: > In fairness, Draven is one of the hardest snowballing champions in the game. So when he gets ahead in bot lane, he’s got two free double kills waiting for him. Yes he's extremly snowbally and I dislike playing Draven or playing against Draven >In top lane, you get the enemy laner and jungler waiting for you. That's the feel you get but there are the same amount of toplaners that get camped than the number of toplaners that are helped by their jungler. And yet you only hear toplaners complaining when they are the toplaner that gets camped by the enemy Jng but never complain when their Jng helps them to smash lane making the enemy toplaner being the one that complains about being camped. That's just the natural way of how we remember the most the bad things, but it doesn't make it right.
> [{quoted}](name=Sir Saltarin,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=eFMWlMq6,comment-id=000100010000,timestamp=2019-05-20T14:55:41.098+0000) > > Yes he's extremly snowbally and I dislike playing Draven or playing against Draven > > That's the feel you get but there are the same amount of toplaners that get camped than the number of toplaners that are helped by their jungler. > > And yet you only hear toplaners complaining when they are the toplaner that gets camped by the enemy Jng but never complain when their Jng helps them to smash lane making the enemy toplaner being the one that complains about being camped. > > That's just the natural way of how we remember the most the bad things, but it doesn't make it right. Well I’m not gonna complain about getting a jungler that carries me! Lol That said, I think it’s not even an issue with top lane as much as it is an issue with the rest of the map. Top lane just feels it the hardest. And I absolutely hate that the lane often comes down to the jungler, win or lose.
: You won Top by getting maybe 1 kill and a 20 cs lead while the Draven smashed his lane completely and went 9-0 why does he carry more than me buaaah
> [{quoted}](name=Sir Saltarin,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=eFMWlMq6,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-05-20T10:27:42.439+0000) > > You won Top by getting maybe 1 kill and a 20 cs lead while the Draven smashed his lane completely and went 9-0 why does he carry more than me buaaah In fairness, Draven is one of the hardest snowballing champions in the game. So when he gets ahead in bot lane, he’s got two free double kills waiting for him. In top lane, you get the enemy laner and jungler waiting for you.
: Hashinshin complaining that Bruisers do no damage to Tanks and that Tanks are weak against Mages
Hashinshin is wrong about the items but he’s right that mages dumpster tanks in lane.
Rioter Comments
: Ever wondered why some times you are clicking on an Enemy champ but it just wont auto attack them?
What would the effect have on point and click spells? Whenever I play Nasus against him, i always feel like I literally can’t wither home. Then I look back at and think maybe I’m misclicking or something.
: > [{quoted}](name=Touch my stump,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=pvW9LQOx,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2019-05-18T03:14:26.821+0000) > > Wow... you are fucking cold dude. Learn to have empathy for people please. Don't have, it's called psychic issues.
> [{quoted}](name=Laufplanke,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=pvW9LQOx,comment-id=000000010000,timestamp=2019-05-18T03:19:12.457+0000) > > Don't have, it's called psychic issues. “Psychic issues” lmao “Nah dude I can’t be nice, the future forbids it”
: Send help, the french rioters have gone mad
Hey at least you have a board My Spanish friends don’t even have a board
Ludicol0 (NA)
: let us walk through minions
Honestly I’ve always accepted that minion block is a part of the game but that doesn’t excuse what we are experiencing now. If you’re melee, this game is legit shit for you and has been for uears.
: The boards will get deleted however i have a little question for Riot
Yeah, I’m going to need more proof than what is said on a random French discord before I believe such a claim. That said, Riot has always had a disconnect with its player base ever since they implemented boards. One moment they’ve been strict about moderation, the next loose. I don’t really blame the mods as much as I blame the almost-impossible-to-consistently-enforce-rules that riot goes back and forth on. It’s also worth mentioning that upvote systems do not work. The only thing they do is encourage spam and hiveminding. Even though the old forums had their flaws, their quality of discussion was much better than boards because upvotes did not decide what was seen or not. The problem with the league community is 99% of the players don’t know what they’re talking about and are so full of bias it hurts. Old league forums had several very authentic posters that really pushed direction in favor of healthier discussion, something these boards lack because you get drowned out in downvoted for going against the majority.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: {{sticker:sg-lux-2}} yup his lane kill rate is one of the highest but the champ completely fails at transitioning leads maybe you want him to be fodder at all points of the game like pre the adjustments
> [{quoted}](name=Ornndyr2k19,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=59ecHOEl,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-05-13T13:55:24.123+0000) > > {{sticker:sg-lux-2}} > yup his lane kill rate is one of the highest > but the champ completely fails at transitioning leads > maybe you want him to be fodder at all points of the game like pre the adjustments Or maybe that’s the crux of a horrible design. Can win lane easily but do nothing with it. I’m sure that’s an enjoyable experience for both parties involved.
Rioter Comments
: Nidalee Players Want Riot To Step Up And Fix The Mess Riot Created.
Gonna be honest with you: not really in any hurry to see AD Nid come back. It was one of the most frustrating things to play against and I’m quite certain there’s very little riot can do to make that playstyle less frustrating. I feel for nid players in that I think it sucks that their champion isn’t where they want her to be, but from personal experience...yeah, leave ad nid dead.
Moody P (NA)
: There are massively more champions now than at the time Shyvana was popular. Which VGUs are good? Sion is toxic and nobody likes when he's good for as much as people like to show how cool they are by praising him at any chance. Same for Poppy. Swain is a generic bursty combo mage and everything that linked him to old swain is watered down or gone. Taric is toxic. Warwick is bad. Galio is a *travesty.* Aatrox is still a dumb champion The only good VGUs to date are Poppy and Akali. Everybody else is mediocre or garbage. Volibear and Shyvana are in the same camp of low popularity champions as Galio and Aatrox. There's absolutely nothing exciting about this prospect.
> [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=P2iA81NO,comment-id=00000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-10T16:55:31.292+0000) > > There are massively more champions now than at the time Shyvana was popular. > > Which VGUs are good? > > Sion is toxic and nobody likes when he's good for as much as people like to show how cool they are by praising him at any chance. Same for Poppy. Swain is a generic bursty combo mage and everything that linked him to old swain is watered down or gone. Taric is toxic. Warwick is bad. Galio is a *travesty.* Aatrox is still a dumb champion > > The only good VGUs to date are Poppy and Akali. Everybody else is mediocre or garbage. Volibear and Shyvana are in the same camp of low popularity champions as Galio and Aatrox. There's absolutely nothing exciting about this prospect. What? Lmao Sion is legit one of the best VGUs riot has ever done. And nobody likes it when anything is good. His kit is fine. It’s not toxic.
D357R0Y3R (EUW)
: You ever tried to play an adc against nocturne hatedaddy? Because I fucking despise this no-counterplay champion that requieres me to never ever be alone and him having vision on me else It's just a straight ticket to hell with nothing I can do about it.
> [{quoted}](name=D357R0Y3R,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=P2iA81NO,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-05-10T16:42:39.536+0000) > > You ever tried to play an adc against nocturne hatedaddy? > > Because I fucking despise this no-counterplay champion that requieres me to never ever be alone and him having vision on me else It's just a straight ticket to hell with nothing I can do about it. Bro, how is that different than any other assassin? Granted, they can’t ult you from a screen away but the overall theme still holds true. And nocturne isn’t going to insta burst you either like Rengar or Talon, so even then you have an opportunity to get away. Moreover, you just said in your own statement what you have to do in order to nullify his ult. And as someone that has played quite a bit of nocturne, nothing is more frustrating than an ADC that stays with their team! But his ult still has good utility, split push potential and even objective potential. So I wouldn’t say it’s feast or famine either.
Moody P (NA)
: Boring for YOU. That's what you people never grasp. There are people who DO like the champion, and never once in any of these OPs that lecture at you why your champion should just be scrapped and redone entirely do they ever consider it. Its all "me, me, me!" And I will predict that just like near all other VGUs in this style many will go at great length to justify bad or boring rework designs and telling you how good it is now while not playing a single game of it themselves and giving NO thought to the people who played it for years.
> [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=P2iA81NO,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-10T16:26:15.944+0000) > > Boring for YOU. That's what you people never grasp. There are people who DO like the champion, and never once in any of these OPs that lecture at you why your champion should just be scrapped and redone entirely do they ever consider it. Its all "me, me, me!" > > And I will predict that just like near all other VGUs in this style many will go at great length to justify bad or boring rework designs and telling you how good it is now while not playing a single game of it themselves and giving NO thought to the people who played it for years. You’re missing the point. It has nothing to do with me. The champion has had a exponential drop in a play rate, especially concerning for a champion that at one time had a huge playerbase. And are you really going to sit here and pretend Shyvana had a champion isn’t generic or uninteresting? That’s what many people are using to explain her playrate drop; that’s why she’s being suggested for a rework in the first place. And with your logic, champions shouldn’t be updated at all because the 5 people who play that champion would be upset as opposed to the millions that might play them and love them if they were actually given functional kits. I’m starting to think this is misdirected frustration because voli is on the slate to be changed and you don’t want that. But whether you like it or not, riot has a good track record on reworking champions full scale. And to their defense, they absolutely admit they fail too and look to address those as well.
DalekZec (EUNE)
: I personally voted for Fiddlesticks because I think he's a toxic champ. Laning against 1 in bot lane is bs and laning him 1v1 in mid lane (which is rare) is like playing vs a bot. My 2nd option would be Dr.mundo though.
> [{quoted}](name=DalekZec,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=P2iA81NO,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-05-10T16:15:19.178+0000) > > I personally voted for Fiddlesticks because I think he's a toxic champ. Laning against 1 in bot lane is bs and laning him 1v1 in mid lane (which is rare) is like playing vs a bot. > > My 2nd option would be Dr.mundo though. Yeah but I think they can make changes to fiddle that push him back into the jungle again, without making him an overbearing support.
Moody P (NA)
: "I don't play Shyvana" Might as well just stop there; you don't, you wont and you never will play Shyvana, so why pretend you want her improved other than to spite her player base? Its fairly consistent pattern for these replacements to alienate their original base.
> [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=P2iA81NO,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-05-10T16:11:53.366+0000) > > "I don't play Shyvana" > > Might as well just stop there; you don't, you wont and you never will play Shyvana, so why pretend you want her improved other than to spite her player base? Its fairly consistent pattern for these replacements to alienate their original base. That is absolutely a fair criticism but that isn’t my intention at all. I’ve always liked the idea of playing her, and then I do and then I’m reminded of just how uninteresting she is. I also see a champion that just doesn’t live up to her design. And as I mentioned, this used to be one of the most popular champions in the game with a vocal and active playbase. Now? Not so much, which is the most concerning thing to me.
Rioter Comments
Kanon241 (NA)
: Vayne should not go top
Vayne top is free gold for your jungler
iPrawn (NA)
: Ssssh, don't tell anyone that Jax pressed R. it's a secret!
If it makes you feel any better, there are absolutely times where I’ve thought I casted my R as Jax but I didn’t, and I got blown up. It is rather annoying.
Rioter Comments
giantZorg (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=HateDaddy,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=0prFckQM,comment-id=0009,timestamp=2019-05-08T14:35:57.441+0000) > > Question: > > If you define buff as change in winrate, don’t you have concerns there? I mean, a winrate Can totally increase as a result of other things not related to direct champion buffs. I realize analyzing that would be a nightmare, but the complaint or notion of buffs for newly released skins doesn’t imply performance improvement, it’s that riot buffs champions to increase skin sales. I just find that definition a bit concerning, because generally buffs are noted in patch notes as specific buffs to improve poor performance. > > Also, as far as the strong correlation with skins and champion changes, I’d say to some extent just the novel effect makes champion changes more likely. Also, it’s likely that skins release increase play rates of champions, so it’s reasonable to think that to some extent it gives riot a larger sample size to work with. That said, there’s usually several explanations for strong correlations. > > Cool stuff nevertheless You have to define "Buff" and "Nerf" somehow, and this was for me the fairest (and easiest btw) way to do so. It's actually way harder to automatically read out from the patch notes which champions got directly buffed and nerfed, not to mention of both happen at the same time (one ability buffed, another nerfed, what happens overall?). Not to mention indirect buffs which are a nightmare to disentangle. Also, when they want to buff a whole class, they change item prices. You also want to get a grip on this somehow. The example here is when they wanted to buff crit ADCs, the lowered the Zeal item prices. But in the end, a winrate increase means the champion got better. Whether directly or indirectly actually doesn't matter so much to me as in both scenarios you have an increased incentive to play this champion as the statistical odds have gotten better.
> [{quoted}](name=giantZorg,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=0prFckQM,comment-id=00090000,timestamp=2019-05-08T19:35:13.951+0000) > > You have to define "Buff" and "Nerf" somehow, and this was for me the fairest (and easiest btw) way to do so. It's actually way harder to automatically read out from the patch notes which champions got directly buffed and nerfed, not to mention of both happen at the same time (one ability buffed, another nerfed, what happens overall?). Not to mention indirect buffs which are a nightmare to disentangle. > Also, when they want to buff a whole class, they change item prices. You also want to get a grip on this somehow. The example here is when they wanted to buff crit ADCs, the lowered the Zeal item prices. > But in the end, a winrate increase means the champion got better. Whether directly or indirectly actually doesn't matter so much to me as in both scenarios you have an increased incentive to play this champion as the statistical odds have gotten better. For what it’s worth, I wasn’t agreeing or disagreeing with your definition. I was more curious about your overall thought process when it came to defining what classified as a buff and/or nerf. I totally get it too - it would require lots of man power to look back at each patch and reas through the notes and see what’s intended as buffs and nerfs; then as you stated, you have to also consider what happens with combinations of buffs and nerfs on the same kit in the same patch. So I’m not in anyway knocking it - it’s a mess to disentangle. What I would say, to provide for an easier working definition, is to perhaps redefine what qualifies as an intended buff, not an actual buff. Again, you still run into the same aforementioned problems. But at least it’s a little easier to understand if you simply look at the relationship as if riot intended for the change to be a buff, not whether or not it actually was (it would mean you wouldn’t need to evaluate the nightmare of winrate percentage changes). After all, the complaint of riot “buffing” champions following skin releases doesn’t really have anything to do with whether or not the changes actually end up being buffs, it’s whether or not riot intends to try and buff them. A good example is super galaxy rumble. Rumble was a stellar pro pick at that time and widely considered strong (I could not actually tell you what his winrate was). But nobody was really buying the skin, so riot randomly comes out with a few small buffs out of nowhere. Whether or not they actually turned out to be buffs doesn’t really matter, the fact that riot wanted to present the idea of him being buffed despite being really strong already is a perfect example of where riot clearly wanted to increase his skin purchases and they gave him small, almost insignificant buffs to try and bolster the sales (if i remember correctly, they randomly buffed his overheat shield by like 25%, which nobody ever really overheats for his shield so it’s a rather pointless buff; they may have done his harpoons too, I don’t remember but again people only ever intentionally overheat with his Q, the other 2 are meaningless).
giantZorg (EUW)
: An analysis on the question whether Riot buffs champions which get a new skin
Question: If you define buff as change in winrate, don’t you have concerns there? I mean, a winrate Can totally increase as a result of other things not related to direct champion buffs. I realize analyzing that would be a nightmare, but the complaint or notion of buffs for newly released skins doesn’t imply performance improvement, it’s that riot buffs champions to increase skin sales. I just find that definition a bit concerning, because generally buffs are noted in patch notes as specific buffs to improve poor performance. Also, as far as the strong correlation with skins and champion changes, I’d say to some extent just the novel effect makes champion changes more likely. Also, it’s likely that skins release increase play rates of champions, so it’s reasonable to think that to some extent it gives riot a larger sample size to work with. That said, there’s usually several explanations for strong correlations. Cool stuff nevertheless
Rioter Comments
: What happens to turret plate gold if no one is nearby?
It goes into mark Merrill’s bank account. Don’t call him greedy.
: Also, what Riot is doing is called blame-shifting. They are making it appear as if they are supportive of their employees wishes whilst intentionally ignoring the bigger picture --- what caused the walkout in the first place. More or less "It's your fault. You agreed to the contract. All your fault. Not ours. That one's on you. And since it's not our fault, we aren't going to change that part of the contract. But if you wanna walk out NOW, we'll be accommodating because we love our employees." It's a business thing. Politicians also do it. It saves their image time and time again. Not always, but a fair bit of the time. It at the very least minimizes damage. Edit: Another fellow in this thread mentioned the pax fiasco where a stand wouldn't allow men in. I am not supportive of stuff like that either. SJWs (which leads to racism/sexism, too) are a problem for the left and racism/sexism a problem for the right, although neither will ever admit to it. They don't see themselves in that **negative** light usually.
> [{quoted}](name=Schoenberg,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cNVPAl3Z,comment-id=0016,timestamp=2019-05-07T16:14:37.446+0000) > > Also, what Riot is doing is called blame-shifting. They are making it appear as if they are supportive of their employees wishes whilst intentionally ignoring the bigger picture --- what caused the walkout in the first place. More or less "It's your fault, you agreed to the contract. All your fault. Not ours. That one's on you. But if you wanna walk out, we'll be accommodating." > > It's a business thing. Politicians also do it. It saves their image. Sadly it has become the norm for riot lately. They want to have their cake and eat it, too. They want to be seen as a socially progressive company that doesn’t condone sexism, racism or any bigotry whatsoever. Yet they took years to even consider introducing a black champion into the game. They make tons of money off of sexually-exploitative skins that objectify women. I admit I’m willing to see nuance here but the reality is that riot hasn’t budged on this at all: they still make that a big part of their skin lines to sell to virgin nerds that don’t have any clue how to address a woman properly.
: > [{quoted}](name=HateDaddy,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cNVPAl3Z,comment-id=0014,timestamp=2019-05-07T15:27:37.023+0000) > > I am fairly positive that when they signed those contracts knowing arbitration was part of the deal, they didn’t think being sexually harassed and demeaned would result in someone simply getting a two month vacation. And then suddenly you’re supposed to talk it out with that person? Even still, companies breach contracts with their employees all the time and employees can’t do anything about it because they simply don’t have the financial backing. So you know what? There’s nothing wrong with someone saying “you know what? This deal is trash, let’s redo it.” The entire point of a "contract" is specifically to say "No, you can't redo it". That said, I'm fairly positive that the possibility for anything happening in the workplace existed when they signed those contracts. Tell me there was someone in the company that thought "I can't believe something wrong happened!" and you'll be the posterboy of the word "Liar". > And riot “promises” no retaliation? I'unno
> [{quoted}](name=The Highest Noon,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=cNVPAl3Z,comment-id=00140000,timestamp=2019-05-07T15:46:55.832+0000) > > The entire point of a "contract" is specifically to say "No, you can't redo it". That said, I'm fairly positive that the possibility for anything happening in the workplace existed when they signed those contracts. Tell me there was someone in the company that thought "I can't believe something wrong happened!" and you'll be the posterboy of the word "Liar". And once again, companies breach contracts all the time - do you have a problem with that? I’m assuming you do, so I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt there. However... It doesn’t matter. In the end, a contract is a piece of paper that isn’t god’s word. Sometimes, in the face of morality and what’s clearly immoral, you break your word. Why now? Things change. People change. New evidence becomes available that you didn’t previously have. And the reality is, no significant change that has vastly improved a construct in any walk of life was ever done under the guide of what was stipulated in a signed contract. In the end, this is an issue of extreme gray area and you’re simply trying to reduce it to a black-and-white argument. It’s not that simple, it rarely ever is. > I'unno No they absolutely did promise no retaliation. It was entirely rhetorical.
: I agree with Riot.
I am fairly positive that when they signed those contracts knowing arbitration was part of the deal, they didn’t think being sexually harassed and demeaned would result in someone simply getting a two month vacation. And then suddenly you’re supposed to talk it out with that person? Even still, companies breach contracts with their employees all the time and employees can’t do anything about it because they simply don’t have the financial backing. So you know what? There’s nothing wrong with someone saying “you know what? This deal is trash, let’s redo it.” And riot “promises” no retaliation? Lmao. Give me a break. All of those people will be conveniently gone within a year. They’ll get fired for things like “time theft,” “tardy policies” that have never been enforced or even updated, “undisclosed reasons.” Companies have to say they won’t retaliate but they all do, and riot is no different. This is why unions are essential, and I really don’t know when this young generation of kids became corporate bootlickers but it’s tragic. People are allowed to retroactively say “you know what? That was fucked up.” And there’s nothing wrong with that at all.
Rioter Comments
: Being blocked by units is a mechanic in League of Legends. There are items, abilities and even summoners that let you pass through minions, but if you don't want to or simply can't use them, you have to work with what you have. Of course, being immobilized by a single minion besides a wall is not intended and should be treated as bug, but you should not be able to just walk through minion waves.
> [{quoted}](name=LordRedStone Nr1,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=9EWoIKZQ,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-05-06T16:55:02.324+0000) > > Being blocked by units is a mechanic in League of Legends. There are items, abilities and even summoners that let you pass through minions, but if you don't want to or simply can't use them, you have to work with what you have. > Of course, being immobilized by a single minion besides a wall is not intended and should be treated as bug, but you should not be able to just walk through minion waves. You’re acting as if it hasn’t significantly gotten worse, and that this itself isn’t a bug. Minion block did not used to be this bad, not even close. I do not expect to be able to freely walk through minions but I also don’t expect minions to CC me for 10 seconds
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: I dropped out of college because I’m a loser
> [{quoted}](name=Ðeath XIII,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=b5LaawFO,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-05-02T21:13:46.927+0000) > > I dropped out of college because I’m a loser Not sure if srs or not but that does not make you a loser.
Rioter Comments
NahDaddy (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=ngqoiJhy,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-05-02T02:36:02.512+0000) > > It's a bug. They've only temporarily disabled them until they figure out what the issues were. Always the herald of good news. Thanks mate <3
> [{quoted}](name=NahDaddy,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=ngqoiJhy,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-05-02T02:36:56.389+0000) > > Always the herald of good news. Thanks mate <3 This is awkward.
: Because that point was already explained. You just didn't catch it. They buffed dmg because his issue is dominantly in the lower tier. If they buff his utility and tank stats, it will have the undesired result of mega buffing him in the upper tiers. They're not trying to buff Maokai himself, they're trying to buff him in a specific tier. A straight dmg buff really only affects those who don't have as many outplay tactics. A longer root, however, effectively reduces outplay potential across the board. I do a lot of card mechanic stuff so I understand card statistics. I'll attempt to relate them. In Blackjack if you were to raise it to 22 rather than 21 what would happen is you slightly make it easier for someone who isn't as familiar with the game win a small percentage more.....but as someone who both can count cards and stack decks, I would clean someone out exponentially better with just that one number increase. People who know the inner workings can abuse much smaller changes to much greater result. I hope that made sense because I'm not sure if I explained that very well.
> [{quoted}](name=cuddlykitten4,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=w4V8o1HH,comment-id=0002000000030000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-02T04:34:32.552+0000) > > Because that point was already explained. You just didn't catch it. They buffed dmg because his issue is dominantly in the lower tier. If they buff his utility and tank stats, it will have the undesired result of mega buffing him in the upper tiers. They're not trying to buff Maokai himself, they're trying to buff him in a specific tier. A straight dmg buff really only affects those who don't have as many outplay tactics. A longer root, however, effectively reduces outplay potential across the board. I do a lot of card mechanic stuff so I understand card statistics. I'll attempt to relate them. In Blackjack if you were to raise it to 22 rather than 21 what would happen is you slightly make it easier for someone who isn't as familiar with the game win a small percentage more.....but as someone who both can count cards and stack decks, I would clean someone out exponentially better with just that one number increase. People who know the inner workings can abuse much smaller changes to much greater result. I hope that made sense because I'm not sure if I explained that very well. The point where I diverge here is that i don’t think he’s doing his job effectively as a tank in higher tiers either. Additionally, buffing his damage still carries over to high elo. And if you have a champion who isn’t doing his intended job well and you focus somewhere else, and if you continue to focus on that other aspect, then you end up morphing their play style. As for maokai, to be more specific, a think a better buff would be to buff his mana costs. His biggest issue right now is that he’s too easy to force out of lane, even with his sustain. And it’s because he goes oom after a few rotations, even when you take manaflow band and run corruption pot. And maokai without mana really is just a glorified cannon minion.
: At no point has the claim that it's the only way to be good in solo que been made. It has been claimed to be the most affective way to affect LOWER TIER solo que. That's still not a false claim tho, as Riot has legitimate data spanning over a decade to reference to. It would fall under, again, a hypothesis. They are getting the idea from a logical source. It is both testable and can be verified as false. Applying it to the patch would qualify as the experiment. Self-fulfilling prophecies do not have an experiment. They have only claim and result. What Riot is doing is quantitative in nature. It can't have a self fulfilling prophecy. They aren't altering a behavior with it. They are altering a statistic to attempt to achieve a desired result. They believe the buff, or variable, will alter the game, or constant, in the way they desire. This is an experiment. The buff is a hypothesis. When they get the data in, they will form a theory. I'll save you some time by correcting your tiers there: False perception is actually hypothesis. Prophecy resulting is experiment results. Result is the resulting theory that would be developed upon arrival of the final statistics of the experiment, regardless of whether desired results were achieved or not. All the things you put after the colons are honestly just your own perception of how you want to take the situation and what riot says. Word of advice, leave the assumptions at home. They work against your credibility.
> [{quoted}](name=cuddlykitten4,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=w4V8o1HH,comment-id=00020000000300000000,timestamp=2019-05-02T03:29:44.552+0000) > > At no point has the claim that it's the only way to be good in solo que been made. It has been claimed to be the most affective way to affect LOWER TIER solo que. That's still not a false claim tho, as Riot has legitimate data spanning over a decade to reference to. It would fall under, again, a hypothesis. They are getting the idea from a logical source. It is both testable and can be verified as false. Applying it to the patch would qualify as the experiment. Self-fulfilling prophecies do not have an experiment. They have only claim and result. What Riot is doing is quantitative in nature. It can't have a self fulfilling prophecy. They aren't altering a behavior with it. They are altering a statistic to attempt to achieve a desired result. They believe the buff, or variable, will alter the game, or constant, in the way they desire. This is an experiment. The buff is a hypothesis. When they get the data in, they will form a theory. > > I'll save you some time by correcting your tiers there: > > False perception is actually hypothesis. > > Prophecy resulting is experiment results. > > Result is the resulting theory that would be developed upon arrival of the final statistics of the experiment, regardless of whether desired results were achieved or not. > > All the things you put after the colons are honestly just your own perception of how you want to take the situation and what riot says. Word of advice, leave the assumptions at home. They work against your credibility. Okay, you’re right - I’ll concede on this point. That said, I still absolutely believe tanks can be effective in all elos without the source of their power focusing on damage. In fact, they have been strong in solo queue, especially in the jungle in season 2, parts of season 3, and season 4 - and their focus was entirely on being tanky and disruptive with little damage. Things have obviously changed but we have seen solo lane tanks thrive on attrition rather than through overtune damage (not that riot attempts that). I don’t see why we can’t get back to that point.
: That's not what a self-fulfilling prophecy is. To be a self-fulfilling prophecy it must start from a false claim, or a claim that is not held in a form of truth. For example, saying "today is going to be a bad day", then having a bad day would be a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is one because you have no reason (even if something bad happens first thing when you wake up) to believe your day will be a bad day. It is a claim based in no realm of truth. If you make a bad day as a result of operating under that assumption, then that is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If Riot were saying that they increased the dmg, that the result would be better results on ppl playing Maokai, then never made the dmg change while still obtaining the claimed results, then yes, that would be a self-fulfilling prophesy. However, since Riot really is making the change they claim, therefore basing all future actions on a true statement and not a false one, what they are really doing when they claim it will improve Maokai's playing is forming a hypothesis. If his win rate does go up as a result, they will then have a theory.
> [{quoted}](name=cuddlykitten4,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=w4V8o1HH,comment-id=000200000003,timestamp=2019-05-02T01:29:37.361+0000) > > That's not what a self-fulfilling prophecy is. To be a self-fulfilling prophecy it must start from a false claim, or a claim that is not held in a form of truth. For example, saying "today is going to be a bad day", then having a bad day would be a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is one because you have no reason (even if something bad happens first thing when you wake up) to believe your day will be a bad day. It is a claim based in no realm of truth. If you make a bad day as a result of operating under that assumption, then that is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If Riot were saying that they increased the dmg, that the result would be better results on ppl playing Maokai, then never made the dmg change while still obtaining the claimed results, then yes, that would be a self-fulfilling prophesy. However, since Riot really is making the change they claim, therefore basing all future actions on a true statement and not a false one, what they are really doing when they claim it will improve Maokai's playing is forming a hypothesis. If his win rate does go up as a result, they will then have a theory. I wasn’t talking about maokai, I was talking about riot thinking damage is the only way to carry in solo queue and both balancing and enforcing this mentality creates that reality, and we know this hasn’t always been true because past seasons have had tanks be successful as damage soakers and disrupters with low damage output. False perception: damage is the only way to be good in solo queue Prophecy resulting: balances around this idea and suggests it in informal and formal situations. Result: damage is the only way to be good in solo queue
: Cars 3 is the best Anime movie of all time
Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=HateDaddy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=w4V8o1HH,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-05-01T17:21:49.891+0000) > > That’s just not true though How long did we struggle with Sejuani before she finally became pro play manageable, and how was it resolved? Somehow, though, what we saw with our own eyes isn't true.
> [{quoted}](name=chipndip1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=w4V8o1HH,comment-id=000200000002,timestamp=2019-05-01T20:38:55.123+0000) > > How long did we struggle with Sejuani before she finally became pro play manageable, and how was it resolved? > > Somehow, though, what we saw with our own eyes isn't true. Sejuani is not the entire class of tanks. Season 2, 3, and 4 had tanks being strong for their durability and utility without having the capacity to practically murder any squishy in one rotation. Just because sejuanis design has been problematic to balance doesn’t mean that’s true for every tank.
: Because as it's been explained in the past: **Buffing tank damage is the best way to get them to improve for *solo queue*, as aside from extreme buffs to utility, anything besides damage won't cause them to improve much for lower skill brackets.** It's why Sej's and Ornn's damage was buffed recently when they were struggling, because if you buff their defense, sustain, CC, any actual aspect of a tank, then they will stay the same for lower skill levels (where people can't or don't know how to take advantage of those strengths to their proper capacity) while also making them extremely strong in higher elo and organized play (where people *do* know how to use those strengths).
> [{quoted}](name=Wilk Łucznik,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=w4V8o1HH,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-05-01T17:16:51.526+0000) > > Because as it's been explained in the past: > > **Buffing tank damage is the best way to get them to improve for *solo queue*, as aside from extreme buffs to utility, anything besides damage won't cause them to improve much for lower skill brackets.** > > It's why Sej's and Ornn's damage was buffed recently when they were struggling, because if you buff their defense, sustain, CC, any actual aspect of a tank, then they will stay the same for lower skill levels (where people can't or don't know how to take advantage of those strengths to their proper capacity) while also making them extremely strong in higher elo and organized play (where people *do* know how to use those strengths). That’s just not true though, and the only thing that style of balancing does is ~~create self-fulfilling prophecies, in addition~~ lead to unhealthy styles of play. If you tell players, and more importantly balance around the idea of doing more damage to carry in solo queue, then of course that’s the only style that can prosper. Season 2, 3, and 4 saw tanks being strong without doing absurd chunks of damage. They were valuable for their CC. They could sustain in lane and they didn’t have to practically one shot you to achieve this. Again, it’s just lazy thinking and making baseless assumptions about the player base. It’s also catering to a horrible style of play that has been perpetuated across the board: damage for everyone.
: Maokai’s q buff is a perfect example of Riot’s horrible approach to balancing tanks
Additionally I want to point out that simply buffing damage is lazy thinking. It’s just fishing for desirable outcomes without much thought into how the achieved outcome of stronger performance is acquired.
Rioter Comments
: Dont think a simple linear regression will help you here. Maybe try a classification tree or a neural net, think it would work better. Also you need more games (bigger population) to try to have some good analisys. Sorry for bad english, hope you understand what i mean.
> [{quoted}](name=DJBlackVoice,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=OAsbqXIh,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-05-01T11:20:02.881+0000) > > Dont think a simple linear regression will help you here. Maybe try a classification tree or a neural net, think it would work better. Also you need more games (bigger population) to try to have some good analisys. > > Sorry for bad english, hope you understand what i mean. Your English was fine! That said, the issue really isn’t the type of analysis he conducted, it’s what he was measuring that was problematic - and problematic isn’t a great word to define this because there’s nothing really wrong with what he ran, it’s just poorly defined. If you’re trying to determine if smurfs are in your game and you’re basing it on the relationship between CS/tower differential correlations, you’re really only explaining what victory looks like. Even if CS per minute is unusually high, that doesn’t suggest its a smurf. Players can CS moderately well in silver, especially if they get ahead. And what you have is called a positive correlation, or a positive linear relationship. And that should be expected - if you have larger CS/minute (even if it’s higher than normal), then you’re going to see that relationship lead to greater tower differences too - in other words, you shouldn’t see a negative correlation here where cs difference on average and towers taken diverge. And because regressions are based on correlations, you also cannot make cause/effect statements. If you want to decide if smurfs are deciding the outcome of your games and you want to use CS as an indicator, you should compare CS performances in wins vs CS performances in losses. If you’re seeing a greater difference of CS on average in losses than what you’re seeing in wins, then perhaps you could interpret that as smurfs are crushing hardcore while you’re winning by an expected margin. There’s a lot of issues with this because this only explains smurfs impacting your losses (you can easily have smurfs help you win); it also assumes every smurf is significantly better than that elo, which also isn’t true. In truth, this is a hard concept to measure and the one thing your regression shows is that the more games you play, it’s more likely you’ll be placed in an elo you belong. Nevertheless, good job. Neat presentation.
Bazerka (NA)
: Question: How do you view Riot?
It’s a business that pretends to be everyone’s friends while simultaneously ignoring them except for when that same friend offers riot over for fried chicken and the opportunity to play goldeneye on the 64. Riot uses its players for profit, which is fine, but pretends as if they don’t really “profit” off of half the things they clearly do. It is a company obsessed with self image but still does little to examine itself with glaring contradictions - I.E we aren’t sexist but but these sexually exploiting and objectifying skins of female champions. And they also wanna be an anime company, too. It’s pretty cringey. I still like riot, but they’ve got...some issues.
: I actually love reading these articles, the stuff they do is so ridiculous, I can't help but laugh
> [{quoted}](name=Enjoy Losing,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=g1qeEOfl,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-30T22:58:59.498+0000) > > I actually love reading these articles, the stuff they do is so ridiculous, I can't help but laugh It just reminds me of monkeys throwing feces at each other lol
Rioter Comments
Show more

HateDaddy

Level 73 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion