Talk:Vladimir/@comment-4600199-20120211231931/@comment-201.52.153.12-20120212180405

are you slow or something? you've not addressed why my "Your argument don't hold neither" at all.

"Riot doesn't nerf champs only if ppl complain about them." my point! it's the first thing they should look for! if a champion's presence is causing distress.

"Instead, Vlad got buffed because people complained about it." you're putting the carriage in front of the horses there. people complained about it because he desperately needed a buff!

"But they realized how it is too strong after the buff." ... vladimir was not, by any standards "too strong". that's why there were no complaints about him in the first place; even if he was as by your example, being too strong exclusively in 2000+ elo games is not very significant to the game as a whole considering he was almost a joke elsewhere. sorry but you'd need far more than "being picked a lot" to objectively justify that claim, specially when people were picking him a lot right after a buff, to try him out once more. moreover, the point remains that there ARE champions people do complain about and those should have been looked at before vladimir. that is the point!! whether his nerf has merit or not is secondary to the fact that it should not by any means have taken precedence over much more seemingly pressing issues!

"Have you ever see a second Everlynn or Morde nerf after the big nerf? Do you know why? Because no one play them... " ... you are slow. you're presenting that as if it's a justifiable, or even good thing?! one of the cornerstones to game design, as far as lol is concerned, is to make every champion as balance, playable and played as conceivably possible, if any of them is clearly up or op, that harms the game! vladimir was nowhere close to op and people don't play evelynn because she is bluntly up!

"Morde got even buffed because no one played him anymore after the overnerf. " as did vladimir...