User blog comment:TheTobarMethod/Gold and Income Overhaul?/@comment-5001455-20130623062315/@comment-11206869-20130624083026

So, in the face of these "obvious flaws", you still think this is a viable change? Tell me more about how your "most hated aspects of LoL" include " Riot's ignorance of TRUE game balance", mate.

Your changes would require an entire rework of the game; essentially start from scratch and build a new game from the ground up to ensure balance. A pointless task, as the game is fine as it is, and no game dev in their right mind would take on such a thing.

Regardless, you still hold this view that people are "missing it" or are "wrong", when,  unfortunately, you guilty of what you accuse.

Increasing farm incentive removes incentive to actually attack your enemy until such a point is reached where you are sufficiently farmed. This DIRECTY contradicts what Riot has done in the past few patches. Even the upcoming patch is placing more focus on actually fighting as opposed to farm (the increase of gold gained from "feeders"/people on a death-streak). You are saying that attacking the enemy puts them behind, thus providing the incentive, but then you change your tune completely and say that gold gaps are closed easier. So why risk putting yourself behind by early aggression if the gap you create is closed as easily as you propose later? Simple answer: nobody would - everyone would just farm until late game team fights/push to end the game at 18. Lanes would be passive and boring, and late game champs like Ryze would become unviable, since they scale with time as opposed to gold. Bruisers like Lee Sin and Darius who excel early game would become less viable, and popularity of carries would increase as they outscale everyone with items (and by extension, gold).



I'm expecting a response similar to the previous one, a 'all you are doing are listing flaws I already know of'. Well, they are obvious, yet important. You know of them, yet you look to ignore them. With all these flaws, I ask a simple question: what is the point of this suggestion? Would a doctor suggest cutting off your hand to remove the pain of a paper-cut? Would a game dev revamp an entire game to solve a problem that isn't really a problem?

As a student of philosophy, I'd expect less contradiction from your arguments, sir.