: I'm honestly disappointed in Riot for buffing crit itemization back up to improve the state of Marksmen. ADC is supposed to be the late game class Riot! Not the two-item class! You want to buff ADCs? Just _give us late game back_.
> [{quoted}](name=Metal Janna,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Aa1zzwg5,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-02-20T20:12:40.413+0000) > > I'm honestly disappointed in Riot for buffing crit itemization back up to improve the state of Marksmen. > ADC is supposed to be the late game class Riot! Not the two-item class! > You want to buff ADCs? Just _give us late game back_. Oh no ADCs can play the game now, oh no please riot fix i want them to farm for 35 mins so they can win/lose one teamfight and finish the game.
Yara0 (NA)
: Going through the rework page all of kayles skins look more like kayle then her new base skin.
Every skin that riot makes money off looks better than the base version of the character. WoW, almost like its intended to be like that
: Everyone suddenly "loves" the old Kayle, meanwhile she is one of the top 4 least played champions.
Its the classic boards circlejerk, someone made it to the hot page whining about her armor like its the end of the fkin earth and 10 more copycats had to make the same post just to feel good about the up votes. In reality literally no one ever played the champ nor did it have anyone talking about it, she was completely forgotten and wouldve remained so if not for this rework that I personally think is awesome gameplay wise and fine aesthetically.
Moody P (NA)
: the difference is that ranged already counters melee by default because melee is inherently risky and ranged isn't. you can beat wind wall by not opening with your strongest spell and understanding your CDs vs his. anything you do will be up at least twice as often as wind wall. sorry that there's a melee champion who doesn't autolose to ranged tumor
> [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=9HhWmgB8,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2019-02-16T15:07:48.058+0000) > > the difference is that ranged already counters melee by default because melee is inherently risky and ranged isn't. > > you can beat wind wall by not opening with your strongest spell and understanding your CDs vs his. anything you do will be up at least twice as often as wind wall. > > sorry that there's a melee champion who doesn't autolose to ranged tumor Oh moody dont you ever feel tired of being wrong, third thread I see your comment hidden cause of down votes
Moody P (NA)
: I don't care just tell me if he's fun or not
> [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=1c1jB48e,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-02-14T23:14:54.702+0000) > > I don't care just tell me if he's fun or not Oh moody your shitposting knows no bounds
SEKAI (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=HàrrowR,realm=EUW,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=Nsx0WJHb,comment-id=0000000000000000000200000000,timestamp=2019-02-14T15:13:34.990+0000) > > If you think you can prove everything you believe with one study then i'll just tell you to google "Norewegian Equality Paradox" and tell you i've won cause damn oxford,cambridge and harvard did studies confirming males and females biologically have different interests which leads to different hobbies. > > Also why do you speak of "traditional views" like its a bad thing and where do you even get the idea that most people are raised by following religous rules, in moder day there's really not a lot of true believers left, yes you can say that Europe and USA are christian and say that this is 1 billion christians but how many of them are really believers, followers of the bible, church goers etc. You are putting a big umbrella under all of them, hell maybe you could even say you're stereotyping about 70% of the Earths population (Christians,muslims,hindus, buddhist), shame on you man, this is why i hate liberals like you, hypocrisy at its finest. > > "DONT STEREOTYPE PEOPLE HE YELLED" As he was sterotyping 70% of the planet. > > And yes, i'm not religious, but i'd rather live in a monastery than a country like Sweden with Censorship, pc agenda, and crazy ideologies spewed as the ultimate truth, feminism and liberalism is your new religion, you just don't see it No, that study does not prove male and female "biologically" have different interests which leads to different hobbies. And it also isn't done by either Oxford, Cambridge, nor Harvard, but by Leeds Beckett University and the University of Missouri last time I checked. The research as far as I know, makes ZERO mention, statement, or reaching conclusion of any sort that involves inherent and "biological" explanations. It only notes the career disparity observed between the 2 sexes, and makes no attempt looking into their causality due to being out of the scope of their research subject, being whether or not higher national gender equality index results in higher female participants in STEM. The causation could be biological, sociological, and anything in-between, and it's NOT within the scope of the study. The study actual conclusion however, finds that women participates in and graduates from STEM in higher percentages in nations with lower national gender equality index because the said nations are usually poorer, making the higher paying and more secure career prospects of STEM more attractive than they would in some welfare states where social security is high regardless. And by being more "gender equal", it's measured on the basis of work, health, time, money, knowledge, and power (something like that) as basis for whether the 2 sexes have "equal power to shape the society". Because they gotta quantise and measure it somehow. However, what it can not measure, is the degree of social conditioning and the influence of traditional views. A nation can entirely have men and women sport the same accessibility to all work options, same level of health and accessibility to medical attention, same amount of time in work, with the same wage prospects with no gendered pay gap, same level of access to education, and holding the same political and social power, or at least roughly equal in most of those regards (remember, it doesn't have to have the full mark to be #1, it just needs to have a higher mark than others), and still be rife with traditional views influencing people's career path and personal choices. Having higher securities, accessibility, options, etc doesn't mean social stigma, expectations, and pressure would cease to exist. If anything "gender equality index" measures the gender equality of government and policy makers given it's what the index is directly measuring, and less about measuring the given society and its culture. In the end of the day, none of this proves anything "biological". You invented this part from a study that's only tangentially related but was about something else that was only interested in discerning SPECIFICALLY why nations with lower gender equality index (that doesn't measure cultural equality as explained) has higher women pursuing STEM subjects than the otherwise. The study I raised does a far better job at showcasing the cultural aspect in action over the supposed biological factors. Because it's what the study was interested in researching, unlike this study which was about something else. ......... Lastly, you're using a fundamentalist talking point of what a religious person is supposed to be with your "there's really not a lot of true believers left [...] yes you can say that Europe and USA are christian and say that this is 1 billion christians but how many of them are really believers". No, if someone identifies as a religious person and a part of a given religion group, for all its worth, that's all it needs to say someone is religious. No one needs to pass a test in religion to be acknowledged as being religious. The real hypocrisy is denying someone's religion because you think they aren't religious enough, not someone identified as religious being counted as so. You might have a bit more ground if you were to question the reliability of the total number of Muslims instead, given afaik some Middle Eastern government for whatever reason has a tendency to default newborns as Muslims on their identity paper and stuff to that nature, so you might make the argument and claim that offsets the population count of Muslims to some extent. But still in the end of the day, it still wouldn't change the fact a majority of the people in this world are directly religious, and more if we're also including ones being culturally religious (isn't directly religious, but have ideals influenced by it) which is kinda everywhere. And, I only bring the religions into this not only because the influences of the largest religions can be found in a good majority of all human population but also because the largest religions all have gendered worldview as per the relics of previous eras (the same reason why I bring up the term "traditional view"), and would inevitably either overly or covertly raise their children with those cultural and social biases either in the conscious or subconscious mind. ......... Finally, if Sweden has any "crazy ideologies" and for some reason undesirable to live in, it would be because it's a culturally deeply and insanely racist nation on par to even the more socially troubled developing nations despite being one of the most developed, that continues to deny it and make up nonsense trying to justify it. Sweden is only ""pc"" in their self-promotion propaganda. """PC""" is also just a dumb word anyway. It's only a word used today because many people have no idea how oppressive the governments and how heavy the social stigma/consequences for every trivial things were even in the freest of states just a couple years prior. These people are just nostalgic for a supposed better time period that never really existed, or at least obviously nowhere near the level of "cool" they think it was. If I would rather anything, I'd rather live in a time of today where say, transgenders are finally recognised (which has ample both scientific and simple social decency reason for their acknowledgement, just that people selectively ignore and diss sensibility, evidences and studies when it's on the topic and outcome they don't like; business as usual), and not in a time and place where even Monty Python can somehow ended up getting banned for nearly 30 years and well into the late 2000s, or in 1940s where even children's cartoon were insanely racist, or in the 80s and 90s where people die to HIV like flies like some fucking plague because governments convinced themselves that HIV only affect gay people (which is completely false) and utterly refused to treat the state-emergency epidemic for a decade.
> [{quoted}](name=SEKAI,realm=OCE,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=Nsx0WJHb,comment-id=00000000000000000002000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-14T16:28:52.075+0000) > > No, that study does not prove male and female "biologically" have different interests which leads to different hobbies. > Why dont you just watch the damn documentary before making a 2000 page essay. Its funny how you see what you want to see, the point of the documentary is that in a free and egalitarian country with tons of government backed incentives for woman to go into STEM they mostly opt out of it and choose HR, teaching or a career in medicine, how you managed to turn this around into a cultural thing beats me. I really couldnt be bothered to read all of your comments, "If I would rather anything, I'd rather live in a time of today where say, transgenders are finally recognised (which has ample both scientific and simple social decency reason for their acknowledgement" but this caught my eye. Why do people get so obsessed about transgeder issues when they make up maybe a 0.01% of the population is beyond me, the only reason SJWS like you focus on it so much is cause its linked to gender and sexual orientation, you know, the BASIS OF EVERYTHING in your universe. Maybe, just maybe, you'd be better off arguing for better ways to help and treat people with disabilities, there's blind,deaf,mute,handicaped people in the world and your side of the aisle is busy fighting for gender neutral bathrooms, just piss where you want there's fucking people in a wheelchair that can't go to places cause the damn building doesn't have a proper ramp .
SEKAI (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=HàrrowR,realm=EUW,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=Nsx0WJHb,comment-id=00000000000000000002,timestamp=2019-02-14T01:11:59.629+0000) > > Can you prove this? Have you done research? is there any research except what you came up with your own? > > Video gaming started becoming popular only in the last 20 years, when i was a kid i was playing doom and i played SEGA with my sister, at some point she stopped playing and i continued gaming, no one forced her and she's the farthest thing from a "traditional gender role" whatever that made up bs term is. > > is it possible maybe that girls just aren't into video games as much? is it possible maybe that they are more into books or tv shows? My gf reads a lot and watches a lot of tv shows that i've never even heard off, she just likes it, i guess i was opressed by traditional gender roles when i was a kid so i was left out of the TV shows and books club. > > Does everything need to be a product of the tyranical patriarchy to you? Dont these girls have a will of their own and maybe most of them for some reason lean more towards other activities, especially social ones than video games? Maybe they just see it as a waste of time (like most of my female friends comment on when they hear me and my friends talk about video games) > > You sound pretty sexist bro, girls can stand up for themselves and aren't so weak minded that you need to step in and defend their honor by saying traditional gender roles are the cause of all of their problems ( problems percieved by you, i guarantee you 99% of the female population world wide don't give a rats ass about a women video game team) Since when pointing out the fact that social norms and social condition exists is me being "sexist" or whatever? I'm sorry but, people aren't born and grown in a vacuum. We are raised in an environment filled with many "old" values (it's a wrong way to put it, what I mean to say is more that the environment is full of traditional views and newer views that often were extension of the traditional views), ofc traditional gender role is just gonna be one of those things that condition us. I mean, for crying out loud, in just counting the largest THREE religions we're already talking about 70% (SEVENTY PERCENT) of the world's population, and you don't need me telling you that they tend to be a bit conservative when it comes to raising children; then we have to consider the people culturally influenced by religions, too. I'm sorry, but it's clear as day that most people are raised and conditioned by traditional views. Maybe your household weren't. Well, good for you. But projecting that onto the rest of the world is highly inaccurate. And if you have to make up some of those "innate differences", all your answers are found in this little study cheekly named _"Checkmate? The role of gender stereotypes in the ultimate intellectual sport"._ In this study, 42 male and female player pairs (total 84 subjects) matched in chess online and offline, matched for ability, within a controlled environment. The 2 settings controlled go as follows: 1. When matched online and anonymous, female players were misled to believe they could be playing against either the male or female participants, when in reality they were only ever playing against male opponents. 2. When playing offline and face to face, female players were only matched with other male players. In other words, the 2 setups are almost identical, but they get to control the switch of the gender stereotypes in the participant's psyche. And what do we get, female players play significantly worse in setting 2 than setting 1 despite facing the same set of opponents and sometimes even face the very same opponent they'd just had online. This definitively proves the existence of an influence from social conditioning regarding gender, which is deeply tied to stereotypes. The influence of gender stereotypes on someone's self esteem over certain subjects which in turn influence their choices such as what they're "into". ......... To chalk everything up to some major set-in-stone innate differences is just highly disingenuous, not to mention just silly.
> [{quoted}](name=SEKAI,realm=OCE,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=Nsx0WJHb,comment-id=000000000000000000020000,timestamp=2019-02-14T03:25:23.315+0000) > > Since when pointing out the fact that social norms and social condition exists is me being "sexist" or whatever? > > I'm sorry but, people aren't born and grown in a vacuum. We are raised in an environment filled with many "old" values (it's a wrong way to put it, what I mean to say is more that the environment is full of traditional views and newer views that often were extension of the traditional views), ofc traditional gender role is just gonna be one of those things that condition us. I mean, for crying out loud, in just counting the largest THREE religions we're already talking about 70% (SEVENTY PERCENT) of the world's population, and you don't need me telling you that they tend to be a bit conservative when it comes to raising children; then we have to consider the people culturally influenced by religions, too. I'm sorry, but it's clear as day that most people are raised and conditioned by traditional views. > > Maybe your household weren't. Well, good for you. But projecting that onto the rest of the world is highly inaccurate. > > And if you have to make up some of those "innate differences", all your answers are found in this little study cheekly named > _"Checkmate? The role of gender stereotypes in the ultimate intellectual sport"._ > > In this study, 42 male and female player pairs (total 84 subjects) matched in chess online and offline, matched for ability, within a controlled environment. The 2 settings controlled go as follows: > > 1. When matched online and anonymous, female players were misled to believe they could be playing against either the male or female participants, when in reality they were only ever playing against male opponents. > 2. When playing offline and face to face, female players were only matched with other male players. > > In other words, the 2 setups are almost identical, but they get to control the switch of the gender stereotypes in the participant's psyche. > > And what do we get, female players play significantly worse in setting 2 than setting 1 despite facing the same set of opponents and sometimes even face the very same opponent they'd just had online. This definitively proves the existence of an influence from social conditioning regarding gender, which is deeply tied to stereotypes. The influence of gender stereotypes on someone's self esteem over certain subjects which in turn influence their choices such as what they're "into". > > ......... > > To chalk everything up to some major set-in-stone innate differences is just highly disingenuous, not to mention just silly. If you think you can prove everything you believe with one study then i'll just tell you to google "Norewegian Equality Paradox" and tell you i've won cause damn oxford,cambridge and harvard did studies confirming males and females biologically have different interests which leads to different hobbies. Also why do you speak of "traditional views" like its a bad thing and where do you even get the idea that most people are raised by following religous rules, in moder day there's really not a lot of true believers left, yes you can say that Europe and USA are christian and say that this is 1 billion christians but how many of them are really believers, followers of the bible, church goers etc. You are putting a big umbrella under all of them, hell maybe you could even say you're stereotyping about 70% of the Earths population (Christians,muslims,hindus, buddhist), shame on you man, this is why i hate liberals like you, hypocrisy at its finest. "DONT STEREOTYPE PEOPLE HE YELLED" As he was sterotyping 70% of the planet. And yes, i'm not religious, but i'd rather live in a monastery than a country like Sweden with Censorship, pc agenda, and crazy ideologies spewed as the ultimate truth, feminism and liberalism is your new religion, you just don't see it
SEKAI (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=HàrrowR,realm=EUW,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=Nsx0WJHb,comment-id=000000000002,timestamp=2019-02-14T01:00:40.342+0000) > > You do realize there's no Stereotype Board Meeting that decides what stereotypes to come up with next? These things form naturally and most people know that they are mostly made up of anecdotal evidence and not a hard proven fact that X applies to all Y . > > Also every group of people ever in history has a stereotype to them, that doesn't mean that every person on this damn planet is a carricature, now im not defending stereotypes, they dont apply to all people of that group and are mostly negative and unwarranted, but asking for people not to stereotype is crazy, cause A) people don't sit down and make stereotypes up and B) Its going against human nature, 10k years ago a stereotype about some tribe or group could save your life, its a natural instinct to have information about a certain group, problem is our brain doesn't want to overcomplicate things so it doesn't tell you 3% of that group act this way, it just tells you hey that group is known for this and that, act accordingly The naturalistic fallacy of "it's our nature" is dumb because: Just because we have our nature, it doesn't mean it's something worth keeping today. Humans have a lot of innate things that raise concerns if we assess them, stereotypes is one, but there are things like cannibalism, too. Cannibalism is a useful trait to have in the wild, which is why it's so prevalent in the animal kingdom and is also possessed and practiced by humans since our inception; why fuss over food when there's one right next to you, amiright? But ofc, it would be wrong of me to assume such trait natural to humans is something worth keeping in our society. Same deal. Stereotype is the act of making up your own answers based on your immediate observation via almost-baseless generalisation and assumption, and you don't need me to tell you just how stupid it is. Assumption is the direct opposite of investigation, it's inherently an anti-intellectual process. It may have existed as a convenience but only just that, an utterly dumb convenience that ultimately means very little in use unless you thrive by dwelling in intellectual mediocrity. There is also a very BIG difference between BEING AWARE OF stereotypes and be the one that use stereotypes which are likely to have been made by someone else in the first place. You can imagine which one of the 2 make better decisions if you believe stereotypes could be used as a part of the decision making. And the worst part of stereotype is not stereotype itself because then we'd at least be just talking about something that's ultimately "meh". But rather, the worst part is how it's how abused. A lot of the "stereotypes" are not only highly untrue but a lot of times it's straight up fabricated to serve an ulterior motive, usually in an attempt to slander and paving way for other nasties. They can be actively fabricated by via good ol' bullshitting ("black people are dumber because this skull shape and that" blah blah blah), or they can be passively fabricated by being selective based on a bias (where due to a historically preconceived and surviving stereotypes against say, black people, the black druggies get busted multiple times more often despite doing drugs in the same rate as say, white in USA, and is laser-focused despite being of a smaller population constituting only 10% of the total population. And we're not even gonna talk about how unproportionally high rate black people in US get wrongly convicted or that police seems to get unusually trigger-jumpy when around black people). Then there's the opportunists that benefit from the abuse of stereotypes, notably the media and the news; especially news and their highly stereotype-driven and biased selection process on which news to even report, as well as how they are reported when they finally choose to report it (For an example: Do you know that say, Muslims in the US alone, receive about 7000 hate crimes in 2017 and is on the rise by about 1000 every year for the last few years, with the only point of reference being the hate crimes against black and jewish people numbering at """only"" 2000 and 900 respectively? Well, me neither until I searched it up myself, because the news is too busy portraying Muslims as bad people). The result is that stereotypes only ever increase in number, and they also become more enforced COVERTLY due to the sheer amount of subconscious exposure. That's the problem.
> [{quoted}](name=SEKAI,realm=OCE,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=Nsx0WJHb,comment-id=0000000000020000,timestamp=2019-02-14T02:25:03.563+0000) > > The naturalistic fallacy of "it's our nature" is dumb because: Just because we have our nature, it doesn't mean it's something worth keeping today. Humans have a lot of innate things that raise concerns if we assess them, stereotypes is one, but there are things like cannibalism, too. Cannibalism is a useful trait to have in the wild, which is why it's so prevalent in the animal kingdom and is also possessed and practiced by humans since our inception; why fuss over food when there's one right next to you, amiright? But ofc, it would be wrong of me to assume such trait natural to humans is something worth keeping in our society. Same deal. > > Stereotype is the act of making up your own answers based on your immediate observation via almost-baseless generalisation and assumption, and you don't need me to tell you just how stupid it is. Assumption is the direct opposite of investigation, it's inherently an anti-intellectual process. It may have existed as a convenience but only just that, an utterly dumb convenience that ultimately means very little in use unless you thrive by dwelling in intellectual mediocrity. > > There is also a very BIG difference between BEING AWARE OF stereotypes and be the one that use stereotypes which are likely to have been made by someone else in the first place. You can imagine which one of the 2 make better decisions if you believe stereotypes could be used as a part of the decision making. > > And the worst part of stereotype is not stereotype itself because then we'd at least be just talking about something that's ultimately "meh". But rather, the worst part is how it's how abused. > > A lot of the "stereotypes" are not only highly untrue but a lot of times it's straight up fabricated to serve an ulterior motive, usually in an attempt to slander and paving way for other nasties. They can be actively fabricated by via good ol' bullshitting ("black people are dumber because this skull shape and that" blah blah blah), or they can be passively fabricated by being selective based on a bias (where due to a historically preconceived and surviving stereotypes against say, black people, the black druggies get busted multiple times more often despite doing drugs in the same rate as say, white in USA, and is laser-focused despite being of a smaller population constituting only 10% of the total population. And we're not even gonna talk about how unproportionally high rate black people in US get wrongly convicted or that police seems to get unusually trigger-jumpy when around black people). Then there's the opportunists that benefit from the abuse of stereotypes, notably the media and the news; especially news and their highly stereotype-driven and biased selection process on which news to even report, as well as how they are reported (Do you know that say, Muslims in the US alone, receive about 7000 hate crimes in 2017 and is on the rise by about 1000 every year for the last few years, with the only point of reference between the hate crimes against black people numbering at """only"" 2000? Well, me neither until I searched it up myself, because the news is too busy portraying Muslims as bad people). The result is that stereotypes only ever increase in number, and they also become more enforced COVERTLY due to the sheer amount of subconscious exposure. > > That's the problem. Please,do you expect me to read all this, if its in line with your other responses i'd expect stereotypes to be a product of traditional gender roles XD
Jamaree (NA)
: I still to the life of me don't understand why some people want Fortnite to just die, did they do something or is it just hate of the game by prox of the community?
> [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=OULvWEXU,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-12T18:47:52.038+0000) > > I still to the life of me don't understand why some people want Fortnite to just die, did they do something or is it just hate of the game by prox of the community? Fortnite SUPER mainstream, i mean celebrities are filming themselves playing it, so i kinda get the hate even though i play it, its like me hating on mainstream music cause i was always into metal/rock/rap
SEKAI (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=AIQ,realm=NA,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=Nsx0WJHb,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T18:22:41.101+0000) > > Slow down buddy. > Stereo type: A widely held but fixed and oversimplified image or idea of a particular type of person or ***thing***. > > That ***thing*** being, ***all female teams are really bad****. He's not wrong. Please tell me the all female team that won anything in LoL. If that's not the case. > > They must break this Stereotype for others to see them as different. Unfair? Sure, but it doesn't change the fact that it's true. > Yes, they must make the effort to destroy this stereo type, not only for their sake, but also for all female gamer proving that it's possible to compete at the highest level regardless of gender. > Unfortunately, I don't think these are the girls to do it, but I hope I'm wrong. > > No one is insulting them.... (yet). We just know based on history how this goes. That's the stereotype. > > Quick example: If you go passed a stop light, the stereotype is Red\Yellow\Green. If one of those lights are blue that is breaking the stereotype. Their is nothing insulting/dehumanizing about this, it's just a fact. > Likewise there is nothing insulting/dehumanizing about hoping they break the stereotype that all female gamer teams fail. (If anything it's the opposite hes hoping for the best.) Stereotype utterly ignores context, and often is used as the context itself in a self-referencing way. Or they just made up nonsense to fill in the gaps and rationalise their way around things. Stereotypes are almost entirely made up by bullshit. Girls are far less present in video game competition scene simply because they not only have no social culture surrounding it owing to traditional gender roles that discourages them from participating, but also because the gaming culture have been actively pushing them out like the good ol' treehouse business. Stereotypes see nothing of this, it just links the already shallow observation to be the cause itself and goes "why girls not in game competition? Must because they aren't made to be" or simply tread into the realm of fiction and fill in the blank by going "well that's because girls are just naturally and forever bad at games" and ringing to some pseudoscience if they are bothered enough (but not enough to actually be bothered with reality). By ignoring context entirely, stereotypes are a highly reductionist worldview that is both invalid and high dishonest and thus pointless. Outside of its pointlessness, many stereotypes are weapons created as political vehicles and have little to no basis in reality. Eastern Asian's stereotypes for instance, have gone from "hypermusculine" to "hyperfeminine" in a handful of decades and currently exists in this limbo where they simultaneously and somehow only have the worst aspects of both. The "Jewish nose" has so little basis in reality that not even 1 quarter of the Jewish population has the said nose nor is it even a unique trait of them. The concept of race has no scientific basis as evident by the fact there is a higher genetic variance WITHIN the so called "races" than in-between, and it gets even stupider if you look at how the classification metric have arbitrarily changed from its initial already arbitrary inception over the centuries. The higher crime rates of say, black people in US is often chalked up to their "nature" by stereotypes while utterly ignoring historical, social and economical reasons, as well as the very simple fact that a heavy bias exists in the US culture and by extension, the police force where they dedicate a significantly higher amount of resource targeting black criminals which ofc leads to more black criminals arrested but it doesn't mean that blacks are that more likely to be criminals (this is also why despite white and black people smoking weed in roughly the same rate, black people are statistically 3 times more likely to be arrested for it). Etc etc etc. Then worst of all, stereotypes place the burden of "prove me wrong" onto individuals subjected to stereotypes (which as we've already explored, don't bother a single bit with context and is also often created for political purposes with little to 0 basis in reality), effectively charging someone as guilty until proven innocence in social terms. A person has to go out of their way to prove that stereotypes don't apply to them or else they would be seen as nothing but a caricature and not an actual person. Now questions arise, WHY SHOULD someone break a stereotype, THAT YOU CREATED, for your amusement? Why should anyone be required to impress you first before anything? Why should individuals be representatives of those who have the slimmest to no connection with them, and not be representatives of just themselves? And why should the whatever subject chosen as a part of the stereotype, which as discussed often entirely arbitrary, be avoided in the first place, just because you said so? Etc etc. Why can't girls just have a team and play in the pro scene, but no instead they have to go somewhere with it to "prove their worth"? Does anyone question all the countless all male team failing to make out anything of worth in every single video game competition, and charge them to prove their worth as make gamers? So why is this on the girl gamers? #If you haven't noticed, the problem with stereotypes is precisely because it's a product of smearing and DOUBLE STANDARD. There is no rational reason whatsoever, to even bother with stereotypes.
> [{quoted}](name=SEKAI,realm=OCE,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=Nsx0WJHb,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T18:59:07.614+0000) > > > Girls are far less present in video game competition scene simply because they not only have no social culture surrounding it owing to traditional gender roles that discourages them from participating, but also because the gaming culture have been actively pushing them out like the good ol' treehouse business. Can you prove this? Have you done research? is there any research except what you came up with your own? Video gaming started becoming popular only in the last 20 years, when i was a kid i was playing doom and i played SEGA with my sister, at some point she stopped playing and i continued gaming, no one forced her and she's the farthest thing from a "traditional gender role" whatever that made up bs term is. is it possible maybe that girls just aren't into video games as much? is it possible maybe that they are more into books or tv shows? My gf reads a lot and watches a lot of tv shows that i've never even heard off, she just likes it, i guess i was opressed by traditional gender roles when i was a kid so i was left out of the TV shows and books club. Does everything need to be a product of the tyranical patriarchy to you? Dont these girls have a will of their own and maybe most of them for some reason lean more towards other activities, especially social ones than video games? Maybe they just see it as a waste of time (like most of my female friends comment on when they hear me and my friends talk about video games) You sound pretty sexist bro, girls can stand up for themselves and aren't so weak minded that you need to step in and defend their honor by saying traditional gender roles are the cause of all of their problems ( problems percieved by you, i guarantee you 99% of the female population world wide don't give a rats ass about a women video game team)
SEKAI (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=PrisonNightmare,realm=NA,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=Nsx0WJHb,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-12T17:57:42.469+0000) > > Lets hope they can break the stereotype/curse these types of teams have had in the past. The fact some people have to break stereotypes is unfair in and of itself. You can make up stereotypes for basically any and everything and then have the audacity to demand the targets of those ""stereotypes"" to exert extra effort over complete nothing just to show you that they're an actual human and not a caricature that you MADE FOR YOURSELF. If I get insulted by some rando on the street, I am in no obligation to prove that their insult is incorrect nor would anyone say that I am assumed lesser just because I don't bother with the insult. Similarly, no one should be burdened with breaking stereotypes which they only ever exist as insults or worse, "positive" insults which is far more vile with its passive aggressive approach. The very existence of stereotype is stupid. They exist for a reason alright, for the reason that you're reaching for an excuse to dehumanise another person and that's it.
> [{quoted}](name=SEKAI,realm=OCE,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=Nsx0WJHb,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-02-12T18:00:29.901+0000) > > The fact some people have to break stereotypes is unfair in and of itself. > > You can make up stereotypes for basically any and everything and then have the audacity to demand the targets of those ""stereotypes"" to exert extra effort over complete nothing just to show you that they're an actual human and not a caricature that you MADE FOR YOURSELF. > > If I get insulted by some rando on the street, I am in no obligation to prove that their insult is incorrect nor would anyone say that I am assumed lesser just because I don't bother with the insult. Similarly, no one should be burdened with breaking stereotypes which they only ever exist as insults or worse, "positive" insults which is far more vile with its passive aggressive approach. > > The very existence of stereotype is stupid. They exist for a reason alright, for the reason that you're reaching for an excuse to dehumanise another person and that's it. You do realize there's no Stereotype Board Meeting that decides what stereotypes to come up with next? These things form naturally and most people know that they are mostly made up of anecdotal evidence and not a hard proven fact that X applies to all Y . Also every group of people ever in history has a stereotype to them, that doesn't mean that every person on this damn planet is a carricature, now im not defending stereotypes, they dont apply to all people of that group and are mostly negative and unwarranted, but asking for people not to stereotype is crazy, cause A) people don't sit down and make stereotypes up and B) Its going against human nature, 10k years ago a stereotype about some tribe or group could save your life, its a natural instinct to have information about a certain group, problem is our brain doesn't want to overcomplicate things so it doesn't tell you 3% of that group act this way, it just tells you hey that group is known for this and that, act accordingly
: I still to this day don’t understand why asking for reports is punishable. If the player intentionally fed/threw a game, he deserves a fucking ban, not the person asking to get him banned.
> [{quoted}](name=purebread86101,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=WAEBLvlF,comment-id=000a,timestamp=2019-02-13T02:25:45.962+0000) > > I still to this day don’t understand why asking for reports is punishable. If the player intentionally fed/threw a game, he deserves a fucking ban, not the person asking to get him banned. Hey one time I got a chat restriction for asking to report an actual person running down mid
Rioter Comments
: Irelia is a goddamn TUMOR. So are adcs.
Hit masters again? Mate you know that op.gg exists, you are bronze/low silver for 5 years now, nevermind looking at your games and seeing most adcs in your or your enemy's team having like 3/9 ? ADCs are and always have been the class with least amout of agency on their own, they have one purpose and that is dealing damage, you dont bitch about Tryndamere that will more often than not deal as much damage per game as an ADC while also having insane splitpushing power and 1v3 fighting potential with extremely short CD mobility that is arguably one of the best in the game ( goes through almost all terrain)
: So glad we came back to season 7 where adc rush one item and you can't stop them anymore after
How does a 2 kill ADC rush IE? Please, can someone tell me cause i seem to be getting 300 gold per kill while ADCs in op's game are getting a solid 1k gold at least. Hell if an ADC runs everyone down with 20% crit chance then i guess getting a Zeal literally uninstals the game of the person that gets hit by a single auto, and i thought assassins like Zed are strong and spike with duskblade, never knew i could actually 1v1 him as soon as i got IE.
: Make Caitlyn's ult more interesting
Worst ever ult suggestion lol, blocked by regular minions? You'd literally hit it once every 10 times
: Being ignored by support team after an unjust ban.
People on this boards should get off their high horse, this shouldn't result in a permanent ban, there's people that literally int,afk or troll and they dont get bans, if you're gonna ban someone ban them for their in-game behaviour and serious hate speech not some petty arguing that culminates with calling someone toxic or saying they'll be muted, this is silly
: PSA: Baron calls are usually poorly done. Just go for a goddamned inhib so that you can set up a future baron even easier.
> [{quoted}](name=DuskDaUmbreon,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=g7GvFVmB,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-11T02:31:39.070+0000) > > PSA: Baron calls are usually poorly done. Just go for a goddamned inhib so that you can set up a future baron even easier. Not this one, they had 2 inhibs down already, 5 people on me while pushing bot, my whole team was around Baron pit and did nothing, just waited for me to die and then go die 1 by 1 afterwards Best part is we respawn, i tell them to get baron while i tp bot again, 4 people on me, Ahri farming mid instead of Baron, tresh chasing alistar around jg, luc and jarvan doing baron when Lucian decides to leave jarvan to finish off a 4k hp baron while he chases down Alistar that leads them to their team, they die, Jarvan cant solo baron, Ahri tries to 1v1 illaoi, dies, we lose the game
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
DeusVult (NA)
: I don't think that OP was saying that Vayne was the reason that the enemy team won the game. In bot lane, I think that Vayne is somewhat balanced. What I believe OP is trying to say is that if Vayne gets picked into a favorable matchup in a lane that is not bot lane, and the player playing Vayne isnt a brain dead potato, then their is nothing that the opposing player can do. Sure, they can try to stay just inside of XP range and collect whatever farm they can near their tower, and you can hope that your jungler comes and the Vayne isnt paying attention or hasnt warded. But Jungle presence isnt counterplay. If saying "just gank them" is how you beat them, then that is as dumb as "just CC them" or "just kill them." And having a low pick rate doesnt mean that something is balanced. Top lane Vayne isnt a first pick. But as a counter pick, you can get one of the most effective 1v1 champs in the game who can also team fight, but also automatically wins lane because of the matchup. Which is something that generally shouldnt happen from a design standpoint
> [{quoted}](name=DeusVult,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=cun7vjnB,comment-id=00010005,timestamp=2019-02-08T18:54:15.738+0000) > > I don't think that OP was saying that Vayne was the reason that the enemy team won the game. In bot lane, I think that Vayne is somewhat balanced. What I believe OP is trying to say is that if Vayne gets picked into a favorable matchup in a lane that is not bot lane, and the player playing Vayne isnt a brain dead potato, then their is nothing that the opposing player can do. > > Sure, they can try to stay just inside of XP range and collect whatever farm they can near their tower, and you can hope that your jungler comes and the Vayne isnt paying attention or hasnt warded. But Jungle presence isnt counterplay. If saying "just gank them" is how you beat them, then that is as dumb as "just CC them" or "just kill them." And having a low pick rate doesnt mean that something is balanced. Top lane Vayne isnt a first pick. But as a counter pick, you can get one of the most effective 1v1 champs in the game who can also team fight, but also automatically wins lane because of the matchup. > > Which is something that generally shouldnt happen from a design standpoint Well by the same logic you can counterpick Vayne top by taking teemo, she cant outpoke or out trade you during lane, and you completely shut her down, or any ranged tops, Vladimir,Viktor,Gnar, also in my own experience playing Vayne top a few times, if you get ganked early and die literally once you can't get back into the lane, especially when the enemy top laner gets his ult, for example Garen, all he needs to do is catch you once since he scales better with abilities and level he will out damage you by a lot actually, and im a Vayne main, of course it's not going to be easy for them but hell, its better than teemo
: dude do you not understand that olaf did more true damage to champs then vayne did while he was jungling? that says something. jungler isnt in a lane constantly trading and poking at a champ. armor does help vs vayne or any auto attacker vayne averages 18.6k in damage per game which is 53rd out of 143 champs out of that 18.6 damage 13024 is physical damage and only 4449 is true damage. which comes out to 24% of her damage being true damage. and if you have armor and items that reduce crit damage , auto attack damage and slow her attack speed her over all dps will be lower.
> [{quoted}](name=MrFawknSunshine,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=cun7vjnB,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2019-02-08T11:20:48.916+0000) > > dude do you not understand that olaf did more true damage to champs then vayne did while he was jungling? > > that says something. jungler isnt in a lane constantly trading and poking at a champ. > > armor does help vs vayne or any auto attacker > vayne averages 18.6k in damage per game which is 53rd out of 143 champs > out of that 18.6 damage 13024 is physical damage and only 4449 is true damage. which comes out to 24% of her damage being true damage. > and if you have armor and items that reduce crit damage , auto attack damage and slow her attack speed her over all dps will be lower. Where did you find that statistic, im really interested in seeing average damage per champs
Cocho (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=HàrrowR,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=dQs0sX6p,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-02-08T19:39:39.778+0000) > > http://eune.op.gg/summoner/userName=harrowr > 86% Winrate yorrick top, please roast my lackluster performance, hell i had most damage on my team by miles when i was auto filled support last game, the only reason we lost was cause yasuo overfed their top looks to me like a plat for 4 years thinking he's good for beating players several divisions under him with a FotM champion on a smurf
> [{quoted}](name=Cocho,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=dQs0sX6p,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2019-02-08T21:09:47.361+0000) > > looks to me like a plat for 4 years thinking he's good for beating players several divisions under him with a FotM champion on a smurf Says kata OTP XD
Cocho (NA)
: matchmaking tries its best to match 2 teams together than have an equal chance of winning. It shouldn't be any other way. Id argue autofill doesnt effect players as much anymore since, that autofilled player is going to be a lower rank than their main role. Please link your OP.GG so I can roast you on your lackluster performance in your games.
> [{quoted}](name=Cocho,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=dQs0sX6p,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-02-08T17:23:43.163+0000) > > matchmaking tries its best to match 2 teams together than have an equal chance of winning. It shouldn't be any other way. > > Id argue autofill doesnt effect players as much anymore since, that autofilled player is going to be a lower rank than their main role. > > Please link your OP.GG so I can roast you on your lackluster performance in your games. http://eune.op.gg/summoner/userName=harrowr 86% Winrate yorrick top, please roast my lackluster performance, hell i had most damage on my team by miles when i was auto filled support last game, the only reason we lost was cause yasuo overfed their top
Rioter Comments
DDEK123 (EUW)
: I like getting my ears blasted by my own ghouls as I am also screaming "HHGHHGHGHHGGGHHGHGH" since I'm a ghoul IRL.
> [{quoted}](name=DDEK123,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=15wf47eX,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2019-02-07T19:15:39.232+0000) > > I like getting my ears blasted by my own ghouls as I am also screaming "HHGHHGHGHHGGGHHGHGH" since I'm a ghoul IRL. aahahhahah,i actually laughed out loud, i do also like that sound, i imagine it confuses the shit out of the enemy too
Moody P (NA)
: vayne
> [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=v4i8mEzG,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2019-02-07T02:54:51.039+0000) > > vayne Im not surprised you made that comment, its getting old dude
: Jhin is the only one having issues with tanks. and as a benefit, he can do large amounts of damage from hyper long range. yes all adcs have an easy time dealing with tanks unless the tank is ahead. also adcs are known for using items such as botrk, last whisper, black cleaver, rage blade, wits end etc.
> [{quoted}](name=Serika Zero,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=00090000000200000003,timestamp=2019-02-07T13:17:54.923+0000) > > Jhin is the only one having issues with tanks. > > and as a benefit, he can do large amounts of damage from hyper long range. > yes all adcs have an easy time dealing with tanks unless the tank is ahead. > also adcs are known for using items such as botrk, last whisper, black cleaver, rage blade, wits end etc. I hate when people talk about the game as if it starts with everyone having a full build, not everyone builds and synergizes well with botrk/guinsoo, Crit champs have to get at least 2 items first before going last whisper and they still wont do a lot of damage to tanks mid game since a 3 item tank can have well over 3k hp +tabi damage reduction + omen crit damage reduction + AS slow, im not saying they are unkillable but please don't say that an equal gold carry can kill an equal gold tank in 4 seconds, especially mid game , especially if you have like 1.5 AS, this is like 5 autos
: Oh FINE. I'll change mages to "Mages with the exception of fringe cases like malzahar who can potentially point and click to delete the ADC if they haven't bothered to buy a mercurial scimitar." There is also the flipside with ADCs like Twitch being capable of nuking a mage who lacks hard CC like a stun simply by pressing R and critting 2-3 times with the added burst of Statikk Shiv and getting a chunk of extra HP through lifesteal to survive the next part of the attack... though that was more of a problem when IE did 250% crit damage. So it's possible that will make a return. It also seems that you're missing the point i'm trying to make here, so i'll put it more simply. ADC vs Mage boils down to this: If the Mage misses their CC the ADC gets to auto them to death. The amount of Damage in this game right now has resulted in what amounts to 'rocket tag' between the two. The first one to make a mistake instantly loses. This assumes this fight is in a vacuum and that there are no summoner spells involved.
> [{quoted}](name=Axzarious,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=jg3IEvL0,comment-id=000a000100000000,timestamp=2019-02-07T01:04:37.192+0000) > > Oh FINE. I'll change mages to "Mages with the exception of fringe cases like malzahar who can potentially point and click to delete the ADC if they haven't bothered to buy a mercurial scimitar." There is also the flipside with ADCs like Twitch being capable of nuking a mage who lacks hard CC like a stun simply by pressing R and critting 2-3 times with the added burst of Statikk Shiv and getting a chunk of extra HP through lifesteal to survive the next part of the attack... though that was more of a problem when IE did 250% crit damage. So it's possible that will make a return. > > It also seems that you're missing the point i'm trying to make here, so i'll put it more simply. > > ADC vs Mage boils down to this: If the Mage misses their CC the ADC gets to auto them to death. The amount of Damage in this game right now has resulted in what amounts to 'rocket tag' between the two. The first one to make a mistake instantly loses. This assumes this fight is in a vacuum and that there are no summoner spells involved. Honestly Mage vs Adc match up is one of the fairest things in this game, Mages having a bit of an upper hand due to their burst,cc and access to zhonyas, meaning that basically a mage has the first turn, if he misses his CC and abilities then by all means carry will blow them up, but if he hits the CC adc is dead.
Moody P (NA)
: A) you have the advantage of range. Even in the era of ridiculous gapclosers that is still enormous. The ability to do DPS from distance is extremely valuable. That more than offsets the damage difference but this is also something I wanted to talk about as a separate topic; ADC kits rely way too much on an item-based steroid (crit, or on hit of you're one of those) and not their own innate qualities. A better way to take them IMO is more unique innate steroids that help define their individuality better and give something more to play around. Even if it's AA based (and I think it should stay AA based for most ADCs) that immediately helps alleviate the issue that marksmen are gated behind an obnoxious pay wall before they can contribute to a team's success. I'd also like to address how shockingly low utility some of them are but that might be pulling too far out of the comfort zone. But I enjoy champions like Ashe and Sivir the most.
> [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=jg3IEvL0,comment-id=00060002,timestamp=2019-02-06T17:27:10.590+0000) > > A) you have the advantage of range. Even in the era of ridiculous gapclosers that is still enormous. The ability to do DPS from distance is extremely valuable. That more than offsets the damage difference but this is also something I wanted to talk about as a separate topic; > > ADC kits rely way too much on an item-based steroid (crit, or on hit of you're one of those) and not their own innate qualities. A better way to take them IMO is more unique innate steroids that help define their individuality better and give something more to play around. Even if it's AA based (and I think it should stay AA based for most ADCs) that immediately helps alleviate the issue that marksmen are gated behind an obnoxious pay wall before they can contribute to a team's success. > > I'd also like to address how shockingly low utility some of them are but that might be pulling too far out of the comfort zone. But I enjoy champions like Ashe and Sivir the most. For someone that shit talked so much on my post and made this thread as a response to it, i do have to say i agree with you on one thing, and no its not the range being more than enough to make up for gap closers and lack of defense, cause its not nearly enough. It's the fact that most carries should have a lot more innate abilities than rely just on their items doing the damage, it's obvious why this is, it feels better to scale with your abilities, you obviously have more options and tools at your disposal if your kit is actually useful, you can start playing the game earlier without having to farm for your items, carries would feel more unique than just being different flavors of auto attacks, and you would obviously be stronger if your kit also synergizes with itself, your autos and your playstyle. Now this is probably where we'd disagree, Lucian and Vayne are a perfect example of a carry who's damage is in their kit, it just feels good playing Vayne knowing that putting ranks in your abilities will actually help a lot, especially late game. Opposite of that would be Cait in my opinion, late game her Q is useless in a middle of a fight since your autos will do more damage, her E feels the same lvl 1 or 5, it doesn't really matter, her R is SUPER situational late game even after the buff, you'd be happy if you manage to kill a 300 hp enemy with it at lvl 16, so many abilities counter it, not to mention one armor item and it deals almost no damage. So all Cait has going for her are literally just her autos and headshot procs out of traps, that's it. I haven't maybe communicated the message properly in my post, but i realized ( a long time ago) that the real problem i have with some carries is that they aren't meeting my Vayne/Lucian standard, since those 2 are the ones i play the most, going from Lucian to Jinx feels super awkward, i love playing Jinx but sometimes it's just frustrating, you'd die and the first thing on your mind would be, i wouldn't die here if i was Lucian, i'd dash over the wall, someone chases you down and you think to yourself i would be able to kill him if i was playing Vayne, he's so bad but my kit offers literally no way for me to outplay him, etc etc. So the point i wanted to make all along is that carries should have more power in their abilities and more defensive options in them, even if that means making them all 500 range, i'd rather have 500 range and a stun than 700 range and a hope that Zed doesn't enter my screen.
: I think this response in underrated. If ADCs didnt heal you wouldnt be as forced to oneshot them, so you could actually take 1 or 2 seconds more to kill them. I even know a Khazix main who used to get bramblevest because if he failed to oneshot someone he would tilt off the face of the earth as the ADC life got from 10% to 90% in 2 autos. Ofc its no panacea but it would help.
> [{quoted}](name=Jamenawerl,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=jg3IEvL0,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2019-02-06T19:23:08.293+0000) > > I think this response in underrated. If ADCs didnt heal you wouldnt be as forced to oneshot them, so you could actually take 1 or 2 seconds more to kill them. > > I even know a Khazix main who used to get bramblevest because if he failed to oneshot someone he would tilt off the face of the earth as the ADC life got from 10% to 90% in 2 autos. > > Ofc its no panacea but it would help. You're literally taking about a 6 item adc with lifesteal, most crit carries can't access lifesteal until their 5th item or maybe not even at all the entire game, for it to heal that much you'd need a full build, meaning that this "problem" of adcs sustaining themselves comes literally at the end of the match, this is one of the problems with carries, we don't want to be a useless sack of gold for 25-30 minutes just to try and win one team fight, help do baron and finish.
: To be fair to mages, they suffer from the exact same frailty of ADCs. Except they actually have to land skillshots to kill people instead of having the conditions of "in Range" and "Right Click on the enemy". Mages actually NEED a fair bit more effort to outplay their opponents and pick up a kill than an ADC. While a mage might be able to kill an ADC in 2 or 3 spells, the ADC can easily kill the mage just as quickly with autos if they can get in range with a simple right click.
> [{quoted}](name=Axzarious,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=jg3IEvL0,comment-id=000a0001,timestamp=2019-02-06T21:54:59.259+0000) > > To be fair to mages, they suffer from the exact same frailty of ADCs. Except they actually have to land skillshots to kill people instead of having the conditions of "in Range" and "Right Click on the enemy". Mages actually NEED a fair bit more effort to outplay their opponents and pick up a kill than an ADC. While a mage might be able to kill an ADC in 2 or 3 spells, the ADC can easily kill the mage just as quickly with autos if they can get in range with a simple right click. That is one of the most outstandingly fake statements on this thread, no it's not a GIFT FROM GOD knowing how to hit a skillshot, no not all mages are even skillshot oriented, Malzahar, no its not easier to kill people with ADCs just for the fact that you don't have as clear windows of engagement, you can go in chasing a low hp Zoe only to eat her bubble and get deleted, if anything mages have one of the easiest kill conditions in the game, it's usually landing the CC and then doing the damage, most of the time you'll know exactly if you can kill an enemy or not and landing one CC on him will effectively make the rest of your kit as easy to land as an auto attack.
: There's a fine line between getting 1 shot by supports to going back to the ardent meta. Please stop spamming "BuT ArDeNt mEtA 'mEmBeR?" Nobody liked that meta. But maybe go back a bit further when damage wasnt so high, and people needed to use stuff to 1 shot you. No one is arguing that adc should eat a full zed combo and survive or duel him, but i dont need to die to R+AA duskblade when my support doesnt even have time to react. What's the point of having damage when i m out of the fight from 1 CC and a stray mage ability. To put it on equal terms in your juggernaut brain (since i know you love circlejerking juggernauts) it would be like removing any catch potential, and MS boost in juggernauts kits and items since kiting them is their weakness and thats their counterplay. Im sure you're gonna reply with some comment on how garen is mechanicly complex for having AA reset or something and marksmen are only right clicking to 1 shot everyone in a 700 unit radius.
> [{quoted}](name=JackMcSnipeyz,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=jg3IEvL0,comment-id=000a,timestamp=2019-02-06T17:03:04.737+0000) > > There's a fine line between getting 1 shot by supports to going back to the ardent meta. > > Please stop spamming "BuT ArDeNt mEtA 'mEmBeR?" Nobody liked that meta. > But maybe go back a bit further when damage wasnt so high, and people needed to use stuff to 1 shot you. > > No one is arguing that adc should eat a full zed combo and survive or duel him, but i dont need to die to R+AA duskblade when my support doesnt even have time to react. > What's the point of having damage when i m out of the fight from 1 CC and a stray mage ability. > > To put it on equal terms in your juggernaut brain (since i know you love circlejerking juggernauts) it would be like removing any catch potential, and MS boost in juggernauts kits and items since kiting them is their weakness and thats their counterplay. > > Im sure you're gonna reply with some comment on how garen is mechanicly complex for having AA reset or something and marksmen are only right clicking to 1 shot everyone in a 700 unit radius. Incredible, if i made that comment i'd get -56 dislikes, but its all true, every time i say this people assume i want to be tanky as sion and dealing kog maw damage, but no i just hate bad players being rewarded for missing everything and killing me, ever more so then that i hate when a 2/5 JG comes out flashes on me and kills me even if im 5 kills ahead of him, because its just the way the game works, i can't kill him faster than he can kill me and if i dare to play anything but vayne and luc then i can't outkite him
: Adcs hate mages or bruisers coming and laning bot, but they love to take over mid (Lucian, ez, xayah, varus, MF, jhin), jg (kog, twitch), top (vayne, Lucian, cait, Ashe, quin (who is naturally a top laner but still an adc technically), and sometimes even support (MF).
> [{quoted}](name=kingDeDeDarius,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7KhkiF8d,comment-id=0015,timestamp=2019-02-06T15:05:52.572+0000) > > Adcs hate mages or bruisers coming and laning bot, but they love to take over mid (Lucian, ez, xayah, varus, MF, jhin), jg (kog, twitch), top (vayne, Lucian, cait, Ashe, quin (who is naturally a top laner but still an adc technically), and sometimes even support (MF). Kog jg,Cait and Ashe top, Mf mid are literally just made up by you, but im giving you the benefit of the doubt since it says youre lvl 31 and who knows what's happening in your games. Now legit things like Vayne top and Lucian mid do happen but it's a rare pick and even rarer for the meta to favor sometihng like Varus/Lucian mid
: > [{quoted}](name=BestPudgeNA,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=0019,timestamp=2019-02-06T17:09:05.939+0000) > > You linked a video were literally every death is him getting deleted by a fed assassin. Should ADCs not be one shotable by fed {{champion:7}} {{champion:107}} ? Best part was he is also playing non-adcs in the video at a few points like {{champion:13}} {{champion:115}} and oh guess what happens when he gets caught out playing mages, shockingly he dies instantly. Yet for some reason only the people who play marksman endlessly complain about this. Odd They want to have the damage of a glass canon, but the tankiness of a sion smh
> [{quoted}](name=Machigainashi,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=00190001,timestamp=2019-02-06T19:01:30.289+0000) > > They want to have the damage of a glass canon, but the tankiness of a sion smh Yes and i want to have zed ult as my basic ability and my autos to shoot Veigar ults while my basic movement speed is sions ult that insta kills anyone i walk into. That's all i want you got me
: your math is still off, 450 * 0.88 = 396 , if you reduce the attack speed, you'd have to factor in whatever the new damage per second is...{{item:3143}} on top = 396 * 0.8 = around 320, but we're not factoring in true damage here caitlynn might not kill a tank, but she is a marksman without an attack speed steroid and each of the marksman varies for what primary rune is best for them in addition to that, you did not specify what sort of build and only one of those items can be present in a 100 armor build
> [{quoted}](name=3TWarrior,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=0009000000020000000200000001,timestamp=2019-02-06T21:52:52.217+0000) > > your math is still off, 450 * 0.88 = 396 , if you reduce the attack speed, you'd have to factor in whatever the new damage per second is...{{item:3143}} on top = 396 * 0.8 = around 320, but we're not factoring in true damage here > > caitlynn might not kill a tank, but she is a marksman without an attack speed steroid and each of the marksman varies for what primary rune is best for them > > in addition to that, you did not specify what sort of build and only one of those items can be present in a 100 armor build Youre taking this way too seriously man, "your math is off" i didnt pull out a pen and paper and my pocket calculator to get to it, im telling you aproximate numbers, seeing how you do 1k dps on a 100 armor dummy, i'd say {{item:3047}} {{item:3068}} {{item:3143}} {{item:3075}} {{item:3742}} {{item:3193}} would be a "bit" harder to kill, i put commas on bit so you know im actually joking and not serious...
: > [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=vWaUbhaB,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-02-06T17:39:59.253+0000) > > I actually want my champions to be bad so I can complain about it and ask for buffs I dont, in reallity the most funny state is when adcs are broken and the Gameplay Boards is full of complaints about adcs. Being honest, the reason I sticked on the Boards was because when I started here the Boards were on full adc hate mode, you would be downvoted for saying that you were an adc main and Gameplay was private club for Morde mains. I saw that hate towards players like me and the champs I play and I just fell in love immediatly with the Boards.
> [{quoted}](name=Sir Saltarin,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=vWaUbhaB,comment-id=00030001,timestamp=2019-02-06T18:08:45.193+0000) > > I dont, in reallity the most funny state is when adcs are broken and the Gameplay Boards is full of complaints about adcs. > > Being honest, the reason I sticked on the Boards was because when I started here the Boards were on full adc hate mode, you would be downvoted for saying that you were an adc main and Gameplay was private club for Morde mains. > > I saw that hate towards players like me and the champs I play and I just fell in love immediatly with the Boards. Same
: what build are you using? true damage substantially cuts into the amount done. also, your math is off 100 armor = 50% damage done, in other words, that caitlynn did 1800 damage per second to deal 900 if we use the standard formula, 100 / (100 + 300) , it would be dealing 25% or 450 damage per second against the 300 armor target of course, again, what is your build for these numbers as they are rather absurd
> [{quoted}](name=3TWarrior,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=00090000000200000002,timestamp=2019-02-06T20:09:50.487+0000) > > what build are you using? true damage substantially cuts into the amount done. also, your math is off > > 100 armor = 50% damage done, in other words, that caitlynn did 1800 damage per second to deal 900 > > if we use the standard formula, 100 / (100 + 300) , it would be dealing 25% or 450 damage per second against the 300 armor target > > of course, again, what is your build for these numbers as they are rather absurd How are they absurd? Just go into the practice tool, get yourself a full build and shoot the damn thing, having a 900-1000 dps on a 100 armor dummy while building full damage means that against someone with Omen,Tabi and 300 armor you'd be doing around 250-300 dps, i mean tabi alone blocks 12% of AA dmg, Omen reduces crit, if you build thornmail then you reduce AS of the attacker as well as return damage, so no way in hell can Cait kill a full build tank solo in 4 seconds, i'd bet my house on it
: No, we fully see the reason. What we would prefer is either a), that squishy-ness was actually given an appropriate reward, such that as we can be easily killed by anything, we should have the best damage to compensate for that OR b) we have less damage, but actually viable defensive tools so that we can perform our jobs as a damage class but not be sitting ducks. We saw what happened with the first, everyone complained that ADCs were op and demanded Riot nerf them into the ground..which they did. Then we had a whole phase of ADCs being still incredibly squishy, but scaling less and slower than basically everyone else in the game and with a more expensive build (and still no good defensive options). It sucked. Now Riot is trying out the other approach: lower damage output, but with more tools and better overall itemization (including viable defensive tools like the new PD shield). Personally, this is the option I would prefer, and I hope that the new system they rolled out performs well in that mission.
> [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=jg3IEvL0,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2019-02-06T15:24:36.656+0000) > > No, we fully see the reason. > > What we would prefer is either a), that squishy-ness was actually given an appropriate reward, such that as we can be easily killed by anything, we should have the best damage to compensate for that OR b) we have less damage, but actually viable defensive tools so that we can perform our jobs as a damage class but not be sitting ducks. > > We saw what happened with the first, everyone complained that ADCs were op and demanded Riot nerf them into the ground..which they did. Then we had a whole phase of ADCs being still incredibly squishy, but scaling less and slower than basically everyone else in the game and with a more expensive build (and still no good defensive options). It sucked. > > Now Riot is trying out the other approach: lower damage output, but with more tools and better overall itemization (including viable defensive tools like the new PD shield). Personally, this is the option I would prefer, and I hope that the new system they rolled out performs well in that mission. I like the direction that they are going in but after years of playing carries i realized that the items are only a small part of the problem. Yes building new PD will make you tankier, merc scimitar and GA will help you stay alive, i build those every time i can, but the real reason some carries feel bad while others don't is simply their kits. Build Merc or Ga all you want on Jhin or Jinx you'll never be as safe as Tristana or Vayne, they have mobility and self peel Build LDR and armor pen all you want you'll never be as good of a tank killer as Vayne and Kog Build Zhonya if you are getting one shotted but you'll never be able to avoid it as good as Xayah can. The problem to me is apparent, only 5-6 carries out of the whole rooster have enough tools in their kits to be playable on their own, defensive itemization will help them more than immobile,defenseless ones, since you can't count on good team mates and supports in solo Q, you shouldn't even expect to have fun playing team oriented carries and that's the sad truth that i wanted to talk about in my original post that this thread is a response to.
: > [{quoted}](name=HàrrowR,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=00190000,timestamp=2019-02-06T17:24:41.407+0000) > > Why do you take things literally, like i said to 10 people here commenting the same thing, THIS IS NOT,I REPEAT IS NOT, a compilation of ALL one shots know to men in league history, nor am i complaining only about getting one shotted, it doesn't matter if youre getting one shotted by rengar or flash on by Jax that will take 1.5 second longer to kill you, you still cant do shit unless you play 3-4 carries out of a whole rooster. > > Also, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CHd9BgrYM8 here's a video of pro players getting deleted by Vladimir,Syndra,Riven,Gragas,Diana,Aurelion Sol even,Sona,Lux,Cho,Veigar you name it, damage is high across the boards, it might not only be an ADC problem especially when youre dealing with a fed assassin but playing an immobile carry like jinx will feel 10x worse than playing a Malzahar with Zhonya, Rylai and Liandry i can tell you that Hello, Hello, Anybody home? Think Mcfly, think. Your title says ADC in it and your thread is about how it "feels bad to play adc" If i'm 1/4 {{champion:77}} with {{item:3047}} a 7/2 {{champion:107}} will one shot me and i don't have a tower or a support that supposed to help me. What you're talking about isn't something that is a "problem" that only ADC face. You can try to turn i around all you want but i can read your OP.
> [{quoted}](name=BestPudgeNA,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=001900000000,timestamp=2019-02-06T17:46:18.288+0000) > > Hello, Hello, Anybody home? Think Mcfly, think. Your title says ADC in it and your thread is about how it "feels bad to play adc" > > If i'm 1/4 {{champion:77}} with {{item:3047}} a 7/2 {{champion:107}} will one shot me and i don't have a tower or a support that supposed to help me. What you're talking about isn't something that is a "problem" that only ADC face. You can try to turn i around all you want but i can read your OP. Again im not talking about Rengar specifically nor am i talking just about being one shotted, i mean how helpless it feels being dived by literally any other class unless youre playing Vayne,Luc,Tristana or Kai Sa, and im not complaining that a fed Rengar can burst me, im complaining that a 1/7 rengar can burst me, cause he sure as hell can kill a 7/2 Jhin but not 7/2 Udyr (Udyr being literally anyone else)
: Imo once they fix the balance for adc champs then they can start to focus on making adc not being bursted instantly. Right now vayne, kaisa and Lucian feel really busted and for me as a tank player, vayne is nearly always a perma ban. Once they bring those adcs down slightly and then bring up the other adcs and reach a middle ground where they can do their job properly, then they can get buffed survivability. Buffing adc survivability across the board without changing the balance of the champions will cause the better adcs like vayne to become even more of a problem which could end up bringing more harsh and unnecessary nerfs to the adc class.
> [{quoted}](name=Grav3Warden,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=001a,timestamp=2019-02-06T17:20:37.239+0000) > > Imo once they fix the balance for adc champs then they can start to focus on making adc not being bursted instantly. Right now vayne, kaisa and Lucian feel really busted and for me as a tank player, vayne is nearly always a perma ban. Once they bring those adcs down slightly and then bring up the other adcs and reach a middle ground where they can do their job properly, then they can get buffed survivability. Buffing adc survivability across the board without changing the balance of the champions will cause the better adcs like vayne to become even more of a problem which could end up bringing more harsh and unnecessary nerfs to the adc class. That's true, most people misunderstood me or intentionally put words in my mouth, i don't think every adc is weak, i think Vayne and Lucian are one of the strongest champs right now, but having 2-3 viable champs out of a rooster of 20 is bad, and i play top so i know the terror of Vayne, she's also my main and she actually spoiled me, playing her i know i can melt everyone after i get my 2-3 items, and i know that i just need to stay alive long enough to deal that damage, on the other hand playing crit carries i've realized how hopeless it is sometimes to try and deal damage to a tank or a bruiser while you do 100 damage per auto and he has 3k hp This led me to a conclussion that items are a band aid fix, building Merc scimitar or Ga is going to be super helpfull for staying alive but its not equally helpfull on Jhin as it is on Tristana, cause Jhin can clean the cc and still get caught, while Tristana will leap out, building LDR is going to be helpfull for dealing with Tanks but you're never going to be better as Vayne or Kog that are natural at it, phantom dancer will now give you a shield, this will undoubtedly save your life sometimes, but will it be more usefull on already hard to kill carries like Vayne or on Immobile ones that will die no matter what cause they dont have any self peel or means of escape. Like i said maybe Vayne just spoiled me and i expect other carries to perform as good as her, maybe Graves spoiled me since he was my all time favorite champ before the rework, being more of a bruiser than an ADC, but those 2 are what carries should be in my opinion to feel good to play with
GigglesO (NA)
: At 4:14 ornn got hit with his first damage taken. 4:18 ornn died. The real issue is just too high of damage on all champs across the board.
> [{quoted}](name=GigglesO,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=001b,timestamp=2019-02-06T17:21:21.621+0000) > > At 4:14 ornn got hit with his first damage taken. > 4:18 ornn died. > > The real issue is just too high of damage on all champs across the board. I agree
: You linked a video were literally every death is him getting deleted by a fed assassin. Should ADCs not be one shotable by fed {{champion:7}} {{champion:107}} ? Best part was he is also playing non-adcs in the video at a few points like {{champion:13}} {{champion:115}} and oh guess what happens when he gets caught out playing mages, shockingly he dies instantly. Yet for some reason only the people who play marksman endlessly complain about this. Odd
> [{quoted}](name=BestPudgeNA,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=0019,timestamp=2019-02-06T17:09:05.939+0000) > > You linked a video were literally every death is him getting deleted by a fed assassin. Should ADCs not be one shotable by fed {{champion:7}} {{champion:107}} ? Best part was he is also playing non-adcs in the video at a few points like {{champion:13}} {{champion:115}} and oh guess what happens when he gets caught out playing mages, shockingly he dies instantly. Yet for some reason only the people who play marksman endlessly complain about this. Odd Why do you take things literally, like i said to 10 people here commenting the same thing, THIS IS NOT,I REPEAT IS NOT, a compilation of ALL one shots know to men in league history, nor am i complaining only about getting one shotted, it doesn't matter if youre getting one shotted by rengar or flash on by Jax that will take 1.5 second longer to kill you, you still cant do shit unless you play 3-4 carries out of a whole rooster. Also, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2CHd9BgrYM8 here's a video of pro players getting deleted by Vladimir,Syndra,Riven,Gragas,Diana,Aurelion Sol even,Sona,Lux,Cho,Veigar you name it, damage is high across the boards, it might not only be an ADC problem especially when youre dealing with a fed assassin but playing an immobile carry like jinx will feel 10x worse than playing a Malzahar with Zhonya, Rylai and Liandry i can tell you that
: I solidly agree with what you say and i hate how these kinds of posts generate a lot of toxicity and negative comments. The problem i understand and experience is that this is happening because of how the game is balanced and what i mean by that is that because the damage and state of the game is mostly balanced around pro play and from what i have seen in pro play is that the entire team tends to focus on protecting the adc (i know there have been tactics where this was not the case but thats not my point) Tanks would get a {{item:3190}} supports would either shield or heal I.E hard core damage mitigate the adc and riot's obsession with making every champion viable for pro play, which is contradictory to me because they are obsessed with pumping out new champions when there is so much work they can be doin on their current champions but i digress. I think the reason that assassins etc are so strong with their burst damage is because riot wants them to be able to do damage while considering that all this damage mitigation is coming out. You can see they were trying to compensate with this kite and survival type play with how crit adcs were for the last few patches but now they scrapped the crit trash concept and reverted it back to how it was. I agree that its stupid to try and balance around pro players when like 95% of the players arent in that pro play and we all have to live and suffer under the effects of their balance state for champions that aren't even picked there: Like how strong nasus and rengar is now but would NEVER be picked in pro play. I always had this mind set that riot's balance team doesn't care about us, the majority of the playerbase and only really care about pro players in general. I've felt like this for years now and I have yet to be proved wrong...
> [{quoted}](name=Priestelar,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=000d,timestamp=2019-02-06T13:10:54.884+0000) > > I solidly agree with what you say and i hate how these kinds of posts generate a lot of toxicity and negative comments. > > The problem i understand and experience is that this is happening because of how the game is balanced and what i mean by that is that because the damage and state of the game is mostly balanced around pro play and from what i have seen in pro play is that the entire team tends to focus on protecting the adc (i know there have been tactics where this was not the case but thats not my point) Tanks would get a {{item:3190}} supports would either shield or heal I.E hard core damage mitigate the adc and riot's obsession with making every champion viable for pro play, which is contradictory to me because they are obsessed with pumping out new champions when there is so much work they can be doin on their current champions but i digress. > > I think the reason that assassins etc are so strong with their burst damage is because riot wants them to be able to do damage while considering that all this damage mitigation is coming out. > > You can see they were trying to compensate with this kite and survival type play with how crit adcs were for the last few patches but now they scrapped the crit trash concept and reverted it back to how it was. > > I agree that its stupid to try and balance around pro players when like 95% of the players arent in that pro play and we all have to live and suffer under the effects of their balance state for champions that aren't even picked there: Like how strong nasus and rengar is now but would NEVER be picked in pro play. > I always had this mind set that riot's balance team doesn't care about us, the majority of the playerbase and only really care about pro players in general. I've felt like this for years now and I have yet to be proved wrong... Thank you, this is exactly the problem, its not just RIots idea of having 4 people protect the carry, it's people thinking this happens every single game from iron 4 to diamond 1, in reality you will get a pyke support, the enemy will have a fed assassin, you will get left alone in a team fight to fend for yourself A LOT of the times, even in plat, your support cant hit every cc and damage is so high that a lot of assassins can delete you without you or your supp even realizing you're being deleted. And the reality is people hate being reliant on a support, and even more being reliant on the rest of the team, as much as supports hate being reliant on their carries, thats why you see people playing Mage supports that can impact the game even if the carry is bad and carries playing Vayne/Lucian/Kai Sa that don't really need a support. And the worst part of it all, you can see comments here saying "oh but they two shot everyone from safety and kill tanks in 3 shots" , this is not how carries work, playing in plat, most games end around 25 minutes, mid game, if i don't have 3-4 items by then you can completely forget killing Nasus/Sion/Garen/Darius, he will literally go into 5 people, deal more damage than you and even make it out alive. And of course you have 0 agency, people say playing top lane feels bad, i started playing Yorick and guess what, im climbing, at least if im strong i can split push and get towers/inhibs or have 3 people come top to kill me so my team can have some breathing room, junglers can take drakes and rift herald, mid laners can at least roam or in case of mages CC and waveclear so you they cant end, most carries have only their damage, and this sucks cause when you're behind or getting shut down by the enemy team you then contribute 0 to the game, no CC,no splitpushing power, you cant roam and gank you cant take drakes, nothing. And people read this and go HEY! This guy wants to be able to splitpush,take dragons,1v5, cc, waveclear, while flying over the map and one shotting the nexus, but in reality i just want to trade some damage for some CC/Surviveabiltiy/Mobility on most carries
: The video is mostly comprised of Assassins(mostly AD and mostly {{champion:107}} specifically) one shotting him. This is not ADC exclusive, mages are getting 1 shot by assassins just as hard(example him playing ziggs and getting 1 shot).
> [{quoted}](name=Malix Farwin,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=000e,timestamp=2019-02-06T13:20:57.535+0000) > > The video is mostly comprised of Assassins(mostly AD and mostly {{champion:107}} specifically) one shotting him. This is not ADC exclusive, mages are getting 1 shot by assassins just as hard(example him playing ziggs and getting 1 shot). Yes true, but at the same time most mages have access to Zhonya/CC/Burst and shields that help them a lot
: > [{quoted}](name=HàrrowR,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=00160000,timestamp=2019-02-06T15:16:13.825+0000) > > Did you read the post? Did you read the comments? I've literally said the complete opposite of your comment in my OP and you still comment this? Do you have issues with reading or understanding? > > "If you want survivability you better give up something." > > "Contrary to what many will spew on the boards, adc mains do not want to be "THE LITERAL GODS OF THE GAME" or Ardent Censer meta back, most people i see commenting just want carries to have more defensive options whether it's their items or their kit, and will gladly pay for it with damage." > > Get your mom to read it for you kid I've met plenty of adc mains who basically want that/wouldn't mind it. even imaqtpie said he wanted ardent back lmao.
> [{quoted}](name=Machigainashi,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=001600000000,timestamp=2019-02-06T15:18:44.856+0000) > > I've met plenty of adc mains who basically want that/wouldn't mind it. even imaqtpie said he wanted ardent back lmao. Am i saying that in my post? How does a random person saying something correlate to me and my post? How old are you? Im not sure you understand basics of logic
: So, it's a problem when the adc dies in a 0.1 - 2 seconds one shot allowed by someone pressing all the buttons right and hitting their skill shots and engaging at the perfect time on the adc, a squishy that usually is to egotistical to build defenses. But it's totally fine for the adc, to kill any class in the game in 2 - 4 seconds (4 seconds for tanks and mages with zhonias, 2 or less everyone else) where they can sneak in 6 auto attacks,. Hmm m gee why do most players hate adcs hmmmmmmm
> [{quoted}](name=Serika Zero,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=000900000002,timestamp=2019-02-06T15:38:52.654+0000) > > So, it's a problem when the adc dies in a 0.1 - 2 seconds one shot allowed by someone pressing all the buttons right and hitting their skill shots and engaging at the perfect time on the adc, a squishy that usually is to egotistical to build defenses. > > But it's totally fine for the adc, to kill any class in the game in 2 - 4 seconds (4 seconds for tanks and mages with zhonias, 2 or less everyone else) where they can sneak in 6 auto attacks,. > > Hmm m gee why do most players hate adcs hmmmmmmm Unless we are talking about a full build Vayne i don't see how Jhin,Jinx,Draven,Miss Fortune, Ezreal, Caitlyn can kill a tank in 4 seconds alone, its literally impossible, go into practice tool, a full build caitlyn will have around 900 dps on a 100 armor dummy, that's basically 250-300 dps on a 300 armor Sion with Omens and Thornmails, she'll literally have to hit him for 15 seconds to kill him without him using any abilities, just standing in place
: > [{quoted}](name=HàrrowR,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=00150000,timestamp=2019-02-06T15:10:08.244+0000) > > -No one said they get literally one shot once they leave the fountain > - Every lane has its top players, what does this prove? *the other person has a valid claim* *sweats nervously*: "W-well we dont alllaaaaays get one shot" Also it proves that adc is a valid role because if ADC's were useless pieces of trash then they wouldn't be able to climb, or climb to those heights at all.
> [{quoted}](name=Machigainashi,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=001500000000,timestamp=2019-02-06T15:17:40.050+0000) > > *the other person has a valid claim* > *sweats nervously*: "W-well we dont alllaaaaays get one shot" > > Also it proves that adc is a valid role because if ADC's were useless pieces of trash then they wouldn't be able to climb, or climb to those heights at all. Holy shit i've never said ADCs aren't a valid role can you stop just assuming things that fit your narrative? I can easily carry with Vayne/Lucian/Tristana, i don't mind playing those champs at all, i'm not saying you cant win a game with an ADC, im not even saying you can't carry one, i'm saying, but im not sure if your brain will still process this, IT FEELS BAD PLAYING AN IMMOBILE ADC THAT HAS 0 AGENCY ON HIS OWN AND RELIES COMPLETELY ON 4 STRANGERS TO PROTECT HIM AND ENABLE HIM TO PLAY THE GAME. Get it now? Or do you still read this as "I want 5.0 AS Kog back with 5k hp and 4 supports around me"
: > [{quoted}](name=HàrrowR,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=000c0000,timestamp=2019-02-06T15:12:54.461+0000) > > Ashe is actually pretty good since she has CC but those 2 are dead as soon as the enemy appears on the screen I remember when kog was super meta, that was cancer, I remember the games getting to thirty minutes, and it was kog 1 vs 5ing
> [{quoted}](name=Machigainashi,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=000c00000000,timestamp=2019-02-06T15:15:11.627+0000) > > I remember when kog was super meta, that was cancer, I remember the games getting to thirty minutes, and it was kog 1 vs 5ing If by 1v5 you mean having special "protect the kog" team compositions then yes, i also remember recently Dark Harvest being changed making every assassin bruiser and mage literally two shot any ADC after the 10 min mark, so what does any of that prove?
Vulkus I (NA)
: Meanwhile, it's ok for ADCs to two shot people from range as their entire team protects them xdddddd
> [{quoted}](name=Vulkus I,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uifWOyRr,comment-id=0017,timestamp=2019-02-06T15:51:11.645+0000) > > Meanwhile, it's ok for ADCs to two shot people from range as their entire team protects them xdddddd We aren't playing the same game if you think carries two shot anyone, here's a simple challenge,go play any adc, preferably crit like Caitlyn, two shot someone, video it and post it here
Show more

HàrrowR

Level 61 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion