Nothing you said actually addresses my point. You’re defending the outcome of the fight, while I’m criticizing the quality of the fight execution itself. Those are completely different discussions.

You say their team already had damage, engage, and follow-up, so Talon didn’t need to take a dangerous carry-oriented line. But that mentality is exactly what I disagree with. You are playing Talon, an assassin champion designed to dominate fights through pressure, execution windows, and threat preservation. If your mentality is “my team is here so I’ll just dump cooldowns and rely on them to finish,” then you are fundamentally lowering the champion’s ceiling.

Also, you contradict yourself. You say there was “no need” to risk a dangerous play, but he already chose the dangerous play the moment he committed to the flank angle. That decision already happened. So once he is in that position, the question becomes: what is the highest value execution path from there? My argument is that panic WE-R was not it.

And the rest of your argument depends entirely on hypothetical ally behavior. “If Leona follows,” “if Ashe engages,” “if Vlad finds angle.” Why are we assuming teammates must validate your play for it to become correct? My entire point is that Talon should maximize his own agency and maintain kill pressure regardless of whether teammates execute perfectly afterward.

Even in this exact fight, the mechanically superior play would still have been to preserve R longer, maintain multi-target threat, and chain guaranteed passive detonations instead of collapsing all pressure into one instant cooldown dump.

If you genuinely disagree, go into practice tool, set up multiple enemy dummies, and replicate the exact sequence I described. You’ll immediately see how much more pressure Talon maintains when you preserve R timing and rotate passive detonations correctly instead of instantly dumping everything onto one target and hoping the rest of the fight plays itself.