: > [{quoted}](name=2ManyJons,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=RZtuZGVX,comment-id=00070000,timestamp=2017-08-14T13:24:05.781+0000) > > Leona is the most popular aggressive support, and one of the most effective engage tanks in the game. > > You ever been tower dived at full health by an Ahri, and her walk away alive? No. > Ever had your bot lane tower dived at full health by Leona, and her walk away alive with the tower and two assists? Probably. In the overall champion popularity between these 2 Ahri is a lot more popular than Leona, she has the most skin sales out of any other female league champion, most of the female league cosplayers are using her as base and she is displayed everywhere on the media especially in Asian countries where the majority of skin sales come from. Not saying that Leona should not get a star guardian skin but picking Ahri first was the correct marketing choice since skin decisions are based primary on profits. That's why they always give priority to champions like Ezreal and Ahri, because they are popular and bring the most profits.
Yes, Riot panders to Ahri now like they did when Katarina was the hot one.
: Leona is a lot less popular champion than Ahri, its obvious that Ahri will get more skins, its called marketing
Leona is the most popular aggressive support, and one of the most effective engage tanks in the game. You ever been tower dived at full health by an Ahri, and her walk away alive? No. Ever had your bot lane tower dived at full health by Leona, and her walk away alive with the tower and two assists? Probably.
: Not everyone is upset she received the skin. I've seen plenty of comments on the Star Guardian Ahri thread praising the skin team for its creation. I'm sure others are happy too, but those upset with the skin are more likely to make a thread about it.
And Ahri mains are more likely to comment on a thread about it. Ahri is marketed to be a sexy "waifu" style champions that panders to the average teen age, anime fan, boy. That's why Katarina used to be all over everything League related, until people stopped wanting a sexy woman champ and wanted to see a younger, more promiscuous champ that preferably had cat ears. Instead they had to settle for fox lol.
: I thought it was great in Ornn's bio to let Anivia burn his house down and Volibear beat him up
Glîtchy (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=2ManyJons,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=RZtuZGVX,comment-id=00000001000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2017-08-11T16:21:10.506+0000) > > tbh, if I could pick one champion to give a Star Guardian skin too for real, it would be {{champion:427}} Like as in making him "the first star"?
Exactly. Ivern would make a perfect Zordon figure for the Star Guardians.
: {{champion:89}} Merely worships the god of a sun (star). {{champion:16}} is literally the **Star Child**. I believe the goddess & descendant of the stars is much more suited to lead the guardians of stars than a human who is a mere worshipper of one particular star. {{sticker:slayer-jinx-catface}}
Actually, after the new Targon lore dropped, she's now the embodiment of the celestial spirit of the sun :D However, I do agree 100% Soraka should have gotten the legendary and not Ahri. For that exact reason.
Glîtchy (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=2ManyJons,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=RZtuZGVX,comment-id=000000010000000000010000,timestamp=2017-08-11T16:14:35.433+0000) > > OK, I think {{champion:43}} {{champion:114}} {{champion:15}} and {{champion:113}} would make awesome Star Guardians, ESPECIALLY Sejuani cause she could ride her little familiar, but would you disqualify them all based on being too old? Not really, so long as they don't put Sej in all pink or red
tbh, if I could pick one champion to give a Star Guardian skin too for real, it would be {{champion:427}}
Glîtchy (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=2ManyJons,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=RZtuZGVX,comment-id=0000000100000000,timestamp=2017-08-11T16:02:37.193+0000) > > Again, what does age have to do with it? > > Akali has 0 particles other than a bubble to work with. Sona would make a pretty Star Guardian imo, but to focus your picks to "champions under the legal age to vote" seems odd. The point being since she's high school age it can work easily, also her Kama's can be changed to stars as well as her dash having a trail of stars behind her, look I'm just spitballing here, though between SG {{champion:84}} or {{champion:22}} (mentioned earlier) I'd take Ashe.
OK, I think {{champion:43}} {{champion:114}} {{champion:15}} and {{champion:113}} would make awesome Star Guardians, ESPECIALLY Sejuani cause she could ride her little familiar, but would you disqualify them all based on being too old?
Zeanix (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Stars Shaper,realm=EUW,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=gJQKTJdo,comment-id=000a,timestamp=2017-08-11T08:21:47.345+0000) > > Then Riot should stop telling us that "fitting the theme" is a deciding factor for X champion getting the skin for Y skinline while in reality it just goes by their personal choices and popularity of the champion. When the hell has Riot has said this? I've read many articles about skin lines and not one has said this. Are you just following what other people are saying or?
I know for a fact I've read Katychaos say that a good 20 times.
: And on the other side we gave the star destroyers with Diana as their leader
See, the story writes its self haha. {{sticker:slayer-pantheon-popcorn}}
Glîtchy (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=2ManyJons,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=RZtuZGVX,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2017-08-11T15:47:42.353+0000) > > See, those two just seem boring kit/particle wise. Leona would look good in a Star themed armour with a winged shield and lots of sparkles, but she'd have plenty of particles to have fun with also. Maybe like a Cosmic skin, but Star Guardian just doesn't look her style. {{champion:84}} is also a good candidate as she's like 16-17 or even {{champion:37}} could make it work
Again, what does age have to do with it? Akali has 0 particles other than a bubble to work with. Sona would make a pretty Star Guardian imo, but to focus your picks to "champions under the legal age to vote" seems odd.
Glîtchy (NA)
: Ehh.... idk, I mean sure I'm up for a different Star Guardian skin, but Leona.....doesn't exactly fit in either, {{champion:22}} or {{champion:39}} would be better
See, those two just seem boring kit/particle wise. Leona would look good in a Star themed armour with a winged shield and lots of sparkles, but she'd have plenty of particles to have fun with also.
: She doesn't seem the type at all. You have a lot of slender girls (and Ezreal), that look like they could be in high school. Leona seems far more motherly in appearance (as a random guess, I'd place her in her early 30s), and, while she's not quite at Illaoi levels of beefy, she's certainly not slender, either...
Op wants to preserve the Magical Girl theme that I hate so much...even though Ahri is like 400 years old lol. I thought poppy, lulu, janna, syndra, mf, and soraka all look fine, and they're portrayed as being women or yordels or a goat.
: It just feels like Miss Fortune was a redundant choice for the skin line. She's already got the magical adventure, hearts and stars and vivid colors going on in Arcade Miss Fortune. Same with Ahri. I'm honestly lowkey livid that you guys chose Ahri for the legendary and not Soraka, the ***STAR CHILD.*** Ahri may deserve a legendary, but not of Star Guardian's variety. That solely belongs to Soraka imo. Potential was wasted on Ahri and Miss Fortune when it could've gone to so many: Karma, Leona, Sivir, Taliyah, Irelia (launching star orbits at your enemies for your ult!), Taric, Sejuani, Lissandra and even Vi. I don't mean to come off aggressive, but it's just really aggravating how much Riot caters to Ahri. Her balance condition, her inclusion in skin lines. I understand you guys are doing this as a marketing strategy because of how much people love Ahri and how well her skin generally sells, but it just feels unfair for many, many champions who barely have more than three skins, some two.
I would have loved more than anything to have had a Star Guardian Leona. And Raka did deserve the legend skin on this one, not Ahri. As far as MF goes, I think her Arcade skin does bright pink and sparkles better than her Star Guardian will. Even though it looks super cool.
Rioter Comments
Zeanix (OCE)
: New Star Guardian Members Announced!
So I really hope they don't try to "over man" Ezeral's skin. I'm perfectly ok with him flying around like a magical girl with the others haha.
: STAR GUARDIAN EZ IS OFFICIAL BOIS
I'm a little annoyed that they made Raka the supp of their team instead of Taric....especially since Ez is there lol
Broporo (NA)
: I see where you're coming from, and it can be looked at as an overall player score as well as champion skill! I believe the reason vision score is calculated into the overall score as well is that it helps to determine just how much you're helping your team overall. Even though it's a mechanic available to every champion in every match (and everyone should probably be contributing to vision somehow), it still helps to figure out just how well you're doing overall. With that being said, if you're playing Sona in support then your vision score *probably* holds a much heavier weight than if you were, say, playing Annie in mid. Still, you're always welcome to post your thoughts on this over in [**Gameplay**](http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance) if you want to get the communities opinions and have a little more visibility towards the devs!
Broporo (NA)
: One of the finer points of how mastery scores are calculated is that your performance is based on what champion and in which role, but also compared to everyone else who played that champion and role. For instance, you were playing Diana in top let's say. Someone else might have had the same score, but a better vision score.
I don't understand some of the scoring points. Vision being one of them. If all champions use wards, why does vision score factor into an individual champion proficiency rank? Does Jinx ward differently than Lucien? Some of the score points feel more like a basis for determining a players overall skill, and less of that players skill with an individual champion.
: no ... focus on eveyrthing and become an all around better player {{sticker:zombie-brand-mindblown}}
Nah, then you'll only get an A, you need like to go like 3-7-1 with 500 farm and your good.{{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}}
: well short answer? YES , what you ask? EVERYTHING we can always improve on everything. learn how to get more objectives, map control, take enemy jungle to deny cs/experience , wave management, rotations , kill participation the list goes on and on and yes you played well that is why you got an A+ ( not here to knock you) very well done but to get S , S+ you have to perform in the top 5% of average for that champ in that role... your damage is ok but quinn actually out damage you. you were involved in less then 50% of team kills as far as this game is concerned if you got more objectives, had more wards, a lil better cs and a higher kill % you would of had an easy S+ nothing wrong with the A+ , but its just not perfect ( S = perfect)
But mostly just focus on farm and nothing else.
: Ok. Let me explain this to you. Unless someone leveled up a smurf account and tailored their MMR to the level of the boostee, you are seriously gimping yourself. If a premade for some reason loses the match, and they have a significantly higher MMR than you, you gain a huge LP boost, and they lose a huge chunk of theirs. If they win, you lose very little, and their gains slow to a crawl. That's quite literally how ranked is balanced.
And if for some reason the premade wins the match (as statistics says they will) and they're playing against people with higher mmr, then THEY will gain a huge Lp boost, and the solo players will lose a huge chunk of theirs because they lost to a 12-13-1400 as a 1600 player. You are treating it as though a solo player is getting the boost with nothing to comp his ability for it. The 4 man is getting the boost but their getting the major bonus of being a 4 man, always in communication, knows eachothers play abilities...ect. That stuff means a lot in a TEAMWORK BASED GAME.
Swegmec (NA)
: Yeah but that means they would lose fewer LP and gain more b/c they have a higher adjusted MMR. Premades would have a harder time b/c they would most likely lose their battle against another premade with +200 MMR, b/c the first premade was adjusted.
But Riot themselves has said that with Dynamic Que rank doesn't represent actual rank in a real way so one would assume that Mmr would follow that logic.
Draqone (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=2ManyJons,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=9YqzOFht,comment-id=00210002000000000000,timestamp=2016-06-04T21:48:30.024+0000) > > But how is that fair? Why do you get lp gains adjusted to 1700 mmr when you only have 1500 individually? > > If 4 players que up together with 1200-1300-1400-1500 mmr and are all adjusted to a 1600 (average plus 200) then they get to play against other 1600's and get the same gains for abusing the ability to communicate and employ better teamwork than the 1600's, how is they fair for the real 1600 who had to do the work to get those gains instead of just ganging up and getting the "Friendship is magic" bonus? > > Dynamic que is NOT FAIR for solo players who don't have on-call friends to play with. Adjusting your MMR upwards is actually not a bonus but a handicap.
For a solo person I agree. But for a 4 man premade, it probably doesn't even matter. The bonus teamwork that comes from being a premade vs four solo players makes a huge difference.
AD Yuumi (NA)
: ^this
But how is that fair? Why do you get lp gains adjusted to 1700 mmr when you only have 1500 individually? If 4 players que up together with 1200-1300-1400-1500 mmr and are all adjusted to a 1600 (average plus 200) then they get to play against other 1600's and get the same gains for abusing the ability to communicate and employ better teamwork than the 1600's, how is they fair for the real 1600 who had to do the work to get those gains instead of just ganging up and getting the "Friendship is magic" bonus? Dynamic que is NOT FAIR for solo players who don't have on-call friends to play with.
patmax17 (EUW)
: Why Super Galaxy and not Neon Strike?
Honestly, looking at them they do SCREAM Neon Strike. Super Galaxy was more of a Gurren Lagann/Anime robo theme. Shyv and Kindred are just large blobs of Neon color.
RedTao (NA)
: This I can agree with. They could maybe to a prerequesite that until they show a certain standard in normal games, ranked can be locked off until they show they can perform. They can have something like if they get a certain elo, unrelated to ranked elo, they have to be content being in normals. This way the intentional feeders have to wise up and actually play normally for a while before they can bring that behavior into ranked. Riot can say this would just tell trolls what they need to do in order to get to where they want to be, but unless they do something that forces people to act they way they should (Banning people does not make the worst of them change their behavior. Tyler is a prime example) then behaviors won't change. I would personally like to see Riot bring back their old chat restrict rules for things verbal related and just stack chat restrictions for people who aren't using chat for intended use. It would either encourage people to use their chat more usefully or at least limit the amount of "toxicity" that can be present in chat. The best they can do from there is to make it harder to earn chat uses from there. Maybe if restriction has to be extended then they can add another minute the person has to wait to be able to use chat +1 more time. This way even if the person continues to be toxic, they'll just end up with only able to say 3 things in game before they can't say anything anymore and people can still have some chat ability that can be monitored for improvement. As far as intentional feeders go, unless Riot relooks at their kill reward system and tweak it to still be rewarding but not useful to intentional feeders, then it will never be resolved. I know Blizzard made feeding pretty much useless with their shared xp system so maybe if they took the xp/gold that you would get in a kill and disperse it to the team it could make the impact of feeding less impactful compared to intentional feeder going to same guy and feeding them to the point they can 1v4-5. Either that or do something where after 2-3 deaths with no kills and you're not worth gold/xp anymore.
I want bronze 5 to stop being the catch all for every bad player that can click "Ranked Matchmaking". You should have to win X amount of your placements to be ranked at all. You should be able to lose LP to the point in Bronze 5 that you downgrade to Unranked. This is the biggest thing that makes bronze so hard is because every feeding troll will eventually pool up there.
: Any? Yes. All? No. The system is still bad, much more conservative than the chat one (and for a reason). Too conservative to be effective. You CAN get away with trolling, but you're not 100% of getting away unless a Rioter intervenes on demand of a Support Ticket as it was before. So please, start making threads about this new anti-troll system being **not enough** - because the threads pretending that it doesn't exist are so ill-informed that they're most likely discarded from feedback.
And the threads that boast the master smiters (lyte, tantrum, rhojin) for their amazing system that works perfectly are worse than that. If the police only caught one murderer for ever 100 murders investigated, would it be considered a working system? No. So why is riot happy with a system now that only punishes the easiest to punish, already exploited people?
: Now there is a pessimistic view if I ever heard one.
Pessimistic usually ends up being the most realistic.
: Now they do punish trolls. Two years ago the system wasn't in place yet.
So she's being punished now? Are any of the "Die for Tyler" trolls being punished this weekend? Or are we just gonna come back monday to a bunch of Lyte, Tantrum and Rhojin "smites" on 4 people who lashed out against the trolls in the chat logs?
RedTao (NA)
: The thing with Riots stand regarding Kaceytron (from what you told me) they don't want to use someone dying frequently as evidence to intentional feeding. If someone dying a lot was sufficient evidence that someone was an intentional feeder then everyone in the bronze division would be banned from the game in a matter of days. It would then become a thing to punish anyone that sucks at the game just because they have that possibility of being an intentional feeder. This would turn people away from the game because it would now be a punishable offense to be bad at the game. While I agree that intentional feeders are never fun to play with, there's a reason anything less than a confession from the feeder or a Riot member having to be in the game to see for themselves is not considered sufficient evidence for punishment. That being said I may be biased in this kind of situation. I've played this game for 3 years and I still can't climb out of Bronze 5 so I know it would be appreciated if I wasn't kicked from the game for still being bad at the game.
To me, they atleast need to inact a type of "Rank Removal" punishment. If you die 50 time in so many ranked games you lose ranked status and go back to unranked. Or just get banned from playing ranked games and forced to play normals.
JoZee II (NA)
: Separate the wheat from the chaff
I guarantee that none of the "die for tyler" trolls will get banned this weekend. However I'm sure there will be a ton of "smites" from rhojin and tantrum monday on the people who got mad and lashed out at them in chat. Gotta work on what's important right?
: I'm 30 with no kids so that really doesn't apply. "This generation" applies to people 10-20 years younger than me. I'm just tired of self-entitled millennials who got coddled too much as kids and got rewarded for being brats. Good point though, parents were way to lazy/stupid/drunk to raise their kids right. Hopefully my generation (the ones having kids right now) realizes the folly of the previous generation and actually raises kids right.
Our generation isn't going to do any better because we live in a world where every other kid in existence is "self-entitled millennial who got coddled too much as kids and got rewarded for being brats." except for our own who are perfect and deserve everything in the world and no one better be mean to em or else. Everyone who makes the whole "Entitlement" speech always ends up being the one at the parent teacher conference saying the teacher isn't doing their job, that's why their kid has bad marks. Then yells at the teacher when she claims he doesn't pay attention in class or study.
: So many tyler1 fanboys are ruining the game for everyone
If they don't say anything in chat, then nothing will happen. You watch, there will be more people banned for raging at the "die for tyler" trolls then there will be actual banned trolls. Tantrum and Rhojin gonna be smiting left and right "You can't rage at him, makes game no fun! No care if he trolled all weekend!"
: I fear for this generation
"This Generation" comments usually come from people who are in my parents age range and refer to people who are my youngest brothers age (17). That means you're more than likely a sad little republican adult that has nothing better to do but come on the internet and try to talk down to kids. So stop whining about the generation that you and your friends were too lazy/stupid/drunk to raise right (cause you didn't wanna be the hard ass drag that your parents were so you let them run rampant and have what ever they want so they can live free like you couldn't) and own up to your generations mistakes like an adult.
J Eevo (EUNE)
: That's not equality though, people get banned every day, and nobody bats an eye, but a 'popular' streamer gets a ban and everyone grabs their pitchforks and torches and starts rioting? And worse off, we KNOW he's guilty, not even his fans are doubting it. And if you really feel like other streamers are doing ban worthy things, WHY DID YOU NEVER SPEAK ABOUT IT TILL NOW? That was the thing you were supposed to riot against, not the one case where the ban system is actually sucesfull.
Excuse me? I was all over the Kaceytron thing a few years ago because she was TROLLING and riot doesn't punish trolls. I do care that riot bans people every day because I don't think it's fair that it's a 9-1 Talker vs Troll ban rate. Lyte and Rhojin and even Tantrum will run to the boards to stroke their ego and "smite" someone with some chat records but when the time comes to punish a troll they puss out and hide behind "but maybe they were having a bad game going 0-51-2" or "They were just using a different build with 6 tears" Riot is OVERLY bias against chat based offences and honestly doesn't give two shits about people who ruin game after game for people. I would honestly rather be called a dirty word then have an hour of my time, or a game of my promotional wasted by a rammus diving mid tower over and over and over. But hey, if she don't say anything she can't get banned so she'll be right back at it next game and the next. Riot needs to step up and start dealing with TROLLS the way they deal with ragers and stop taking the easy way out by only fighting battles they can win with chat logs. Also, he deserved that ban. I'm not a Tyler1 fan. I just hate the system shouting triumph over this ban when there are many more that they are ignoring.
J Eevo (EUNE)
: I feel like if you really believe that, instead of trying to argue in favor of tyler1 getting unbanned you should rather try to get other toxic players get banned as well. It's so weird looking at people basically saying "he broke the rules, but there are people who broke the rules and didn't get punished for it so he shouldn't be either"... GUYS IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY, two wrongs don't make a right.
No, but equality does. If a teacher paddles your kid for drawing on the wall and when you get there to pick them up you see another kid drawing on the walls, but the teacher just smiles at them and says "Looks good sweety!" how are you gonna feel?
RedTao (NA)
: Meh. Some players find more enjoyment in talking to the team than the game itself. If Riot wanted people who talk too much to stop talking they would permamute them. If the game didn't depend on early game so much I'm sure there would be less to talk about saying you lost a game in the span of the first 5-10 minutes.
Honestly, if I had to choose between a rager or someone like Kaceytron in my game, give me the rager. Atleast the rager still plays and tries to contribute. A troll only trolls. And a troll is a useless if not negative member of your team. Atleast you have an option to deal with the rager /mute. Also, If riot is gonna man up and deal with the streamers who post video evidence of themselves breaking the summoners code and ruining peoples games, then they have to be fair about it and treat them (man, woman, Chinese, X pro) just like your average player. That's what all the Tyler fans bringing up Metos and Kaceytron are trying to say. Heck, I remember last year when the Kaceytron thing was HUGE. Riot didn't do anything to her. I don't even think she got a little 14 day ban. They even defended her saying she might not be good and is making mistakes. Yeah, mistakenly running down mid to die every 5 minutes. I think that really goes to show just how strong riot is with their whole "punish the talker not the troll" system. Riot defends people that just troll and it's sick.
: PSA: Sharing/trading/selling accounts is against the Terms of Use and will get you permabanned...
This has been Deep Terror Nami earning her blue name with a random psa. Thank you and goodnight.
: > What good does it do to say you want to fix the problem long term, but are removing the only way to fix the problem short term? This is a good point honestly, and it's one we've been mulling over as well. Not too long ago, we removed DFG from the game and went about the process of a bunch of compensation buffs and what-not. Generally speaking, we think that attempt in being ahead of a change actually caused more issues than it cut off. It's possible we should nerf Zed (and again, there are others) for 6.9, but it's possible the less disruptive action would be to see how things actually play out as opposed to prematurely nerfing all the things we _assume_ will cause big disruptions without knowing how they will actually play out.
When DFG got removed it hurt Veigar bad and then riot turned around and nerfed him and called it compensation. The QSS change helps Zed so I can only assume the balance changes will end up being a buff to him to go along with the buff he's gonna get with this item change.
: Most of the chat cases we see are from people contesting their punishments. Trolling is a very deliberate thing. They know what they are doing in almost all cases. But yes, I have seen smites for trolling. > [{quoted}](name=WookieeCookie,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=1cvmXAWA,comment-id=000b,timestamp=2015-11-17T23:15:08.506+0000) > > To the contrary, we still review a number of cases on a daily basis for acts of trolling. This is especially important because our current toxic chat and intentional feeding detection systems are only as smart as the current live data we have shared with them. By reviewing new cases for behaviors that we're not currently tracking we can feed this data back to the PB Development team who can add it to our current detection methods. A cycle that we expect to go on forever as new trolling behaviors are created and adopted by toxic players. > > Your current case wasn't found by our PB detection systems but it was hand reviewed by someone in Player Support. The account was locked because the degree of your behavior and the frequency it was occurring was creating a terrible experience for other players. Because these bans are 100% reviewed manually, a reform card is not sent. You're free to contact Player Support for more details. > > In your case, you are correct when you said you didn't chat, but your in game behavior was often much worse then a few toxic words. This wasn't behavior in one or two games, but a traceable pattern that goes back a few months. Intentionally feeding, blowing summoner spells at random times, buying multiple boots, multiple tears, teleporting into base and running back and forth and of course, the non-stop pinging that you would do to your team mates. In fact, when you get really upset it looks like you just decide to ping all the time stopping only for the forced cooldown period and then starting back up again. Even when asked to stop you continue to do it for no real tactical reason. Perhaps to force an early surrender so you can get to the next game since you know that pings are not currently mutable? > > Regardless that behavior isn't acceptable and intentionally trolling games and ruining them for others can and will result in your account being locked.
In that case, he did call out his builds and what not. I'll admit that. But the whole "smite" in this one seemed to be centered around pings (which all but the basic one) shows up in the chatlogs.
Cosnirak (NA)
: The problem with that is two fold. First, the ways they detect non chat offenses are intentionally kept somewhat secret in order to help prevent people from gaming the system. A lot of people _think_ they know how it works but are generally wrong. And second, those people rarely come here trying to get their account unbanned. They trolled/griefed/whatevered and they know it and they have no delusion that they can convince others they don't deserve the ban. Despite all that, I have in fact seen some smites dealt to people who did non chat things, but they are rare. Additionally, I've reported people for non chat offenses and then gotten the notification that they were punished. This isn't some blinding faith in Riot, this is me seeing the proof.
I have been in and out of these boards for 2 years and all I've ever seen is (presents chat logs) "gg Lyte smite" I would just love to have proof that riot has a way to deal with the trolls in my game that don't speak, cause at current I just don't feel like it's worth reporting them. I also communicate less in games with trolls because I'm afraid something I say will be misconstrued and used against me in the trolls report.
Cosnirak (NA)
: >But in that instant, under all the stress of that lost ranked game being pinned on you, can you say you wouldn't say that last line as a plea to your team mates no to report you and to acknowledge whats actually happening? Yes! Without a doubt. Can and _have_ numerous times. It's _really_ easy. If somehow necessary, I just remember that my report is all that's needed and any extra do absolutely nothing. >it just seems like the system easily sways to the retaliator much faster and in more cases than the offender. That's because people come on the forums and complain about it as if it works that way. But it doesn't. Most of the complaints are from people who were total asshats who said lots of awful stuff that most people would never say, even if they were _really_ angry over a game where they got trolled hard and asked for reports and everything. There are tons of beautiful smites by Rhojin and Tantrum and Lyte and probably more that perfectly showcase this again and again. Did this myth originate from some old system that was in place previously? I have no idea. Does it come from other games that operated this way? Maybe. Is it just somehow the natural assumption? Doubtful but possible. Riot really needs to do PSAs about this, because man this is one giant and persistent as hell myth.
Your faith in riot's system is blinding. Does it not seem odd to you that all the overlord's "smites" are for people through chatlogs? Have you ever seen Lyte, Rhojin, or Tantrum "smite" someone with evidence they were trolling rather than just slinging chat logs at them? I wonder how the justice system in this game would work sometimes if the chat system was removed. How would "smites" be delt to people then?
Cosnirak (NA)
: In your example of the jungler never says that last line they will 100% not get punished for doing what you mentioned. Don't feed the trolls, don't ask for reports. Just carry on your marry way and report the bad people. Also, Riot's systems are not so easily fooled, especially if the players involved do what they should. Riot's not likely to punish that mid for doing that in just one game, but make a habit of it and they will absolutely get punished. I've reported people who said nothing against the rules in chat and been notified that they were punished. The system works far better than most players think it does.
But in that instant, under all the stress of that lost ranked game being pinned on you, can you say you wouldn't say that last line as a plea to your team mates no to report you and to acknowledge whats actually happening? I don't think riot is honestly that easy to fool either. I'm sure the real trolls get punished too, it just seems like the system easily sways to the retaliator much faster and in more cases than the offender.
: I'm not sure you are looking at what Rhojin said the right way. So I'll give you an example. Let's say a mana hungry jungler needs blue buff to take camps and gank efficiently, and at the same time the mid laner is also very mana hungry. The jungler might take the Blue Buff and to continue his ganking and farming without having to back (and that seems perfectly fine right?). However, the mid laner sees this as instigation when the jg keeps taking blue without thinking of how the mid laner may need it despite pings and chat. The mid laner starts feeding kills and flaming "b/c of the jungler's actions" (in his eyes). The game is ultimately lost b/c the mid laner is feeding kills when the team was ahead. Which should get punished? The mid or the jungle? Rhojin would say (feel free to correct me Rhojin) the mid due to the actions they made when they felt antagonized. I hope this helped, and feel free to reply. I'd love to talk about it. {{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}}
I agree. In said situation the mid should have communicated with the jungler and they should have been on the same page. But reverse the situation. So mid is denied blue for the jungler and decides she wants to get back at him. So every time she calls for a gank and he shows up they both go to engage, she flashes back and lets him try to finish the gank alone causing him to die. Jungle asks "That was dumb, why did you do that?". Mid doesn't reply. Eventually he stops coming and she starts to ping for assistance. He says "No, you're trolling and are trying to set me up". Then his ally laners start getting mad because they're losing mid towers. They start pinging mid. Team goes "Why you no gank?". Jungle replies "I cannot risk dying, all she's doing is trolling and trying to feed.". Now ally team is mad at both of them. Team says "We're gonna report you two if you don't start playing right". Jungler says destressed "just report her, she's trolling". Mid reports him. Riot sees this. Mid: Can I have blue, I need. Jungle: Sorry I need it :P Jungle: That was dumb, why did you do that Jungle: No, your trolling and trying to set me up Jungle: I cannot risk dying, all she's doing is trolling and trying to feed Jungle: just report her, she's trolling. Trolling the current system isn't hard as long as you don't say anything. And I don't think it's fair that riot can cherry pick things people say to give restrictions and then use the excuse of "well, the instigator didn't say anything negative. Their kda was 0-40-2 with 6 tears of the goddess as their build. But they could have just been having a bad game."
: I can and I do expect that. Especially since doing anything has almost no chance of improving the situation and is almost guaranteed to make it worse. If the only thing you did was ask them to stop dancing at dragon or to gank then there is no chance you get punished for that. That is just some fantasy you have. What isn't fair is that the other people in the game are forced to deal with the instigator and now also the retaliator.
Actually, you can be punished for telling someone to stop trolling or stop feeding because it you are implying that they ARE trolling or feeding and that's an insult if you're just having a bad game. What about in situations where the other four people on the team are suffering and start to retaliate, who's suffering from their retaliation? The other team? No, they're enjoying their ticket to a free win due to the troll. At that point, the system punishes people for making the troll (the person who set out to ruin people's games) feel bad. The troll shouldn't get protect from bad feels when they are the source of the bad feels.
: This is completely wrong. In the case of retaliation, no one is saying w/e thing the instigator did was ok. They are talking specifically about someone's response to the situation. Someone intentionally feeding, trolling, dancing in the dragon pit, or w/e are all unacceptable. What people are saying is that raging at them is also unacceptable. It has no meaningful chance of improving the situation and is almost guaranteed to escalate it. It isn't that instigating is acceptable and retaliation is not, both are unacceptable. The problem is, the instigators are more calculated in what they do. While the system is pretty good at finding and punishing toxicity, it isn't all encompassing. The guy trying to stay under the radar has a significantly higher chance of actually staying under the radar than someone who is exploding with emotion. It is also important to remember that those who are retaliating are also feeding the instigators. Raging at them is just tossing them a little treat for their efforts. If no fish ever bit, fishermen would stop lining the coast.
You cannot expect people to absorb all the aggression from the same person trolling your games over and over again and not get flustered about it. The saddest part is that it doesn't take majorly aggressive or rude things to get punished. Just asking to stop dancing at dragon or I need you to gank my lane can be blown out of proportion to the level of a threat in riot's eyes. I just don't feel as though it's a fair system.
: Way to lose all possible credibility in the first sentence.
I remember you guy are orators or abitrators or something, I just couldn't put my finger on it. All I knew was 6 people got a special title for knowing something about who deserves punishment for things. SJW was just what came to my mind first.
: You're only making it worse when responding. If you aren't going to make an attempt to de-escalate the issue instead of exacerbate it, mute, report, and move on. The other person will be judged for their actions alone, as you are yours. "Well he started it!" is a child's excuse; please refrain from using it. > a friend just got his own friend perma banned for a false report on his friends account while they were in a premade group together. The report was a fake joke but what was outlined as the reasons for said report was legit Ok? The report was legitimate, so the punishment was as well. If it only took his friend's one report to trigger his ban, then he was going to get banned anyway, whether from another player's report flagging the match, or due to his behavior in the next game or so. His friend reporting as a joke didn't change anything. Just because it's a troll doing the report doesn't make the report invalid or the punishment unwarranted. If you spent half as much effort trying to reform and improve yourself as you do denying that your behavior is not welcome, you'd be a positive player in the community.
Oh look, one of those blue SJW peeps. So in terms of this system, I wanna preface by saying I've never been punished for anything ever. But seeing the way riot responds to giving punishments I've often wondered about how it only matters what you say and not what you do. So riot can sit back and say that no matter what I DO in game, say I just feed for days or spend all my time farming the jungle and never come out to gank or even spend half the game dancing at Dragon pit. As long as I don't say a single word, build my items along a semi-normal path and manage to get atleast one kill and about 60 farm, Riot will never say I did anything wrong, I was just having a bad game. But on the contrast. The people that ask me in chat not to live in the jungle, or to stop dancing at dragon or to quit feeding are around 95% more likely to receive punishment than I am, even though I'm the one actually doing something wrong. Now I know, I know, the blue justice code calls for the person to fought back to be punished because fighting back is is the biggest source of toxic behavior in this game, but how does this system improve in a way to address the actions as fast as they address the words? We all know ranked is a very stressful game mode. If you don't have a good rank then you're worthless to the league community. So when you go and try to get this rank, people who go in for the sole purpose of costing you a game can really get under your skin. Where is the line of how much you should take from the pattern of someone ruins your game, you report, you que back up and get the same troll in your next string of games before you stop playing ranked? I guess what I'm asking is what does the system do to punish the silent perpetrators in the same speed and severity it does for the vocal victims?
: > [{quoted}](name=2ManyJons,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=a4Az9htA,comment-id=000e000000040000000000020000,timestamp=2016-04-17T06:24:39.661+0000) > > The rioter I responded too was saying that no only is there not a bad time to use it, but that there's really no counterplay other than "don't build ap". > > I took that as Veigar's ult is so OP that there is nothing anyone ever can do against it so they're gonna gut it just like they did his stun. It looks as though it's gonna end up being a skill shot and they're gonna take the anti-mage title from him by removing the enemy Ap scaling. I think you just misinterpreted him. It's not that his ult is OP but rather that it's so simple and reliable in what it does (you couldn't possibly craft a more basic "kill one champion" ability than Primordial Burst) that there's way less "Yay I did this really well" or "Shit I fucked up" moments with it than the vast majority of ultimates. To compare it with Lux's ult... Good Veigar ult quotes: "Yay I used it on a squishy and worthwhile target!" Bad Veigar ult quotes: "Shit why did I waste that on the support" "Shit it was stupid trying to kill someone that bulky with ult" Good Lux ult quotes: "Yay I managed to snipe that person and secure the kill!" "Yay doing my Illumination procs perfectly got me that kill!" "Yay I lined it up perfectly to hit loads of people in that team fight so my team can clean up!" "Yay I managed to time it perfectly steal Blue/Dragon/Baron!" Bad Lux ult quotes: "Fuck I missed that person I would have killed" "Fuck if I'd just chained my passive proc properly I could have finished them off" "Fuck how did I only hit the tank, now our team fight is screwed" "How did I hit literally nobody?" "Dang missed the Blue/Dragon/Baron" steal "Why did I use it the cast time got me killed" "Why did I waste that on the support/why did I try to combo Mundo?" ________________________ The point is that the only ways to succeed/fuck up Veigar's ult apply to every other ult in the game, but other ults have more ways to succeed/mess up. Every ult requires good target selection but using the given example, Lux's ult requires perfect aim to use optimally (line up to hit all valuable target) and can even be considered a failure if it hits one person, because it should have hit a few. It has optimisations surrounding use of her passive and has a noticeably low cooldown primarily to encourage Lux players to try to use it in ways that have a good chance of going wrong (i.e. its low cooldown enables them to try stealing objectives and try to secure kills in other lanes). None of this says that Veigar's ult is OP - to an extent it actually makes it weak because its lack of variation means it has no chance of ever being properly spectacular. Lux's ult is often used just to combo one person, but can utterly devastate a team fight if she lines up ER to hit all the squishies. Veigar doesn't have any way to tap extra potential in his ult because it's never going to be anything other than "Target one person, do tons of damage to them". I don't know what they're gonna do with his ult outside of removing the AP scaling, but I do know that it's not becoming a skillshot (they said so in this thread). All I know is that they likely want to make it so that it's actually possible to think "Holy shit what a Veigar ult" or "lol that Veig ult was terrible".
But you have to realize that Veigar's point and click delete is all he has. I don't know if you have been around this long, but back before the Veigar (compensation for DFG) nerfs, Veigar could have those "Wow that was a nice play from Veigar" moments. Veigar could land a perfectly placed multi stun with his E, get a QR on the ap mid and land his meteor without taking any response damage. That was a good Veigar play. Now with his unreliable E he can't really use his W unless he gets lucky. His Q isn't guaranteed to make it to the target since it can now be minion/ally blocked. His Ult is the only reliable tool he has left in his slow, squishy kit and you're saying that reliability is a bad thing? Lets go back to lux. She has reliable range, ratios and cd's. If lux misses that ult, she can have it back relatively quick. Not to mention she's still helpful to her team with those back line, long cast, CC loaded spells. One of the only things Veigar brings to his team is that delete from his ult and if it's not reliable then there's not gonna be a reason to play Veigar anymore. And I don't want that. I want someone to acknowledge that since they added all this counter play to his kit all ready, that adding more counter play is just adding straight counters. I wanna see him get something nice for a change, and not more things taken away from him to leave him useless against mobile champions or fast engage junglers. But instead all we ever get to talk about is "Well Veigar has this and we don't like that. Remove it." while Veigar players get to see champions like Lux (she's just my prime example) with their loaded-out-the-ass kits that can change a game just for being there never get touched. Hell, Veigar got the delay cast on his stun because the Koreans were taking him support. Lux can crap on people as a mid or support, what ever she's feeling that game, and she doesn't get any special "mid shouldn't be bot" nerf. It's all about whats fair. If one mage gets bombarded with all these game slowing, power cutting changes, then other mages should have to be "balanced" the same way.
Show more

2ManyJons

Level 33 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion