: 20 games is hardly a reliable group of games to pull from if we're trying to be an actual analysis, in terms of relativity. And aiming for this not to be rank shaming, but I do think it is nessecary to point out this is the Silver and Gold crowd you're pulling from, and playing with. A lot of the folk in these elos aren't coordinated, nor understand, how to properly play safe when behind, or how to handle a fed carry on the opposing team. And that's not even mentioning the potential factor from soft-inting/giving up.
It is because of these factors that you listed that snowballing should be less effective in silver/gold. Theses players don't know how to properly close out games. At least this was the case in the past. The comeback ratio should be higher in silver/gold.
: I have no clue what SJW is so I googled it and it says : Social justice warrior (SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual who promotes socially progressive views, including feminism, civil rights, and multiculturalism, as well as identity politics.''' I eh, don't quite see the harm in this, surely being against wage discrimination and discrimination based on sex is part of both feminism and civil rights
> [{quoted}](name=hhaavviikk,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=0013,timestamp=2019-05-02T06:31:24.536+0000) > > I have no clue what SJW is so I googled it and it says : > > Social justice warrior (SJW) is a pejorative term for an individual who promotes socially progressive views, including feminism, civil rights, and multiculturalism, as well as identity politics.''' > > I eh, don't quite see the harm in this, surely being against wage discrimination and discrimination based on sex is part of both feminism and civil rights The problem is it used to be a good term people actually identified with but people have since turned it into an insult. Even more so for league of legends it is a way for people to insult those who have a different viewpoint and a way to silence them. In my opinion the word should be marked as hate speech since it provides no benefit to a conversation.
: I mean no disrespect here to anyone, but my thought is this; Pandering to SJW's even a little bit is like opening Pandora's Box. You cave one time and it's over for your company/business because they will demonize you with mob justice and call you the worst things imaginable to shut you up and keep you from defending yourself or even explaining yourself. Bear in mind, I'm talking about the #hashtag activists, the people that make EVERYTHING about gender, race, or sexual orientation, and force their way into all sorts of cultures just so they can gut them and replace the people with other SJW's to make more echo chambers, and use those positions to silence anyone who has differing views from theirs. "Straight white male right wingers" do it too, I'm not disputing that for one second. [removed by moderation] Worst of all, they make allegations and accusations based on hear say and feelings without respect for things like due process and rights of the accused all while ignoring the slippery slope they are on because all that mob justice they dish out on others can be used against them in turn. It's anarchy, accelerationist, and it's just plain not progressive in any sense of the word. Riot could be innocent and being targeting so these people can gain something, Riot might be guilty full stop. That's up to the justice system to decide, and it's why it exists. SJW's think they can circumvent the systems of checks and balances that protect EVERYONE'S individual rights from actual tyranny, including people like themselves. You can make accusations, you can call out bad behavior, you can fight for justice, but you better fucking have some evidence or damn good probably cause to do so. You better respect EVERYONE'S rights, even the accused, or you're no fucking better! SJW mob justice and #hashtag activism also hurts the actual victims because now their word is seen as just as cooky as the extremists. TL;DR: SJW's don't allow due process and it shits it up for everyone in the long run. I completely understand wanting to make the world a better place, but they refuse to acknowledge their own bias and hypocrisy in their use of mob justice over actual justice.
> [{quoted}](name=Düff McWhalen,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=5qzvVOJ5,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-05-01T20:42:54.128+0000) > > I mean no disrespect here to anyone, but my thought is this; > > Pandering to SJW's even a little bit is like opening Pandora's Box. You cave one time and it's over for your company/business because they will demonize you with mob justice and call you the worst things imaginable to shut you up and keep you from defending yourself or even explaining yourself. > > Bear in mind, I'm talking about the #hashtag activists, the people that make EVERYTHING about gender, race, or sexual orientation, and force their way into all sorts of cultures just so they can gut them and replace the people with other SJW's to make more echo chambers, and use those positions to silence anyone who has differing views from theirs. "Straight white male right wingers" do it too, I'm not disputing that for one second. > > SJW's though, are extremists. They never improve the thing they are trying to change. They just pervert it to serve themselves. The difference between them and groups like the KKK or ISIS are simply in the demographics they like/hate. The tactics are the same. > > Worst of all, they make allegations and accusations based on hear say and feelings without respect for things like due process and rights of the accused all while ignoring the slippery slope they are on because all that mob justice they dish out on others can be used against them in turn. It's anarchy, accelerationist, and it's just plain not progressive in any sense of the word. > > Riot could be innocent and being targeting so these people can gain something, Riot might be guilty full stop. That's up to the justice system to decide, and it's why it exists. SJW's think they can circumvent the systems of checks and balances that protect EVERYONE'S individual rights from actual tyranny, including people like themselves. > > You can make accusations, you can call out bad behavior, you can fight for justice, but you better fucking have some evidence or damn good probably cause to do so. You better respect EVERYONE'S rights, even the accused, or you're no fucking better! SJW mob justice and #hashtag activism also hurts the actual victims because now their word is seen as just as cooky as the extremists. > > TL;DR: SJW's don't allow due process and it shits it up for everyone in the long run. I completely understand wanting to make the world a better place, but they refuse to acknowledge their own bias and hypocrisy in their use of mob justice over actual justice. Just a heads up, your country was established by SJWs. Just thought you'd like to know.
: That could also go the other way and lead to them having much more conservative views than most people here today as well, due to their views on relationships. I agree there's nothing wrong with having your own headcanon, but on the internet people can and will disagree.
Now I can agree with you on this. There are a lot of possibilities. It would be nice to see what Riot thinks, though that would probably be a losing battle no matter what they decide.
: Except for the glaring fact that we are obviously not monkeys and live very differently from Bonobos. That's like trying to compare the mentalities of a Golden Shepherd and a Gray Wolf because they're pretty close genetically, it doesn't take into account any other factors such as upbringing, environment, or lifestyle, and is an overall poor comparison.
Actually, bonobos are apes, not monkeys, just like humans, and their views on sex are very similar to the modern day human, except they are significantly more promiscuous. That aside, you helped prove my point even more. The denizens of Runeterra are not Earth humans. We do not know their upbringing, environment, or lifestyle. We know bits and pieces of a select few people/creatures that inhabit Runeterra and a **general** idea of what each nation stands for and their general beliefs. We shouldn't take the little knowledge that we have and be against anything new that would be added to the overall culture of Runeterra. There's nothing wrong with pretending the entirety of Runeterra "enjoys the company" of someone of the same gender until the devs say otherwise. It is a different world from ours.
: I meant natural as in how we're to reproduce and continue the species, how we evolved etc. In a magical world like Runeterra they're probably not going to persecute gay people, and nobody should be persecuting gay people in our world either tbh, especially not Christians. But if you look at it objectively, the number of gay people is extremely small, only 1-2% of the population in the USA I think. There likely wouldn't be very many gay people in Runeterra either judging by those numbers alone. I imagine open homosexuality would be fine in Noxus, but I also imagine anyone that came out would be harassed or insulted constantly for liking men sexually more than women, for being weird. Or nobody would care tbh. Idk, I just imagine that Noxus would hold a lot more sadistic or demented people compared to other places, just due to the nature of society. You also have to understand that while we know that homosexuality occurs naturally and in animals as well, they might not have the same view point. Just like the Salem witch trials and what not, (though not nearly as graphic) they might believe that being homo is unnatural or bad or whatever. Or they could be more like some tribes of Native American Indians who kinda revered the gay/bi for being so unique. As long as it feels natural and forced if/when they put more homosexuality in then sure, why not. I just don't like it when people feel the need of extreme overrepresentation that is unrealistic and/or disproportionate. Nothing against gay people, but when Riot expands on the lore I don't want a bunch of homosexuality or homo figures everywhere that feels kinda forced. Sexuality doesn't need to be in the spotlight. I don't want the gay and bi people to feel like black sheep or unwanted or something, I'm fine if there's some characters and representation and whatever, I just don't feel like having every other person being gay is realistic. I know this was a lot, I just figured I'd type out everything I think on the situation to just get it out there instead of having this long-winded argument or whatever because you don't wholly understand where I'm coming from.
Actually, having every other person be bisexual is actually realistic. (I promise I'm not trying to push an agenda) We can't assume that even the humans in runeterra are the same as humans and our world, and on the basis of how science and evolution works, we should assume that they are a very similar, but different species. With that in mind, we should look at the bonobos who are about as close to us as any other animal can get DNA wise. The bonobos as a species are bisexual. It is just part of their culture. It is entirely possible that the species of humans in runeterra, and the other species as well, are entirely bisexual or highly homosexual. We cannot use our own species as a basis for guesswork. If the devs want to use our human species as a basis, that's fine, but we cannot assume because there are examples that vary significantly.
: so gay men can't love a women? those poor moms/sisters. setting sexual attraction aside has happened in reality so why wouldn't it be possible in fiction? Noone was talking about forced marriage so you'd still have to find someone you're willing to marry. And then we're not even talking about their children, where hopefully sexual attraction doesn't matter. And why wouldn't they be ok with it? Maybe for the same reasons some nations in real life don't? or for the reason he said, resources for war. I don't expect any of these nations to ban gay marriage, and i don't expect any character ever stating they think it should be. Simply because of how much drama that would come forth of it. But it's a thing that happens in reality, no reason it couldn't in fiction.
No one said anything about not being able to love women at all. The topic was specifically about romantic/spousal relationships, not familial ones, and I brought up forced because that is what would have to happen for a gay to marry a non gay. This applies even to our own world. Do you really think gays married people of the opposite sex because they wanted to? No, they felt they were forced to. That force may not have been physical. Most of the time it was just the sheer pressure that society put on them to fit in. I've already debunked the resources of war argument. If they are so desperate for soldiers, they'd force women not to go to war so they can stay home and have children before they force gays to have children. That happened in reality more than banning gays did by the way.
: Tell me why they should be okay with homosexuality when many places are warring and don't have massive populations. I get the "fight harder for your boyfriend" and that makes sense, but why not fight harder for your wife and children at home? That would make me fight much harder tbh, or at the very least about the same. Not only is it the natural way, it helps to make more soldiers, craftspeople, farmers, etc. Now tell me why you have to get into this at all.
Tell me why they shouldn't be okay with homosexuality? Your logic would make sense only assuming that each of these nations has an extreme distaste of homosexuality so much that it would force those that are homosexuals to hide who they are, and let's be honest, in all likelihood there are homosexuals in each of these nations. Otherwise, you are saying that these nations are forcing their people to marry for the full benefit of creating offspring to be shipped off to war, and even with my limited knowledge of lore, none of these nations seem to have that sort of government, especially since they all allow women to fight instead of forcing them all to give birth to as many children as possible. Lastly, no homosexual would fight harder for a spouse and child they were forced to have. People don't work like that. That may be the case for you, but would most certainly not be the case for any homosexual. Said homosexual would most certainly fight harder for someone they truly love than for someone they are only married to out of necessity and have no chance of loving.
: I'm readin through this, seeing all the people who tell him that his behaviour is bad and clearly know how to play fair and this is really warming my heart. But still it's kinda bugging me that when i play myself I never find teammates with these points of view. Most of the time it's just guys like OP that call you out on every minor thing and get all toxic about it until you'd rather uninstall than play another game. **Where are you guys? :(**
The vast majority of people aren't going to talk unless given a reason to and a lot of people feel that being frustrated and lashing out against their frustration is a good reason to. Non toxic people do exist, but you actually have to put in some work to find them. The problem is the game is not set up to fascilitate the forming of long term bonds and just random chit chat that is needed to get a feel for the person's personality. The games are too short and the gameplay far too fast for any of this. What we need is some way of chatting with random people within the client in real time that does not involve being in a match, but even that only helps so much. Just look at wow. (I know, i know, something something about a certain someone that won't be named) this is an anecdote, but prior to the introduction of the random dungeon finder, i made a lot of friends that I would spend long hours talking to and hanging out with and no matter if they were 13 or 30, not a single one of them ever turned out to be toxic. Even the random people i recruited to run a single one off dungeon with ended up being friendly and provided good conversation. I even met a lot of people playing in the pvp battlegrounds that were friendly, and while there were some hard feelings in those battlegrounds, the toxicity is day and night in comparison to league. The biggest disagreement I ever had was about strategy rather than skill. Fast forward post RDF, all anyone cares about is going as fast as possible and winning as fast as possible. Now no one says anything in dungeons unless its to complain and throw fits and flame. Surprisingly BGs didnt change much, but people talked a whole lot less. The entire culture of the game changes when the mechanics of the game change from being slow and methodical to fast and active. I would say message me and we can play but there's an ocean dividing our servers and I don't really play any more for reasons that are not how toxic the game is. :( TLDR: Blame the damage and mobility creep and lack of a clientside chat system for more than just friends and teammates.
: > [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=oJZRHxkR,comment-id=00090000,timestamp=2018-12-16T20:51:25.350+0000) > > Number 3 was actually a toxic response and they should be considered the toxic individual in this case. It doesn't matter if the other player was intentionally feeding (which doesn't absolve the toxic response) or simply playing badly/getting snowballed. I can't. You can't be serious dude. If someone said that at work they wouldn't be punished. Especially since work takes into account context. You are way too sensitive. > [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=oJZRHxkR,comment-id=00090000,timestamp=2018-12-16T20:51:25.350+0000) > > Number 1 is borderline. The tone itself is toxic (condescending remarks) Did you just infer what someone's tone was based on one sentence? In this case, the person was bewildered than being condescending. It is equivalent to saying "What were you thinking?". Do you consider that condescending too?
> [{quoted}](name=Lakrosin,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=oJZRHxkR,comment-id=000900000000,timestamp=2018-12-16T20:54:41.096+0000) > > I can't. You can't be serious dude. If someone said that at work they wouldn't be punished. Especially since work takes into account context. You are way too sensitive. > > Did you just infer what someone's tone was based on one sentence? > > In this case, the person was bewildered than being condescending. It is equivalent to saying "What were you thinking?". Do you consider that condescending too? He was right about both cases. Calling someone out specically and blaming them for your problems is against the summoners code and is indeed toxic. There is a reason you can't post screenshots on the boards with players names. This does the same thing and no you won't get punished at work for it, but you will either get a talking to for verbally lashing out against a fellow employee or they will keep a very close eye on you as such behavior is an early sign of further violence. As for the other point, you can read tone from just a single sentence. Sentence structure and word choice are remarkable tools and writers make use of them very throughly. It is not something that a normal person on the internet thinks about but it is there. If you are upset, your messages will be shorter and to the point. If you are excited they will be long drawn out messages. What we type more closely matches what we say than what you think and more goes into the tone of what you are saying than just the actual tone of your voice that you are using. As for the actual context, the first one was a very commanding statement. Did i say very? I meant very. Not to mention, the included "Dude" followed by the exclamation point leads me to believe that the person speakkng is very upset, if not at the very least, borderline angry. Yes, I got all of this from one sentence. It would be more productive to say, "Hey, if we want to win this, we are going to have to work together. We can't be jumping in on our own." Yes, this took a littlenlonger to type, but it still shows you are upset, with out being commanding or even condescending. Not to mention the person who is at fault knows you are speaking directly at them, but because you used we, it is not technically finger pointing, and you have included yourself with them which shows that you have every intention as working as a team and winning this through teamwork amd cooperation. In fact, the best thing anyone can do, is never use direct pronouns. Avoid the word you, he/she/(inser third person pronoun here), you all, our (insert role here), dude, or whatever other pronoun you can come up with. Stick with we unless absolutely necessary for strategizing. Then say (insert champion name) should do this while we do this) it promotes teamwork amd cooperation and avoids being toxic. TLDR: Word choice matter more than whether you're cussing at someone or not.
: > [{quoted}](name=True Ðamage,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=oJZRHxkR,comment-id=00070000,timestamp=2018-12-16T17:58:26.321+0000) > > i just think its funny how people will say any champion that kills them easily is broken. > I've had people try to argue vayne is broken. > Zed is broken, hell even thresh. > some very rarely seen, and those who make the champion even look broken are the one tricks, who know them inside out, and even they know the champions have problems and when they are weak or strong. > but if you play any champion right, and make the right decisions, and beat someone down and 0/4 them in lane, they will say you are just abusing a broken champion. Zed himself isn't broken. His problem is that the lethality items were designed around his potential to abuse them. I can legitimately say Zed was less of a problem before Lethality items. Thresh is also still broken in the sense that he could do zero damage with his active skills and still have most of his power through their sheer utility. Having two enemy displacements that both stun as well as a box to keep enemies where he wants them is exceptionally strong. This isn't even accounting for his lantern, which not only offers a shield but can also be a major life saver allied pull or even so you can surprise enemies with an extra ally being pulled in. Playing a champion well is one thing. Champions being designed to have tools to deal with everything is poor design with a roster as large as League's because it prevents other champions from having niche viability, something that would increase the variety in professional play.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=oJZRHxkR,comment-id=000700000000,timestamp=2018-12-16T20:34:55.890+0000) > > Zed himself isn't broken. His problem is that the lethality items were designed around his potential to abuse them. I can legitimately say Zed was less of a problem before Lethality items. > > Thresh is also still broken in the sense that he could do zero damage with his active skills and still have most of his power through their sheer utility. Having two enemy displacements that both stun as well as a box to keep enemies where he wants them is exceptionally strong. This isn't even accounting for his lantern, which not only offers a shield but can also be a major life saver allied pull or even so you can surprise enemies with an extra ally being pulled in. > > Playing a champion well is one thing. Champions being designed to have tools to deal with everything is poor design with a roster as large as League's because it prevents other champions from having niche viability, something that would increase the variety in professional play. This. I agree 100%. We are at the point now that for a champion to be even considered decent, not good, but decent, they have to be able to react to any given situation. If you are playing a champ that can't react to every single situation instantly, those that can will be seen as broken 100% of the time. This doesn't mean those champs don't have counterplay. Looking at thresh and zed as mentioned, and I'll add in Yasuo for good measures as he is the poster boy of broken champs, they each have counterplay. For zed, he is infinitely telegraphed. You know exactly where he will dash to every single time and his ult goves you a free stun on him. For thresh, his hook has a windup that is very obvious and his lantern is the biggest joke in the game. Just stand on it or drop a ward and laugh as it is now a useless ability. For Yasuo his dash is telegraphed, he needs minions to move around and his windwall has such a high cooldown and can be easiliy baited out. (Not to mention his ult makes his a very vulnerable target) The problem with all of these things? Knowing the answer to them doesn't mean youre able to deal with them. Knowing zed and yasuo are going to land right behind you doesnt mean you can do anything about it. First, you have to remember the answer in a high stress environment, then you have to be able to react with perfect timing, as you have less than a second to react, all while keeping tabs on wave management, enemy laner and jungle positioning, your health, your mana, and your cooldowns, as well as enemy laner health, mana and some cooldowns. There is far too much going on to be expected to react like that under that much stress without significant practice and coaching. That is why the pros are pros and why thise champs aren'tgood in the pro scene but are in lower mmr. That is a problem, and the same can be said about dropping a ward instantly on thresh's lantern. Its ok to have proactive skillful play be incredibly difficult, like dash-flash combos (gragas) and lee sin crazy maneuvers because that is skillful play that people should be rewarded for. They have mastered something practice and hard work. It is not ok for the counterplay to regular non combod abilities to be out of the reach of a regular person. That is broken gameplay. (Though i think thresh is fine and if anything the ward covering up his lantern should be removed. Talk about your kit being invalidated by a free item...) TLDR: if your counterplay is high reaction times, its problematic and "broken gameplay". If your champion excels theough high reaction times, that is skill expression. If we want the game to grow, the game as a whole needs a low skill floor and high skill ceiling, not just individual champs, but how we react to those individual champs as well.
: I got banned. Please help.
As someone who consistently lets other people know their feelings in game while never having ever been punished or even warned, the best advice I can give is watch your word choice. That is the one thing that usually gets people banned. Criticizing someone will never get you banned. Telling them they are doing something wrong or ruining your game will never get you banned. Cussing them out or telling them to go screw themselves or to uninstall will get you punished. Basically, be polite about it. I don't mean ask them nicely to stop feeding with please and thank you. Screw that, they don't deserve that. I mean to be as cordial as possibly while telling them that what they are doing is wrong. The bonus part is that being friendly and nice while telling people that they are wrong pisses them off even more than cussing at them does. Sure they may flame you for being so nice while telling them off, but that'll only add fuel to their possible ban while keeping you safe from punishment. Honestly, I make a game out of how much I can piss them off without being rude myself. TLDR: Don't cuss and be friendly even when they aren't friendly.
: Is everyone experiencing 5+ dodges before a game actually starts?
I've been experiencing a significant number of dodges for several years now. This is not new. People have been complaining about this since I believe the first draft changes in season 6. I could be wrong, but prior to that I know that dodges were much more scarce.
: I think alot of people use the Term "Toxic" far too loosely, Same can be said for the term "broken".
I've been doing all of those things aside from pinging too much since season 1 and I'm never called toxic, nor have I ever received a chat restriction or any punishment of any sort, nor have I ever received a warning that those things may happen. It's not about what you say or do, it's about how you're saying or doing it. If you criticize in a polite and constructive manner, you won't be seen as toxic. Just an fyi, tone is very apparent even when typing. Your word choice can very easily put the other person on the defensive. Pinging is a whole different beast. Pinging too much is just outright annoying, not to mention can be easily construed as harassment. Just don't do it and everyone will have a better time. Ping a few times to let your ally know the situation is dangerous, but don't spam it more than those few times. They either will notice it and care, notice it and not care, or they just won't notice it at all if they hadn't after the first few pings and then you're just wasting your time anyways. (Tunnel vision is real and for some people it's not so easy to ignore.) As for people claiming champs are broken. Sure, people can be over dramatic about it all the time. We all know it happens. We just need to take those complaints with a grain of salt. I'm sure for most of us, there's just that one champ that we lose to every single time and it is frustrating. That doesn't mean that all the complaints of champs being broken are false. When there is as much dissent as there is right now on these forums, either someone is very good at riling up a very large amount of people and this is some sort of conspiracy to take down riot, or something is seriously wrong.
: "Honorable" Toxic Players.
Even worse is when a teammate flames you the entire game and your best friend of 15 years honors said teammate... I was livid.
Reziztor (NA)
: Would you guys rather have long queue times but better matchmaking or just keep it the way it is
I don't know too much about how it was in high MMR matches, but prior to season 6 in gold and silver MMR and even in most of my normal games, all of my matches were instant queues. Now, i don't believe that matchmaking is the best that it can be, but I don't believe the solution that everyone is asking for is possible. If we are comparing prior to season 6 and season 6 onward (disregarding season 8 because I believe the problems we are experiencing this season, in silver and gold MMR, have nothing to do with matchmaking but rather with game design and balance, but that's a discussion for another thread), matchmaking in silver and gold was leaps and bounds better after the introduction of role selection in season 6. My opponents recieved the role they wanted and thus everyone was more evenly matched. Every single one of my games were higher quality (disregarding balance) because everyone was playing what they were good at. Now I understand that this doesn't work the same way in diamond+ because of the significant numbers difference between the two cases, but I don't believe that extending queue times will help. It's not that extending queue times won't increase the quality of the games, but by offering infinite time to find an evenly matched game, the games are most certainly going to be higher quality, but if you take into account that challenger games prior to role selection were already unbearably long, if you wanted evenly matched challenger games with role selection included, with no autofill because obviously with autofill said person won't be playing at their best and thus not the most even game, the queue times will be beyond unbearable not to mention the impact that might have on challenger streamers. In the end, the question shouldn't be whether we want riot to make matchmaking better by increasing queue time, but whether we are willing to sacrifice role selection in order to have higher quality games. Of course, this is just a high MMR issue and these issues don't particularly plague the lower portion of the spectrum.

Caylera

Level 105 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion