Subdue (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=HeärtNeT,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kibA4mAK,comment-id=000c00000000,timestamp=2018-10-25T13:52:58.276+0000) > > I actually believe that the current system do both (not perfectly, there is room for progression and it will never be perfect anyway). > > If the players smurf and create new account, that applies to Team as well doesn't it? So they will still be able to play with their team anyway following this logic. > > I don't think that because you can create a smurf, you end up "not carring" about loosing your account. The time and potential investment you put in it are still gone. It is unfortunately how it works. The more you have to loose, the more you will refrain from doing something to put it at risk. > > So I do believe that it's important to be intransigent with perma-banned players. There is nothing vindictive about it. Being perma-banned suppose being past the redemption period and burning many chances to change your behavior already. I'm not here telling you lets burn every toxic player^^. > > I do not have 1 friends that has been permabanned and I play since season 1. It's not something that just happen because you had a rough day. I think you missed the point. It isn't that these permabanned players don't care about losing their accounts because they can create a smurf. They create a smurf _because _they lost their account. This does not mean that their attitude has changed. It simply means they want to continue playing, and a select subset of them want to terrorize new players in retaliation for their primary account being banned. If such player's accounts are not permanently banned, they are less likely to create the smurf because there is less reason to. And yes, in the current state if they create a smurf, that smurf can play with their team. However, that smurf can _also_ play with new players.
I think it's true, but not for every players. I don't have numbers and I don't like to stipulate but I think you can agree that when you permaban an account, not 100% of those account transforms into smurfs. But I 100% agree, the current system has it share of imperfection and permaban doesnt mean "problem solved". You can only reach a certain level of perfection anyway as it's not just math, it's human behavior which cannot be prevented in life and in game. Anyway, I think we both made our point^^ it was good to share ideas even though we disagree in the end.
Subdue (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=HeärtNeT,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kibA4mAK,comment-id=000c,timestamp=2018-10-25T11:38:57.513+0000) > > I like the way you suggested your idea, it’s very though through and clear with a certain logic behind it. Yet I disagree with it because I see it as a step in the direction of the perma-banned players more than towards the potential teammates of this toxic players. > > > I do understand that it’s annoying/punishing for a potential team to not be able to play with a friend or anybody that got banned. Yet it follows a certain logic. It’s true for any team in any context and it’s part of the consequences of a bad behavior. > > I could not imagine for example, somebody being suspended in football being rehabilitated to play but with Strap on his month to be sure he can’t insult the other team, just so it doesn’t punish the team all together (Ok, it’s a stupid situation to imagine, but I just took it to extrapolate how I see this solution in another context. > > When you are toxic, and especially if you get permabanned, which is the ultimate punishment that suggest many or really extreme bad behavior, you do not get to have special treatment just because you have a team. It’s also unfair to players who only play solo queue compared to those who actually put much effort into their team and don’t mind getting punish in solo queue for example. > > Even if I really understand that it is not the idea behind your suggestion, It gives a potential “I don’t care, I can still play with my team anyway”. > > The team/a team is responsible for the players they choose to play with. Even on a professional stage, a pro-player gets banned for x behavior, he punishes his team and it impacts both of them, with much more at stake. This should be true at any level of the game, from bronze to the highest professional level. > > I see permaban as a full punishment with no compromises. I might have a different approach if this would be for any other sanction such as first offence or leave-buster that are annoying for the all team, but in my opinion, it does not apply to permabans. This seems like an example of choosing vindictiveness over practicality. And while you're entitled to your opinion to be sure, the goal of a permanent ban is to prevent toxic player from creating a negative experience for non-toxic players. Currently, some (not all) permanently banned players create smurf accounts and continue on being toxic - towards new players. If those players still had access to their primary accounts, albeit in a limited capacity as described in the original post, they would be much less likely to create smurf accounts, but they would be 100% separated from anyone who does not want to be on a team with them. So, what is more important, vindictively penalizing toxic players, or reducing the overall impact of toxic players on the player base?
I actually believe that the current system do both (not perfectly, there is room for improvement and it will never be perfect anyway). If the players smurf and create new accounts, that applies to Team as well doesn't it? So they will still be able to play with their team anyway following this logic. I don't think that because you can create a smurf, you end up "not carring" about loosing your account. The time and potential investment you put in it are still gone. It is unfortunately how it works. The more you have to loose, the more you will refrain yourself from doing something to put it at risk. So I do believe that it's important to be intransigent with perma-banned players. There is nothing vindictive about it. I do not have 1 friends that has been perma-banned and I play since season 1. It's not something that just happen because you had a rough day. Being perma-banned suppose being past the redemption period and burning many chances to change your behavior already. I'm not here telling you lets burn every toxic player^^. If you think that players are perma-banned unfairly, too easily, that would be another debate, but it is "supposed" to be the ultimate punishment for players that are not fit to play a game and they should be treated as such assuming it is justified.
KazKaz (OCE)
: You think Riot games, the company behind the creation of {{champion:142}} and rework {{champion:39}} give a flying fuck about their game?
With this kind of argumentation,I think you should takeover!
: Bro this is so true, and the thing that makes me sad is the game is cool, the champions are diverse and fun w/ all sorts of different play styles. But good god a ton of the "people" who play it are some of the most miserable toxic people on the face of the earth. If league ends up dying it will be more-so because of the player-base and not riot's changes to the game itself ( riot's lack of action to maintain a better player base, or counterproductive action like automating the punishment system)
It's not the game itself, it's people that you are criticizing. LoL community is not one kind of people. Any online place with a massive community and a platform to communicate has a pretty high toxic fanbase nowadays. Just look at twitter or Youtube comments, you can clearly see that toxic people are everywhere.
: It's good advice, league is extremely addictive, and only a special kind of masochist has fun with the kind of game this has become this season.
So there are millions of masochist around you^^. Or...not everybody is addicted or impacted the same way.
SonicAF (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=HeärtNeT,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kibA4mAK,comment-id=000800000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-25T11:19:37.601+0000) > > I do understand where you'r coming from with the "f**k the D1 player" as he is toxic and all but even between toxic player you should have fairness. > > As I read your solution, it would be unfair, so not sustainable. I rather have a "f*** all the toxic players" solution rather than "f*** only part of them". > > It create a situation where being bronze/silver is an advantage and it should not be (neither should be being diamond an advantage ofc). I am coming from a point that this is how things naturally are and being diamond is already a disadvantage. Imagine purely hypothetical situation in some other universe, where rainbows and unicorns are less common and there are multiple people needing a new heart...per free heart. Would it be unfair to save a percentage of them while letting some of them rot?
Your last sentence sums it up for me. I would agree if that was unfortunate players that are victims of the randomless of life. Permabanned players are not to be saved in my opinion. I think it's completely ok to ban every players for what they did, it's not a tragedy that fall on them because of random factors they can't control. To make a comparison too, I would associate it more with a "you can get out of prison if you pay 1000 000 dollars. It does happen in reality, but I don't think that's necessary right^^.
: Unpopular opinion: An early cloud or ocean drake is WAY more influential than an early infernal.
I think it's pretty popular to think that Ocean drake is the best early drake. It least that is what I hear the most and what I agree with. I guess for cloud drake it must be different. I would still prefer infernal to cloud drake at any stage just because even if the impact is delayed, at the end it has more chances "in general" to be impact full compared to cloud. But that is situational and it doesn't make cloud drake no worthy.
: I had enough of technology skins...
I kind of agree. Mecha skins are nice don't get me wrong, but there is a lot of series with them and out of series futuristic-looking-like skins now. Which I guess are very popular otherwise we would not have so many. But I'm personally a fan of original/funny/yet cool-looking skins. Yes, I'm a very simple person with no demands :) My biggest dream is to see a very cool skin on Morgana. Yes she has a lot of skins, but she as only 900 RP worth skins and she is in the game from the very beginning. I think she deserve at least ONE 1300 RP worth design, and if you want to go all the way for 1800 or Ultimate skin I will not complain as well :p. (This is true for Kayle as well I guess, even thought I really don't care about this champ :p). #RespectTheSysRiot!
Subdue (NA)
: We could do away with Permanent Bans...
I like the way you suggested your idea, it’s very though through and clear with a certain logic behind it. Yet I disagree with it because I see it as a step in the direction of the perma-banned players more than towards the potential teammates of this toxic players. I do understand that it’s annoying/punishing for a potential team to not be able to play with a friend or anybody that got banned. Yet it follows a certain logic. It’s true for any team in any context and it’s part of the consequences of a bad behavior. I could not imagine for example, somebody being suspended in football being rehabilitated to play but with Strap on his month to be sure he can’t insult the other team, just so it doesn’t punish the team all together (Ok, it’s a stupid situation to imagine, but I just took it to extrapolate how I see this solution in another context. When you are toxic, and especially if you get permabanned, which is the ultimate punishment that suggest many or really extreme bad behavior, you do not get to have special treatment just because you have a team. It’s also unfair to players who only play solo queue compared to those who actually put much effort into their team and don’t mind getting punish in solo queue for example. Even if I really understand that it is not the idea behind your suggestion, It gives a potential “I don’t care, I can still play with my team anyway”. The team/a team is responsible for the players they choose to play with. Even on a professional stage, a pro-player gets banned for x behavior, he punishes his team and it impacts both of them, with much more at stake. This should be true at any level of the game, from bronze to the highest professional level. I see permaban as a full punishment with no compromises. I might have a different approach if this would be for any other sanction such as first offence or leave-buster that are annoying for the all team, but in my opinion, it does not apply to permabans.
SanKakU (NA)
: Toxic player's friends are probably also toxic so they're probably all chat banned already.
I disagree. You can have a variety of friends. I've never been banned, or sanction in any way yet I know people who did. I'm actually pretty sure every Toxic players have friends that are not toxic. Most of the time because they know them in real life.
SonicAF (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Subdue,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=kibA4mAK,comment-id=0008000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-10-25T07:20:44.732+0000) > > Matchmaking works by sorting players relative to the player base. Because it's a team game, solo queue randomizes who you are able to play with or against, within your mmr range. Because everyone in your mmr range is just as likely to be in your team as against you, overtime you get a pretty accurate placement within the player base. > > However, if a tiny percentage of the player base cannot be mixed with the whole player base, that tiny percentage will be ranked incorrectly. > > Let's take a concrete example. Imagine a diamond 1 player is on the toxic queue. There are few if any diamond 1 players in the queue, so his teammates are almost always platinum or high gold. As a result, matchmaking will try to compensate by making the enemy team something like 5 diamond 3 or 4 players. However, this is not a fair or well matched game. > > In the current state, this stuff happens once in a while when very high ranked players queue up and no one is around at their level to play with them. However, under a toxic queue it would happen literally all the time, because the pool of possible players is so much smaller. Matchmaking system, obviously, should not do that for the sake of permabanned players and in your particular concrete example...fuck this D1 player? Having soloqueue somewhat functioning is required for two reasons: 1.) Without it soloqueue players will leave and create smurfs to play soloqueue. My suggestion works for bronze, silver, gold and a part of platinum, leaving only a fraction of players left without games in soloqueue, making it naturally banned. I guess it's better than having it artificially banned for everyone. 2.) You suggested monitoring their behaviour to consider restoring their status in case they truly reform, but it is not going to work for full premade teams. Someone who flames in soloqueue may be really friendly with their premades and some of their inside jokes can be inappropriate for the majority of community, so some form of solo matchmaking, is mandatory. But the cause itself is just and noble. It is exciting. It's actually what tolerance should look like.
I do understand where you'r coming from with the "f**k the D1 player" as he is toxic and all but even between toxic player you should have fairness. As I read your solution, it would be unfair, so not sustainable. I rather have a "f*** all the toxic players" solution rather than "f*** only part of them". It create a situation where being bronze/silver is an advantage and it should not be (neither should be being diamond an advantage ofc).
: The fact that I came back 1.5 years later and Diana still has not been updated disgusts me.
In my opinion Diana is not broken or weak. Not every champ is meant to be changed. > -Has to wait till 6 to do aother nything (hence why was reworked) Same can be said to many champions, especially assassins mid-lane that tend to have a high power-spike at lvl6 (fizz, zed, talon...) > -Has no real ultimate I find her ultimate very strong giving her potentially 2 gap closer that makes her a real treat in a 1v1 matchup. I also fit perfectly with her other abilities. > -Lacks an identity (where should you go as Diana) I guess that's a personal opinion. I see Diana as a mid, and some people like to use her elsewhere. Same as Poppy, Camille, Trundle that used to have specific role and evolved with the meta and players decisions. Not all champions are devoted to one role only. That also answer your next point which is "can't jungle" as if she was meant to be a jungler. I think she was used jungle the same way Ekko is used/were used jungle. It's not necessarily because they have been designed to be, but because players find it healthy and that evolve with the meta/changes each seasons. If there is a big up for AP jungler for example she might benefit from it. But I don't think (I might be wrong thought) that Riot is trying to make her a good jungle as an individual champion. To sum it up, she is healthy to me. I don't see her very often, she is never banned, but when I see her, she is not what I would call a weak champion. People playing Diana are most of the time Diana main and they are able to work well with her compared to some more popular champions. I would welcome any main Diana in my team. More than the likes of Yasuo's for example that tend to be way less reliable^^ (but that again is very personal). And as a conclusion, Id say that with 140 champs if her kit doesn't suit you I'm sure you can find your happiness on a champ that would answer your needs.
: Doesn't that show error in the system then? Any judicial system enacts context as a major contributing factor. Plus this is a game people put countless hours and a ton of money into. Also --> mute button
That's the thing. Judicial system takes time and actually judge your case specifically with people responsible for it. It's obviously impossible in a videogame. There is just no way in my opinion to expect this. All you can do is make sure you don't do what can get you banned or punished in any way, regardless of the context you are in, knowing it will not be taken into account.
: Irelia nerfs are a joke.
Irelia is my priority ban in any game. -5 ms will not change that for sure :p
: "We recognize damage is too high in league and we are working to fix it" -riot games
The balance between attack and defense depends on your preferences. There is no such thing as "perfect defense" or "perfect attack" balance. Some will prefer an aggressive meta, some a longer lane phase, and some prefer to make a lot of damages when other don't. In those many years, we had the occasion to test many meta with different balances. I personally like it as it is now. It's actually one of my favorite seasons in terms of diversity of champions and damages. But If one of the major feedback from the community is "too much damages" they I guess there is a logic behind adjusting it. Doesn't mean it is right or wrong, it's just a choice and feedback will determine again if it's a good one or not, as always.
: On the recent patch notes why is Ashe labelled as a 'marksperson' and not correctly as a 'marksman'
Agree or not, at this end it doesn't change anything game related. It just hurt/annoys you if you are against it, and it makes you happy if you are supporting it. I personally believe that Riot is entitled to use the world they see fit according to their own personal (as a company) believes. It's better than doing the opposite. Then if you want to discuss the issue, it's certainly not in League of Legend that you will find the answer.
rujitra (NA)
: Look, i hate the term “person” being used where “man” was traditionally used (ex: fireman turned into fireperson [firefighter is okay], congressman being turned into congressperson, etc). It’s awkward, clunky, and stupid. “Man” in this instance refers to human. As much as people try to change it, “man” will always be the definitive term for all of “humanity” - history can’t be altered. That being said, I love that Riot is at least trying to be inclusive, even if I personally think it’s unnecessary, clunky, and annoying.
> [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=QxrREyI4,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2018-10-24T20:27:20.970+0000) > > Look, i hate the term “person” being used where “man” was traditionally used (ex: fireman turned into fireperson [firefighter is okay], congressman being turned into congressperson, etc). It’s awkward, clunky, and stupid. “Man” in this instance refers to human. As much as people try to change it, “man” will always be the definitive term for all of “humanity” - history can’t be altered. > > That being said, I love that Riot is at least trying to be inclusive, even if I personally think it’s unnecessary, clunky, and annoying. I would not say that the use of a world is "history" and can't be altered. There is an infinity of worlds we don't use anymore and that were very commun. Maybe in 100 years it will be logical. You are just experiencing the change when it happen.
: I just hate when a company does this
Always funny to read "playing is not rewarding" as if playing was some kind of job that had to give something in return for all the hard time you spent having fun :p
Rutoya (NA)
: So yeah... Platinum V to Silver IV, The Story and Ranting
I'm in the same situation. The good thing is, you win way more LP than you loose if you manage to win your games in silver (not like me, I'm playing with my feet lately, but thats on me^^) I was plat 5 went down to Silver II after a 3/7 placement. I win 25 LP when I loose 14. It can be very fast. Do not loose hope honestly it can go pretty fast and if you have friend from previous season you can play with them from Gold which is just around the corner!
Rioter Comments
: Power Rankings - 7/21/2015
Instead of comparing SKT and Fnatic from their league remember that they played against each other not such a long time ago and it was great. Fnatic improved by recruiting Rekkles, SKT improved as well and I believe Fnatic is clearly in the Top 3 or 4 right now. I know that people love to think tht Fnatic is way behind for some reason and that asian teams are godlike but that not that easy.

HeärtNeT

Level 119 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion