: I've had it with people belittling the amount of effort it takes to play tanks
Sorry but tanks often do way too much damage, nearly as much as any damage fighter, while being infinitely more tanky than them. They often have the best of both worlds PLUS lots of CC.
: Please Make "Target Champions Only" a Toggle
Right? Fucks sakes Riot, get on this
Mannny (NA)
: ADCs are needlessly strong this patch
ADCs should be near fucking useless unless they have teammates nearby. I am tired of them self kiting themselves against a diver/fighter and somehow managing to out mobility them.
: How can a crappy idea like that get so much upvotes, dont people actually have a brain on these boards ? This should have been downvoted to oblivion. > Picking support should mean you are for sure getting support, and because of that, **a boots in LP** if you win, A boost in LP ? Seriously ? It's stupid for a lot of reasons actually : - It's unfair. - It will place the tiers and divisions of supports main higher than the non support player, but the funniest thing is as the matchmaking uses MMR and not grades to match players, these support will keep playing with the same players as before, but they would complain a lot because "omg i'm silver 3 and i'm alway matched with and against silver 5", because their MMR would still be silver 5 actually. - since their MMR would be lower than their actual tier/division, they will win less LP per win, then get a bonus, they would just go as high as bonus + lowered lp win = lp win if they were at the right tier/division. - Who cares about LP ? Everything is about MMR.
> [{quoted}](name=Starcraft243ver,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vlaRhwQj,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2017-06-21T09:05:49.220+0000) > > How can a crappy idea like that get so much upvotes, dont people actually have a brain on these boards ? This should have been downvoted to oblivion. > > A boost in LP ? Seriously ? It's stupid for a lot of reasons actually : > > - It's unfair. > > - It will place the tiers and divisions of supports main higher than the non support player, but the funniest thing is as the matchmaking uses MMR and not grades to match players, these support will keep playing with the same players as before, but they would complain a lot because "omg i'm silver 3 and i'm alway matched with and against silver 5", because their MMR would still be silver 5 actually. > > - since their MMR would be lower than their actual tier/division, they will win less LP per win, then get a bonus, they would just go as high as bonus + lowered lp win = lp win if they were at the right tier/division. > > - Who cares about LP ? Everything is about MMR. Its not unfair. Most players consider it the least fun role to play.
: Junglers are buying Knight's Vow, Toplaners are back to being a living bait for enemy ADC
Riot. An incompetent company that got into the industry at the right time, security such a huge market share that they are shield by their own stupidity.
Rioter Comments
: Riot is not immune to the normal pitfalls of employee competence
"You assume I changed the definition of generalization on purpose. I simply made a mistake and misused it. I backed off that line of reasoning yet you still persist after it. " That was everything. You have no argument without that misuse.
: You are not an authority on what is and is not trolling. I'm genuine in my efforts here. No funny business at all. It's not about refuting things. It's about presenting a case and arguing it. I worked with the examples you provided. That's not trolling that's how debate works. :P But yes, please tell me more about how I am a troll.
> [{quoted}](name=HalcyonDweller,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-06-18T00:39:45.183+0000) > > You are not an authority on what is and is not trolling. I'm genuine in my efforts here. No funny business at all. > > It's not about refuting things. It's about presenting a case and arguing it. I worked with the examples you provided. That's not trolling that's how debate works. :P > > But yes, please tell me more about how I am a troll. On my own posts I am the ultimate authority on what I would consider trolling. You are a troll because you reworked the definition of generalizing AND decided unilaterally that its always wrong, and therefore me generalizing anything makes whatever point was made invalid. Good day.
: rickless killed akali, killed kennen, and will most likely... just make aatrox useless
> [{quoted}](name=The 14th Angel,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=6vY3RhMP,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-06-17T18:38:58.752+0000) > > rickless killed akali, killed kennen, and will most likely... just make aatrox useless He's a fucking joke
Rioter Comments
AhmadS5 (EUNE)
: He will get his rework when they start working on divers . 100% he will be reworked {{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}}
> [{quoted}](name=AhmadS5,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=qgVsdodu,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-06-13T09:31:59.988+0000) > > He will get his rework when they start working on divers . > > 100% he will be reworked {{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}} they will fuck it up like they always do. Riot is a borderline incompetent company
: > [{quoted}](name=Exobiocytosis,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-06-14T16:22:46.808+0000) > > Your problem is you are assuming that all generalizations mean everyone: > > "Not all people who like apples hate pie. Claiming that they all did would be false because it's not true for some of them." > > Generalizations most certainly are not used to imply EVERYONE. You have assigned a fake definition to the work in order to more easily argue against it. I never once said that generalizations mean everyone. You extrapolated that out of your ass so you can argue against it. You used a generalization based on your past experience with people defending Riot to make an incorrect assumption about me: > "After years of posting and reading the boards, I am judging correctly. Its a generalization based on what I see." I understand your confusion now. I miscommunicated. What you did was apply a generalization of your past experience to dismiss me as being like some unreasonable people you've argued with when in fact I am not the same as them. That is what I was calling bullshit on. > Guess what, generally speaking black murder more. In fact at 13% of the population comitting more than half of all murders in the U.S. The same could be said for a lot of types of crime, it's not due to race. It's due to poverty. People of color have been trapped in the underbelly of society for so long that their situation shapes and dictates a lot of the factual statistics like your murder rate listed above. > Does this figure violate your safe space? If so, how about "most people like chocolate" Is that WRONG of me to say that very GENERAL fact? You use generalizations to describe what usually occurs or what is usually true when talking about very large numbers. > > Seriously, what is wrong with you? There's nothing wrong with me, I called you out for assuming something incorrect about me and now you're the one going off about safe spaces and questioning my... rightness? Sanity? I dunno, whatever you meant by asking what is wrong with me. Anyway, you're the one who is acting violated for being challenged.
> [{quoted}](name=HalcyonDweller,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-06-14T17:15:41.003+0000) > > You used a generalization based on your past experience with people defending Riot to make an incorrect assumption about me: > > I understand your confusion now. I miscommunicated. What you did was apply a generalization of your past experience to dismiss me as being like some unreasonable people you've argued with when in fact I am not the same as them. That is what I was calling bullshit on. > > The same could be said for a lot of types of crime, it's not due to race. It's due to poverty. People of color have been trapped in the underbelly of society for so long that their situation shapes and dictates a lot of the factual statistics like your murder rate listed above. > > There's nothing wrong with me, I called you out for assuming something incorrect about me and now you're the one going off about safe spaces and questioning my... rightness? Sanity? I dunno, whatever you meant by asking what is wrong with me. Anyway, you're the one who is acting violated for being challenged. You refuted nothing. Generalization is used to talk about what generally occurs. End of story. You have no point or agreement, please troll elsewhere.
: > [{quoted}](name=Exobiocytosis,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:49:09.205+0000) > > No, you are. I never said the players were always right, and I never said they were always wrong. You are the type of person this post is meant for, people like you who leap to their defense so blindly you actually make up things that I never said. You said that players who jump to Riot's defense should instead join other players in complaining about problems. I'm not making that up, you said it here: > [{quoted}](name=Exobiocytosis,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:11:17.225+0000) > > I'm saying that everyone on the boards who always jump to Riot's defense should instead come down on the side of the players and on the side of a fun balanced game. My question to that is, "Why?" I'm not going to simply side with someone because they are against Riot. Just like I'm not going to side with them simply for defending Riot. If they present their arguments reasonably and with good evidence then I will pay attention to them, and if I am persuaded then I will likely upvote. Notice how I never typed any reply to your main post? That's because you presented a reasonable argument. I felt no need to challenge it. It's posts (and comments) that make brief erroneous claims or hyperbole that I'm going to challenge. It has nothing to do with defending Riot.
> [{quoted}](name=HalcyonDweller,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=00000000000000000001,timestamp=2017-06-14T17:32:06.758+0000) > > You said that players who jump to Riot's defense should instead join other players in complaining about problems. I'm not making that up, you said it here: > > My question to that is, "Why?" > > I'm not going to simply side with someone because they are against Riot. Just like I'm not going to side with them simply for defending Riot. > > If they present their arguments reasonably and with good evidence then I will pay attention to them, and if I am persuaded then I will likely upvote. Notice how I never typed any reply to your main post? That's because you presented a reasonable argument. I felt no need to challenge it. > > It's posts (and comments) that make brief erroneous claims or hyperbole that I'm going to challenge. It has nothing to do with defending Riot. The implication was that players should be default side with the players, ie, the customers. You are just extrapulating what you need to make arguments against me. Stop.
Kieferr (NA)
: That would lead to players bullying teammates who are having bad games/feedeing to go quit, so they can benefit from lower lp loss. Which in turn will drastically increase toxicity and verbal abuse.
> [{quoted}](name=Kieferr,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=6XNXd3B4,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-06-16T19:05:53.722+0000) > > That would lead to players bullying teammates who are having bad games/feedeing to go quit, so they can benefit from lower lp loss. Which in turn will drastically increase toxicity and verbal abuse. What a brain dead argument. So you think that instead of having a chance to win, a chance to come back, too many players are going to take for sure loss just so they can lose a little less? Stupid.
: You are wrong. Generalizations are never correct because they inherently ignore the parts of the sample that do not conform to the generalization. And anecdotal/experiential evidence is not enough to prove a point.
> [{quoted}](name=HalcyonDweller,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-06-13T00:23:14.447+0000) > > You are wrong. Generalizations are never correct because they inherently ignore the parts of the sample that do not conform to the generalization. > > And anecdotal/experiential evidence is not enough to prove a point. Furthermore, you are assuming generalizations ignore other parts that don't conform. Um, are you serious? The fact that someone is generalizing means he is acknowledging that there are exceptions
: Calling it brainwashing doesn't make it true. That is your opinion. Don't act like it's a fact. Generalizations are inherently wrong because they make false claims about subsets of the group in question. People are never that simple. Not all people who like apples hate pie. Claiming that they all did would be false because it's not true for some of them. This generalization has pretty much the same accuracy and merit as the one you made above. Basically zip.
> [{quoted}](name=HalcyonDweller,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-06-14T15:18:30.767+0000) > > Calling it brainwashing doesn't make it true. That is your opinion. Don't act like it's a fact. > > Generalizations are inherently wrong because they make false claims about subsets of the group in question. People are never that simple. > > Not all people who like apples hate pie. Claiming that they all did would be false because it's not true for some of them. > > This generalization has pretty much the same accuracy and merit as the one you made above. Basically zip. Your problem is you are assuming that all generalizations mean everyone: "Not all people who like apples hate pie. Claiming that they all did would be false because it's not true for some of them." Generalizations most certainly are not used to imply EVERYONE. You have assigned a fake definition to the work in order to more easily argue against it. I never once said that generalizations mean everyone. You extrapolated that out of your ass so you can argue against it. Guess what, generally speaking black murder more. In fact at 13% of the population comitting more than half of all murders in the U.S. Does this figure violate your safe space? If so, how about "most people like chocolate" Is that WRONG of me to say that very GENERAL fact? You use generalizations to describe what usually occurs or what is usually true when talking about very large numbers. Seriously, what is wrong with you?
meowwow7 (NA)
: well that's the thing for fighters but those poor guys didn't get the full use as much as the ranged champs had over it
> [{quoted}](name=meowwow7,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=7p4TITEe,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-06-14T02:20:29.294+0000) > > well that's the thing for fighters but those poor guys didn't get the full use as much as the ranged champs had over it It was one of the few items that did more for Aatrox than other champions.
Rioter Comments
: You are wrong. Generalizations are never correct because they inherently ignore the parts of the sample that do not conform to the generalization. And anecdotal/experiential evidence is not enough to prove a point.
> [{quoted}](name=HalcyonDweller,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-06-13T00:23:14.447+0000) > > You are wrong. Generalizations are never correct because they inherently ignore the parts of the sample that do not conform to the generalization. > > And anecdotal/experiential evidence is not enough to prove a point. They are absolutely correct when you are talking about large groups of people. Get over the brainwashing that generalizing is wrong.
: > [{quoted}](name=Exobiocytosis,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3Q3TclbY,comment-id=000000000001,timestamp=2017-06-12T20:41:51.389+0000) > > You got down voted for speaking the truth. The fact is they do change just for the sake of changing. Keeping the game in constant unbalanced chaos drives sales--players are forced to try this and that champion, buy more rune pages etc to try to figure out how to pull ahead in ranked. It's not about sales. Almost no game can be perfectly balanced. The few that are truly balanced are "solved" games - Tic Tac Toe and the like, where there's _always_ a single best move. Complex games like MOBAs are particularly hard, though, and League's stat system makes it one of the most complex of all. However, most people can agree that games that are consistently broken are usually less than fun. No one wants to play against any champ 100% of the time, as evidenced by all the trendy anti-Yasuo/Lee/Rengar/Orianna!?!?/Tryndamere/Pantheon!?/FOTM/Teemo threads. So what's the solution? The answer is called **perfect imbalance**. The concept is that of **giving up on perfect balance** and acknowledging its impossibility. You then rotate power quickly enough through a complex game system to prevent people from just following the meta and becoming amazing at every new strong meta whatever, encouraging people to stick with things they're good at through the bad times for long-term rewards. The result is a highly malleable meta, a chaotic balance environment, and, ideally, high playstyle diversity where every player has their day in the spotlight.
> [{quoted}](name=Neddoreo,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3Q3TclbY,comment-id=0000000000010000,timestamp=2017-06-13T02:06:37.528+0000) > > It's not about sales. > > Almost no game can be perfectly balanced. The few that are truly balanced are "solved" games - Tic Tac Toe and the like, where there's _always_ a single best move. Complex games like MOBAs are particularly hard, though, and League's stat system makes it one of the most complex of all. However, most people can agree that games that are consistently broken are usually less than fun. No one wants to play against any champ 100% of the time, as evidenced by all the trendy anti-Yasuo/Lee/Rengar/Orianna!?!?/Tryndamere/Pantheon!?/FOTM/Teemo threads. So what's the solution? > > The answer is called **perfect imbalance**. The concept is that of **giving up on perfect balance** and acknowledging its impossibility. You then rotate power quickly enough through a complex game system to prevent people from just following the meta and becoming amazing at every new strong meta whatever, encouraging people to stick with things they're good at through the bad times for long-term rewards. The result is a highly malleable meta, a chaotic balance environment, and, ideally, high playstyle diversity where every player has their day in the spotlight. Spare me with your get out of jail free called bs of "perfect imbalance" You think there is a highly diversity of playstyle? Haha. Despite the fact that 130 champs feels like about 30? Yeah, nice diversity. You would have more diversity by having more champions viable. Right now, we don't have that and it shows.
: the main issue i have is riot's balance team is too small. the have over 140 champions and they have how many people on thier balance team? there is ZERO way they have a good idea about the state of every champsion.. LEt ALONE how to fix them... i have over 1000 games on nidalee.. i know her inside and out. i can and HAVE pridicted how EVERY change ever put to pbe would affect her without ever having PBE access. (except twice but honestly NO ONE predicted those 2 times, so i dont feel bad about that) lets take {{champion:268}} ... he has been broken since they day he was released. he was always either OP or complete trash... and for the past YEAR he has been complete trash. is that batter than having him banned every game, yes... but he pretty much doesn't exist. NO CHAMPSION should sit at below 45% for OVER A SINGLE PATCH in EVERY ELO. now do i know how to fix him? no of course i don't... but im sure as hell there about 50+ azir mains each who have DOZENS of ways to do it.. but does riot bother to try to talk to them? Not that i can see. I have pointed out how each change would effect nidalee before it went live. i have posted over SIX differe't way u can fix nidalee during her jungle rollercoaster ride. but did riot try a SINGLE ONE? nope.. they NEED TO LISTEN to the players who MAIN the champsion. and not just ONE, ten fifty , 200. they NEED to get opinions from the players who MAIN the champsion. rek'sai was my main jungler in season 4-5, but i stopped playing her in season 6... WHY? because the RUINED the REASON why i play her... it wasn't about her winrate.. she had a 48% winrate... in every elo... and that viable enough.. i quit her because they made her BORING to play. they DESTROYED every FUN aspect about her. thier balance team doesnt seem to CARE about what they do to the champion as long as they can get people to stop calling it "OP" i mean that why {{champion:35}} mains are complaining about him needing a buff we he has a bloody 53% winrate... he donest need a buff.. he needs a NERF.. but a NERF that will make shako player's FEEL like they got the champsion they loved back.
> [{quoted}](name=SwiftKitten88,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2017-06-13T00:11:02.259+0000) > > the main issue i have is riot's balance team is too small. the have over 140 champions and they have how many people on thier balance team? > > there is ZERO way they have a good idea about the state of every champsion.. LEt ALONE how to fix them... > > i have over 1000 games on nidalee.. i know her inside and out. i can and HAVE pridicted how EVERY change ever put to pbe would affect her without ever having PBE access. (except twice but honestly NO ONE predicted those 2 times, so i dont feel bad about that) > > > lets take {{champion:268}} ... he has been broken since they day he was released. he was always either OP or complete trash... > and for the past YEAR he has been complete trash. > > is that batter than having him banned every game, yes... but he pretty much doesn't exist. > > NO CHAMPSION should sit at below 45% for OVER A SINGLE PATCH in EVERY ELO. > > now do i know how to fix him? no of course i don't... but im sure as hell there about 50+ azir mains each who have DOZENS of ways to do it.. > but does riot bother to try to talk to them? Not that i can see. > > I have pointed out how each change would effect nidalee before it went live. > > i have posted over SIX differe't way u can fix nidalee during her jungle rollercoaster ride. > > but did riot try a SINGLE ONE? > nope.. > > they NEED TO LISTEN to the players who MAIN the champsion. and not just ONE, ten fifty , 200. they NEED to get opinions from the players who MAIN the champsion. > > rek'sai was my main jungler in season 4-5, but i stopped playing her in season 6... WHY? because the RUINED the REASON why i play her... it wasn't about her winrate.. she had a 48% winrate... in every elo... and that viable enough.. i quit her because they made her BORING to play. they DESTROYED every FUN aspect about her. > > thier balance team doesnt seem to CARE about what they do to the champion as long as they can get people to stop calling it "OP" > > i mean that why {{champion:35}} mains are complaining about him needing a buff we he has a bloody 53% winrate... he donest need a buff.. he needs a NERF.. but a NERF that will make shako player's FEEL like they got the champsion they loved back. You nailed it man.
: > [{quoted}](name=Exobiocytosis,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:11:17.225+0000) > > I'm saying that everyone on the boards who always jump to Riot's defense should instead come down on the side of the players and on the side of a fun balanced game. . > the side of the players As if there is only one side? Because that's certainly the implication here. > [{quoted}](name=Exobiocytosis,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:49:09.205+0000) > > No, you are. I never said the players were always right, and I never said they were always wrong. You are the type of person this post is meant for, people like you who leap to their defense so blindly you actually make up things that I never said. I don't leap to their defense blindly, I disagree with many of their decisions. You sir, are quick to judge and label others.
> [{quoted}](name=HalcyonDweller,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=00000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:55:03.435+0000) > > . > > As if there is only one side? Because that's certainly the implication here. > > I don't leap to their defense blindly, I disagree with many of their decisions. You sir, are quick to judge and label others. After years of posting and reading the boards, I am judging correctly. Its a generalization based on what I see.
: Such responses are not worthy of typing a reply to. If you have faith in your argument then you shouldn't need to respond to such comments. And if you choose to respond, you'd best do it tactfully. Insulting / dismissing someone who opposes you doesn't help your argument, it just makes you look more like an ass. See my response to their comment. That's more appropriate.
> [{quoted}](name=HalcyonDweller,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=00020000000000000000,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:47:49.934+0000) > > Such responses are not worthy of typing a reply to. If you have faith in your argument then you shouldn't need to respond to such comments. > > And if you choose to respond, you'd best do it tactfully. Insulting / dismissing someone who opposes you doesn't help your argument, it just makes you look more like an ass. > > See my response to their comment. That's more appropriate. Ill do it anyway I see fit. Don't lecture me. You made a stupid comment and got a stupid reply. That is what happens, and that is what should happen. I am an ass, and I really don't care.
: It's not us vs them. Riot is full of controversies and conflicting opinions too. They're players just like us, they love their game and they sometimes make really stupid mistakes while trying to improve it. That doesn't mean they are bad, and it doesn't mean we are good. You are looking at this issue extremely one-sidedly.
> [{quoted}](name=HalcyonDweller,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:45:07.094+0000) > > It's not us vs them. Riot is full of controversies and conflicting opinions too. They're players just like us, they love their game and they sometimes make really stupid mistakes while trying to improve it. > > That doesn't mean they are bad, and it doesn't mean we are good. You are looking at this issue extremely one-sidedly. No, you are. I never said the players were always right, and I never said they were always wrong. You are the type of person this post is meant for, people like you who leap to their defense so blindly you actually make up things that I never said.
: > [{quoted}](name=Exobiocytosis,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:40:24.340+0000) > > Yes, drone. Nice ad hominem. Such persuasive. Very Wow.
> [{quoted}](name=HalcyonDweller,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:42:39.500+0000) > > Nice ad hominem. Such persuasive. Very Wow. What do you expect when you act the fool by typing a one word response to a post?
Mig89 (NA)
: No.
> [{quoted}](name=Mig89,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:39:08.232+0000) > > No. Yes, drone.
: > So many of you think they aren't susceptible to incompetence infecting their company. > > ...Clearly there are people who make extremely poor decisions. They reason these boards are so active is because we talk about their poor decisions mostly. > > And its not like we haven't been proven correctly time and time again. We have. Riot has been categorically wrong in so many cases that we pointed out, only to have them drag their feet in reverting a change or admitting they messed up. There are times when the community is correct about how something will turn out, and there are times when Riot is correct about how something will turn out. Remember the whole "blast cones will favor Ranged champions, this is Ranged favoritism!" fiasco? Riot said there wasn't a meaningful difference in the two, and look at it today. Skarner's "Dominion Lite" Passive was one I think a lot of the community saw coming that Riot tried to convince themselves was a good idea. In general, I think the people working at Riot Games have reasons they came to the conclusion they did before making a change. Yes, it might have been a wrong reason or didn't end up like they thought it would, but they had a reason. I feel like as often as you see people trying to defend everything Riot does you see people trying to crucify them over everything they do. How many times have posts come up asking for a Riot employee to be fired or worse over a mistake they made? We can scarcely get that in Politics for serious mistakes, and they want it for a minor change to a video game! Even if you assume someone working at Riot is incompetent in their promoted position, what do you want them to do about it? It seems like you'd have to keep playing musical chairs until you find someone who's somewhat better at that promoted position, or you'd have to train the person in the promoted position better.
> [{quoted}](name=DrCyanide,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:19:47.313+0000) > > There are times when the community is correct about how something will turn out, and there are times when Riot is correct about how something will turn out. Remember the whole "blast cones will favor Ranged champions, this is Ranged favoritism!" fiasco? Riot said there wasn't a meaningful difference in the two, and look at it today. Skarner's "Dominion Lite" Passive was one I think a lot of the community saw coming that Riot tried to convince themselves was a good idea. > > In general, I think the people working at Riot Games have reasons they came to the conclusion they did before making a change. Yes, it might have been a wrong reason or didn't end up like they thought it would, but they had a reason. > > I feel like as often as you see people trying to defend everything Riot does you see people trying to crucify them over everything they do. How many times have posts come up asking for a Riot employee to be fired or worse over a mistake they made? We can scarcely get that in Politics for serious mistakes, and they want it for a minor change to a video game! > > Even if you assume someone working at Riot is incompetent in their promoted position, what do you want them to do about it? It seems like you'd have to keep playing musical chairs until you find someone who's somewhat better at that promoted position, or you'd have to train the person in the promoted position better. What I want them to do, for starters, is clearly define for us what success means in balancing. As in, what is the goal? What criteria could be met that would mean success? Is there even a metric for that? If not, the balancing means nothing because its all arbitrary. For example, they could define success as, 1)less than x percent of champions are banned over x percent of the time 2)x percent of champion are picked at least x percent of the time 3)no item is built more than x percent of the time 4)no item is built LESS than x percent of the time 5)Less than x percent of matches end due to nexus loss before x time 6)less than x percent of matches go over x time Something like that.
Rioter Comments
Eggbread (NA)
: What exactly are you trying to say?
> [{quoted}](name=WAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=krtod2zL,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:10:15.650+0000) > > What exactly are you trying to say? I'm saying that everyone on the boards who always jump to Riot's defense should instead come down on the side of the players and on the side of a fun balanced game.
: I mean, it might be because buying just a gunblade on Jax gives more sustain than all of Aatrox's kit.
> [{quoted}](name=DracoMTA,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hVYGKEIR,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2017-06-12T23:04:45.363+0000) > > I mean, it might be because buying just a gunblade on Jax gives more sustain than all of Aatrox's kit. Yup that too.
Sasogwa (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Exobiocytosis,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hVYGKEIR,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2017-06-12T22:17:07.327+0000) > > Yes but WHY is he bad? This is one of hte main reasons--the distribution in power and utility in his kit makes him very vulnerable and easily counterable. m'yeah basically But I don't like the term "free magic damage" for Jax R. Nothing is free. It occupies an ability slot ffs. And honestly, it's mostly about the CD. We're in league of mobility, kite, some tanks ({{champion:79}} {{champion:3}} {{champion:154}} ) so peel/CC. And Aatrox's Q CD is insanely high. Plus he's supposed to be a lifesteal based skirmisher/diver which is basically a garbage concept in teamfights as you want CC/tank frontlines and DPS ranged carries cause range is overpowered as shit. But that CD means he's complete garbage. He can't dive anything. It's not like he's gonna lifesteal through carries dpsing him on an armored tank. Even Jax is kiteable even though he has a Q on really short CD (6s -> 3.6s depending on his CDR) meanwhile Aatrox's dash CD is fucking 11s -> 6.6s depending on CDR. That's insanely high. Meanwhile a bunch ADC's have dashes with shorter CD and can get help to kite him. Just that means he's garbage, on top of the fact his dash is actually kinda sluggish and not easy to land.
> [{quoted}](name=Sasogwa,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hVYGKEIR,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2017-06-12T22:26:25.192+0000) > > m'yeah basically > But I don't like the term "free magic damage" for Jax R. Nothing is free. It occupies an ability slot ffs. > And honestly, it's mostly about the CD. We're in league of mobility, kite, some tanks ({{champion:79}} {{champion:3}} {{champion:154}} ) so peel/CC. And Aatrox's Q CD is insanely high. Plus he's supposed to be a lifesteal based skirmisher/diver which is basically a garbage concept in teamfights as you want CC/tank frontlines and DPS ranged carries cause range is overpowered as shit. But that CD means he's complete garbage. He can't dive anything. It's not like he's gonna lifesteal through carries dpsing him on an armored tank. Even Jax is kiteable even though he has a Q on really short CD (6s -> 3.6s depending on his CDR) meanwhile Aatrox's dash CD is fucking 11s -> 6.6s depending on CDR. That's insanely high. Meanwhile a bunch ADC's have dashes with shorter CD and can get help to kite him. Just that means he's garbage, on top of the fact his dash is actually kinda sluggish and not easy to land. No its free. He gets it passively. Most champs nothing until they activate their ult. To your other point, yes, other champions have lower CD dashes that are RELIABLE.
Rioter Comments
: I prefer Aatrox over Jax anyday.
> [{quoted}](name=Radiant Wukong,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hVYGKEIR,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-06-12T22:07:50.821+0000) > > I prefer Aatrox over Jax anyday. You shouldn't, Jax is a much more consistent and reliable champion
: jax can build bruiser and still do damage
> [{quoted}](name=Pink Leg Warmers,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hVYGKEIR,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2017-06-12T22:13:39.600+0000) > > jax can build bruiser and still do damage? Yes
Sasogwa (EUW)
: The reason why Aatrox is worse than Jax is because Aatrox is bad. THat's it.
> [{quoted}](name=Sasogwa,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hVYGKEIR,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2017-06-12T22:09:14.644+0000) > > The reason why Aatrox is worse than Jax is because Aatrox is bad. > THat's it. Yes but WHY is he bad? This is one of hte main reasons--the distribution in power and utility in his kit makes him very vulnerable and easily counterable.
Nahui (NA)
: You just put two champions relative to each other for no reason whatsoever. It's common knowledge Aatrox is in a bit of a fix, but idk why jax had to be involved. I mean I don't see jax life stealing like Aatrox can or reviving upon death. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses, but they're not really comparable champions, and one is widely known to need a rework of sorts.
> [{quoted}](name=Nahui,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hVYGKEIR,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-06-12T21:51:42.678+0000) > > You just put two champions relative to each other for no reason whatsoever. > > It's common knowledge Aatrox is in a bit of a fix, but idk why jax had to be involved. > > I mean I don't see jax life stealing like Aatrox can or reviving upon death. Each has their own strengths and weaknesses, but they're not really comparable champions, and one is widely known to need a rework of sorts. For no reason? Um, they both are seen at top a lot and they are both melee auto attack champions who rely on attack speed to the point they both have it built in to their kits? Jax doesnt NEED to lifesteal when he can stop damage for a couple of seconds with his counterstrike and stun. Also, he has built in resistances that scale off AD. They are comparable. His kit works well, and Aatrox's doesn't.
Rioter Comments
: Yasuo is always banned now
Good. Fuck that champion.
korg023 (EUNE)
: Again Riot trying to fix things that were not even broken before. At this point i feel like they just change things for sake of change without much thought into it. I still dont see why they focused so much time to change {{item:3143}} {{item:3068}} {{item:3742}} etc etc, instead on spending that time on something that actually matters like dozens VGU that are actually needed.
> [{quoted}](name=korg023,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=3Q3TclbY,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2017-06-12T12:50:59.150+0000) > > Again Riot trying to fix things that were not even broken before. At this point i feel like they just change things for sake of change without much thought into it. > > I still dont see why they focused so much time to change {{item:3143}} {{item:3068}} {{item:3742}} etc etc, instead on spending that time on something that actually matters like dozens VGU that are actually needed. You got down voted for speaking the truth. The fact is they do change just for the sake of changing. Keeping the game in constant unbalanced chaos drives sales--players are forced to try this and that champion, buy more rune pages etc to try to figure out how to pull ahead in ranked. Its sad that only you and me and like 3 others apparently out of everyone has the brains to understand that this is happening for a variety of reasons, some of which involves employees being promoted to their own level of incompetence, and ego driven leadership that cares more about their ideas than what is good for the game and what the players want.
Rioter Comments
kile147 (NA)
: > Your company treats is customers like they are stupid morons who don't understand things. For the most part they are, evidenced by this entire post.
> [{quoted}](name=kile147,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=pXEoxzKI,comment-id=000000000002000000030000,timestamp=2017-01-25T00:37:26.937+0000) > > For the most part they are, evidenced by this entire post. Gee, what a nice little elitist we have here. Go read Marc Merrills blog. READ it, and read between the lines of what he is saying.
: It means that just because you spam these topics constantly doesn't mean Riot should respond to them over other, smaller stuff like the Rift Herald transition, which plenty of people like to hear about. I don't know how to put it more clearly. I can see Meddler already put you in your place though.
> [{quoted}](name=Zone0ut,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=pXEoxzKI,comment-id=000000000002000100000000,timestamp=2017-01-24T18:53:31.162+0000) > > It means that just because you spam these topics constantly doesn't mean Riot should respond to them over other, smaller stuff like the Rift Herald transition, which plenty of people like to hear about. I don't know how to put it more clearly. I can see Meddler already put you in your place though. Haha yeah okay pal, if you call that putting me in my place. Take your Riot colored glasses off and see it for what it was. Dodging the larger issue by focusing on the issue of Rift and Baron which clearly was only just one example. Frickin Riot drones, I swear.
Meddler (NA)
: Turret first blood has only increased predicted win % off first tower very slightly (about 1.5%) relative to before its introduction. I read through that thread on the front page today about it. I didn't feel I could add much more to it though, since one of the first responses explained it really well already, and did so with data that seemed quite accurate (credit to LeagueofGraphs on that one). It's also something we've talked about a couple of times since adding the first turret gold and the numbers just haven't changed over time so I can't offer anything new and insightful. First turret's certainly a strong predictor of who will win, even with no gold at all on it that'd be fairly true though. The first team to take a turret's playing better, are more coordinated and have just given themselves more map control. It's certainly possible we could keep the benefits we see from turret first blood (additional victory condition in lane, indirect interaction with other lanes, cost to lane swapping, concentrated gold to increase odds of personal carry potential etc) with a slightly lower value. We'll likely try tweaking it slightly at some point. The mechanic itself we're still feeling really good about though. In terms of responding to this thread? It's a question that's cropped up a number of times that I'm not sure we've ever explained our thinking on (it's a cool idea, so why haven't we done it?). It's also a really quick and easy post to make. Sorry if it's not something you're interested in, suggest not reading it if so.
> [{quoted}](name=Meddler,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=pXEoxzKI,comment-id=0000000000020000,timestamp=2017-01-24T03:50:10.187+0000) > > Turret first blood has only increased predicted win % off first tower very slightly (about 1.5%) relative to before its introduction. I read through that thread on the front page today about it. I didn't feel I could add much more to it though, since one of the first responses explained it really well already, and did so with data that seemed quite accurate (credit to LeagueofGraphs on that one). It's also something we've talked about a couple of times since adding the first turret gold and the numbers just haven't changed over time so I can't offer anything new and insightful. > > First turret's certainly a strong predictor of who will win, even with no gold at all on it that'd be fairly true though. The first team to take a turret's playing better, are more coordinated and have just given themselves more map control. It's certainly possible we could keep the benefits we see from turret first blood (additional victory condition in lane, indirect interaction with other lanes, cost to lane swapping, concentrated gold to increase odds of personal carry potential etc) with a slightly lower value. We'll likely try tweaking it slightly at some point. The mechanic itself we're still feeling really good about though. > > In terms of responding to this thread? It's a question that's cropped up a number of times that I'm not sure we've ever explained our thinking on (it's a cool idea, so why haven't we done it?). It's also a really quick and easy post to make. Sorry if it's not something you're interested in, suggest not reading it if so. My point is there are always new players, and players want to know thoughts from Riot as it pertains to actual game play. It doesn't matter if an issue was addressed 3 months ago or 6 months ago. Everything is reinforcement and habit. There are dozens of issues that we never see responses from Riot. I swear its like trying to squeeze blood from a stone trying to get you guys to honestly talk about the state of champions, Riot's priorities and thinking, balance issues etc. Your company treats is customers like they are stupid morons who don't understand things. But you guys do. Marc Merrills blog oozes with it--implying that the players just don't understand the difficulties Riot faces from being so awesome so fast. You guys justify it by saying well its free to play, as if we therefore are not customers and not providing you guys jobs and success with our patronage, and therefore you don't owe us anything. Let me tell you something Meddler, and everyone else at Riot--Gamers tolerate your constant nonsense because they love competitive gaming, and you are the biggest game around. We play DESPITE your failings as a company. You guys have misconstrued that to think we play because what you guys do is so great. Most of us will abandon you as soon as a bigger better game from a better company is developed. You want to talk about balanced....apparently Riot's idea of balanced is the same 10 champions banned every match an the same dozen or so played, out of what..128 champions? Instead of working to make more champions viable so that we see greater diversity in team match ups, you leave champions in awful states in favor of new ones. Then you defend your actions by clinging to the whole "perfectly imbalanced" nonsense, which is essentially a get out of jail free card for game developers. You want to know a good metric for if a game is balanced? Pick rates that are closer together than they are now, and greater number of champions being banned regularly, not just the ones you guys leave broken or OP...OR annoying to play against, and not even fun to deal with it because the design of the champion is innately toxic and annoying. Basically, you strong arm players into playing a select few champions, if they want to climb in ranked, because most champions are not viable for carrying and climbing in solo que. Your company, like other companies in other industries, entered your market at just the right time. Now the barrier to entry is pretty huge, and you enjoy market dominance. Therefore, the incentive to change how your company operates is small until you start seeing players leave for other games, or the rate of new players dropping significantly. But the most mind boggling thing is the changes you guys make to the game. Remember when the new keystone mastery system was released? And there was the crit mastery that everyone immediately say was totally broken on Yas and Trynd....eventually you guys fixed it a couple months later. My question is, how did you guys NOT realize it would be broken AF, but the community immediately identified it as broken? Where is the analysis and testing on your part? Are people at your company who make decisions so detached from the game that they can't calculate the impact of a change? Or is the autonomy of different parts of Riot so great that decisions and changes are not following any cohesive logic? Just wondering. I play this game a lot and the more I play it the more I believe that Riot is one trick pony that got lucky with the timing and the venture capital.
Meddler (NA)
: Pretty much. It was something we talked about when we were building the first version of Rift Herald. Conclusion was that we'd be better off putting the animator time into other work, champion updates included, though. We figured we'd reassess if Rift Herald was a clear success and something we definitely wanted to keep in the game long term. So far that hasn't been the case however. If we do find a version of Rift Herald that really nails it we'd want to revisit Baron/RH ceremony opportunities, see how getting that work done stacked up versus other stuff going on at the time. Unless that happens though it's likely to be pretty low value (in terms of upgrade to game quality) relative to other things that could be done instead.
> [{quoted}](name=Meddler,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=pXEoxzKI,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2017-01-24T02:50:37.206+0000) > > Pretty much. It was something we talked about when we were building the first version of Rift Herald. Conclusion was that we'd be better off putting the animator time into other work, champion updates included, though. > > We figured we'd reassess if Rift Herald was a clear success and something we definitely wanted to keep in the game long term. So far that hasn't been the case however. If we do find a version of Rift Herald that really nails it we'd want to revisit Baron/RH ceremony opportunities, see how getting that work done stacked up versus other stuff going on at the time. Unless that happens though it's likely to be pretty low value (in terms of upgrade to game quality) relative to other things that could be done instead. Whats amazing is that given how many posts there are laying down real criticism and problems, such as turret first blood correlating with a 73% win rate, that Rioters spend time commenting on shit like this has no bearing on the game at all.
: Despite Rito's effort to make competetive games short and exciting
Another important post that won't see a Rioter response. Good job Riot, we can tell you care!
: Reminder that whatever team gets first tower has a 73% win rate
This is an indirect buff for Aatrox--I usually get first turret blood!
: i called the random downvoters c un ts, and said there may be a group funded by riot to downvote as many posts as possible so riot doesnt have to deal with as much. it got removed for calling them c u nts but lets be real here, that was directed at a shadow not a specific.
> [{quoted}](name=Denims Wrath666,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=XlOuBybq,comment-id=000000000000000000010001,timestamp=2017-01-22T21:36:52.549+0000) > > i called the random downvoters c un ts, and said there may be a group funded by riot to downvote as many posts as possible so riot doesnt have to deal with as much. it got removed for calling them c u nts but lets be real here, that was directed at a shadow not a specific. Oh, you mean Riot shills? Yeah, of course they are around, its how Riot protects their image.
: BREAKDOWN!! > [{quoted}](name=Exobiocytosis,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=XlOuBybq,comment-id=,timestamp=2017-01-22T20:43:47.727+0000) > > First of all, lets dispense with the argument that they don't have time to go over things that they have covered before--there are new players all the time, TONS of them, and just because Riot addressed and issue 6 months ago doesn't really do jack shit for newer concerned or confused players. Google is a thing. The boards have a search tool. Issue One solved. > Secondly, the lack of response from Riot on posts that get tons of upvotes making valid points is very telling--they are often posts that correctly lays criticism and blame on Riot, and Riot doesn't want to even touch it. > > I find it disgusting when I can scroll for 2 pages and not see any Riot responses except on joke posts, questions about skins, or a Rioters favorite color. We don't give a shit about what you like in real life, or if you think someones post is funny. Give us feedback and answers to our posts. Valid concern that I also share. However it must be taken into consideration that not all Rioters are working on the same thing. Let's assume Phreak is reading the Boards. Two posts pop up on the Hot page for him: "OMG Yasuo is OP REWORKHIMNOW" (gameplay) and "What do you get if you cross Mordekaiser and Cassiopeia?" (M&G). As he's not even remotely tied to anything resembling gameplay in this game, there is no use for him on the Yasuo thread, instead he goes to the M&G thread to see the joke and makes a Pun of Damage in the thread. There is also the possibility that those Rioters are not working at the moment they make the post in M&G, and are just enoying some of their free time. > I really want to know what the major malfunction is in Riot leadership. Shit rolls downhill, so where does it start? What culture permeates the company that makes Riot feel like they need to shove changes that no one wants down our throats, quite contrary to say, Dota2 balance team (usually)? What is this culture where Riot almost seems to blame the players for not understanding their level of genius (insert heavy sarcasm here)? Never played DotA2, always been a LoL player. I have a few friends that play both and they all say that one thing they admire in LoL is the fact that Riot uses the feedback it receives and communicates with it's players. I'm not sure how accurate that is, but it might show that DotA2 is in a poorer state than LoL and shouldn't be used as an example. Or that my friends are mentally challenged. Both are very much possible. > My personal belief is that Marc Merrill is an egotistical toolbag, and that his mediocre ability and intelligence has infected the entire company. > > Don't believe me? Look up some of the stupid things he has blogged and tweeted and said. You don't really know how a company works, right? It's not like he's sitting in a big chair and issuing orders. You have groups of people with a large degree of autonomy working on different things at the same time. Specially when it comes to in-game issues, Tryndamere is not really deciding much.
> [{quoted}](name=TequilaZombie,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=XlOuBybq,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2017-01-22T22:18:16.839+0000) > > BREAKDOWN!! > > Google is a thing. The boards have a search tool. Issue One solved. > > Valid concern that I also share. However it must be taken into consideration that not all Rioters are working on the same thing. Let's assume Phreak is reading the Boards. Two posts pop up on the Hot page for him: "OMG Yasuo is OP REWORKHIMNOW" (gameplay) and "What do you get if you cross Mordekaiser and Cassiopeia?" (M&G). As he's not even remotely tied to anything resembling gameplay in this game, there is no use for him on the Yasuo thread, instead he goes to the M&G thread to see the joke and makes a Pun of Damage in the thread. > > There is also the possibility that those Rioters are not working at the moment they make the post in M&G, and are just enoying some of their free time. > > Never played DotA2, always been a LoL player. I have a few friends that play both and they all say that one thing they admire in LoL is the fact that Riot uses the feedback it receives and communicates with it's players. I'm not sure how accurate that is, but it might show that DotA2 is in a poorer state than LoL and shouldn't be used as an example. Or that my friends are mentally challenged. Both are very much possible. > > You don't really know how a company works, right? It's not like he's sitting in a big chair and issuing orders. You have groups of people with a large degree of autonomy working on different things at the same time. Specially when it comes to in-game issues, Tryndamere is not really deciding much. Yes he has talked about that approach in his blog, which I think its very stupid for a game like this. " You have groups of people with a large degree of autonomy working on different things at the same time." Considering how hard it is to balance this kind of game, I would suspect a lot of balance issues come from too much autonomy. I hate heavy top down management and micromanagement as much as anyone else. But there is no other way to explain some of the changes they made in the past. Things like the crit mastery when they made the new keystone masteries. Day 1, everyone says its broken and Riot finally nerfs it. But how is it that everyone can instantly spot a broken feature in the game, and Riot somehow can't see it, and release it like its fine?
: yeah, you cant prove otherwise, so even if its speculation.
> [{quoted}](name=Denims Wrath666,realm=NA,application-id=cIfEodbz,discussion-id=XlOuBybq,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2017-01-22T20:57:39.287+0000) > > yeah, you cant prove otherwise, so even if its speculation. Now I'm curious what your post said that they deleted.
: Riot's piss poor rate of responding to board posts and their company culture
If you are going to down vote, have the decency to explain why you don't agree.
Show more

Exobiocytosis

Level 30 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion