the position. Has the E really been buffed enough to justify a max? If you can consistently get them with the 2nd half of Q does it still do more poke damage?
|
|
No, E max deserves some thought:
1) It's a 55 damage increase and a 10% slow increase per level compared to double up's 15 damage increase 2) The mana cost stays the same whereas double up increases (not really a big deal) 3) You will rarely be able to use more than one double up in a situation that's not all-in while you're in the lane 4) In teamfights, your main goal is to AoE 5) Your burst at level 6 with E max is 200 from 3 points in E and 400 from your ult plus a bit more from one rank in W
The last point isn't to be neglected, your burst at 6 with any form of CC is enough to immediately force a bluepill if not outright kill your lane opponents.
But again, I run dual pen and build sorc boots because it's fun.
|
i switched from maxing E first to Q as a result of listening to conventional wisdom in this thread and other places and i'm pretty sure my performance suffered. in addition to the advantages already listed i think having good waveclear as an adc is underrated.
|
Anecdotally: When you're with a Soraka against Draven/Janna, this E-max MF build absolutely demolishes them in lane.
After 3 more tries, the strategy seems a bit win-more for laning (it doesn't help if you get behind), but is really good for midgame teamfights if you're light on CC. I think E-max vs. Q max is really a matchup and gamestate call, I'm not really sure if devoting reds to hybrid pen over flat AD is worth it though. The big part for me was the increase in slow being extremely relevant for a lot of fights, it's negligible at rank 1.
|
I went and tried the E max split pen miss fortune.
I had Zyra supp vs a jinx/morg lane. It was brutal. The aoe slow makes the root easy to land, and we both had so much dmg we could 2v3 their jungle most of the time. I loved it, I don't play adc but that was so much simpler than usual.
tl;dr: 10/10 would pick again, zyra support goes great with it.
|
The slow into w auto q auto chase is insane amounts of harass, I haven't picked a spot where I got outtraded using it yet and E is great for kiting when they try to harass or all-in. As long as you tag them with it you're probably going to escape fine even if you have to blow summoners or bluepill and sometimes they just eat the full duration + creep aggro and you end up being able to commit to the fight and win it anyway. Worst case scenario is that you have to concede lane but even in that case you still have E max plus ult for teamfights which can swing games really hard.
At rank 5 E has a 65% slow attached to it. That's more than Nunu Ice Ball or Absolute Zero and it does 310 damage to boot? I don't know how many times I've been dived and thought "shit, I'm dead" but ended up coming out ahead when they eat the full duration of Make it Rain.
|
Hmm, food for thought. Thank you for sharing your experiences. Is the total lack of attack speed items a problem in extended trades? Q max mitigated this issue by having a low-CD ability to use while attacking.
|
W active gives attack speed, and the extra bit of onhit from the passive component kind of evens out the DPS output from autoing.
It synergizes even better with the hybrid pen because the on hit magic damage scales with AD, which is kinda weird.
Is Q an auto reset?
|
On May 28 2014 23:35 ticklishmusic wrote: W active gives attack speed, and the extra bit of onhit from the passive component kind of evens out the DPS output from autoing.
It synergizes even better with the hybrid pen because the on hit magic damage scales with AD, which is kinda weird.
Is Q an auto reset?
i'm reasonably sure it is, and as someone else stated here going E should depend on your support, I have a fiddlesticks support main I play with sometimes and he increases your magic damage by a lot, or as someone else said soraka lets you spam a lot and clear waves very fast.
I would much rather practice landing Q's with second bounce, I don't know if its said here, but if you AA, back off and then Q bounce off a minion near the champion you hit last it will hit everytime
|
On May 28 2014 23:35 ticklishmusic wrote: W active gives attack speed, and the extra bit of onhit from the passive component kind of evens out the DPS output from autoing.
It synergizes even better with the hybrid pen because the on hit magic damage scales with AD, which is kinda weird.
Is Q an auto reset?
Q isn't an auto reset, but it is an ability, so Auto-Q-Auto takes about the same time as two auto attacks. Since you've got your E on them, getting two autos should be pretty easy. Even Auto-Q is quick enough that if they can't dash/flash out they're going to take a load of damage.
|
I'm gonna cross-post an AsianEcksDragon post from the forum here because it explains max E very well:
On May 29 2014 16:52 AsianEcksDragon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2014 13:13 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: I'm a huge advocate of E-max MF with dual pen and sorc shoes
Like, at level 5 Make it Rain does like 300 damage and slows by 65%, which is more than nunu ice ball or ulti I've done E-max long before the MF rework when laning against champs like Caitlyn who does not like forced trades. It's a no-brainer choice against all champs now because most of Double Up's damage have been moved from base to AD scaling which stays the same from rank 1 through rank 5 while E's slow got buffed to 65%. MF has always been more of an AD caster than a true autoattack carry because attack speed and crit become such a wasted stat while she is channeling her ult through the duration of a teamfight. I have yet to play a lane where E max didn't devastate. Ganks go so badly when they get tagged by a 25/35/45/55/65% slow for a quarter of their health bar. Supports can land stuff ezpz and if they don't blow flash immediately or have it up in the first place then they're gonna eat a ton of one-sided harass. Honestly E max is so strong that I don't see any reason to max Q on MF.
So here's my go-to build nowadays:
QWEEER R>E>Q>W
Dorans + pot -> any combination of up to 3 longswords OR vamp scepter OR BF on first buy with some health and mana pots -> BT -> bruta -> LW/Sorc Shoes -> Defensive item usually, Ranudins or Banshees are my two personal favorites, then whatever sixth item you need. Liandry's is fun but realistically you probably want either another Thirster, another defensive item, or an aspd/ms item of some kind like triforce/PD/zephyr
|
What's your reasoning for going QW on the first 2 levels? Why not go E earlier if you want to max it?
|
Because double up is crucial for last hitting, impure shots adds stacking magic damage and 20% attackspeed, and I generally use levels 1-2 to feel my opponents out for mistakes I can punish later.
|
On May 29 2014 03:34 Goumindong wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2014 23:35 ticklishmusic wrote: W active gives attack speed, and the extra bit of onhit from the passive component kind of evens out the DPS output from autoing.
It synergizes even better with the hybrid pen because the on hit magic damage scales with AD, which is kinda weird.
Is Q an auto reset?
Q isn't an auto reset, but it is an ability, so Auto-Q-Auto takes about the same time as two auto attacks. Since you've got your E on them, getting two autos should be pretty easy. Even Auto-Q is quick enough that if they can't dash/flash out they're going to take a load of damage. To be clear, Q IS an auto attack reset. As soon as the Q lands, you will be able to auto attack again. If you have enough attack speed this won't make much more of a difference other than fitting the Q in between auto attacks, but at the beginning of the game at level 1 it gets the 2nd aa out much quicker than normal.
|
am i wrong in thinking that there is merit to taking E level 1 to use on the creep wave and increase the likelihood of hitting level 2 first?
|
While the manacost is static for E, it's really high at 80 at level one - you only have around 250 base mana.
|
On May 30 2014 06:16 Complete wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2014 03:34 Goumindong wrote:On May 28 2014 23:35 ticklishmusic wrote: W active gives attack speed, and the extra bit of onhit from the passive component kind of evens out the DPS output from autoing.
It synergizes even better with the hybrid pen because the on hit magic damage scales with AD, which is kinda weird.
Is Q an auto reset?
Q isn't an auto reset, but it is an ability, so Auto-Q-Auto takes about the same time as two auto attacks. Since you've got your E on them, getting two autos should be pretty easy. Even Auto-Q is quick enough that if they can't dash/flash out they're going to take a load of damage. To be clear, Q IS an auto attack reset. As soon as the Q lands, you will be able to auto attack again. If you have enough attack speed this won't make much more of a difference other than fitting the Q in between auto attacks, but at the beginning of the game at level 1 it gets the 2nd aa out much quicker than normal.
Q is not an auto reset. Go try it at lvl 1, second auto is at normal pace.
|
On May 30 2014 06:16 Complete wrote:Show nested quote +On May 29 2014 03:34 Goumindong wrote:On May 28 2014 23:35 ticklishmusic wrote: W active gives attack speed, and the extra bit of onhit from the passive component kind of evens out the DPS output from autoing.
It synergizes even better with the hybrid pen because the on hit magic damage scales with AD, which is kinda weird.
Is Q an auto reset?
Q isn't an auto reset, but it is an ability, so Auto-Q-Auto takes about the same time as two auto attacks. Since you've got your E on them, getting two autos should be pretty easy. Even Auto-Q is quick enough that if they can't dash/flash out they're going to take a load of damage. To be clear, Q IS an auto attack reset. As soon as the Q lands, you will be able to auto attack again. If you have enough attack speed this won't make much more of a difference other than fitting the Q in between auto attacks, but at the beginning of the game at level 1 it gets the 2nd aa out much quicker than normal.
It's not a reset, in point of fact, it's exactly the opposite. Your aa timer lasts through the Q casting time, so it does come out somewhat faster, but no faster than if you hadn't Q'd at all.
|
On May 30 2014 06:26 chalice wrote: am i wrong in thinking that there is merit to taking E level 1 to use on the creep wave and increase the likelihood of hitting level 2 first? The only issues I see with this are 1) might be harder to last hit perfectly 2) double up gives you a lot of control at level 1 and 3) rank 1 of make it rain is only 90 damage for 80 mana. Not worth imo, without auto q auto to follow up E I think it's a lot less likely you'll be very threatening. QWEEER gives you all the early benefits of MF with a level 6 burst combo to force them out of lane.
I might consider QEEWER or QEWEER but I still think levels 1 and 2 should be primarily focused on last hitting and figuring out their tendencies in lane.
|
On May 30 2014 08:42 deth2munkies wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 06:16 Complete wrote:On May 29 2014 03:34 Goumindong wrote:On May 28 2014 23:35 ticklishmusic wrote: W active gives attack speed, and the extra bit of onhit from the passive component kind of evens out the DPS output from autoing.
It synergizes even better with the hybrid pen because the on hit magic damage scales with AD, which is kinda weird.
Is Q an auto reset?
Q isn't an auto reset, but it is an ability, so Auto-Q-Auto takes about the same time as two auto attacks. Since you've got your E on them, getting two autos should be pretty easy. Even Auto-Q is quick enough that if they can't dash/flash out they're going to take a load of damage. To be clear, Q IS an auto attack reset. As soon as the Q lands, you will be able to auto attack again. If you have enough attack speed this won't make much more of a difference other than fitting the Q in between auto attacks, but at the beginning of the game at level 1 it gets the 2nd aa out much quicker than normal. It's not a reset, in point of fact, it's exactly the opposite. Your aa timer lasts through the Q casting time, so it does come out somewhat faster, but no faster than if you hadn't Q'd at all.
Q is an auto reset in the same way that Tiamat active is an auto reset, it's not. It just lets you do something during the downtime.
|
On May 30 2014 08:14 sob3k wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 06:16 Complete wrote:On May 29 2014 03:34 Goumindong wrote:On May 28 2014 23:35 ticklishmusic wrote: W active gives attack speed, and the extra bit of onhit from the passive component kind of evens out the DPS output from autoing.
It synergizes even better with the hybrid pen because the on hit magic damage scales with AD, which is kinda weird.
Is Q an auto reset?
Q isn't an auto reset, but it is an ability, so Auto-Q-Auto takes about the same time as two auto attacks. Since you've got your E on them, getting two autos should be pretty easy. Even Auto-Q is quick enough that if they can't dash/flash out they're going to take a load of damage. To be clear, Q IS an auto attack reset. As soon as the Q lands, you will be able to auto attack again. If you have enough attack speed this won't make much more of a difference other than fitting the Q in between auto attacks, but at the beginning of the game at level 1 it gets the 2nd aa out much quicker than normal. Q is not an auto reset. Go try it at lvl 1, second auto is at normal pace.
This is correct. A smooth Auto-Q-Auto is possible only once you've finished Greaves/First AS item.
|
On June 01 2014 10:13 ShaLLoW[baY] wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2014 08:42 deth2munkies wrote:On May 30 2014 06:16 Complete wrote:On May 29 2014 03:34 Goumindong wrote:On May 28 2014 23:35 ticklishmusic wrote: W active gives attack speed, and the extra bit of onhit from the passive component kind of evens out the DPS output from autoing.
It synergizes even better with the hybrid pen because the on hit magic damage scales with AD, which is kinda weird.
Is Q an auto reset?
Q isn't an auto reset, but it is an ability, so Auto-Q-Auto takes about the same time as two auto attacks. Since you've got your E on them, getting two autos should be pretty easy. Even Auto-Q is quick enough that if they can't dash/flash out they're going to take a load of damage. To be clear, Q IS an auto attack reset. As soon as the Q lands, you will be able to auto attack again. If you have enough attack speed this won't make much more of a difference other than fitting the Q in between auto attacks, but at the beginning of the game at level 1 it gets the 2nd aa out much quicker than normal. It's not a reset, in point of fact, it's exactly the opposite. Your aa timer lasts through the Q casting time, so it does come out somewhat faster, but no faster than if you hadn't Q'd at all. Q is an auto reset in the same way that Tiamat active is an auto reset, it's not. It just lets you do something during the downtime. Meant to say it looks faster, but this is what I was trying to say ><
|
Just tried out QEEWER and it totally lost me lane. Having W active for when you trade at level 2 is really crucial, it turns out, because then you can smooth auto-q-auto.
|
Winning lane is not the problem with mf. Against someone like Draven or Twitch, you will win 100% because they have no way of avoiding your combo. She's just too vulnerable in teamfights if the other team pick to shut you down. This is why I don't pick her a lot even though I'm 4-0 with her this season. She's a very situational pick.
BTW The upcoming BT nerf will severely gimp her because no other ADC benefit from BT -aside from maybe, Graves- as much as mf. Caitlyn and Twitch are going to be really strong with IE.
|
Yeah, the problem with MF will always be that you need 2-3 people peeling for her, otherwise she will get blicked in every teamfight past 25 minutes.
|
Hey guys, just popped in and noticed this thread is very out of date. I'm still an active player (shooting for Challenger this season). MF is quite obsolete now but I will do my best to add some meaningful updates to the guide within the next week or so.
|
What makes you think she's obsolete? She has literally the highest winrate in challenger out of all ADCs at the moment over the past week at 68% winrate, beating out Varus for second at 61%, Twitch and Jinx at 59%, and Lucian, the #1 most popular pick in challenger, at 57%.
|
which site are you quoting here?
|
|
thx alot! i checked it out. they have some interesting data on there.
|
They shouldn't be using challenger though. Too much variance. Better to use diamond.
|
i agree about the challenger variance. How many challenger games with a given champion actually occur per week (which is what elophant uses)?
i think Diamond is better for stats. therefore...
Last month's diamond games, all regions, ADC chart
Note that MF is >50% for all matchups except Sivir at 49.9% lol. Also note that out of all of Twitch's matchups, he has the lowest winrate against MF
Stats aren't everything but there has to be a decent reason why the stats are the way they are. My guess is that MF is pretty good at what she does and isn't obsolete, although I would like to hear how she would be.
|
That's pretty interesting. She wins by a significant margin in a large sample size against everyone but Sivir, who she basically coinflips with. I personally think she's insanely strong right now, and looking at that chart I don't really see anyone who has a better winrate average in bot lane at the moment...
|
I think MF has a high win rate because the people playing her are much more likely to be ADC players who actually play a good deal of mf whereas the same can't be said for people who play tw/luci/(jinx).
|
Maybe. But why are these dedicated ADs picking her as opposited to twitch or jinx or cait If they don't think she is strong?
|
|
So I mean if the strongest AD carry players are picking her to test her out and they're having a ridiculously good winrate with her, doesn't that indicate in some sense that she's, like, good?
Obviously the pro meta at the moment isn't the same as even the highest level of soloqueue at the moment so there's a disparity in pick stats in the LCS, but at the very least, she's got the best winrate among ADCs in soloqueue, and that does say something about her potential.
|
|
a lot of the value of the MF pick is that many players don't know how to play against her. for example playing vs MF breaking her passive is pretty important
also one unique thing about MF is that boots are completely optional on her. she's also surprisingly tanky (compared to other ADCs)
|
On June 13 2014 12:19 krndandaman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2014 12:09 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: So I mean if the strongest AD carry players are picking her to test her out and they're having a ridiculously good winrate with her, doesn't that indicate in some sense that she's, like, good?
Obviously the pro meta at the moment isn't the same as even the highest level of soloqueue at the moment so there's a disparity in pick stats in the LCS, but at the very least, she's got the best winrate among ADCs in soloqueue, and that does say something about her potential. well, pro players are good enough to win consistently with any low tier adc so thats kind of a moot point. then again, miss fortune is not that bad. its seen pro play in actual meaningful tournaments (OGN) but I don't think shes quite up there yet with the other top adc's. Wouldn't it just be simple logic that the champions that are "higher tier" have the better winrates? And what other meaningful metric is there to the strength of a champion than their winrate when picked? It's not like Urgot has a near 2/3 winrate. MF does right now and she beats out damn near every other champ including Lucian, who's considered the best ADC at the moment, by a LOT.
All I'm saying is that how can she not be up there with the other top ADCs when she's got the highest winrate by a ridiculous amount?
|
|
when i said "variance" earlier i'm talking challenger games where you probably have like 400 games per month for a somewhat low % champ like MF or even lower with true low % champions like urgot
this is why i prefer diamond
last month's diamond soloQ top champions by winrate*
MF is sitting there with a 53.5% winrate with 17,000 games in diamond. i really don't think sample size is the problem here.
speaking of urgot, check this shit out:
last month's challenger soloQ top champions by winrate*
see that ugly motherfucker at the top of the list with a pick % so small i can't even hover over it with my mouse? looking at his stats, i get around *60 urgot challenger games* played over the entire month.
60 fuckin games is a variance problem. the game number is so small it might well be influenced by whether or not some challenger urgot player shows up that month and kills people who don't know the matchup, or how much trolling a couple of dudes do in favor of the urgot player
TLDR i don't think variance can be attributed to MF's really good soloQ winrate TLDR i dislike using challenger for only winrates when the # of games is that small
*Edit* before people declare the champ really strong or top tier or whatever, i think a definition would be nice
question 1: if a champ is top tier, is it important that someone can first pick the champ without much to fear in terms of counterpicks? question 2: if a champ is top tier, is it important that the champ fits a wide variety of team compositions?
|
|
Why would a champion with a winrate that high NOT be "top-tier"?
Did you even click the link because Fiora STILL got the sixth-highest winrate in the past month, two spots above MF.
I mean you can define her all you want, all I know is that she has the highest winrate out of literally all ADCs at the moment in both Diamond and Challenger. So basically, she's not "top-tier", whatever that means, but she wins more than the "top-tier" ADCs?
The most important metric to me when I pick a champ in this game is "how likely is it that I will win this game if I pick this champ?" Beyond that, I think her kit is ridiculous right now and her weaknesses aren't that bad. Just don't FP her or pick her when they have champs that own you, just like any other vulnerable pick.
|
On June 15 2014 05:04 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: Why would a champion with a winrate that high NOT be "top-tier"?
Did you even click the link because Fiora STILL got the sixth-highest winrate in the past month, two spots above MF.
I mean you can define her all you want, all I know is that she has the highest winrate out of literally all ADCs at the moment in both Diamond and Challenger. So basically, she's not "top-tier", whatever that means, but she wins more than the "top-tier" ADCs?
The most important metric to me when I pick a champ in this game is "how likely is it that I will win this game if I pick this champ?" Beyond that, I think her kit is ridiculous right now and her weaknesses aren't that bad. Just don't FP her or pick her when they have champs that own you, just like any other vulnerable pick.
I'm clocking in a 65% win rate down here in Gold on MF, for whatever that's worth. Most losses can be attributed three main issues.
Either it's me going way too ham with passive and/or scared supports (like seriously, why do 75% of the Leona players I come across in SoloQ hide at the back of our own lane bush?)
Or
I snowball the early game but team doesn't know how to win with a fed as fuck ADC, refuse to group ANYWHERE, let alone mid, and throw the game away by getting picked off one-by-one clearing jungle camps. (Does this ever get any better as you climb the ladder? It's like people don't care about winning, they just want to play League deathmatch.)
Or
The other team has a Renekton, J4, Vi, Master Yi or other such champion that can blick me and my team is unable to protect me in teamfights.
Of those reasons, I can accept the blame for 1)
2) I assume that arranged 5s teams would both try to protect the fed ADC, and also group for early objectives to try and win games early.
3) worries me on arranged teams, I feel like picking MF anything but last would result in a pretty easy champ select for the opposing team and they'd just pick champions that can make MF miserable in teamfights. In a recent IH I was fed really early on in the game and we were winning teamfights, until suddenly a wild Scip on Master Yi appeared! And even with the whole team dedicated to protecting me, I wouldn't survive more than about 3 auto's worth of time in a fight and we ended up losing the game. This is why I wouldn't consider MF a top-tier pick outside of SoloQ.
|
|
I don't feel like I should have to rehash every single point I've made in every single post over the past few pages.
I equate winrate over a reasonable sample size with tiers. That's the whole point. If a statistically significant number of players tend to win more when they pick and play a champ, there must be something about the champ that's causing this to happen. Thus, something about the champ makes them a better pick if you want to win a game.
I mean if you're talking about top-tier mobility or top-tier ability to not die in lane or top-tier range or whatever then sure, MF isn't top tier.
BUT IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT HER ABILITY TO STRAIGHT UP WIN GAMES, SHE IS THE #1 IN SOLO QUEUE BY A HUGE MARGIN.
If you think that anything else matters aside from winning or losing a game in solo queue, then that's where our disagreement is. I will consider champs that win a whole lot more when picked higher tier than champs that don't win as much when picked. Period.
And yes, I did state multiple times that she's generally not picked in competitive play, but I think that's going to change soon. Factors which affect this:
1) Solo queue meta and the double jungle + 2v0 meta are WILDLY different. 2) Pro games are played on older patches. 3) She's vulnerable to being counterdrafted and teams generally have premeditated strategies going into pick/ban. At a coordinated, professional level, there are a lot more factors which affect her desirability.
So yes, she isn't as competitive of a pick in professional games.
But for all of you non-progamers out there, she's fucking ridiculous right now if you want easy wins.
|
On June 14 2014 05:25 krndandaman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 13 2014 19:17 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:On June 13 2014 12:19 krndandaman wrote:On June 13 2014 12:09 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: So I mean if the strongest AD carry players are picking her to test her out and they're having a ridiculously good winrate with her, doesn't that indicate in some sense that she's, like, good?
Obviously the pro meta at the moment isn't the same as even the highest level of soloqueue at the moment so there's a disparity in pick stats in the LCS, but at the very least, she's got the best winrate among ADCs in soloqueue, and that does say something about her potential. well, pro players are good enough to win consistently with any low tier adc so thats kind of a moot point. then again, miss fortune is not that bad. its seen pro play in actual meaningful tournaments (OGN) but I don't think shes quite up there yet with the other top adc's. Wouldn't it just be simple logic that the champions that are "higher tier" have the better winrates? And what other meaningful metric is there to the strength of a champion than their winrate when picked? It's not like Urgot has a near 2/3 winrate. MF does right now and she beats out damn near every other champ including Lucian, who's considered the best ADC at the moment, by a LOT. All I'm saying is that how can she not be up there with the other top ADCs when she's got the highest winrate by a ridiculous amount? not exactly, since soloq has so much variance. we would have a bigger picture if we also had stats on how often other adc's are picked along with mf. if mf had a 60% win rate with maybe 1000 games played, while lucian has a 51% winrate with 20,000 games played, all it would indicate is that we don't have a large enough sample size for mf. not only that, since lucian is so popular and mf is not, the data is most likely skewed by the people just picking up lucian without actually playing him.
No, the confidence interval for 1000 games is basically zero. If there is a bias situation (because MF is only picked against strong matchups or because MF is only picked by people who main AD) then this would not be corrected by sample size increases
|
|
Pretty sure his point is that there isn't anything to "correct". The fact of the matter is that Miss Fortune is the ADC with the highest win rate in SoloQ, and that's because she is a very strong ADC.
The only thing that would "correct" the stats would be a high number of picks in competitive play to "test" her "real" power, but competitive play is usually either 2 months behind SoloQ, or 2 months ahead of SoloQ, depending on who you ask.
|
On June 15 2014 12:21 krndandaman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 15 2014 11:29 Goumindong wrote:
No, the confidence interval for 1000 games is basically zero. If there is a bias situation (because MF is only picked against strong matchups or because MF is only picked by people who main AD) then this would not be corrected by sample size increases what would it be corrected by then? that was the only thing I could come up with but I'm not well versed in statistics as you seem to be.
What you're proposing is omitted variable bias. The only way to fix it is to make sure the variable is in the regression model. Which we more or less can't do for technical reasons (Only Sufficiency has the dataset and the calculation is potentially intensive on such a large dataset and its hard to define an AD main and such a regression would suffer endeogenity concerns)
That being said, i don't think that we are seeing much omitted variable bias here. MF has a really strong and punishing laning phase. If she gets ahead she can easily snowball to victory, moreso than many other popular AD's, due to the nature of her kit having every offensive tool necessary to close out games (W makes shoving towers fast, Q lets you siege, e lets you generate picks, r teamfights, and her passive allows her to rotate faster than defenders) and mixed damage which is hard to itemize against.
|
mf (and similarly also varus) packs alot of early game trading power with an extremely impactful aoe ult. but she isn't a resilient early pick compared to lucian for example who has decent trading power and decent aoe which he rounds up with moblity.
this is why lucian is picked more often but has a more average winrate. the "experts pick mf" argument is reasonable too especially combined with situationally strong champions, which amplifies the impact of picking mf into the right team, against the right team, while maintaining a low pickrate because the experts know when not to pick her as well.
this phenomenon is consistent with hipster junglers such as fiddlesticks, rammus, mao shaco et al. Situationally strong picks with a unique style, above average winrate and low pickrate.
"not fotm but hella strong"-picks like these have the potential to rise up to op-status with just small, confidence boosting buffs on them, because they make games where they fit in extremely one dimensional. more often than not their success is dependand on your opposing team screwing up in their picking phase and their ways of responding to the situation. a classic example would be Eve/Shaco in enemy team and then you pick a bunch of aggressive laners with a lack of CC and or sustain so your only early game strategy consists of hoping to not getting caught while overextending.
|
You should probably study some basic statistics
For clarification, a week has (extrapolating the Braum number) about 4000 games played in challenger from all regions sampled. Most of those champs on the page have less than 100 games picked. So even if the top 4 are Nautilus, Galio, Urgot, and Olaf, even a visual check for validity can determine that the sample size is too small to mean anything. Like, seriously, just look at it. You can't even see a bar that has numbers with the amount of games picked next to them. It could be three, for all we know. And in the Galio case, I think that's literally what it is.
|
|
Braum's # of games played is 617 and his percentage of games picked is 15.03%
So if you do the math on that, 617/.1503 = ~4105 which is about 4000 ish
But yeah, that's why monthly + diamond is a better combination for stats analysis, it's been pretty well-explained over the past two pages by multiple people
|
And also Urgot has been seeing play mid lately, I was watching Maknoon do it on stream a few days ago and he was crushing a Lulu
Literally no way to know based on what we have, but it might explain some of that.
[edit] I just looked at it and you can't even see a yellow bar next to him indicating what percentage of games he's played in. Perhaps you should just listen to us if you can't interpret that graph by just looking at it. [/edit]
|
On June 16 2014 10:36 krndandaman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2014 05:58 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:You should probably study some basic statistics For clarification, a week has (extrapolating the Braum number) about 4000 games played in challenger from all regions sampled. Most of those champs on the page have less than 100 games picked. So even if the top 4 are Nautilus, Galio, Urgot, and Olaf, even a visual check for validity can determine that the sample size is too small to mean anything. Like, seriously, just look at it. You can't even see a bar that has numbers with the amount of games picked next to them. It could be three, for all we know. And in the Galio case, I think that's literally what it is. how can you see that there are 4000 games played in challenger? I don't see it anywhere on that page. also the list is almost equally trolly on every single league. I just used challenger as an example since it was the highest league and most troll. edit: I changed it to monthly for challenger and urgot is still #1?
As a graduate student in epidemiology and biostatistics I'm appalled at the apparent lack of basic statistical inference from ZERG_RUSSIAN.
The premise of your argument is that the higher the soloq win rate percentage equates to greater ability of the champion, which can't be further from the truth. Even for statistically significant results, there is still the possibility that it may be due to chance. Setting aside the fact that a large sample size can make any marginal difference significant, the question of what sample size would be appropriate given a marginal error would be acceptable to predict the strength of the champion is the true question.
Even if we believe the numbers as they are, there are many confounders for why numbers can be skewed 1. The players using the champion are simply better in every way (people like WT are "outliers" that can make any champion look good)
2. If a champion is picked more often, then the law of large numbers suggest that the win rate will regress towards the mean, which is ~50% given the match maker. MF win rates being higher than other ADs may simply be the product of less games played overall compared to the other ADs, which may make her win rate appear higher.
3. The higher win rates may be contributed by lower tiers (bronze, silver, gold, etc) as opposed to diamond/ challenger. You would have to stratify the win rates based on tiers, and also calculate appropriate sample sizes, control for region, times played (patches). Lower elo players may prefer MF more, and given how they are less likely to know how to play against it (think season 2 AOE compositions), could boost the win rates. This is very likely given that more people are in lower elos.
4. Chance. We simply cannot ignore that the people that played MF got lucky in soloq, that even with thousands of games, people may have lucked out more than when they tryhard on another AD. Setting aside the argument of psychological impacts of playing different ADs (based on meta or non-meta picks), chance alone can still affect win rate.
These arguments don't even add factors such as psychological effects, team compositions or win rates of individual players (of even if they main AD or not). There are more reasons but I can write you a 20 page paper on the entire topic of confounding but ZERG_RUSSIAN may not understand it.
The premise of whether an AD is good hasn't truly come from pure soloq statistics anyways, but more about number crunching based on trading, ability to position, teamfight contributions, late game potential and so on. Just looking at statistics alone isn't enough evidence to prove that the champion is good or bad. Think about it, when was the last time we thought a champion was good purely based on statistics. Most people would side with "we think X is good since the pros feel that the champion has more utility, carry potential, for Y reasons."
Lastly, isn't observational data purely speculative as to the true meaning behind the numbers? I can interpret the lower poppy win rate to players not understanding how to play the champion, and not due to the the fact that it may be a poor champ. You need more controlled environments to come up with more definitive conclusions.
Mabye it's ZERG_RUSSIAN who should take some statistics courses, and stop pretending that he actually knows anything about it.
|
On June 16 2014 13:14 SniperVul5 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On June 16 2014 10:36 krndandaman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2014 05:58 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:You should probably study some basic statistics For clarification, a week has (extrapolating the Braum number) about 4000 games played in challenger from all regions sampled. Most of those champs on the page have less than 100 games picked. So even if the top 4 are Nautilus, Galio, Urgot, and Olaf, even a visual check for validity can determine that the sample size is too small to mean anything. Like, seriously, just look at it. You can't even see a bar that has numbers with the amount of games picked next to them. It could be three, for all we know. And in the Galio case, I think that's literally what it is. how can you see that there are 4000 games played in challenger? I don't see it anywhere on that page. also the list is almost equally trolly on every single league. I just used challenger as an example since it was the highest league and most troll. edit: I changed it to monthly for challenger and urgot is still #1? As a graduate student in epidemiology and biostatistics I'm appalled at the apparent lack of basic statistical inference from ZERG_RUSSIAN. The premise of your argument is that the higher the soloq win rate percentage equates to greater ability of the champion, which can't be further from the truth. Even for statistically significant results, there is still the possibility that it may be due to chance. Setting aside the fact that a large sample size can make any marginal difference significant, the question of what sample size would be appropriate given a marginal error would be acceptable to predict the strength of the champion is the true question. Even if we believe the numbers as they are, there are many confounders for why numbers can be skewed 1. The players using the champion are simply better in every way (people like WT are "outliers" that can make any champion look good) 2. If a champion is picked more often, then the law of large numbers suggest that the win rate will regress towards the mean, which is ~50% given the match maker. MF win rates being higher than other ADs may simply be the product of less games played overall compared to the other ADs, which may make her win rate appear higher. 3. The higher win rates may be contributed by lower tiers (bronze, silver, gold, etc) as opposed to diamond/ challenger. You would have to stratify the win rates based on tiers, and also calculate appropriate sample sizes, control for region, times played (patches). Lower elo players may prefer MF more, and given how they are less likely to know how to play against it (think season 2 AOE compositions), could boost the win rates. This is very likely given that more people are in lower elos. 4. Chance. We simply cannot ignore that the people that played MF got lucky in soloq, that even with thousands of games, people may have lucked out more than when they tryhard on another AD. Setting aside the argument of psychological impacts of playing different ADs (based on meta or non-meta picks), chance alone can still affect win rate. These arguments don't even add factors such as psychological effects, team compositions or win rates of individual players (of even if they main AD or not). There are more reasons but I can write you a 20 page paper on the entire topic of confounding but ZERG_RUSSIAN may not understand it. The premise of whether an AD is good hasn't truly come from pure soloq statistics anyways, but more about number crunching based on trading, ability to position, teamfight contributions, late game potential and so on. Just looking at statistics alone isn't enough evidence to prove that the champion is good or bad. Think about it, when was the last time we thought a champion was good purely based on statistics. Most people would side with "we think X is good since the pros feel that the champion has more utility, carry potential, for Y reasons." Lastly, isn't observational data purely speculative as to the true meaning behind the numbers? I can interpret the lower poppy win rate to players not understanding how to play the champion, and not due to the the fact that it may be a poor champ. You need more controlled environments to come up with more definitive conclusions. Mabye it's ZERG_RUSSIAN who should take some statistics courses, and stop pretending that he actually knows anything about it. No, I'm not equating winrate with champion ability. I'm equating it with pick strength. As in, players who pick MF tend to win more games than players who pick other ADCs.
Either way you look at this, it's in my favor:
A) Better players pick MF more often. Sure. Why are these better players picking MF right now and winning with her? Win.
B) Many different types of players are picking MF, and not just better players. Okay, then her winrate is just high. Win.
Let me address your points, though.
+ Show Spoiler +Point 1: With a large enough sample size this should not occur. Even if it does, it kinda proves my point. Better players pick her more often why? Because she's bad and they want a challenge? I don't think so.
Point 2: A regression towards the mean is seen in the data right now anyway and she's still got the highest winrate. The amount of games we're talking about here with MF picked in diamond alone over the past month is close to 60000. Also, your "regression towards the mean" argument assumes a normal curve of winrate on all champs, which is not true. Some champs win more than others. See Goumindong's post below for a more eloquent explanation.
Point 3: WE DID THAT. READ.
Point 4: Our sample size is close to 60000. It's not just a couple thousand. It's sixty-fucking-thousand on a conservative estimate (I rounded down when adding the numbers for this estimate. If you want to check it, just go to the link at the bottom and add it yourself.). The amount of influence "chance" has over this goes down in relation to the sample size. Our sample size is FUCKING HUGE.
Basically, your argument comes down to our sample size not being large enough to make any inferences. I disagree and I'd be willing to bet a month ban on having enough games to make a conclusive statement at 99%. Our sample size for MF games played in diamond is something like 60000 games. Again, sixty-fucking-thousand. On a conservative estimate for JUST diamond.
(By the way, I just went and added it, it's actually 68142 games.)
For reference: + Show Spoiler +http://www.lolking.net/charts?region=all&type=bottom-matchup&range=monthly&map=sr&queue=1x1&league=diamond
Tell me that 21344 Lucian vs MF matchups isn't large enough to make a conclusive statement about who tends to win the matchup? And that we can't take the aggregate of all that data and be confident about her winrate? With numbers like this we can be extremely confident that our results are NOT due to chance.
And again, my point is that she wins the most games when picked. If you want to define how good a champ is in some other way, then by all means, go ahead, and I'll concede to you that she has her weaknesses.
But if you just want to pick the ADC that statistically wins the highest percentage of games in solo queue, it's MF.
And FYI I'm a fucking doctoral student in clinical psychology. On top of that, I'm one of those diamond players that plays MF. Don't credential drop on me and try to tell me I don't know stats.
(Edited for clarity and to remove most of the reactive statements.)
|
On June 16 2014 13:14 SniperVul5 wrote: As a graduate student in epidemiology and biostatistics I'm appalled at the apparent lack of basic statistical inference from ZERG_RUSSIAN.
As a graduate student in biostatistics you should know pretty intuitively that a 60% win rate with 1000 trials would reject a 50% win rate even with a p value threshold corrected for multiple tests, you would certainly know that it was the case for the tens of thousands of MF games played each week/month in diamond. But biostats is easy stats so maybe that isn't true.
To reiterate, the variance on a (1000 binomial distributions with a p=.5) /1000 (I.E 1000 coin flips averaged) is .025% So about 1% of the time we would expect that in 1000 trials, a champion who had a win rate of exactly 50% would display a win rate over 50.5%. Lets correct for multiple champions. Rather we want a p-value such that we would find 1 champion of 100 total over that value supposing. The 99.99% for 100 tests at 1000 trails corresponds to the 99.9% for 1 test at 1000 trials. Which is 3.62 Z value or about 50.57%.
Of course we don't believe that champion win rates are precisely 50%, but we do observe that, outside of meta shifts/buffs which effect the champion, most champions do not see much more than 1-2% variation in their win rate across days which is pretty consistent with relatively constant champion powers.
1. The players using the champion are simply better in every way (people like WT are "outliers" that can make any champion look good)
Unlikely.
2. If a champion is picked more often, then the law of large numbers suggest that the win rate will regress towards the mean, which is ~50% given the match maker. MF win rates being higher than other ADs may simply be the product of less games played overall compared to the other ADs, which may make her win rate appear higher.
This is not true. I cannot even begin to reason why someone would think this was true. The negation is obvious. Suppose we have a champion which straight wins every game its played in. It does this because its so OP its literally impossible to lose. As the champion is picked more often its win rate continues to be 100%. OK so 100% is a degenerate distribution, but it holds true for any champion whose power implies a non-50% win rate.
Note that the existence of champions who have above average win rates does not imply that some summoners must be at levels where they have higher win rates and are playing that champion. This is because not every summoner gets their champion each game even if they get their role the majority of the time.
Just looking at statistics alone isn't enough evidence to prove that the champion is good or bad.
Fine, then our theory is "Miss Fortune is good because we have reason to believe so by looking at her kit" and we go and test our theory and we cannot reject it. And we have an alternate theory "Miss Fortune is average or below average" and we go and test that theory and holy christ we reject it pretty strongly.
Now, it could be wrong. But the likelihood is not on your side to suggest it. We're way [i]way[i] past a 50/50 bet here even if a 50/50 bet is probably the p value we should be looking at. After all, if i am picking champions(or thinking about picking up a champion), so long as i pick champions which have a >50% chance of "winning >50% of the time" I will on average win >50% of the time and that is really what we're after isn't it?
Lastly, isn't observational data purely speculative as to the true meaning behind the numbers?
No. An example. Suppose i want to know how tall my door is. I go and get a tape measure and i record the height of my door. I didn't build my door so i guess i don't know the true meaning behind the number? What if i measure 1000 times and then average the values? I would have a pretty good estimate of the height of my door. OK this is a bit remedial, because here we are measuring and not hypothesis testing. We know the model and its very simple.
But the differences between observational data and what we just did with my door isn't that far off. The main difference is that we're testing and not measuring(so we're looking at error rates mainly, and we're checking against a model whose distribution we know) and that we have more variables.
Observational data can be hard to interpret, especially if you don't know the underlying model, or if there are various effects which it doesn't make sense to talk about right now. This makes the statistics and interpretation more difficult, but not speculative.
Another way to say it is that correlation does imply causation. Yes, yes, i know your into to stats teacher told you otherwise, but they were wrong and/or being overly simple. Correlation implies that f(x) exist, x(f) exists, f(g(x)) [or x(g(f))] exists or some combination exists. If none of those things existed then we would not have any correlation. When doing stats on observational data you're mainly trying to make sure that you're not seeing x(f) or f(g(x)) [you might know these as endogeneity/reverse causation and spurious correlation], and that if you're looking at the right f(x) [and getting f(x) looked at in a correct way so that x(f) if it exists as well is not mucking up the scales]. When doing stats in controlled environments, because you can know that your control is exogenous, you can be sure that only f(x) exists, and so you're only trying to find the right model(well if you care about that accuracy)
One of the ways to informally ask yourself how strong your correlation results are with regards to causation is to simply look at the other functions. Do better players tend play MF? No, i doubt that. Though if they do we would have to ask why do only good players play MF and why they would not raise up in ranking. Is there a spurious correlation here? Does playing MF correspond with playing blue side and playing blue side corresponds to winning? Well, also probably no. Unless MF was such a contested pick that people were grabbing her first. But that isn't the case.
|
Damn, that may have been the most eloquent shut down I have ever read on TL.
Anyway, back to the matter at hand:
My split pen build was dumb and I dominate lanes a lot harder with a standard armorpen/armor/(mp5/MR)/(flat ad/lifesteal) page. I still think sorc boots are worth it sometimes, though, but the buildup to them is a lot harder than the buildup to zerks. You can also run full flat AD reds but I think with the changes to armor runes and the large amount of penetration you build on MF, the rune penetration is worth it. Adjust your last hitting accordingly under tower (auto-tower shot-auto for casters for the first couple levels) or go AD reds if you don't want to.
I have not done the math on it but I'm assuming based on experience. If someone can verify or show me why I'm wrong I would very much like to know because climbing diamond is going to be a little harder than blowing through plat and marginal advantages like runes are going to start to become more important.
|
On June 16 2014 16:02 Goumindong wrote:Show nested quote +On June 16 2014 13:14 SniperVul5 wrote: As a graduate student in epidemiology and biostatistics I'm appalled at the apparent lack of basic statistical inference from ZERG_RUSSIAN.
As a graduate student in biostatistics you should know pretty intuitively that a 60% win rate with 1000 trials would reject a 50% win rate even with a p value threshold corrected for multiple tests, you would certainly know that it was the case for the tens of thousands of MF games played each week/month in diamond. But biostats is easy stats so maybe that isn't true. To reiterate, the variance on a (1000 binomial distributions with a p=.5) /1000 (I.E 1000 coin flips averaged) is .025% So about 1% of the time we would expect that in 1000 trials, a champion who had a win rate of exactly 50% would display a win rate over 50.5%. Lets correct for multiple champions. Rather we want a p-value such that we would find 1 champion of 100 total over that value supposing. The 99.99% for 100 tests at 1000 trails corresponds to the 99.9% for 1 test at 1000 trials. Which is 3.62 Z value or about 50.57%. Of course we don't believe that champion win rates are precisely 50%, but we do observe that, outside of meta shifts/buffs which effect the champion, most champions do not see much more than 1-2% variation in their win rate across days which is pretty consistent with relatively constant champion powers. Show nested quote +1. The players using the champion are simply better in every way (people like WT are "outliers" that can make any champion look good) Unlikely. Show nested quote + 2. If a champion is picked more often, then the law of large numbers suggest that the win rate will regress towards the mean, which is ~50% given the match maker. MF win rates being higher than other ADs may simply be the product of less games played overall compared to the other ADs, which may make her win rate appear higher.
This is not true. I cannot even begin to reason why someone would think this was true. The negation is obvious. Suppose we have a champion which straight wins every game its played in. It does this because its so OP its literally impossible to lose. As the champion is picked more often its win rate continues to be 100%. OK so 100% is a degenerate distribution, but it holds true for any champion whose power implies a non-50% win rate. Note that the existence of champions who have above average win rates does not imply that some summoners must be at levels where they have higher win rates and are playing that champion. This is because not every summoner gets their champion each game even if they get their role the majority of the time. Show nested quote +Just looking at statistics alone isn't enough evidence to prove that the champion is good or bad. Fine, then our theory is "Miss Fortune is good because we have reason to believe so by looking at her kit" and we go and test our theory and we cannot reject it. And we have an alternate theory "Miss Fortune is average or below average" and we go and test that theory and holy christ we reject it pretty strongly. Now, it could be wrong. But the likelihood is not on your side to suggest it. We're way [i]way[i] past a 50/50 bet here even if a 50/50 bet is probably the p value we should be looking at. After all, if i am picking champions(or thinking about picking up a champion), so long as i pick champions which have a >50% chance of "winning >50% of the time" I will on average win >50% of the time and that is really what we're after isn't it? Show nested quote + Lastly, isn't observational data purely speculative as to the true meaning behind the numbers?
No. An example. Suppose i want to know how tall my door is. I go and get a tape measure and i record the height of my door. I didn't build my door so i guess i don't know the true meaning behind the number? What if i measure 1000 times and then average the values? I would have a pretty good estimate of the height of my door. OK this is a bit remedial, because here we are measuring and not hypothesis testing. We know the model and its very simple. But the differences between observational data and what we just did with my door isn't that far off. The main difference is that we're testing and not measuring(so we're looking at error rates mainly, and we're checking against a model whose distribution we know) and that we have more variables. Observational data can be hard to interpret, especially if you don't know the underlying model, or if there are various effects which it doesn't make sense to talk about right now. This makes the statistics and interpretation more difficult, but not speculative. Another way to say it is that correlation does imply causation. Yes, yes, i know your into to stats teacher told you otherwise, but they were wrong and/or being overly simple. Correlation implies that f(x) exist, x(f) exists, f(g(x)) [or x(g(f))] exists or some combination exists. If none of those things existed then we would not have any correlation. When doing stats on observational data you're mainly trying to make sure that you're not seeing x(f) or f(g(x)) [you might know these as endogeneity/reverse causation and spurious correlation], and that if you're looking at the right f(x) [and getting f(x) looked at in a correct way so that x(f) if it exists as well is not mucking up the scales]. When doing stats in controlled environments, because you can know that your control is exogenous, you can be sure that only f(x) exists, and so you're only trying to find the right model(well if you care about that accuracy) One of the ways to informally ask yourself how strong your correlation results are with regards to causation is to simply look at the other functions. Do better players tend play MF? No, i doubt that. Though if they do we would have to ask why do only good players play MF and why they would not raise up in ranking. Is there a spurious correlation here? Does playing MF correspond with playing blue side and playing blue side corresponds to winning? Well, also probably no. Unless MF was such a contested pick that people were grabbing her first. But that isn't the case.
So these are great points and I apologize to ZERG_RUSSIAN (whoever you are) for reacting the way I did. It was inappropriate given the above average quality of discussion (setting aside the fact that I shouldn't act the way I did in any discussion).
You are right in that biostatistics is easy stats because the focus is more towards predicting the biological mechanisms behind the numbers produced. For example we may look to attribute changes to wait times in the hospital to under-staffing, or poor productivity. Further tests would then be done comparing various hospitals across localities to better understand what is going on. Another example could be looking at the effect of newly developed drugs on decrease in systolic blood pressure and trying to link numerical differences to the drug modifications. Eventually we may look at odds ratios for developing X disease and think about how a new drug would affect one's odds compared to a reference. The statistics portion is not as strong with respect to the theory, which also explains why I didn't use hard number examples. However, the examples you posed are very interesting to think about and I'll keep them in mind in the future.
With respect to your other point with observational data, naturally we'd like to then test what we see in a more controlled environment. What I was trying to say was that right now, we don't have that type of environment, and that given what we have it's more difficult to interpret whether the higher win-rate is attributed to MF being OP or the other functions you mentioned. Perhaps after looking into those, we'd have more confidence in our interpretation but I wasn't fully convinced at the time.
I'm assuming from your discussion on the law of large numbers is that a truly strong champion will theoretically have >50% win rate regardless of number of trials, while average champions may fluctuate high/low but eventually reach ~50%. If MF truly is above average then I would see why it further supports your point over mine.
Once again, thanks for your response and my apologies to ZERG_RUSSIAN for my rude demeanor.
|
On June 17 2014 14:20 SniperVul5 wrote:
I'm assuming from your discussion on the law of large numbers is that a truly strong champion will theoretically have >50% win rate regardless of number of trials, while average champions may fluctuate high/low but eventually reach ~50%. If MF truly is above average then I would see why it further supports your point over mine.
Spoiled because its not about MF
+ Show Spoiler + Not quite. Specifically what we would be doing would be to look at a group of pmfs which take the value of 1 for P=f(X) and 0 for 1-P where X is the vector of champions and f is an unspecified function. Looking at MF's win rate we would be looking at a function where P=f(X|MF=1)
We don't know f(X|MF=1) and we more or less can't know it, though we can look at individual matchups easily enough.
We note that there exists a LLN which basically states that the average of a sum of random variables converges in probability to their weighted expectations.
This is saying that Miss Fortune's Win rate converges in probability to the sum of f(X|MF=1) weighted for the relative density of each possible game. That is; we look at X as a random vector and can use iterated expectations to say that E(WIN|MF=1) = MF's Win Rate
This win rate can change over days as the distribution of X the random vector changes and the overall win rate will converge in a similar way with distribution changes (or changes to the function, like with a buff or nerf). But this isn't helpful to us because what we are interested in specifically is how likely MF is to win a game in the current meta(basically this just means that we constrain ourselves to relatively stable and recent periods with few buffs.
This applies to every champion with a restriction such that P(Win|No info) = .5, or the sum of each champions weighted expectation will be equal to .5. In precisely the same way that f(X_1|MF=1) doesn't need to equal f(X_2|MF=1) we note that each champions expected win does not need to be equal to .5
Then we simply measure MF's win rate, though technically what we are doing is that we are gathering samples of the random events which occurred, random events with a pmf that takes the value 1 for P=f(X|MF=1) and 0 else.
Technically it is correct in that the variance of our complicated random variable is larger than the variance of a simple binary variable. But once we have 60,000 samples that barely matters anymore and if a champion is consistently winning a large percentage of games then we have very good evidence that they're strong. At the very least in the current meta. That is to say that yes, a champions current win rate is basically the only good definition of their general strength, with a champions conditional win rate as a slightly better definition for the given matchup.
Now, this is imperfect because it relies on the idea that the meta is exogenous from a champions win rate (which depends on the meta). However there is probably good evidence to suggest that the meta is exogenous. After all, if the meta depended on win rates we would expect that a champions counters would be played more often in response to first picking. And so either the meta has stabilized or we should see something that we don't see. The thing we should see but don't is win rates for champions moving; that only happens in specific times when champions are being figured out. If the meta is relatively stable then its endogeneity doesn't matter because it doesn't change.
The things which people say can get in the way don't seem like they can make any effect on this(technically we can put them into X, but that isn't helpful) or at the worst inform us as to her strength in a different way. If MF is played only by AD mains then AD mains have to be picking her for a reason. And we believe that AD mains pick champions who are strong at their position (because their goal is to win) and so if AD mains are picking MF then they must believe that MF is strong which they would not if they could not win with her. Which pretty much the definition of champion strength
PS about biostats
+ Show Spoiler +Biostats is not easy stats because it doesn't focus on theory. Biostats is easy stats because experimental data does not tend to have as many complications as observational data and the situations in which you need to look at do not require methods to get around those problems.
|
On June 17 2014 15:53 Goumindong wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2014 14:20 SniperVul5 wrote:
I'm assuming from your discussion on the law of large numbers is that a truly strong champion will theoretically have >50% win rate regardless of number of trials, while average champions may fluctuate high/low but eventually reach ~50%. If MF truly is above average then I would see why it further supports your point over mine.
Spoiled because its not about MF + Show Spoiler + Not quite. Specifically what we would be doing would be to look at a group of pmfs which take the value of 1 for P=f(X) and 0 for 1-P where X is the vector of champions and f is an unspecified function. Looking at MF's win rate we would be looking at a function where P=f(X|MF=1)
We don't know f(X|MF=1) and we more or less can't know it, though we can look at individual matchups easily enough.
We note that there exists a LLN which basically states that the average of a sum of random variables converges in probability to their weighted expectations.
This is saying that Miss Fortune's Win rate converges in probability to the sum of f(X|MF=1) weighted for the relative density of each possible game. That is; we look at X as a random vector and can use iterated expectations to say that E(WIN|MF=1) = MF's Win Rate
This win rate can change over days as the distribution of X the random vector changes and the overall win rate will converge in a similar way with distribution changes (or changes to the function, like with a buff or nerf). But this isn't helpful to us because what we are interested in specifically is how likely MF is to win a game in the current meta(basically this just means that we constrain ourselves to relatively stable and recent periods with few buffs.
This applies to every champion with a restriction such that P(Win|No info) = .5, or the sum of each champions weighted expectation will be equal to .5. In precisely the same way that f(X_1|MF=1) doesn't need to equal f(X_2|MF=1) we note that each champions expected win does not need to be equal to .5
Then we simply measure MF's win rate, though technically what we are doing is that we are gathering samples of the random events which occurred, random events with a pmf that takes the value 1 for P=f(X|MF=1) and 0 else.
Technically it is correct in that the variance of our complicated random variable is larger than the variance of a simple binary variable. But once we have 60,000 samples that barely matters anymore and if a champion is consistently winning a large percentage of games then we have very good evidence that they're strong. At the very least in the current meta. That is to say that yes, a champions current win rate is basically the only good definition of their general strength, with a champions conditional win rate as a slightly better definition for the given matchup.
Now, this is imperfect because it relies on the idea that the meta is exogenous from a champions win rate (which depends on the meta). However there is probably good evidence to suggest that the meta is exogenous. After all, if the meta depended on win rates we would expect that a champions counters would be played more often in response to first picking. And so either the meta has stabilized or we should see something that we don't see. The thing we should see but don't is win rates for champions moving; that only happens in specific times when champions are being figured out. If the meta is relatively stable then its endogeneity doesn't matter because it doesn't change.
The things which people say can get in the way don't seem like they can make any effect on this(technically we can put them into X, but that isn't helpful) or at the worst inform us as to her strength in a different way. If MF is played only by AD mains then AD mains have to be picking her for a reason. And we believe that AD mains pick champions who are strong at their position (because their goal is to win) and so if AD mains are picking MF then they must believe that MF is strong which they would not if they could not win with her. Which pretty much the definition of champion strength
PS about biostats + Show Spoiler +Biostats is not easy stats because it doesn't focus on theory. Biostats is easy stats because experimental data does not tend to have as many complications as observational data and the situations in which you need to look at do not require methods to get around those problems.
Once again thank you for the response. I have to admit I need to think through the explanation you gave a bit more but it was insightful in that it shows me I still have a long way to go to understand the statistics better.
With respect to biostats + Show Spoiler + I'd have to somewhat disagree with your reasoning, since biological data (particularly human trials) are arguably just as complicated, albeit for different reasons. In a non-inferiority trial comparing a new drug to a set standard, we have to adjust methodologies to cater towards our population, while making sure that they adhere to the regimen (setting aside other issues of contamination and/or adjustments for human diversity). While I acknowledge that I don't have the same level of expertise with respect to discussing the theories, we require significant methodological manipulations. The data is difficult to interpret in that sense and our methodology focuses more on the subjects as opposed to the calculations.
Edit: I am curious if there are more reference materials that I can get regarding our discussion. Always want to pick up on more knowledge.
|
Well, fundamentally you're describing survey methodology, not statistical methodology. Which is a part of statistics, but makes the actual statistics part easy, since you're basically controlling for the the things other people have to correct for.
Frankly i would say that the majority of the underlying theory and understanding you won't actually have to know as a biostatistician. You will either pick it up as you go (running into small problems that need small fixes until you've acquired a breadth of knowledge that informs the whole) or you will simply run the statistical tests and methods that others come up with in the same way that I cannot build the car i drive but it does get me places.
If you're looking to know more, it would be good to know how familiar with linear algebra, difference equations, and calculus? If you're very familiar then the various wikipedia entries aren't bad. Though i would not begin to understand how to go through the various articles in order to make sense of them from a theoretical standpoint and come out with a coherent framework.
Franky the best thing to do would be to take the set of undergraduate probability and mathematical statistics courses that your university statistics department offers. Its very unlikely that they will bung anything up. The problem with this, is that getting from undergraduate probability and mathematical statistics to graduate level theory takes a lot of time. If the mathematical statistics course does not require calculus its not the course for you. If the course on linear regression theory does not require linear algebra its not the course for you.
|
Alright, so how did the new patch affect everyone's favorite adc? From my understanding, the new bt is kinda meh, so I would be inclined to think she's not as strong as before. Anybody tried her extensively yet?
|
I'd argue that MF is actually stronger now that AD is harder to get. Early on AD's depend on spells for a good chunk of damage, so losing the increased damage from bonus AD hurts. A champ like MF who has good base damage and steroids benefits a bit, or rather is hurt less than others.
That's my hunch anyways, could be miserably wrong.
|
She's still strong... the cost of BT went up 250 gold but you get 10 more AD on it. I'm debating whether or not it's worth it to just go double dorans -> infinity edge though, now that the base AD is the same. IE just got a straight buff, BT is about the same or a little weaker, Merc Scimitar is a legit buy now in some games. It will take some time to come to a conclusion though, and she's probably about the same, but the dorans change back to lifesteal was good for her imo.
|
Is there any lane MF struggles with? Her high damage and grievous wounds make her quite an obnoxious lane, so i am wondering if there is any good way to shut her down?
|
On June 23 2014 11:42 Bam Lee wrote: Is there any lane MF struggles with? Her high damage and grievous wounds make her quite an obnoxious lane, so i am wondering if there is any good way to shut her down?
Caitlyn is a skill match-up. Tristana performs well against her, so do Quinn and Varus. I also remember having a tough time against Draven players back in the day, but they're so rare now I'm not sure I've come across a good one in months.
|
Quinn with either Thresh/Morgana/Leona is probably the hardest matchup because the blind disables 100% of your auto-q-auto
Trist has a strong level 6 all-in which can interrupt your ult plus a massive gapcloser for gank support.
Draven should get totally dunked unless you screw up huge by trying to trade with him before you have at least 2 ranks in E. In general against Draven you want to all-in a lot because his harass is much stronger than his commit. As always, support dependent, though, but a bit of jungle pressure + a well placed Make It Rain should make the lane quite easy as long as you don't let him get the item advantage.
A good Lucian is hard to deal with because he can cleanse your slow and avoid most of the damage from Make It Rain. As long as you don't eat a lot of Qs aimed at minions from him you should be fine, but play conservatively and aim for teamfights in Lucian matchups because Make It Rain into Bullet Time just totally owns ~DA CULLING~ in a team skirmish.
|
What's the point of 2 ranks in Make it Rain? The very high damage + the slow that, if well-timed, can force Draven to miss an axe?
Also The Culling has a shorter cooldown than Bullet Time, keep that in mind.
|
On June 23 2014 19:43 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: Quinn with either Thresh/Morgana/Leona is probably the hardest matchup because the blind disables 100% of your auto-q-auto
Trist has a strong level 6 all-in which can interrupt your ult plus a massive gapcloser for gank support.
Draven should get totally dunked unless you screw up huge by trying to trade with him before you have at least 2 ranks in E. In general against Draven you want to all-in a lot because his harass is much stronger than his commit. As always, support dependent, though, but a bit of jungle pressure + a well placed Make It Rain should make the lane quite easy as long as you don't let him get the item advantage.
A good Lucian is hard to deal with because he can cleanse your slow and avoid most of the damage from Make It Rain. As long as you don't eat a lot of Qs aimed at minions from him you should be fine, but play conservatively and aim for teamfights in Lucian matchups because Make It Rain into Bullet Time just totally owns ~DA CULLING~ in a team skirmish.
Against Lucian I just play the old reliable Q max, W second build. E is almost pointless because he can just dash out of it. I find going up against Lucian to be pretty safe as MF, Double-Up trades well with Lucian Q so harass is a wash, and the lower CD on Double-Up means by level 6 you should be able to get 2 off in an all-in (getting my second Q in an all in is what I miss most when I try your E-max). His E is just a bitch because he can escape your Make it Rain and Bullet Time so easily.
|
On June 23 2014 20:39 Alaric wrote:What's the point of 2 ranks in Make it Rain? The very high damage + the slow that, if well-timed, can force Draven to miss an axe? Also The Culling has a shorter cooldown than Bullet Time, keep that in mind.
He plays an E-max Miss Fortune against immobile ADCs (Twitch, Varus, Draven, Ashe, et al).
I've been testing it but I still miss having my second Q available to me in all-ins, I'm not convinced it's any good yet.
|
yesterday i ended up basically trading ults with lucian 1v1 in a teamfight and it was glorious, i think i actually lol'd. wish i had a build order i was confident in after the bt nerfs tho.
|
Yeah, I think in the Lucian matchup I'm going to rely on Q max. E is too unreliable against him when he can just dash it... although I do want points in it for teamfights, because a 65% slow at rank 5 is RIDICULOUS. I think it might be the highest AoE slow in the game. I think other skills may slow more for single target, but it does 310 damage or something at rank 5 plus a 65% slow. So maybe like 2-3 points in double up then switch to E max for Lucian MU.
|
lucian is so easy to trade with now, MF doesn't have a counter anymore IMO
as far as BT "nerf"
i've always build botrk IE PD on her, now I even get to add a youmoos to the equation
|
i tried going IE + ghostblade because there is some synergy between her playstyle and the AS/MS active (you obviously don't need attack or move speed during her ult), only a one game sample, but it didn't feel strong at all.
|
why would you build bork first on MF
;o
|
Singed's slow is stronger but it's shorter ranged, has a slight cast time iirc (the slow is applied when he sprays, not when the adhesive falls to the ground, but not sure about the leaning animation he does before) and doesn't have the juicy damage attached.
|
On June 24 2014 07:53 GreggSauce wrote: lucian is so easy to trade with now, MF doesn't have a counter anymore IMO
as far as BT "nerf"
i've always build botrk IE PD on her, now I even get to add a youmoos to the equation Well actually the statistics always had MF winning the matchup, he wasn't the problem. Just don't E max off the bat vs him.
Your build path is terrible though lol, BotRK is one of the worst possible AD items to build on MF first.
|
On June 25 2014 05:11 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 07:53 GreggSauce wrote: lucian is so easy to trade with now, MF doesn't have a counter anymore IMO
as far as BT "nerf"
i've always build botrk IE PD on her, now I even get to add a youmoos to the equation Well actually the statistics always had MF winning the matchup, he wasn't the problem. Just don't E max off the bat vs him. Your build path is terrible though lol, BotRK is one of the worst possible AD items to build on MF first.
what elo are you in?
|
On June 25 2014 05:11 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 24 2014 07:53 GreggSauce wrote: lucian is so easy to trade with now, MF doesn't have a counter anymore IMO
as far as BT "nerf"
i've always build botrk IE PD on her, now I even get to add a youmoos to the equation Well actually the statistics always had MF winning the matchup, he wasn't the problem. Just don't E max off the bat vs him. Your build path is terrible though lol, BotRK is one of the worst possible AD items to build on MF first.
Or ever, really. It was fantastic when it was 45 AD though.
By the by, I've been making TF a standard item on my MF now in place of PD or Shiv and it feels really nice.
General build order is BT - Greaves - LW - TF (zeal, phage, complete)
I get a Zeal before LW if I'm screwin around with extra E points (Q - E - W), since W at level 1 simply doesn't replace the missing AS from building Zeal as late as I do. But the build is very natural if you're doing Q - W - E skill order. TF procs on Q and I get a laugh every time I smash a squishy for 1/3rd health off a single Q once TF is finished.
|
now that bloodthirster is garbage maybe triforce first has some merit, maybe BF sword into TF so you actually have some ad and are taking advantage of the +5ad buff on bf sword.
|
On June 25 2014 07:05 GreggSauce wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2014 05:11 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:On June 24 2014 07:53 GreggSauce wrote: lucian is so easy to trade with now, MF doesn't have a counter anymore IMO
as far as BT "nerf"
i've always build botrk IE PD on her, now I even get to add a youmoos to the equation Well actually the statistics always had MF winning the matchup, he wasn't the problem. Just don't E max off the bat vs him. Your build path is terrible though lol, BotRK is one of the worst possible AD items to build on MF first. what elo are you in? http://na.op.gg/summoner/userName=5HATCOMBO
2206 is my estimated MMR in NA right now (click "calculate MMR"), I'm diamond 5 but I think I can make at least d3 by the time I play 120* ranked games [edit] wtf i already hit 100 =//[/edit]. I'm still getting +25~ a win but I had to move back to a place where the internet is shaky so sometimes I randomly lagspike or dc. Haven't been playing much lately.
|
so we're about equal then i just dropped to plat 1 kinda just trolled my elo to shit didn't think i'd drop out of diamond, idk i've been able to out duel all other adc's as mf by rushing botrk, i don't generally use conventional builds unless they are truly the best, nothing i've seen has proven to me that botrk isn't the best item for her
|
On June 25 2014 11:58 GreggSauce wrote: so we're about equal then i just dropped to plat 1 kinda just trolled my elo to shit didn't think i'd drop out of diamond, idk i've been able to out duel all other adc's as mf by rushing botrk, i don't generally use conventional builds unless they are truly the best, nothing i've seen has proven to me that botrk isn't the best item for her
How about some common sense?
She's a Q-based ADC. The more you can make her Q deal damage, the better off you'll be playing MF. I'm pretty sure that even with the nerf to BT she's STILL better off starting BT.
Like seriously, unless you're doing some silly E-max or E-second build (I still need to play more E max and second to give it a fair shake, but so far as I can tell it's still sub-par compared to Q-W-E), BT should be your go-to cheapest 80 AD. You can build LW next and by the time LW is finished you're level 10-11 with 2 points in W to make up for any lost attack speed from either Zeal or BorK. Then you can build the attack speed item of your choice (mine is TF, but PD, Shiv or even BorK work here) and finish with IE and GA...
|
On June 25 2014 11:58 GreggSauce wrote: so we're about equal then i just dropped to plat 1 kinda just trolled my elo to shit didn't think i'd drop out of diamond, idk i've been able to out duel all other adc's as mf by rushing botrk, i don't generally use conventional builds unless they are truly the best, nothing i've seen has proven to me that botrk isn't the best item for her Sure, but that doesn't change the fact that MF's main role in teamfights is to get a good E+R off, and BotRK gives 25 AD while BT gives, for only 300 more gold, 80 AD. Her ult doesn't have a ratio, but it DOES apply W, which gives you a ridiculous amount of AD scaling as magic damage--essentially the same thing. You do a LOT more damage with BT in teamfights even if your ability to 1v1 is questionably better with BotRK. There are only a few situations where I would take BotRK over BT on MF and they're usually when I'm like 1v1 with Renekton or something.
Anyway, my opinion on the matter is that BT's stronger. I'm pretty sure the math will back me up, especially because BotRK loses efficiency against targets with low health and/or squishies.
|
On June 25 2014 14:25 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2014 11:58 GreggSauce wrote: so we're about equal then i just dropped to plat 1 kinda just trolled my elo to shit didn't think i'd drop out of diamond, idk i've been able to out duel all other adc's as mf by rushing botrk, i don't generally use conventional builds unless they are truly the best, nothing i've seen has proven to me that botrk isn't the best item for her Anyway, my opinion on the matter is that BT's stronger. I'm pretty sure the math will back me up, especially because BotRK loses efficiency against targets with low health and/or squishies. not that it matters because lol botrk, but the %current hp factor has to be huge in teamfights when you get a solid ult off and everyone is less than 50% hp before you even start attacking anyone.
|
Current is current. Not total. So it'd do almost nothing. I also don't think it even stacks on-hit stuff, just impure shots. Least that's what the wiki says.
|
On June 25 2014 16:44 zer0das wrote: Current is current. Not total. So it'd do almost nothing. yeah that was the point, the passive is probably worse on mf than any other ad in the game.
|
On June 25 2014 14:12 Nemireck wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2014 11:58 GreggSauce wrote: so we're about equal then i just dropped to plat 1 kinda just trolled my elo to shit didn't think i'd drop out of diamond, idk i've been able to out duel all other adc's as mf by rushing botrk, i don't generally use conventional builds unless they are truly the best, nothing i've seen has proven to me that botrk isn't the best item for her How about some common sense? She's a Q-based ADC. The more you can make her Q deal damage, the better off you'll be playing MF. I'm pretty sure that even with the nerf to BT she's STILL better off starting BT. Like seriously, unless you're doing some silly E-max or E-second build (I still need to play more E max and second to give it a fair shake, but so far as I can tell it's still sub-par compared to Q-W-E), BT should be your go-to cheapest 80 AD. You can build LW next and by the time LW is finished you're level 10-11 with 2 points in W to make up for any lost attack speed from either Zeal or BorK. Then you can build the attack speed item of your choice (mine is TF, but PD, Shiv or even BorK work here) and finish with IE and GA...
I hope you know that Q isn't actually on-hit and thus doesn't give you any lifesteal. It can't crit either but IE is still more cost-efficient and the benefit of a crit is far better than the little lifesteal that bt gives now. If you want your Q to hurt, a brutalizer will be better for laning. Overall, this patch has been a nerf to MF but if you still want to play her then IE or Trinity suits her better than BT. BOTRK is terrible as well because her Q and W scales with AD while only W scales with AS. Also, E max is generally better against all but Ezreal, Tristana, and Lucian.
Tbh, I wouldn't play her in the current patch. Caitlyn and Twitch can build IE and be more effective because her kit simply doesn't optimize the crit/AS stats.
|
From the wiki:
- Both hits will apply on-hit effects.
- On-next-attack effects will only apply to the first target, such as Spellblade.
- Counter Strike, Riposte and Aegis Protection can block either hits.
- If Miss Fortune is blinded, both hits will miss.
- Spell shields will block either hit.
- Neither hits of Double Up can critically strike.
In this context, lifesteal is an on-hit effect (see Yasuo).
|
On June 25 2014 17:27 AsianEcksDragon wrote:Show nested quote +On June 25 2014 14:12 Nemireck wrote:On June 25 2014 11:58 GreggSauce wrote: so we're about equal then i just dropped to plat 1 kinda just trolled my elo to shit didn't think i'd drop out of diamond, idk i've been able to out duel all other adc's as mf by rushing botrk, i don't generally use conventional builds unless they are truly the best, nothing i've seen has proven to me that botrk isn't the best item for her How about some common sense? She's a Q-based ADC. The more you can make her Q deal damage, the better off you'll be playing MF. I'm pretty sure that even with the nerf to BT she's STILL better off starting BT. Like seriously, unless you're doing some silly E-max or E-second build (I still need to play more E max and second to give it a fair shake, but so far as I can tell it's still sub-par compared to Q-W-E), BT should be your go-to cheapest 80 AD. You can build LW next and by the time LW is finished you're level 10-11 with 2 points in W to make up for any lost attack speed from either Zeal or BorK. Then you can build the attack speed item of your choice (mine is TF, but PD, Shiv or even BorK work here) and finish with IE and GA... I hope you know that Q isn't actually on-hit and thus doesn't give you any lifesteal. It can't crit either but IE is still more cost-efficient and the benefit of a crit is far better than the little lifesteal that bt gives now. If you want your Q to hurt, a brutalizer will be better for laning. Overall, this patch has been a nerf to MF but if you still want to play her then IE or Trinity suits her better than BT. BOTRK is terrible as well because her Q and W scales with AD while only W scales with AS. Also, E max is generally better against all but Ezreal, Tristana, and Lucian. Tbh, I wouldn't play her in the current patch. Caitlyn and Twitch can build IE and be more effective because her kit simply doesn't optimize the crit/AS stats.
I hope you know that Q actually DOES apply on-hit effects and thus DOES give you lifesteal (I think I would have noticed that it wasn't applying lifesteal sometime during the thousand or so games I've played on her). It can't crit though, you're right about that.
Also, you don't build TF instead of BT, you build them both. You would build TF in place of a PD or Shiv and rely on W to subsidize the missing AS, but it doesn't really matter because Q already does that, plus it's applying TF procs.
I also don't agree that E max is generally better against anything. While I've noted that I need to try it some more and get a real feel for it, I'm of the opinion that at best, E should be maxed second behind Q. In the 10 or so games I've maxed E first and get into engagements I'm BEGGING for my Q to get off CD in order to finish people off that I'm certain my normal Q max would have secured. I AM leaning towards going E second instead of W now though, that's starting to feel really strong to me.
|
I stand corrected. However, IE is still more cost efficient and crit is far better than that crappy shield that BT give. I don't know why you would build BT over anything because it has lost the main stat that gave it an edge over other AD items: its 30 extra AD.
As for Q vs. E max. If you're dueling against someone who can't dash out of the E, then he will not only take all of the damage from it, but the 65% slow will allow you to hammer him with at least 2 extra autos. If it's a Draven, he will drop his axe and get destroyed. If you can't secure a kill despite the slow, and your ult then I doubt maxing Q would be anymore beneficial since you will be sacrificing a lot of chasing power and damage for a bit more CD.
|
Just because they don't have a dash doesn't guarantee they take the full brunt of E. And specifically I'm talking about laning where more often than not they take about half the damage from an E. So I'm looking at a level 5 or 6 exchange/all-in. E at level 3 applies a 45% slow and deals 200 damage over it's entirety, but most players will only stay in the area of effect for about half of its duration. E at level 1 is still enough of a slow that it all but guarantees me one more Q at level 3, plus it still deals up to 90 damage. That extra Q will deal 160 + at least 30 damage from impure shots (Usually more because I've hit another auto or two in between Q's) not accounting for Mastery bonuses (At level 6 I generally have Doran's, BF and scepter, but I've only accounted for Doran's and a BF as well). So that's at least 190 damage to make up for E at level 3, PLUS if my level 1 E deals just 10 damage, it's a wash. BUT Q on a lower CD is always going to be better and more useful. It's going to deal more damage over time, always, than having a few extra points in E.
Like look, I've been playing this champion for a long time and LOTS of games. I generally know when I've missed out on a kill I "should" have had when I mess around with my skill order. I know that the guy getting away with 50 health because I had to wait 2 more seconds for my Q is a kill I would have had if I hadn't maxed E and maxed Q instead.
That all said, I used to max W second but more and more I'm of the opinion it should be E now. Those E's in mid-game teamfights are pretty boss, but Q is still the bread and butter damage dealer. I want it on as low a CD as possible, as early in the game as possible... pretty much always.
As to IE vs BT, I get BT early in the game because it costs less. 300 gold that early in the game is a big difference, and as MF I'm not as reliant on auto attacks as, say Cait or Jinx or Twitch. The vast majority of the damage I'm dealing is coming from Q, which doesn't crit. So yes, I'd much rather be 300 gold faster in the early game. I'd rather have 80 AD, lifesteal, a small shield, and Boots over 80AD, 25% crit, and a crit damage mod. I'd rather be faster and have more sustain. But that may just be personal preference.
|
I still prefer E max for most lanes that aren't Lucian. I use it to pick off supports a LOT in conjunction with my own because it makes stuff insanely easy to land for your partner in lane. If they land something first then it just 100% punishes, too.
And whoa that's crazy you must farm like a god if you have a BF Sword and dorans at 6 that consistently. It's not like I last hit well or anything, but I only miss like 1 a wave ish... usually I go double dorans into BF nowadays too, but still, having vamp + BF + Dorans at 6 seems farfetched to me.
|
On June 27 2014 05:39 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: I still prefer E max for most lanes that aren't Lucian. I use it to pick off supports a LOT in conjunction with my own because it makes stuff insanely easy to land for your partner in lane. If they land something first then it just 100% punishes, too.
And whoa that's crazy you must farm like a god if you have a BF Sword and dorans at 6 that consistently. It's not like I last hit well or anything, but I only miss like 1 a wave ish... usually I go double dorans into BF nowadays too, but still, having vamp + BF + Dorans at 6 seems farfetched to me.
I usually clear wave and buy BF sword about halfway through level 5. Something like around 7:30 I expect to have a BF sword. At 7 minutes I expect to have 50-60 CS (75-80 at 10 minutes), and 120 by 15 minutes at my personal rate of farming. Obviously shit happens in lane, so I consider 100 CS at 15 the absolute bare minimum, and usually I'll have a kill/assist (or death, lol) in such a case. I think you only need around 40 CS at 7:00 to consistently get a BF sword at 7:30 (assuming you hit your cannons).
Edit: Ya, 114 gold per minute, times 6 minutes (1:30-7:30) is 684. You need 866 gold from CS which I always estimate at 20/minion average = 43, we'll say 45 minions. That's pretty easy to hit consistently at 7 minutes....
Edit 2: For even more detail, consider that Minions meet at bot lane at ~2:00. 5 minutes worth of minion waves is 10 waves of minions, with a cannon every 3rd wave, that's 63 possible CS at about 7 minutes. Shouldn't be an issue to get that BF before lvl6 unless you're forced out of lane and need to buy second Doran's. Which in higher ELO wouldn't really surprise me.
I was wrong about scepter, that's usually on second back along with boots around level 7-8. Although sometimes I have a longsword in addition to the Doran's and BF.
|
|
mf is in an awkward spot this patch, definitely op but probably hurt the most out of everyone by the BT nerf.
|
On June 27 2014 10:54 krndandaman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 00:02 Nemireck wrote:On June 25 2014 17:27 AsianEcksDragon wrote:On June 25 2014 14:12 Nemireck wrote:On June 25 2014 11:58 GreggSauce wrote: so we're about equal then i just dropped to plat 1 kinda just trolled my elo to shit didn't think i'd drop out of diamond, idk i've been able to out duel all other adc's as mf by rushing botrk, i don't generally use conventional builds unless they are truly the best, nothing i've seen has proven to me that botrk isn't the best item for her How about some common sense? She's a Q-based ADC. The more you can make her Q deal damage, the better off you'll be playing MF. I'm pretty sure that even with the nerf to BT she's STILL better off starting BT. Like seriously, unless you're doing some silly E-max or E-second build (I still need to play more E max and second to give it a fair shake, but so far as I can tell it's still sub-par compared to Q-W-E), BT should be your go-to cheapest 80 AD. You can build LW next and by the time LW is finished you're level 10-11 with 2 points in W to make up for any lost attack speed from either Zeal or BorK. Then you can build the attack speed item of your choice (mine is TF, but PD, Shiv or even BorK work here) and finish with IE and GA... I hope you know that Q isn't actually on-hit and thus doesn't give you any lifesteal. It can't crit either but IE is still more cost-efficient and the benefit of a crit is far better than the little lifesteal that bt gives now. If you want your Q to hurt, a brutalizer will be better for laning. Overall, this patch has been a nerf to MF but if you still want to play her then IE or Trinity suits her better than BT. BOTRK is terrible as well because her Q and W scales with AD while only W scales with AS. Also, E max is generally better against all but Ezreal, Tristana, and Lucian. Tbh, I wouldn't play her in the current patch. Caitlyn and Twitch can build IE and be more effective because her kit simply doesn't optimize the crit/AS stats. I hope you know that Q actually DOES apply on-hit effects and thus DOES give you lifesteal (I think I would have noticed that it wasn't applying lifesteal sometime during the thousand or so games I've played on her). It can't crit though, you're right about that. Also, you don't build TF instead of BT, you build them both. You would build TF in place of a PD or Shiv and rely on W to subsidize the missing AS, but it doesn't really matter because Q already does that, plus it's applying TF procs. I also don't agree that E max is generally better against anything. While I've noted that I need to try it some more and get a real feel for it, I'm of the opinion that at best, E should be maxed second behind Q. In the 10 or so games I've maxed E first and get into engagements I'm BEGGING for my Q to get off CD in order to finish people off that I'm certain my normal Q max would have secured. I AM leaning towards going E second instead of W now though, that's starting to feel really strong to me. wait, so is TF normal on MF now? i've been seeing a lot of success with mf this patch going ie shiv lw as my core but tf seems interesting
It's a personal preference, I certainly don't think it HURTS in place of Shiv or PD. I just really like that HUGE Q shot that you can land up to every 3 seconds.
|
BT is faster than IE, true. However, BT doesn't really give that much more than BF + Pickaxe. I understand that MF relies heavily on AD more so than crit. In fact, I was a heavy proponent of a double BT end game build prior to this patch, foregoing crit and AS entirely and I regrettably admit that IE is better than BT even on MF whose skillset make crit kind of a waste due in large to her channeling ult.
Graves probably got hit harder than MF though. MF at least has high base damage and AP scaling. I still wouldn't play either in the current state of the game because if I'm going to build IE then I'd rather play Cait or Kog. Although if I must play her then I will choose either starting IE or TF/Brutalizer.
|
On June 27 2014 15:06 AsianEcksDragon wrote: BT is faster than IE, true. However, BT doesn't really give that much more than BF + Pickaxe. I understand that MF relies heavily on AD more so than crit. In fact, I was a heavy proponent of a double BT end game build prior to this patch, foregoing crit and AS entirely and I regrettably admit that IE is better than BT even on MF whose skillset make crit kind of a waste due in large to her channeling ult.
Graves probably got hit harder than MF though. MF at least has high base damage and AP scaling. I still wouldn't play either in the current state of the game because if I'm going to build IE then I'd rather play Cait or Kog. Although if I must play her then I will choose either starting IE or TF/Brutalizer.
Funny you mention that, I tried that double BT endgame prior to this patch (I'm assuming your build was BT - Greaves- LW - BT - IE? Shiv? PD? - GA Since you say you passed up AS entirely) in LOTS of games (Both BT as 6th item and in place of PD and IE) and found that the crit was sorely missed in the end-game.
No matter what you START with, you eventually are going to need those crit multipliers in the end-game to shred opponents and really amplify her burst. 30 extra AD to pass up a 25% crit chance with a damage modifier LATE game is pretty silly just to make her skills do <30 extra damage.
It's not like I'm passing up IE entirely, I just don't agree that it's the best first item on MF. You say it's just a BF+Pickaxe but the sustain it provides is so so important at that stage of the game. I prefer having more sustain and faster movespeed in the early-mid game rather than no sustain but a small chance to deal a burst of damage. I want to be able to stay out on the map generating gold for as long (and thus as quickly) as possible, and I feel like BT provides that where IE doesn't.
|
can double BF sword into IE-BT be a thing on mf now?
|
|
On June 27 2014 22:34 chalice wrote: can double BF sword into IE-BT be a thing on mf now?
it could work but it'd be scimitar not BT, the issue is MF always did well with attack speed, people just didn't want to believe it
my attack speed MF consistently outduels everyone including more "normal MF" builds. I really don't know why anyone would ever build her otherwise when her constant damage is so high
|
|
So I'm currently having lots of success as of the last patch with MF going standard runes/masteries and E maxing against everyone but Ezreal, Lucian, and Graves, who you should max Q against because they can just dash/blink out. Trist can go either way, I tend to E max in that matchup because Rocket Jump is so much more unforgiving than Ez/Luc/Gr's escapes. Vayne I E max still because she just rolls over and dies to slows and your E + ult burst, plus at level 6 she will be invisible and AoE still hits her.
Anyway, double dorans -> BF Sword -> Infinity Edge -> LW/BT/PD/BC/TF/GA/Banshee's depending on the game. IE is strong, BT is underrated because that shield makes you quite tanky, PD/TF/Shiv are all decent options if you need to maneuver more (I prefer PD and rarely get TF), LW after IE if they have a lot of armor incoming, and PD or BT if not.
The trick to winning really hard as MF is just buy lots of mana potions. I routinely come back to lane with 5 mana pots.
Brutalizer's not worth it anymore. I realized that the 10 extra armor penetration doesn't make up for raw damage in most games. I didn't do the math on it and I'm not going to. Cleaver isn't that good in the first place, Ghostblade is okay, but I'm convinced that BT is just better. 80 AD is a LOT of attack damage, and you're getting LW anyway.
|
Is essence reaver worth it for the mana and CDR? you mention you spend a lot of money buying mana pots, and the stats are much better now.
|
On July 17 2014 09:52 scFoX wrote: Is essence reaver worth it for the mana and CDR? you mention you spend a lot of money buying mana pots, and the stats are much better now.
I was enjoying how it felt when it was first released with 50 AD. I'm looking forward to getting out there with the 80 AD version. MF is a mana-hungry biatch and the CDR and Mana regen on Reaver are great tools. Many times in those games I was spamming my skills on farm and still had nearly full mana for any teamfights that broke out, it's an underrated tool on MF.
|
It's a decent option but it would help more with forbidden idol as a component and lower combine cost. The fact that you need to complete it first to get the mana for spamming makes laning for her more or less the same as before when you don't build it. I would still get IE because BF Sword + Pickaxe grants more lane dominance than BF + Vamp.
|
I don't think you can fit it into the build, it's pretty unforgiving on slots. IE/BT are too strong, you need a PD late game, LW is non-negotiable, boots are mandatory, and MF has no escapes so you generally want GA. Late game I sell my boots for either triforce or zephyr.
Honestly, mana potions do the same thing and I ALWAYS come back to lane with 5 of them if I can afford it.
|
After a 40 minutes games playing MF with the max E build (AD/AS runes, 2 dblades -> IE+boots -> LW -> zerks -> PD -> banshee -> PD, QEWEER, R>E>Q>W, with the LW second and no zerkers I prob should have maxed W second though) I ended up dealing ~14k magic damage to champions out of ~50k total, so 28%.
Seemed pretty high, although the game was pretty chaotic (lots of 1v1s, only one of them built MR, also bunch of bronzes in my team and mostly mid-high silver in theirs, it was through teambuilder) and I ended up not auto-ing that much in fights because my clicking speed/accuracy is atrocious, so E was a lot of my damage even in midgame skirmishes and I never really got money ults either (apart from 2 on 3-4 people). Does MF do a lot of magic damage usually? It has to be lower than 28% of her total champion damage still?
|
These are the percentages from my last 10 MF games:
18.3 28.4 22.1 31.9 24.1 18.3 18.2 27.5 21.8 29.3
That's an average of 23.9% Magic Damage. But I build Triforce instead of PD, so my numbers are going to be a little bit inflated from the AP off Tri.
Remember that W and Ult both apply some Magic Damage as well.
|
On August 10 2014 02:44 Alaric wrote: After a 40 minutes games playing MF with the max E build (AD/AS runes, 2 dblades -> IE+boots -> LW -> zerks -> PD -> banshee -> PD, QEWEER, R>E>Q>W, with the LW second and no zerkers I prob should have maxed W second though) I ended up dealing ~14k magic damage to champions out of ~50k total, so 28%.
Seemed pretty high, although the game was pretty chaotic (lots of 1v1s, only one of them built MR, also bunch of bronzes in my team and mostly mid-high silver in theirs, it was through teambuilder) and I ended up not auto-ing that much in fights because my clicking speed/accuracy is atrocious, so E was a lot of my damage even in midgame skirmishes and I never really got money ults either (apart from 2 on 3-4 people). Does MF do a lot of magic damage usually? It has to be lower than 28% of her total champion damage still?
She can yes. All of the scaling damage on her ult is magic. And all of the increasing damage on her ult is magic as well (I.E. the first wave does base damage plus one stack, the second wave does base damage plus two stacks).
Triforce will actually decrease the portion of magic damage you do since it gives less raw AD and gives more spellblade(which is physical) whereas the majority of MF's magic damage is on impure shots AD scaling and E base damage. Plus the AP scaling on her ult is physical damage rather than magic damage.
The more you're able to consistently auto attack the more of your damage will be magic, up to about 30% of your standard auto attack damage. Depending on your total AD and level your ultimate will be between 30-50% magic damage scaling towards the high end on a full charge and potentially more if you tagged people with impure before the ult.
20-30% seems right to my eye but i don't have a bunch of games that i can look through my history to do so.
On July 18 2014 07:44 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: I don't think you can fit it into the build, it's pretty unforgiving on slots. IE/BT are too strong, you need a PD late game, LW is non-negotiable, boots are mandatory, and MF has no escapes so you generally want GA. Late game I sell my boots for either triforce or zephyr.
Honestly, mana potions do the same thing and I ALWAYS come back to lane with 5 of them if I can afford it.
Why GA and not QSS->Scimitar?
|
Mmmm I tend to like GA better because it's easier for me and it provides my team with a window to save me rather than just relying on my reflexes. Perhaps if I was better I would like Scimitar, but I'm not god-tier on my reaction times and the visual of having a GA makes your opponents think a lot harder about engaging than having a scimitar does.
Also you tend to have enough raw AD by the time you get GA that an extra 80 wouldn't make you kill in less shots, and the extra resists + BT health is pretty substantial against AD. Depends, though. I might go QSS against like Lissandra but GA vs like Talon.
|
So apparently I'm pretty high ranked for MF on lolskill:
+ Show Spoiler +
Might be able to go Master tier with her, but I just got dumped on by Phaxen with Vayne/Sona vs MF/Morg. The sustain Sona provides in that lane is ridiculous and I might have to max Q in Sona matchups to be able to duel, because whittling down with E doesn't work well against her.
|
Wellllllll I just broke the top 100 with MF and I'm 27th in NA (#12 NA/#49 world as of today tho). Time to give some various thoughts on how to play her:
ALWAYS BAN YASUO. This is one of the most important things to do if you're going to pick MF. Not only does Windwall block all of your shit, he can chase you down even with your passive on and you just have to duel him at that point.
E max is standard, but Q max is good in some lanes. If you're against Sona in particular you should Q max because you need to do immediate burst against her to win a fight. If she shields well, you usually can't trade unless your support is really good.
Hard champions to play against in lane: Kogmaw, Sona, Tristana, Veigar support (was doing ranked 5s with my team and we ran into a team in challenger promos who ran Lucian/Veigar bot. Couldn't do anything at all against them, even with a Morgana support.). Consider picking an easier matchup against these if your opponents are competent. You can always win with a good jungler/support helping you out but these four in particular are bitches.
Most of your damage comes from landing a good E then getting an auto-q-auto off. Activate W only when you're going all-in.
Do NOT blow ult on waves if you are E maxing, almost ever. The cooldown is pretty high early and you can accomplish nearly the same thing with E + Q/W as far as clearing creeps goes. Don't ult dragons or barons unless you're trying to steal them. Your ult is probably the strongest tool in your kit and having it up is really important. E + R at level 6 does like 700 damage if they take the full channel of both.
The very first thing you do every single game from blue side is buy dorans pot trinket and run straight to the tribush. Ward it and move towards the small bush unless they have a hook, in which case go around red to the opening of wraith. This covers your red completely from invades unless they do some dumb flash dragon wall bs which is fine because you should be able to flash/heal out and they just wasted a lot more than you.
If you're on purple side, buy dorans pot trinket and rush to the back of blue side's red buff. Drop a ward in there and retreat to blue entrance. If they have a hook you need to be careful but because of strut you should easily be safe if you go immediately.
Start Q, try to push if you can. I miss a ton of cs on the first one or two waves and I want to improve on that. If I were a mechanical god I would get them all. Once you get W you can start aggressively trading unless they have a heal or Janna. When playing against Thresh you need to be mindful of hooks. If strut is down, don't be in hook range. You probably will end up getting hooked at some point and you may need to consider just going all-in if it does happen. Sometimes you win. If it doesn't look like you can get out because of Flay or The Box then just focusing the lower of the two targets while standing in place so you don't take Box damage. E max owns Thresh pretty hard, he'll often take the full duration of it trying to position against you, and it helps a bit by slowing.
Bush control is important as MF, but you don't want to be standing in them and it's basically on your support/your trinket ward. Having a full range of direction to dodge is important. Creep block is real and be aware of the possibility as it is extremely unforgiving to lose strut + take harass + get creep blocked on the way out.
Double Up is good harass, but I basically only use the second bounce when I know they HAVE to run because of Make It Rain threat. Otherwise I auto-q-auto their face instead. The damage difference isn't that huge.
As far as items go, I basically always go double dorans -> boots + up to 10 pots -> BF sword (can get earlier if you farm well or pick up a kill) -> Pickaxe -> IE -> Zerks/Zeal -> PD -> BT/LW depending on what they have. Lately tanks have pretty much fallen out of favor in my games so I rarely get LW before BT.
The higher up in skill level you get, the harder time you will have in lane. Good Lucians seem to always punish me early and I expect to be down quite a bit of CS in certain matchups. This is fine because your damage output is so much higher than theirs is in teamfights, as long as the teamfight isn't too spread out and disjointed. Pick your fights and when you can't get them, do something constructive like farm or heal/shop.
|
i do really enjoy how you can safely get a ward down in your opponent's jungle lvl 1 thanks to your passive just by not being afk when the game starts.
|
I bought mf and the arcade skin on my alt acc, I really dig that skin and I think I1d like to learn playing with her. I suck hard time with adcs, but she seems somewhat forgiving.
Anyway, is E maxing really a thing? The base damage and the slow is great indeed, but no one will stand through it, and I1d run out of mana pretty fast. Or do you just push the wave 0-24?
Also, how is brutalizer and youmuu/black cleaver on her?
Is a no crit, "ad caster" build viable? Basically it relies in good ults and to not waste any seconds when activating W.
Clarity or Heal?
|
I also run 22/5/3 on MF for the mana regen. I'm slightly less tanky in all-ins but having that extra mana is better than a little more HP, in my opinion, because I use bluepill liberally after shoving and buy a ton of hp/mana pots to keep myself high.
Oh and to answer your question, yeah, I E-max in every lane that I'm ahead and only Q-max from behind. I have been thinking about switching to Q max in lane and E max after level 6 for teamfight utility. 65% slow too strong to pass up and it's like 300+ dmg aoe.
I don't like brutalizer unless I'm really, really behind--the reason being that I can buy a BF sword for like 200 more, and saving for BF sword is HUGE on MF. I routinely stay on double dorans + boots/pots until I can get BF Sword instead of buying pickaxe or vamp in lane. Yeah, I play her more like an AD caster until I get phantom dancer, at which point I become a hybrid caster/adc. I take heal, always, because saving your support is important too!
Note: I have been thinking about changing from armor penetration to flat AD. It would make last hitting a LOT easier and I tend to be bad at that early on...
|
On August 12 2014 20:18 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote:
Might be able to go Master tier with her, but I just got dumped on by Phaxen with Vayne/Sona vs MF/Morg. The sustain Sona provides in that lane is ridiculous and I might have to max Q in Sona matchups to be able to duel, because whittling down with E doesn't work well against her.
Sona just beats Morg and there is little you can do about it except hope their sona is bad
|
I've been starting to play around with Q max in ranked and it's allowing me to bully a lot harder. The tradeoff is that I generally won't be able to do as much damage in teamfights until E is maxed. However I have noticed that my mana has been easier to manage and I find myself being able to hit a lot more Q bounces off of casters. Verdict is still out but we dominated a Lucian/Lulu lane as MF/Blitz and zoned a Trist that started W really hard. I'm starting to like it a lot more though and I think the higher in skill I get the more important it is to be able to trade at any time and not just on my terms. I'll keep you updated on it.
|
I've been trying E first a lot more often since seeing it recommended so often by ZERG_RUSSIAN but I'm still of the opinion that Q max should be standard. However, E second has replaced W second.
Against any ADC with an escape I go normal Q max.
Against immobile ADC's my first 6 levels are typically Q - W- E - Q - E - R followed by Q-max.
RUSSIAN: Have you tried giving up the Attack speed Quints in favour of more damage/arpen?
I'm running 8 AD Reds (1 Crit), 1 AD Quint, and 2 ArPen Quints (5%). One of the things that makes it so comfortable is that you can 2-hit Caster Minions with 2 Dorans and a BF sword. I personally find that Q and W do more than enough to compensate for the AS missing from my runes.
|
On August 17 2014 15:44 Nemireck wrote: I'm running 8 AD Reds (1 Crit), 1 AD Quint, and 2 ArPen Quints (5%). One of the things that makes it so comfortable is that you can 2-hit Caster Minions with 2 Dorans and a BF sword. I personally find that Q and W do more than enough to compensate for the AS missing from my runes.
You can use arpen marks and quints if you like but the other way around gives less stats.
|
On August 17 2014 15:44 Nemireck wrote: I've been trying E first a lot more often since seeing it recommended so often by ZERG_RUSSIAN but I'm still of the opinion that Q max should be standard. However, E second has replaced W second.
Against any ADC with an escape I go normal Q max.
Against immobile ADC's my first 6 levels are typically Q - W- E - Q - E - R followed by Q-max.
RUSSIAN: Have you tried giving up the Attack speed Quints in favour of more damage/arpen?
I'm running 8 AD Reds (1 Crit), 1 AD Quint, and 2 ArPen Quints (5%). One of the things that makes it so comfortable is that you can 2-hit Caster Minions with 2 Dorans and a BF sword. I personally find that Q and W do more than enough to compensate for the AS missing from my runes. I have, but honestly at the level I'm playing at if I don't have the attackspeed and they do, I lose trades. I've been experimenting with my pages and I think my new standard is actually 2 aspd quints, 1 ad quint, 9 ad reds, 9 armor yellows, 4 aspd blues and 5 flat mr blues.
Before this I couldn't out-trade Lucian on straight auto-attacks and now I can. I wasn't thinking about W's stacking effect. Attack speed is better right now, I'm thinking, but I'm still testing it. I'll keep you informed.
|
I have a hard time csing under turret without 2 AD quints. I think it's because of the dblade nerf because I never had this problem back when 2 ls + 1 AD was common.
|
|
|
|