Tolkmit (NA)
: I seriously wonder who Riot has making these decisions. Every time they take a step forward, the next they take back. For NA & EU as example; They finally realize that Bo3>>>>Bo1, change up the spring and summer splits... but then not only do they fail to eliminate the Bo1's from MSI & Worlds, but they add more international events with Bo1's. Wonder if teams have the option to skip events like these. NA teams were already using IEM for tryouts or just skipping them entirely, because they'd rather have the time off than put effort into something that doesn't help them at Worlds... why would they want to bother with this? These games will have less impact on what the teams actually care about than the normal summer split matches before & after them. Seems like a high chance of all-star type cheese & troll matches.
Agree 100%. Bo1s are horrible. Absolutely horrible. At least in the NAvEU version the Bo1s are for seeding only, not elimination. But still... Bo1s are garbage.
Aamano (NA)
: Wait...I can't gift Summoner Icons?
I was trying to login and buy all three NA team Summoner Icons for my wife but since I can't that's money that will never get spent. Oh well.
: Actually it says that the player can't talk to anyone. The person who owns their contract can. In other words, putting out feelers in an unofficial fashion is punishable. What doublelift and zionspartan did would be fine in most industries, including sports. The contracts LCS players are forced to sign to participate give quite a bit of power to both riot and the team owners at the expense of the players. The part where a player who is unhappy with his team can't talk to anyone who might give him a way out until his contract is gone and his team can put pressure on him to commit is not healthy for the players. It also means that when somebody is trying to explore options discreetly.... guess what... it's not discreet because the team owner gets to know and the player doesn't get to be involved. And do you really believe that the team owner is going to represent the player fairly when there is conflict with the player? The issue here isn't about how easy to follow the rule is. It's about the way this rule bans normal actions for players and creates an unhealthy environment for players that desire to see what other employment options are available to them. I understand that Riot was trying to protect team owners, and that's commendable, but their methods created a bad situation for players. Honestly, without being a clg fan, I can't help but think that the real villain in the latest set of rulings against them are rules Riot created. Punishing people for trying to expand their horizons is not a commendable action.
Actually no, people in other industries - including pro sports - talk with colleagues all the time about jobs. Casual conversation is known an accepted. Outright, deliberate, nefarious poaching moves (explicit offers, etc.) is the only thing frowned upon.
: Competitive Ruling: Counter Logic Gaming
This rule is a level of expectation higher than the NFL, NBA, etc., and those people are making millions. I think Riot needs to dial this back in a huge way. These are kids playing a video game. It is a very tightly knit community that ends up very separated from the rest of the world due to the hours they put in. Also, these are all 1 year contracts that expire every season. Once Worlds ends, it is natural for people to discuss topics like this. I'm not even sure this should really be a rule. I'm certain pro sports players talk to each other all the time about where they might play in the future, encourage friends to join them (Lebron/Wade), etc. This all sounds like casual conversation happening between people in a very tight community. I am not sure these super strict rules are appropriate at this very early stage. It restricts normal, natural communication between friends/colleagues a little too much.


Level 30 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion