: you kinda missed the point of OP didnt you.
it's not that crazy to imagine klepto being as efficient for the two as it's relient on spell whereas the other two would have too big of abuses. until ezreal top klepto, it's not that bad
SEKAI (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Jaspers,realm=EUW,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=3FImT4en,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-07-20T13:22:20.848+0000) > > I mean she's 80 so that might be questionable. She's only that old in terms of how long she's been alive. Her body's age is a lot younger than say, a typical 80 yo lady due to her hextech core supposedly reduced or stopped her aging process. We don't know how old her body actually is, but she visually seems to be about the same age as Illaoi barring the white hair (which can be white not exclusively because of aging reasons). But as mentioned in another post, that women have a fixed stock of eggs that they would ever have in their lives as they're born and typically runs out by the age of 40-50 or so, so Camille may still be infertile in that vein (unless there is a thing where a women may get pregnant by receiving external BOTH egg and sperm, but I'm not too sure if it is possible especially the external egg part given possible implications of rejection; sperm is k because they signal the women's body to accept them when they enter the egg).
SiG DxD (EUNE)
: why is grasp/glacial augment reduced for ranged
why grasp is reduced for ranged ? imagine if {{champion:8}} gain 1 ap every 8 auto on a champion ? why is glacial augment reduced for ranged ? imagine {{champion:429}} had a 60% slow on auto ?
Rioter Comments
zPOOPz (NA)
: > Name me a state that doesn't have similar law ? South Dakota. Now go find me a similar law.
22-16-37. Aiding and abetting suicide--Felony. Any person who intentionally in any manner advises, encourages, abets, or assists another person in taking or in attempting to take his or her own life is guilty of a Class 6 felony. Source: SDC 1939, §§ 13.1902, 13.1903; SDCL, § 22-16-38; SL 1968, ch 31, § 1; SL 1976, ch 158, § 16-7; SL 2005, ch 120, § 167. And cherry on the cake 22-19B-1. Malicious intimidation or harassment--Felony. No person may maliciously and with the specific intent to intimidate or harass any person or specific group of persons because of that person's or group of persons' race, ethnicity, religion, ancestry, or national origin: (1) Cause physical injury to another person; or (2) Deface any real or personal property of another person; or (3) Damage or destroy any real or personal property of another person; or (4) Threaten, by word or act, to do the acts prohibited if there is reasonable cause to believe that any of the acts prohibited in subdivision (1), (2), or (3) of this section will occur.
KABLUMP (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=KABLUMP,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=fnmNP5Ed,comment-id=000600010000,timestamp=2019-07-16T17:32:06.103+0000) > > Sure if the crime was committed in California I like how someone downvoted me saying "That law only applies if the crime was committed within the juristiction" Since the person I responded to is from EUW I'm going to assume they don't know that different states have their own laws, california law does not apply in texas for example.
I do know that already answered it > [{quoted}](name=The Anivia OTP,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=fnmNP5Ed,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2019-07-16T15:30:31.047+0000) > > Cal. Pen. Code § 401 > (a) Every person who deliberately > aids, or advises, or encourages another to commit suicide, is guilty of > a felony. > > i'm a french dude, i shouldn't know your laws better than you (i mean that's assuming you're in california, but whichever is your state, there is little chance there is no equivalent) > > I'm redacting the article rn , and there are tons of different laws involved > hatespeech is very specific
KABLUMP (NA)
: ***
Cal. Pen. Code § 401 (a) Every person who deliberately aids, or advises, or encourages another to commit suicide, is guilty of a felony.
: thats cause youre kind of searching the wrong thing. telling someone to kill themselves isnt a criminal threat, thats just hate speech. yes, there is a difference.
Cal. Pen. Code § 401 (a) Every person who deliberately aids, or advises, or encourages another to commit suicide, is guilty of a felony. i'm a french dude, i shouldn't know your laws better than you (i mean that's assuming you're in california, but whichever is your state, there is little chance there is no equivalent) I'm redacting the article rn , and there are tons of different laws involved hatespeech is very specific
Aladoron (EUW)
: Did you care to open the link i gave, or you just read the URL and spread your BS about it? I would advise you to open the link and search for the word, for example encouraging, where you could find the following things: - https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=PEN&sectionNum=401.&highlight=true&keyword=suicide - https://law.justia.com/codes/louisiana/2011/rs/title14/rs14-32-12/ - A lot fckin more if you would try reading instead of only writing..... But as far as i see, you prefer to spread bullshit before informing yourself. PS.: The first link is broken for me, but if you copy the URL and paste it works (what the fuck!? )
no i started the post, because i stumbled upon many things about assisted suicide, then i did read the actual link especially california law i did not expect them to include that as, if i remember there was a law about medically assisted suicide but again as i just said : Mea culpa
Aladoron (EUW)
: So here are some laws by state for encouraging suicide (and any other related stuff): http://www.patientsrightscouncil.org/site/assisted-suicide-state-laws/ On the other hand you would have to search very hard to find a judge who would sentence anyone for writing a "kys" in an online game. You can also look up the bitch who was arrested for texting his boyfriend to suicide (TBH i found that sentence stupid too, but whatever...). Once people should really realize that words in an online game from a stranger (who you can mute), has literally 0 power... If you do not like it, you mute it and move on. Even the current system is a huge overkill of the "problem", bringing in legal stuff would be absolute batshit crazy.
assisted suicide is not advocacy of suicide We're talking about average players, not people with actual teminal diseases edit : mea culpa , i did read it through Cal. Pen. Code § 401 (a) Every person who deliberately aids, or advises, or encourages another to commit suicide, is guilty of a felony. thanks for help
Rioter Comments
: >what people build have nothing to do with HOW a champion mechanic should work that's often pretty much the opposite That's actually how it pretty much always goes. It server no purpose to add an interaction to an ability with an item that the champion doesn't want to build. It's like asking why azir's soldiers do not apply bork passive on the targets. He doesn't need it, he doesn't want it. Your line "what people build have nothing to do with HOW a champion mechanic should work" actually works against your argument too. Just because you want to build BC on camille it doesn't mean her second q has to apply a stack. >again , you do proc one 2nd Q sometimes and leave Of you do that, you weren't gonna benefit from BC or EC anyway. EC is only effective against healing during combat when you go all-in. Not in short poke trades. Same with BC being better in longer engagements. You hitting the enemy once isn't going to make bc useful even if you would get a stack for it. And again, you will not buy BC on her. Stop using it as an argument because it's not valid. In EC's case, you have already sold it at level 16 AND you can proc it with everything else in your kit like w. She doesn't ever rely on her second q to put on these effects. >because you want to kite out, and not use your spells as you are preparing for an escape or something You can always use w. Always. You can also use basic attacks and you should ALWAYS use a basic attack and then use the second q as an AA reset. Your argument is invalid. >And the situation where you fight like this to get out , on some matchup this would actually be handy Nope. Not a single case where you would need those effects and not a single case where the only thing you use o nthe enemy is your second q. You even have to use your first q on something first and that is definitely most likely the enemy champion in a case like this. It's not like they run at you and you hit a minion with your q instead of the enemy champion. Low skill level gameplay is not the baseline for game balance. >especially that just regenerate all his hp and when you want to escape him you shouldn't stand there auto attacking , however using a Q to boost movement speed , e out and w when you are far enough will be effective but during that escape you cannot use it And in a situation like this your BC (that you aren't going to actually buy) stacks are useless because you are running away instead of fighting and you are applying them anyway with other attacks, same with EC. Another invalid argument. >Maybe you haven't played enough , but camille doesn't always ALL IN Sometimes , especially when keeping your spells is important that little regeneration denial is important it may represent 60 hp not regenerated and that is a lot. I have played camille much more than you have and on a MUCH higher skill level than you have. She is one of my go to top laners and one of my favorite champions in the game. I know how she works. She doesn't go all-in in pretty much any match-up during laning phase. There also in't any time when keeping your spells up is important unless we are talking about her ult or her e. She can use q and w freely. She only needs her e to escape. And again, you can apply grievous wounds with something else than second q. Second q is not needed at all for it. >why should you be in a better situation pre 16 than post 16 ? isn't strength supposed to build up ? You are in a better situation post 16. Her damage changes from physical to true damage on the second cast. That's a power increase, not a decrease. >and that "You will pretty much NEVER hit an enemy just with your second q so you will proc the item anyway" is an assumption that shouldn't be there It's not an assumption, it's a fact. A scenario that will happen 99.9999999% of the time. >you can , and if that can happen and is missleading for the camille player, it is a bad design It's not misleading for the camille player. You are supposed to know what you champion does and you know her second e deals true damage and not physical damage after 16. It's not bad design. >rules shouldn't change suddenly based on level up and not skill point if the champion isn't design with that in mind. The champion is designed with that in mind though and the rules aren't changing. True damage doesn't apply those effects which means the rules stay the same. Your arguments hold no value on this topic. I consider this topic closed and will not reply to further comments. Have a great day.
> That's actually how it pretty much always goes. It server no purpose to add an interaction to an ability with an item that the champion doesn't want to build. It's like asking why azir's soldiers do not apply bork passive on the targets. He doesn't need it, he doesn't want it. Your line "what people build have nothing to do with HOW a champion mechanic should work" actually works against your argument too. Just because you want to build BC on camille it doesn't mean her second q has to apply a stack. Again , it's not because I want to build BC , but because i want interaction to be consistent You seem to miss the whole point, Her second q APPLY A STACK PRE 16 that's the whole point of the thing meaning for most of the game you're fairly ok , and suddenly , you're unable to use these mechanics because you leveled up the ONLY other champion that loses item interaction is kayle no champion lose permanently ability to use effectively an item, except from camille BC will take 1 more hit to stack and 2nd q poke will not remove regeneration anymore by itself ANY new mechanic based on that ad damage will as well loose it's interaction due to damage going from 97% to 100% from level 15 to level 16 it's not only these two item , it's every future item ad that will be impossible to use past level 16 > Of you do that, you weren't gonna benefit from BC or EC anyway. EC is only effective against healing during combat when you go all-in. Not in short poke trades. Same with BC being better in longer engagements. You hitting the enemy once isn't going to make bc useful even if you would get a stack for it. And again, you will not buy BC on her. Stop using it as an argument because it's not valid. In EC's case, you have already sold it at level 16 AND you can proc it with everything else in your kit like w. She doesn't ever rely on her second q to put on these effects. For BC That changes how EARLY in the combo you can leave, 1 of your attack will benefit it as i said , this represents maybe 10 damages (around 8) but that 10 damages loss is holding back every single all in , and over 10 engage , it's already 100 damages this stacks up very quickly that also mean you will be faster to help your adc if you are playing support camille. EC is a little more touchy , but the kiting out situation sums up pretty well the problem : you are forced to use another spell to remove healing PAST level 16 because it doesn't work anymore. any situation where you land 2nd as final hit and leave will be weaker too it might just represent 20 hp , but again , this does stack over the course of a game. > You can always use w. Always. You can also use basic attacks and you should ALWAYS use a basic attack and then use the second q as an AA reset. Your argument is invalid. You relise that the effectiveness range is different ? Q is fairly close , w is mid range > Nope. Not a single case where you would need those effects and not a single case where the only thing you use o nthe enemy is your second q. You even have to use your first q on something first and that is definitely most likely the enemy champion in a case like this. It's not like they run at you and you hit a minion with your q instead of the enemy champion. Low skill level gameplay is not the baseline for game balance. > but during that escape you cannot use it It's like you're denying just for the sake of denying, and you're being so stubborn your wrong you're actually assuming that there is NO situation when you only land 2nd q and nothing else for 3 seconds ? I brought that good mundo example because that's typically what it happens there, you use 2nd q on him then jump out and use your w in case he get closer so you can cc him What you're asking is that we use W as an attack (that stops your from attacking btw), not use ANY of it's feature , just to get that anti heal ? not sorry you can't do that , because it's stupid however something that is not stupid is using your Q on a minions to rush out , use 2nd Q on him in case he gets to close use E as soon as your not slowed , keep W in case you need to keep advance what Does the removal of regeneration has to do with all that ? Well , if h is low , he stays low longer, and given the fact you kept your W, you don't need to go closer to get 6 seconds of anti heal that is handy in a laning phase. i mean you can ALREADY do that until level 16 where you cannot anymore. that is something you seem to struggle to realise > And in a situation like this your BC (that you aren't going to actually buy) stacks are useless because you are running away instead of fighting and you are applying them anyway with other attacks, same with EC. Another invalid argument. > I have played camille much more than you have and on a MUCH higher skill level than you have. She is one of my go to top laners and one of my favorite champions in the game. I know how she works. She doesn't go all-in in pretty much any match-up during laning phase. There also in't any time when keeping your spells up is important unless we are talking about her ult or her e. She can use q and w freely. She only needs her e to escape. And again, you can apply grievous wounds with something else than second q. Second q is not needed at all for it. 1 you haven't played camille more than me , i own two account , this one who used to be called camille otp and the camille otp account both these accounts are mines much hgher skills , sorry i don't think so , you're plat , you're not diamond 2 i've coached players with bazillions times your level , that doesn't mean i would be more right than you , and the opposite is true , you're no one , remember it. 1st of all, YOU don't go all in in any matchup because you play camille your way, stop being self centered, there is camille jungle , camille mid camille top and camille support 2nd of all ,n this doesn't not concern laning phase , but the very late game , we're talking about level 16 what ever you are bringing before that is irrelevant > You are in a better situation post 16. Her damage changes from physical to true damage on the second cast. That's a power increase, not a decrease. that power increase is not as effective as the other power increase in that situation i would agree to say that black cleaver is .... fairly rare and should not be a prime target BUT , EC is camille's ONLY option against heavy healing, Seeing EC not as effective due to inconsistencies in her kit is NOT > It's not an assumption, it's a fact. A scenario that will happen 99.9999999% of the time. i wanted to check that , so i did one thing, just googled camille pro plays , 1st video 3rd clip we already see a camille kiting out using only 2nd Q with long delay but yeah , that never happens https://youtu.be/0gZksFcvrD0?t=47 Kiting out is fairly frequent, Are they the major part of her "game" , of course not at this problem only triggers when this happen after level 16 , but this problem CAN exist, therefore should be considered imagine if shaco would disappear because of an overview in the game code , or an aurelion sol star disappear from the game *kappa* > It's not misleading for the camille player. You are supposed to know what you champion does and you know her second e deals true damage and not physical damage after 16. It's not bad design. Again , people knew about tk 0 mana cost, but it was inconsistent and finally got changed Bad design is showed when part of your kit is in a grey area and show inconsistencies, that's why old morde was blamed that's why they fix bug UX is maybe the most important part of a design. > The champion is designed with that in mind though and the rules aren't changing. True damage doesn't apply those effects which means the rules stay the same. > > Your arguments hold no value on this topic. I consider this topic closed and will not reply to further comments. Have a great day. It's like saying , hey , you can't use you car to got there now , i mean you always could , but past that point , can't drive it , yeah it is 5 meters away from your home , yes you can use every other thing maybe only 0.0000001% of time will you not be able to go there with anything else but a car but the thing is , you always could and suddenly you can't, that's an inconsistency , it's not critical , but it enhance the experience. to jump back on your azir example , you showed that you don't understand that this is not ALL game just final levels where you are not as effective, and if azir soldier could use botrk until level 16 , there would be the same thread about him.
: >every single thing that triggers from ad damages does not trigger anymore with a single q past level 16 They do. The single q is your first q. Only your second q doesn't apply them. The only things that do not trigger from her second q are BC and executioner's calling. You don't buy BC on her anyway and executioner's calling procs from other sources of physical damage. You will pretty much NEVER hit an enemy just with your second q so you will proc the item anyway. >2 she would not get as much use from the stack as she would otherwise, which is unfortunate, even if it represents like 5 damages Why do you keep bringing this up? This argument is not valid. Stop it. She doesn't get black cleaver. She doesn't want it so it doesn't matter if she gets stacks or not. It doesn't fir her build or play style. >3 you can't simply q to remove regen from champion for 3 seconds and e out past 16. Yes you can. Your first q still applies everything. As i said before, you will never only use your second q on a champion and nothing else. >it know it looks uncanny but CONSISTENCY ! that would make the game more clear so people understand better how to play against that champion None of that would help people play better against her as none of that changes anything. She would still not get a black cleaver and she would still proc executioners calling with some other source than second q. All your arguments are invalid.
what people build have nothing to do with HOW a champion mechanic should work that's often pretty much the opposite again , you do proc one 2nd Q sometimes and leave without any other attack because you want to kite out, and not use your spells as you are preparing for an escape or something And the situation where you fight like this to get out , on some matchup this would actually be handy especially {{champion:36}} that just regenerate all his hp and when you want to escape him you shouldn't stand there auto attacking , however using a Q to boost movement speed , e out and w when you are far enough will be effective but during that escape you cannot use it Maybe you haven't played enough , but camille doesn't always ALL IN Sometimes , especially when keeping your spells is important that little regeneration denial is important it may represent 60 hp not regenerated and that is a lot. why should you be in a better situation pre 16 than post 16 ? isn't strength supposed to build up ? It's not because i mentioned black cleaver that he is the only and that "You will pretty much NEVER hit an enemy just with your second q so you will proc the item anyway" is an assumption that shouldn't be there you can , and if that can happen and is missleading for the camille player, it is a bad design rules shouldn't change suddenly based on level up and not skill point if the champion isn't design with that in mind.
: But again, that's not a problem because BC is not an item she wants to build. Not to mention she would get all the stacks during her combo anyway. She has to stay and basic attack after the combo to get the stacks anyway. She doesn't benefit from black cleaver enough to want it (and that one stack is not even nearly enough to make her buy it).
you forget one thing : every single thing that triggers from ad damages does not trigger anymore with a single q past level 16 it is very awkward for a champion to loose interaction past a certain timing 2 she would not get as much use from the stack as she would otherwise, which is unfortunate, even if it represents like 5 damages 3 you can't simply q to remove regen from champion for 3 seconds and e out past 16. it know it looks uncanny but CONSISTENCY ! that would make the game more clear so people understand better how to play against that champion
: OmG Camille buff???? WTF are you thinking you trying to make a knmgjksdngp;n monster????!?!!?!?? but really though camille doesnt need a flat out buff she needs a way to actually interact with her laner other then W them endlessly. tri force gives camille everything she wants and more. question though does her Q true damage crit?
1 damage buff , that just allow some interaction with item she has pre-level 16 but not after level 16 That's not a huge buff , just making things more consistent
: Those items are completely usable but you don't want a black cleaver in her build anyway. Get a tiamat item and they will proc even on her 2nd q. Also, while camille does lose most lanes, she is still a very solid pick because her mid/late game is super strong.
they are usable but not AS effective , it's barely something but it changes a little the penetration on her combo or the way she can play with Buffed Q
Rioter Comments
: Alt-tab If its in window'd borderless, you can alt-tab, and click where your taskbar would be to make it overlap the client and type in task manager. Also if you hold alt tab you can select the task manager window.
Rioter Comments
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: July 5
YES YES YES YES Counter tools are amazing just like i love the fact we can burst shields with spells These add a lot more interactivity in the lobby , and makes picking a champion way more interesting :D Having a counter tool as a strenght is always amazing that's why we like braum and his amazing W or Kassadin and his interruption It's not targeted against everyone , just a bunch of champion that give a general sens to the champion , and that's amazing.
: thx your advice. so What can i do contect the headquarter's twitter??
yes, but again , make sure to get a friend to translate for you , If you can properly report abuse from your region with a good translation They will surely investigate, player behavior can help you understand what is wrong. make sure to post in that section then make a tweet about your problem so if riot don't react , drama comes in :D
: RiotGames_Korea unfairness
1st : wrong board, this is not ["player behavior"](http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation) 2nd: i have no clue what you are saying , i know for a fact that i'm not a reference in terms of english good practises, however, i have NO CLUE whatsoever of what you're trying to say, , ask a friend for help on translation or use contextualized translation. 3rd : if you want to talk to the headquarter's responsible(/manager/whoeverisincharge), consider using twitter
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
CurS1VE (NA)
: Zilean is the most versatile champion in the game!
I've Analyzed every champion 1v1 as a coach, and after analysis Here are the most versatile champion in the game in order : #1 {{champion:85}} {{champion:74}} they do not need to swap items to fit the current strategy which makes them extremely versatile Kennen just have t prioritize different spell and type of play Heimer just have to change the configuration of his turret #2 {{champion:201}} {{champion:268}} {{champion:126}} {{champion:34}} {{champion:30}} {{champion:141}} {{champion:117}} {{champion:61}} {{champion:98}} {{champion:8}} {{champion:238}} All are pretty versatile as they have tool to siege, wombo combo and splitpush however they are not perfect at one of these 3 and therefore are not more versatile than the 2 above But again changing playstyle require a lot. i could go on , but i'll directly jump to the last category , the champion that do 1 thing only most of the time : #last {{champion:131}} {{champion:9}} {{champion:150}} {{champion:120}} {{champion:202}} {{champion:96}} {{champion:421}} {{champion:107}} {{champion:68}} {{champion:16}} {{champion:23}} {{champion:77}} {{champion:350}} {{champion:115}} Changing their way of playing might be extremely costly (for instance ziggs need to get mana/cdr items to poke or {{item:3100}} to split push) or some (as fiddlesticks) are just really not good at the other things this is what the document i made for versatility look like https://imgur.com/s2XiaT5 ANd before you ask zilean has a score of 4 4 5 3 that mean (the first three) that he can play many strategy (passivee , agressive, bait) but he needs to change quite a bit to fit his new gameplay so NO he is NOT the most versatile as he require too much to change gameplay and because the are champion who do as much as him without the need to change anything whe he picks a strat he has to stick to it.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: Why was he escalated to a 2 week ban? Why not a chat restriction? This is just PR garbage.
> [{quoted}](name=ChrisBrownze,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=9TrQjVsX,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-06-21T08:01:45.831+0000) > > Why was he escalated to a 2 week ban? Why not a chat restriction? This is just PR garbage. Because chat restrict don't stop people from afk
: We’re updating our policy so unusual play styles don't get 14 day bans
I remember that I clearly pointed out how shady the standard is YEARS ago , I remember writing a total of 150k character to show that Stardards are too unclear for what it was And clarification was needed as excuses could be find in many places and although full of bad faith https://studio.youtube.com/video/5Nl1dDSv1-c/edit?utm_campaign=upgrade&utm_medium=redirect&utm_source=%2Fanalytics this video i made for the occasion shows that a standard was critically needed (I mean if i didn't clearly said in chat "i wanted to show lee sin how do you loose a game", yet i still note to that day that the rioter DID NOT point out these things, it's like he had NO strandard whatsoever to hold on) I may not have participated directly but i'm glad i noticed it WAY before you guys and if it was me , that issue would have ben fixed long before that happened. ------------------------------------- If you want to avoid the next Drama , i already contacted the support but the "I ban because i want" is illegal And is considered and abusive contract clause (at least here in europe) You really should avoid these lines in the contract, gameforge already had a little taste (ref in french: https://forums.jeuxonline.info/showthread.php?t=1332560 ) The access to account, even if freely created has to be maintained unless contract can be broken through non abusive clauses don't thank me
: "Riot doesn't enforce metas" And then Riot proceeds to enforce a meta.
: Well im usually playing with friends so it may be different, but we generally accept that someone plays terrible to eachother and with that knowledge, expect less from them. There's no reason to say anything to the person after you know theyre bad. Theres nothing you can say to improve their skill immediately. You just gotta accept when someone is bad, and roll your eyes at their terrible plays. I say this cuz the only problematic thing is that you seem to harp on people, specifically that draven. Ive never considered it a good, or cool, or even beneficial thing to be good at video games, so i feel like a douche harping on someone's play, yaknow? So i just dont do it. I would be embarassed for taking such an inconsequential game so seriously and to show emotion over someone else's ability to play it.
to be fair, i didn't take it badly , it just generally annoyed me that i could not communicate with draven and therefore that no team cohesion was possible (which to me is pretty much like griefing) and i was generally very chill in this game , even slipping a few jokes and when pointing out mistake , i make sure to not being mean but constructive and helpful even with rhetorical question as "why you run toward enemies with 20 hp ?" But i wondered how other people would take it
: Don't change anything. Yes, it will net you a perma-ban eventually if you keep going like this but it's **INSANE**, beyond insane that you got silenced (and therefore banned) for this. It's crazy. While this is negative, this is how every human pretty much acts and while you could not type, it's impossible, this game drvies you insane. I can't believe it.
buddy , i didn't get banned, my account is going perfectly well , i'm just trying to se what i can do better
Rioter Comments
: (┛ಠ_ಠ)┛彡┻━┻
OMg , this made my day
: Can we give GLP its hp back and remove the mana please.
inb4 you play it with glacial augment and realise how absurd it gets
Jordmore (EUW)
: Riot-NB3 A Unjust Hypocrisy.
Well , they could invest millions into advertisement... or just become the streamer's puppy
: Is there still a zero tolerance policy for certain phrases?
: No. a report does not show favoritism. A report is an unbiased review by someone that doesn't have a predetermined view and zero backstory. Calling up your friend and having them specifically review and ban a player is not the same thing as an unbiased review. No matter how you slice it - this act was wrong and whoever was called by the player (NB3) should not be allowed to review the case nor should the person reviewing the case have any previous knowledge of the incident. The very moment that NB3 called his friend riot should have nullified the report as a dispute between two streamers and either punished both or punished neither. *edit* beyond that what NB3 did was blatant harassment in game chat and there is literally video proof of him admitting to intentionally AFKing to end the game regardless of whether or not his team was still playing. --------- The behavior exhibited by NB3 is borderline psychotic and extremely unhealthy. the amount of targeted hate and rage will serve to do nothing but fuel animosity towards off-meta and new or unskilled players.
> [{quoted}](name=BLACK REALM GOD,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=IzkwRl25,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-06-16T22:19:40.697+0000) > > No. a report does not show favoritism. A report is an unbiased review by someone that doesn't have a predetermined view and zero backstory. Calling up your friend and having them specifically review and ban a player is not the same thing as an unbiased review. No matter how you slice it - this act was wrong and whoever was called by the player (NB3) should not be allowed to review the case nor should the person reviewing the case have any previous knowledge of the incident. Again , that behavior happen in game and sending support a ticket is exactly the same as what he did > The very moment that NB3 called his friend riot should have nullified the report as a dispute between two streamers and either punished both or punished neither. Two wrong don't make a right. each thing has to be judged individually > beyond that what NB3 did was blatant harassment in game chat and there is literally video proof of him admitting to intentionally AFKing to end the game regardless of whether or not his team was still playing. Be careful , you might not know but inting when streamer are int he game IS a thing That's why the rioter said "i will investigate" or rather "i'll take a look" but not "yes i'll ban him" They will contextualize his behavior. lot of you guys a reproaching blurry things, may it be the afk, what he said vocally or anything. and to be honest , it has to be seen from chat perspective mute the video and it doesn't look THAT bad (i've reported manually a bunch of people , one of them clearly asked me to "die" and is still playing to this day, so i believe this is the borderline toxicity they want.) they cannot ban you for something happening OUTSIDE of the game that's why t1 is still vocally insulting. > The behavior exhibited by NB3 is borderline psychotic and extremely unhealthy. the amount of targeted hate and rage will serve to do nothing but fuel animosity towards off-meta and new or unskilled players. again , read chat , not what he said , he could be the worst psycho , what he has to be judged on is his IN GAME behavior it's not like he was a pro and they could cut his salary a little.
: I think the primary complaint is NB3 isn't getting banned for his behavior. I have no issues with the other player getting banned
> [{quoted}](name=skills of luck,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=IzkwRl25,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-06-16T21:43:18.174+0000) > > I think the primary complaint is NB3 isn't getting banned for his behavior. I have no issues with the other player getting banned Tbh , if it's not a consistent behavior and he get only "that" toxic a couple of times over 1000 games , it can be considered acceptable Unless you explicitly cross the border, you will most likely not get banned also , he shouldn't get BANNED but rather receive a chat restrict at worse. this toxicity has happened to all of us , if it's not consistently happening (such as t1 pre-megaban) streamer are rarely banned more or less than other players. it's just easier to spot such behavior when it happen in front of 1000+ people
Rioter Comments
afmghost (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Ornndyr2k19,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=vrmBjMNv,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-06-13T13:37:53.847+0000) > > "Riot is paying women less than men" > this is the most bullcrap base for investigation one can hope to investigate > > pay should be based on your contribution to the company and your assertiveness for the raise > most women don't seek out to get a raise > most men that do get raises seek it actively > > im sure a 10y male employee will be thrilled to find out that the 1y female cowerker is getting paid the same because of reasons > that would be a hard incentive for senior employees to leave the company if it becomes so While I agree that pay should be based off of the employee's contributions to the company, as well as things like merit and experience, this is Riot games we're talking about. I checked the article, and it mentions that it's also about things like sexual harassment and assault, not just pay. The article also says that Riot is refusing to provide the information requested. The only reason they would be doing that is if they are trying to hide something. I mean people refuse to take drug tests or take tests at sobriety checkpoints because they're under the influence, and refusal to comply makes it worse for them. Why shouldn't it make it worse for riot?
> The article also says that Riot is refusing to provide the information requested. The only reason they would be doing that is if they are trying to hide something. If you are not forced to give informations up , you should never agree, especially when it's about such thing , they may have forgotten to pay someone a month , and solved that but still get sued for that institution will give them the right to used only the concerned data , not any other which they could get sued from if they gave it away Imagine you have a wallet , and you happen to use a picture of a friend without it's consent, let's imagine the friend died, and his family don't wan't to let you have a picture of him now police is looking for substances : If you accept and the policemen want to get you in trouble they can take the picture, find that guys , ask the family and get you in trouble for that but if you refuse police has to get a special permission and they have to be only looking for thing that are directly incriminating such as weapons or drug and they can never take that picture and get you sued for it. that's why they should always refuse, because maybe they forgotten something , an old paper , never took care of it , it never bothered anyone , is related to an odd law (such as naming you pig napoleon in france) ; they will eventually get searched, everyone knows it , but at least only the VERY interesting things will be delivered and anyone trying to get them in trouble will themselves be in trouble in that vincinity but anyway, if they hides it , it DOESN'T MEAN THEY ARE LYING.
: There are a lot of old champion designs that have these redundant AP ratios, often it's because of items like Tri Force that used to give 30 AP long time ago and was a slight boost to these abilities. Newer champion designs/reworks tend to focus on only 1 core offensive stat unless they are meant to be played hybrid or have more options like for example Kayle or Kai'Sa. On the other hand you have champions like Trundle or Wukong (with AP ratio on his W, extremely useless). Then there are also some champions with slightly more potent AP ratios but still suboptimal like Nasus or Pantheon that maybe used to be better with AP but the idea got abandoned and I guess Riot just left it there out of nostalgia or for URF or as a trap.... who knows, so there are a bit trollish but rarely seen. These values come from a time when champions where created with a lot more room for experimentation because the whole game was experimentation and there was no most efficient strategy, because Riot didn't really plan it, the game was very unbalanced but also very unpredictable so you could often find a way to do something unexpected and new so the lack of balance was less likely to become a consistent issue. Nowadays the game is balanced a lot more tightly for specific builds and metas and players got more adapted to this environment so these rudimentary stat ratios seem very silly. Ironically players sometimes say the game is less balanced but that is a misconception. Experimentation just isn't cheesy and rewarding as it used to be. You can do some weird builds but it will put you at a disadvantage more often than not.
You completely forgot that some things like baron buff add ap damage without any need to build ap. which make them stronger for a smaller cost. Also riot said they don't want to remove these ratios as troll build are appreciated and add some diversity , that's why rengar rework has still W ap ratio and shaco got new ap ratio on Q. sylas also have an ad ratio , and that makes it funny.
: Which champion do you think I would enjoy playing?
: all of these say america good luck arresting someone from an other continent {{sticker:sg-miss-fortune}}
Well , even if you can't arrest someone, He will be unable to step in the territory if he committed such crime so that's ok !
: " Prisons are full in most countries tbh, and most of the time, you're just gonna get paid a few bucks plus" That is not the subject here.Are you intentionally confusing subjects because you have no arguments or ??? "yes, that's called natural selection. such people should not be in society as they are a threat. to society this way, people are either going to contribute to society to repair their stupidity or contribute to society by not threatening other people" what are you talking about...Everyone sometimes do something stupid under emotions.Even you...So there is no need to act like you are above any other human being... You act superior like you newer made anything stupid ever...That is just to arrogant .You need to improve your attitude in order to contribute society...
> [{quoted}](name=captaincomando1,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=FIqJTvdp,comment-id=0000000000010000000100000001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-09T00:42:03.579+0000) > > " Prisons are full in most countries tbh, and most of the time, you're just gonna get paid a few bucks plus" > > That is not the subject here.Are you intentionally confusing subjects because you have no arguments or ??? You brought in the fact that prison would be full, i corrected you by explaining that they are ALREADY full AND most of the time if you are threatening someone , you get fined, not sent in jail. so bringing the jail argument is invalid You just didn't catch the argument , but i agree it was unclear > what are you talking about...Everyone sometimes do something stupid under emotions.Even you...So there is no need to act like you are above any other human being... You act superior like you newer made anything stupid ever...That is just to arrogant .You need to improve your attitude in order to contribute society... I agree that we do things stupid under emotion , that's why there is something called SELF CONTROL if you don't plan on having any, you're not suited for society Anger is no excuse for making other potentially have ptsd Arrogance is perfectly suited for society, because even if it makes you feel bad That's your personal reaction to my behavior that comes from YOU if you're annoyed by someone arrogant the problem is from YOU As i'm not doing any harm to you , nor am i affecting you at all and threatening anyone, the only thing that makes you feel bad is the fact that you don't like feeling like you're inferior But what if YOU WERE inferior ? what does justify that feeling ? Nothing ! Of course, if you follow no standard in your life , you're going to be annoyed once you realise how much you left yourself live without thinking about your surroundings yet still think i could in no point be superior. I do think that i am smarter than most people, not because it's just like that , but because i spent my damn life learning instead of being interested in what do other think about me, because learning why people judge others is 100x better than trying to not be judged at all. you're playing a game you're not even understanding , yet you expect things from this game it's like trying to kill the nexus min 1.... you will test many things , loose your time, make stupide decision , all because you are too lazy to learn. Same for social intelligence, you don't even understand the purpose of language, it's advantage, what you can expect from other humans, how they will react, and you use it in a way that may harm others. YES we make stupid decisions, however, the range of the stupid decisions you can make can be greatly altered by simply THINKING BEFORE ACTING if you can't think when you're angry, then learn to go to sleep when you're angry DOGS KNOW HOW TO BEHAVE, If you Can't control yourself better than a dog can I also know that due to identity protective cognition you will simply ignore all i said , stand your ground because YOU CAN'T be a bad person right ? you can't have been wrong all this time ? i must be the one being wrong learning and trying to make the world a better place for everyone equally and safely, by making others realise that they are not alone, think deeply about their arguments before thinking, being able to change their opinions. and even if i know that alone i won't be able to do it, i hope that identity protective cognition will push them OUT of the forum , so only people using their brain properly , avoiding fallacies, backing up their argument with example if needed AND agree to be wrong sometimes will stay (so we can actually have a good and constructive discussion). be one smart human or https://media2.giphy.com/media/A6PcmRqkyMOBy/giphy.gif and i'm sorry , but most of us haven't threatened anyone, if you are able to do it , well learn to contain your anger if you can't, we have medication for that And if you don't want anything in the end, just go away from society if you're planning on doing harm. if you threaten players in the game , you shall be expelled from that game. As much as if you don't want to kil yourself, don't jump off a plane without any parachute.
: if you say so.If people get internet treat serious and start legal action every time they get death treat over a game on the internet,and cops take action based on that,prisons would be full . Is it ok to treat someone life even as a joke on the internet,no it is not. But does that mean that someone will take action every time that happen,nope. People in real life sometimes use "I will kill you" in anger,or as a joke.Do you really think it is necessary to take action every time someone say those words.Are you sure that is how world function??? Treat need to be real in order for anyone to take action...
> [{quoted}](name=captaincomando1,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=FIqJTvdp,comment-id=00000000000100000001000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-08T22:51:46.524+0000) > > if you say so.If people get internet treat serious and start legal action every time they get death treat over a game on the internet,and cops take action based on that,prisons would be full . Prisons are full in most countries tbh, and most of the time, you're just gonna get paid a few bucks plus a little extra > Is it ok to treat someone life even as a joke on the internet,no it is not. But does that mean that someone will take action every time that happen,nope. Yes, but just like when you're stealing something , legally you are wrong , but as long as the victim don't take any legal action , you're safe > People in real life sometimes use "I will kill you" in anger,or as a joke.Do you really think it is necessary to take action every time someone say those words.Are you sure that is how world function??? Treat need to be real in order for anyone to take action... yes, that's called natural selection. such people should not be in society as they are a threat. to society this way, people are either going to contribute to society to repair their stupidity or contribute to society by not threatening other people
Hotarµ (NA)
: >Literally every person on my team agreed with me that he was being a horrible person. But ok riot, good job with your system You were punished because two wrongs don't make a right. Yes, that player was probably being a tool and I won't deny that, especially if the majority of your team agrees with you. **However**, that doesn't give you the right to stoop to their level. Riot doesn't want negativity in any capacity. Besides, that should have been evident from your 2 previous punishments if they were for standard negativity. If it was for zero-tolerance language (such as racism, homophobia, or inciting self-harm) that is unacceptable and will always warrant a 14-day ban. If you can't respond civilly, don't respond at all. Sorry you had a rough game, but that doesn't excuse your own misdeeds.
> [{quoted}](name=Hotarµ,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=7BEYyqxu,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-06-08T22:57:34.392+0000) > > Do you know why you were punished? Because two wrongs don't make a right. That's what i like to hear <3
: oh god help you...If that is the case half of internet users would be in prison. you have no idea what you talking about.' There is a difference between SERIOUS treat and a fucking treat in internet game to total stranger.So many uneducated people around here
NO there is no difference, As much as you can't 'kill someone for fun' A threat IS a crime, because the other person is not supposed to know if you're joking the whether it is perceived as a joke will only change the fact that the threatened person will take legal action or not.
Kattzy (NA)
: Here are a few examples: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/democratic-staffer-arrested-dox-wikipedia-senate-republicans-personal-information-online.html https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/new-york-man-sentenced-24-months-prison-internet-offenses-including-doxing-swatting http://www.startribune.com/canadian-teen-sentenced-after-swatting-doxxing-across-north-america/318537651/
HHMMMMMM ArgumentationPorn i already am in love with you
KABLUMP (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=The Anivia OTP,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=FIqJTvdp,comment-id=0000000000060000,timestamp=2019-06-07T20:42:49.697+0000) > > 1- Mocking people is making fun of them, at NO POINT i made fun of him > sarcasm on the other hand is made for mocking > > 2- how to formulate it... > while i understand his point of view, linking your source would have been more appropriate > And i'm pretty sure that speech would find itself a hard time to be implemented in the real world > due to assumption of a certain way human behavior is functioning back then (before 2000) > Most for our discoveries on behaviorism are fairly recent. > > > However , i appreciate the fact that you used a source to back up your argument > but the source of that argument No, youre disparaging people like myself woth asd in order to get upvotes and look cool You did not have to bring up EIQ in the debate at all You are acting like bully What you said was akin to telling a short person that they couldt partake in basketball because they are too short Also your correlation between empathy and eiq is false People with low eiq show less empathy, that does not mean they have less empathy. Anyways feel free to downvote this one too while pretending youre so cool even though youre just a fucking bully
>No, you're disparaging people like myself woth asd in order to get upvotes and look cool You'd better see my message record, i'm used to get downvoted to oblivion, I am ALWAYS like that, yet you made the assumption that i care about the opposite I don't want to feel cool that is pointless, however , i wan't to bring well thinking and good conversations in this forum Do not try to guess someone else's intent , unless he express it himself, you're not going to look very smart. >You did not have to bring up EIQ in the debate at all 1- i did not social intelligence is NOT EIQ, you need to read properly, 2- and even if it was why should i not ? back up your argument please >You are acting like bully Was i looking for you to tall you that ? or did i simply reply to your message , if you don't like counter argumentation , simply refrain from speaking, no one will the be able to reply to you >What you said was akin to telling a short person that they could partake in basketball because they are too short No , that would be unjustified discrimination, i would not do that, however , i would say that YES short people are disadvantaged >Also your correlation between empathy and eiq is false That's because i never told anyone to empathize, i did not even bring in EIQ as a matter of fact , you're making a scene of something i've not said i'd bet my car that you thought that what "understood meant" yet psychiatrist understand you, that doesn't mean they empathize. that's the kind of understanding i was referring to. >People with low eiq show less empathy, that does not mean they have less empathy. To be fair, you're a little away , between to people , if dude 1 meet dude 2, and dude 2 need something from dude 1, whether dude 1 don't have it or don't show it have no differentiation in that context. Because it has no incidence what so ever, and if he have it and want to show it , he should consider his condition all the time as a matter of fact that almost what my last advice said. >Anyways feel free to downvote this one too while pretending youre so cool even though youre just a fucking bully i will not downvote this because i'm cool , but because you're wrong. It's okay to be wrong, you can't always be the smart one you maybe have thrown some personal issues into it Social intelligence is completely something else The original definition by Edward Thorndike in 1920 is "the ability to understand and manage men and women and boys and girls, to act wisely in human relations" You are totally wrong , and it's because you are to lazy to google things you don't really understand because if you google "social intelligence" this is the first article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_intelligence However, that wonderful AD hominem of yours is quite incredible.... i could be the worst person, any kind of these psychopath or criminal or other, a bully that wouldn't change the truth behind my sayings. you misunderstood what i said, then pulled an Argmentum Reductio ad Hitlerum, Followed by a bunch of misconceptions about EIQ, Social intelligence, discriminations, my intentent based on the ad hominem; said 1 thing debatable (the penultimate sentence) and gracefully closed the conversation with Argumentum ad lazarum the amount of fallacies is incredible, please use that message to become a smarter person as you clearly lack the intelligence to not use fallacies.
Show more

The Anivia OTP

Level 169 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion