: Is it worth getting the Trials Pass?
Get it. I've been doing 3 ARAM games daily for 4 per loss or 8 per win. Then the 18 per mission a day is nice. If for some reason I don't squeeze more games in, I'll buy the bundle for more tokens.
: Hm, I'm sorry but I see no reason for that wine, in fact, Lux is historically used as a counter pick to LeBlanc (specially with the old shield, but she can still do it). In order to Leblanc to chain you right in your face she has to W on you, and honestly as a Lux main I don't see how you can't react to With Lux it's impossible for Leblanc to actually Q-W on a Lux due to her huge range, and since Leblanc will most likely max W in order to wave clear, she will lose a lot of damage by using W to close the gap. The best way to counter Leblanc is by afk-pushing the wave, Leblanc has no way of effectively clearing waves AND poking at the same time, specially without commiting into it. And honestly, if you use Barrier and rush Banshee's, you have ABSOLUTELY no problem against Leblanc, everything I can say is: you're playing that match up VERY wrong.
My statement was never about the previous incarnations of Leblanc, who's matchup may have been different. LB does not have to W onto lux. LB has to W NEAR lux and throw a Q, then immediately W back. This is pre 6. WQW is fast enough to avoid being Q'd unless you actually use W to get in front of lux. Now, Lux can no longer throw her Q, unless she wants to be harassed for free. Lux's E is her main source of poke and her main source of farm, usually punishing champions who stand with their minions. The moment she sends her E out, and until the CD is done, you have the ability to jump in and potentially land 3 skills on lux, assuming you avoid her E. Post 6, you now have the ability to mix things up, with the extra damage from Q, your main goal against lux is to poke her with an immediate WQW until you can all-in her. I think you're not used to playing against lux and are unaware of the opportunities you have to constantly poke her.
: Just because you have the most kills, doesn't mean that's what you should be doing
If the lane your helping isn't taking the tower, what are you both doing? If you're ahead and not securing objectives, what are you doing? You could be 10/0/0, but if you're not somehow trying to ensure that we get Drag, Herald, First tower, ANY tower, or inhibs, then what are you doing overall aside from giving the opponent more time to catch up? And frankly, I think everyone should be keeping an eye on how all the towers are fairing before the tower bonus is taken, because one gank or one badly timed back can net your opponent WAY too much gold and cause an item spike you can't deal with for various potential reasons. This is what I'd complain about, specifically.
: Except season 3 had this LB too and she was actually stronger then. Y’all talked about how great season 3 was. Well this is a lot like season 3. Whatever Assassin gets more fed just 1v9s the game.
I never said season 3 was great. LB may have been different then. She may have been STRONG then, but she also had deathfire grasp. Items were as much a problem back then as skillsets and stats.
Fasmodey (EUW)
: Can we have a mostly evil character that loves someone deeply?
I thought we had {{champion:122}} Do you not count him as evil?
: Can you give LB's Ethereal chains ANY counterplay.
I logged in for this. I main Lux. I decided last season that I would instant ban LB any time I went mid as lux. It doesn't matter who the FotM is. It doesn't matter if Zed or Fizz or Kassadin is strong. Rengar or Kha'zix could 100-0 me all game. I do not want to fight a champ who has 1 skillshot that is only ever cast in lane when they are right in front of me. I don't want to fight a champ that needs to land a skillshot to CC me, but has a blink (possibly 2) to get right in my face and do it. Zed has to land skillshots or commit, and he pops up behind me with ult. I can counterplay. Rengar gives notice when he's ulting, or requires bushes to be effective. counterplay. Kha lacks CC and has to commit, counterplay. Most, if not all assassins have some form of counterplay that, while maybe not effective once fed, I can still reliably use to escape, hinder, or kill them. NOT Lb. If I combo her and fail to kill her, I'm rewarding with a time period of me NOT seeing her, then I deal with trying to figure out which is the real her for an important fraction of a moment, just so I can TRY to kill her if she hasn't used up her gaps. I'd rather Season 3 Kassadin, than LB.
: The reason why I chose God-King Darius and you should too
Garen dies and ELEMENTALIST LUX SAVES THE DAY{{champion:99}}
RØNÎN (NA)
: Players without a mastery for a champion shouldnt be able to play that champion in a ranked match.
I don't want to play normals anymore. I don't want to have raise my normal MMR so it is similar to my ranked MMR, which is significantly higher, thus making my games similiar to my ranked matches, which will make some the of knowledge I gain from it relevant. I don't want to be restricted in my list of champions to play, especially after the amount of time and effort required to unlock every champ without RP, and then reaching level 6 and 7 mastery on the small number I use often. Mastery doesn't matter if your mechanics are trash, and they don't matter if your meta-game knowledge and decision making skills are trash. Mastery level 7 yi bronze 4, thank goodness we stopped them from playing yi before they learned the champ. Maybe my opinion would be different but... Autofill is needed Unlocking champs is already time consuming I prefer a small number of champs, limiting my number of mastery champs I sometimes pick a champ I feel is a great option for the comp, despite having little mastery on them I had to reach level 30 just to start ranked previously, and own a certain amount of champs to ensure I could play Entering a normal game doesn't guarantee the champ is mine to play, thus promoting dodging, or wasting my time further with a game mode I did not want to play Mastery doesn't mean I know my matchups, my high level combos or skill applications, my synergistic lane partners, etc. Since the entire system is not perfect, adding this little rule only feels like a punishment to a player such as myself, who is pretty active.
D357R0Y3R (EUW)
: List of freelo bot lane combo
I noticed a lack of {{champion:99}} So I helped you: {{champion:99}} {{champion:99}} {{champion:51}} {{champion:99}} {{champion:119}} {{champion:99}} {{champion:81}} {{champion:99}} {{champion:110}}
: In-game shop bugged
I suffered the same issue.
: [GAMEPLAY] Unable to buy certain items in game as support
I suffered the same bug just now. Couldn't complete my boots and couldn't complete Luden's Echo despite having the gold for them.
Lost R (NA)
: Oh they do it in real life. Sometimes it involves the manager screaming at you until he turns purple and throwing staplers like a Touhou boss. Sometimes it involves random retail customers snapping like a dry twig and trying to jump the counter to gut you like a fish and bathe in your chest cavity in response to you being out of their favored brand of tobacco (anyone who works in retail can empathize). And don't even get me started on mass shooters and domestic terrorists. The main difference is in real life, people can actually try to commit real violence against you. We decided the best reaction to that was to arm everyone, including the psychopaths just seconds away from forever losing their shit.
: No, if you proc illumination on the melees they will just shove you in making you loose the entire wave or straight up zone you out while your main trading tool is down. The best way to clear a (pushed for you) wave is to leave E on the ground unexploded and when it actually explodes you'll throw another one shortly, securing the casters with it and then autoing the melees. Then the meelees will probably still be alive so you Q 2 of them and only one is left that needs to be dealt with autoattacking. Waiting confirmation from the fellow Lux player in diamond of course since I 'm shit but this seems the best way to avoid complete zoning (even if you go back E will slow the wave making it push slower in case they push you in and since they just used their cooldowns to push you can tank a few hits while your next wave approaches to momentarily freeze it near your turret but not under and finish it as soon as E is back up, or keep the Cs there and last hit with autos and save E to still be able to trade ). The worst scenario is when you arrive and your wave is already under turret: That's an E-R or it goes entirely lost.. The thing that makes roaming so dangerous on Lux as if you invest your R on the roam it's almost a guaranteed lost wave even if you don't need to recall (excluded her immobile and squishy ass of course), if you want to counter roam you either push quickly without bothering last hitting, arrive late as you need several autos to push and last hit or E-R the wave and arrive ultless in the fight
I don't like using 2 E's on a single wave. If I have to because of pressure, sure. But I'd really like to avoid it. Since E eventually gives you the ability to clear casters with 1 auto, I like to wait for most minions to take damage before detonating or even throwing E. Being pushed in so I have to clear all the minions is also a drag. If able, I'll take damage and freeze the lane closer to me. Worst case scenarios and best case scenarios are too varied, so it's not that you're wrong at all. Lux has a pretty weak auto, so if you manage your skills well, you can just let the tower take care of melees for you by auto'ing in between them. It just gets sloppy if your opponent didn't quickly clear your own minions and your farm took some random amount of damage. You are definitely right about roaming. Clearing one wave immediately doesn't mean you won't lose the next wave if your opponent stays. And if you're clearing without R, it's not fast enough at all. Clearing with R leaves you without your damage.
Ifneth (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=MillForMe,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=xOwB79P6,comment-id=000300010000000000000001,timestamp=2018-01-23T16:51:09.529+0000) > > Lux is safe in teamfights. And she is capable of throwing her skills from a safe range. This does not mean her ability to clear a wave is also safe when she is required to AA the minions at a distance less than her abilities. > > Champion.gg gives us 45 champs mid. Of these champs, 17 have blinks, not including vlad. 11 have to be in melee range to auto minions. 2 of those champs are in not actual counters to lux, Galio and Gragas. That&#x27;s 34 champs that can farm from range with autos, but some of the melee champs have ranged abilities, such as ekko and zed. Then there&#x27;s kat, kass, fizz, yasuo, lb, akali, and talon, who have always loved going against lux, despite her safe range. > > When compared to the rest of the champs, the bulk of them are able to farm safely against her, while possibly being able to also throw their own poke in her direction as well. Some of these champs, such as vel, syndra, anivia, annie, heim, malz, and taliyah are capable of throwing cc at lux without needing to avoid minions, unlike lux&#x27;s Q. Only 5 or 6 champs actually have to avoid minions for their cc to work in mid, lux being one of them. > > Taking the damage of a lux E in order proc your full combo is a good trade for champs against lux. Walking up to your casters while lux needs to clear them is a zoning technique for champs that are able to apply combos from such a position. > > Lux zones with her active E, and her potential Q. She does not zone in lane with her E not on the map. Throwing E has a small cast time, and the travel time gives dashers a chance to react and attempt their own combo. The lack of E lessens her trade for a few seconds, which is enough time for mages to try their own combos while hitting minions. > > Killing minions with E alone means no autos. Ori, Morg, Xerath, Aniv, Galio, and others are capable of using non-ult skills to kill off minions. Ori Morg, and Syndra are able to clear casters at a lesser overall cost than lux (Q&gt;E(This may be W, not sure which is shield), E, Q,Q). > > I suppose my main point is that, Safe range in teamfights does not translate to safe range in farming. Lux can effectively clear a wave now with her E and R because her R comes up so quickly now, lessening the amount of times she needs to auto in lane and lessening the overall mana she spends, but it takes away your combo if you choose to roam and by the time it&#x27;s a spammable combo, your opponent if not destroyed, is just as capable of clearing and roaming, or was capable earlier. But E alone opens up too much counter play to call it good wave clear. > > It&#x27;s why Lux is not a counter to annie, but a skill matchup. It&#x27;s why vel has a higher winrate, same as xerath and malz, veig(on one), and anivia. Lane phase is not safe and fast. It&#x27;s safe and slow, or risky and moderate, until R is spammable. A little digression to both of you first. When I was writing my response, I was trying to decide on a tone between arrogantly certain to grovellingly ignorant. I chose a middle-ground: acknowledge that a high-elo player has shown they know a lot about the game and have the mechanics to back it up. I knew I could be wrong and so hoped you would reply in all this convincing detail. Thanks! More than just about Lux, it showed me just how deep and complex League becomes as you climb the ladder. It was amazing to peer inside your heads. ——— With that said, back to Lux. Lemme wrap my poor little Silver head around this one. Are you saying that tanking Lux’s E is the setup to a combo, and that a champ like Taliyah should trade through it? Wow. I never thought about it that way. I’ve always tried to keep my teenage stoneweaver outside Lux’s range and dodge the circle of ouch, which is no mean feat since I haven’t been keeping good track of its cooldown, or range, or speed... >_> So, yeah, just imagine what would happen if she tried to use E for waveclear against a competent opponent. He would just _run_ at her, and unless he stepped out from behind two minions, she would be helpless. No wonder I saw Bjergsen’s Lux only last-hit with autos in this one really old video of him against Zed. E was the one thing keeping her safe from that shuriken-chucking maniac. So I see your point. Lux can waveclear efficiently only in a lane that is empty or almost empty already, by which point mana-efficient clear isn’t the name of the game. I feel bad for her. She was one of my favorite first champs, along with Ezreal, for her spells and long-range ultimate. Surprising people with that was one of my favorite things. <3
You don't have to trade through it, but lux is a poke champ with a combo based off Q. Other champs have combos that are more freely available, meaning reading her poke is a valuable skill for them and sometimes being hit by E is a small cost for being able to set up a high damage combo. So yes, you've basically got it now.
Ifneth (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=MillForMe,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=xOwB79P6,comment-id=0003000100000000,timestamp=2018-01-23T12:20:54.239+0000) > > We are not discussing the most efficient wave to clear a wave. Lux, is not a great wave clearer until she reaches a specific point in the game, and even then her ult&#x27;s spammability is the trait we&#x27;d be praising, not necessarily her wave clear ability. > > Lux&#x27;s E requires her to auto every minion either before, or after. Melee&#x27;s require multiple AA&#x27;s. Burning 140/160/200/230/260 mana(2 E&#x27;s) on a single wave is wasteful and any opponent worth their salt is either roaming while you do that, shoving the wave harder so you have to compete with your tower, or diving in after you&#x27;ve dropped that E and need to auto the minions. > > In favorable matchups, she&#x27;s capable of clearing the wave because the other opponent is terrible at it and not a dasher/assassin. But against other ranged poke mages or assassins, lux&#x27;s wave clear is a weakness that allows her to stay balanced. > > If lux were capable of clearing waves easily and safely without the use of her ult and without being ahead of her opponent, she&#x27;d be too busted and require a nerf. I say this as someone who has played her since season 3 against bronze, silvers, golds, plats, and diamonds. > > I don&#x27;t believe her wave clear is strong enough to use it in an argument about how powerful she is. Her wave clear leaves a lot of room for counter play for champs that want to engage, and is weak enough that other wave clear mages can either race her and win, continue doing it for a longer duration of time when they are effective at it. I was replying to a poster who said something to the effect that Lux has bad waveclear because she can’t clear casters with her E alone. With the tacit assumption that she were alone in lane, I showed that she could. You played Lux in Diamond, so I am prepared for you to prove me wrong about the above and, also, the following. I thought about clearing the wave with E and her passive. On the first wave, the safest way seems to be to cast E on the whole wave and pop the marks on the melee minions. Once her E cooldown ends, the melees should be low enough for Lux to cast E on the wave again and pop the marks on the melees to last-hit them. Then, Lux can last-hit the caster minions. To your point, her opponent can try to zone Lux away from marked minions, but he would need to use an ability with very long range to reach her without warning her by walking up. Regardless, that ability would cost about as much mana, might miss her, and would not necessarily push the wave, either. In sum, Lux is a safer, more-efficient laner than you think. The only counter to this tactic would be to pick a champion who could trade while she were using her telegraphed passive. Say, Vel’Koz. Am I missing something here?
Lux is safe in teamfights. And she is capable of throwing her skills from a safe range. This does not mean her ability to clear a wave is also safe when she is required to AA the minions at a distance less than her abilities. Champion.gg gives us 45 champs mid. Of these champs, 17 have blinks, not including vlad. 11 have to be in melee range to auto minions. 2 of those champs are in not actual counters to lux, Galio and Gragas. That's 34 champs that can farm from range with autos, but some of the melee champs have ranged abilities, such as ekko and zed. Then there's kat, kass, fizz, yasuo, lb, akali, and talon, who have always loved going against lux, despite her safe range. When compared to the rest of the champs, the bulk of them are able to farm safely against her, while possibly being able to also throw their own poke in her direction as well. Some of these champs, such as vel, syndra, anivia, annie, heim, malz, and taliyah are capable of throwing cc at lux without needing to avoid minions, unlike lux's Q. Only 5 or 6 champs actually have to avoid minions for their cc to work in mid, lux being one of them. Taking the damage of a lux E in order proc your full combo is a good trade for champs against lux. Walking up to your casters while lux needs to clear them is a zoning technique for champs that are able to apply combos from such a position. Lux zones with her active E, and her potential Q. She does not zone in lane with her E not on the map. Throwing E has a small cast time, and the travel time gives dashers a chance to react and attempt their own combo. The lack of E lessens her trade for a few seconds, which is enough time for mages to try their own combos while hitting minions. Killing minions with E alone means no autos. Ori, Morg, Xerath, Aniv, Galio, and others are capable of using non-ult skills to kill off minions. Ori Morg, and Syndra are able to clear casters at a lesser overall cost than lux (Q>E(This may be W, not sure which is shield), E, Q,Q). I suppose my main point is that, Safe range in teamfights does not translate to safe range in farming. Lux can effectively clear a wave now with her E and R because her R comes up so quickly now, lessening the amount of times she needs to auto in lane and lessening the overall mana she spends, but it takes away your combo if you choose to roam and by the time it's a spammable combo, your opponent if not destroyed, is just as capable of clearing and roaming, or was capable earlier. But E alone opens up too much counter play to call it good wave clear. It's why Lux is not a counter to annie, but a skill matchup. It's why vel has a higher winrate, same as xerath and malz, veig(on one), and anivia. Lane phase is not safe and fast. It's safe and slow, or risky and moderate, until R is spammable.
Ifneth (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=MillForMe,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=xOwB79P6,comment-id=00030001,timestamp=2018-01-23T08:14:05.137+0000) > > I&#x27;m triggered. > Near global ult, he says : {{champion:115}} {{champion:101}} > Champs played with globals/high range : {{champion:81}} {{champion:222}} {{champion:240}} {{champion:56}} {{champion:80}} {{champion:3}}{{champion:41}} > Her ult is basically a tower to tower range, which is pretty good. > Shoving lane as lux only RECENTLY became practical because of how quickly you hit a high cd for spamming your ULT(specifically your ult) to clear waves. E is a monster on your mana and doesn&#x27;t kill any minions without 2 full items. > > ADCs are melted by a combo if no one else interferes. That&#x27;s very true. E clears waves efficiently if used correctly. Two E’s and some auto attacks should fully clear any wave: E the wave. Pop the marks on the ranged minions with auto attacks to last-hit them. Auto attack the melees until they are all around the same 1/3 to 1/2 HP. Then E the melees and pop the marks for last-hits. If you don’t pop the passive marks and prep the melees, then you will miss last-hits and need three or four E’s to clear the wave, eating through mana.
We are not discussing the most efficient wave to clear a wave. Lux, is not a great wave clearer until she reaches a specific point in the game, and even then her ult's spammability is the trait we'd be praising, not necessarily her wave clear ability. Lux's E requires her to auto every minion either before, or after. Melee's require multiple AA's. Burning 140/160/200/230/260 mana(2 E's) on a single wave is wasteful and any opponent worth their salt is either roaming while you do that, shoving the wave harder so you have to compete with your tower, or diving in after you've dropped that E and need to auto the minions. In favorable matchups, she's capable of clearing the wave because the other opponent is terrible at it and not a dasher/assassin. But against other ranged poke mages or assassins, lux's wave clear is a weakness that allows her to stay balanced. If lux were capable of clearing waves easily and safely without the use of her ult and without being ahead of her opponent, she'd be too busted and require a nerf. I say this as someone who has played her since season 3 against bronze, silvers, golds, plats, and diamonds. I don't believe her wave clear is strong enough to use it in an argument about how powerful she is. Her wave clear leaves a lot of room for counter play for champs that want to engage, and is weak enough that other wave clear mages can either race her and win, continue doing it for a longer duration of time when they are effective at it.
: \>Playin a high range mage with a near global ult \>Playin in a lane that you can easily shove and roam with \>ADCs are easily killed by your combo if you land it \>This is your op.gg https://i.imgur.com/PxeD7Jr.png Clearly it's mid lane itself bein trash {{sticker:poppy-wink}}
I'm triggered. Near global ult, he says : {{champion:115}} {{champion:101}} Champs played with globals/high range : {{champion:81}} {{champion:222}} {{champion:240}} {{champion:56}} {{champion:80}} {{champion:3}}{{champion:41}} Her ult is basically a tower to tower range, which is pretty good. Shoving lane as lux only RECENTLY became practical because of how quickly you hit a high cd for spamming your ULT(specifically your ult) to clear waves. E is a monster on your mana and doesn't kill any minions without 2 full items. ADCs are melted by a combo if no one else interferes. That's very true.
: Honor capsule gave me just enough fragments to open a box! Hope I get a nice skin shar—
Hey man, it's not every day that {{champion:99}} on your side. Enjoy it!
: > [{quoted}](name=MillForMe,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=zsVbc9ir,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-12-23T17:57:44.312+0000) > > I had a similar situation happen, but I&#x27;m petty, so I took advantage. > I&#x27;m second pick supp - I pick zoe as my pref > Fourth pick is mid and also wants Zoe > They complain, I say too bad, I got priority > Turns out they are duo with first pick who is going top > First pick takes Zoe for them > First pick lists champs for their duo to pick, one being Garen > Instalocked that boy immediately. > Now they are caught between having a Garen supp, first time Garen top, dodging, or giving me Zoe. > > Luckily first pick was cool and suggested he Garen supp. His buddy was salty, which he displayed proudly in chat, but we won and I got to lux top which I haven&#x27;t done in forever. > > This was ranked. I don't understand why you held the ADC hostage for a shitty duo. If the duo didn't let you top neither of them would have been punished outside of losing the game because of the bot lane. The ADC is the one who would feel it the most lmao.
You mean the adc and jg! Both of them had to deal with this conflict that fixed itself before the game. And I'm terribly sorry, but I screwed up and put lux. I mean Zoe top. I'll go edit it now. That my change my story a little if people didn't realize I meant Zoe!
: Why troll champ select because they picked before you? They might have won but it probably was not fun for them
Well, I won't say if I would've gone bot as Garen Supp. I'm not too entirely sure how confident I'd be in that regard. My actions came from the blatant overpowering they tried to impose on me. They didn't have to be a duo. First pick could've been anyone else trying to force my hand. I'm unfortunately not the kind of person who will always choose to be the better person. As a result, I forced their hand. JG and ADC were quiet throughout this event. At this point, we were playing Chicken to see how things would go. I had a stronger bluff.
Barcid (NA)
: "Can I top, please?" - Teammate assigned jungle
I had a similar situation happen, but I'm petty, so I took advantage. I'm second pick supp - I pick zoe as my pref Fourth pick is mid and also wants Zoe They complain, I say too bad, I got priority Turns out they are duo with first pick who is going top First pick takes Zoe for them First pick lists champs for their duo to pick, one being Garen Instalocked that boy immediately. Now they are caught between having a Garen supp, first time Garen top, dodging, or giving me Zoe. Luckily first pick was cool and suggested he Garen supp. His buddy was salty, which he displayed proudly in chat, but we won and I got to Zoe top which I haven't done in forever. This was ranked. Edit: I accidentally wrote lux top. It was definitely Zoe. Sorry.
: [Skin Suggestion] Bewitching Ahri, Jinx, Lux and Soraka
For the sake of the Universe, we do this. http://i0.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/005/616/qb.jpg
: > It's possible that her viewpoint on life and death is different, given that she is able to view the lifespan of a creature and outlive generations of humans. To her, it could simply be the way things are. We don't truly know. I doubt it as it doesn't seem like she would care to observe. She doesn't value life as far as i can tell seeing as she just swats people when they get in her way. > The issue I take with your sharp tongue is that your words dictate how this conversation goes. If you're going to argue that Zoe is an "ignorant psycho drugged with power" then I expect you to mean that and not just exaggerate due to flavor. It's to give you an idea of how i view it using..."flavor". I'm not trying to intimidate you into not providing a counter-argument as long as you keep ad-hominems out and so will i. > My questions were for you to think about. How do you think your worldview would change, or even your opinion, if you were capable of seeing the entire life cycle of an organism, or any organism, as it sat there in front of you? Does that sort of vision impact your philosophy? Would it change your viewpoints on morality? Would actual proof that your worldview is correct change how you see things, or how you act? It could. But considering humans don't just "sit" there it's not a very good analogy. You're asking if proof of my philosophies would change me. Well i'll tell you something: It is nearly impossible to break faith from my moral code for example so it wouldn't change much because i'd still stay true to it, obviously. I suppose i'd be happier for that extra 1%? > Her first impression as a person isn't deep. And that's partly because she's a child. We haven't been given a character developing conflict with her. It's her role in the world and how the the world is changed when the power to change the world is given to a child. To me, it's most likely the Aspect keeping her mind as the child she is. She doesn't seem to be developing. You, the Writing team or I cannot comprehend a literal Milennia of mental lifetime. She HAS TO learn beyond everyone's sophistication in that time even if she doesn't want to. It's just Life. She would pick up on things in time but i really think the Aspect is keeping her...well retarded so to say. Without it, she'd grow up. That's just my theory and it seems the only plausible one because even children can grow up before they actually grow up. > She's a Legend. Zoe the messenger. Zoe the Herald. Zoe, the Aspect of the Twilight. Yeah, question being: The hell's the message if she can't remember it? Someone else has to deliver then.
I agree that she doesn't value life the same we way do, but she doesn't experience it the same way, so why would she? "sat there" was for that moment. As in, you stared a person in your view and saw what is there entire life from beginning to end. Would you change your moral code if you found that your views on the world were absolutely wrong, or that your moral code actually created a net negative in the entire world? Well, Zoe's time isn't the same as ours, so it's not easy to say. This is the only part that's super speculative to me so I can't say too much outside of just asking questions about possibilities. Is the message for a person, or for the world? Is the message "Find the World Rune" or is it "There's a World Rune over there"? It could even be "Uncover this World Rune." I think it's implied that she's a tool to complete the job of the Aspect and not that she has to actively attempt to do the job.
: > The implications of her time with the lunari implies they aren't good at getting things deep in her. She'd rather tease them than listen to them. They probably had more power than her, but her interactions prove she cares less about it. Look, teaching kids is already hard. We don't know who the Lunari teachers were, how they taught, or how they treated Zoe. In the real world, classmates tease each other and teachers all the time. Still, from what we're shown, Zoe was a problem student; easily distracted, not getting her lessons, and just wanting to get entertainment. It's not about power, it's about respect. I didn't like some of my teachers, but I respected them when I was fifteen, and still do. >And while she may have lived longer than us, has she had to live through the repercussions of her actions like we have? Does she have to meet the families of the soldiers she killed? Does she have to confront their grievances head on, or does she wonder away, unaware of it all? She doesn't have to do anything, so she won't, unless she finds it amusing. It's just creepy that she can kill people and not care. That's not a human reaction. She is still human somewhere in there, after all. I mean, when I first saw her I expected her to have some acient wisdom in her head, and have maturity. She's just a 15 year old, with the mind of a ten-year-old and the powers of a god. She only cares for her own amusment, and those things togtheor make a horrifying creature. At least you agree with me on the danger she is capable of. Personally though, I have a funny feeling that Jinx is next in line for the aspect.
But you're taught to respect others, right? Even if it's at a young age, it's not as if you simply gave everyone respect out of natural instinct. It's a learned behavior. Zoe may be disrespectful. It's a very strong argument. I don't know where the disrespect lies. Does she not value lives, society, relationships, lessons, work, etc. But I chalk her disrespect up to her being a young child that has not been disciplined and taught to respect the things our society normally expects. Children are taught to behave when a natural behavior in them is deemed unacceptable. It's a standard forced onto them. So when I see that a child like Zoe isn't adhering to standard behaviors, rules, or viewpoints, I'm more inclined to question her upbringing instead of attacking her, as she can learn to be less destructive and she can learn to be more considerate and careful. I do doubt the aspect would pick Jinx as Jinx has her own specific goals. Destruction, explosions, bother Vi and Cait. Unearthing a world rune in the middle of nowhere that can't be done by those options seems too boring for Jinx to do.
: Well clearly she does not recognize it as murder and inflicting suffering on others. It's worse than that, she thinks it's fun and glittery and stupid sunshine crap. She doesn't understand the concept of Death at all. It's kind of like when Nora from RWBY rides a monster, killing it she goes at the end "Uuu...i broke it!" as if it's a machine. Well the difference being, Nora knows she actually killed it. It's just for comic relief. Zoe doesn't. Zoe just wants to have fun no matter how much collateral damage there is, she won't even notice it or care. > And you did seem angry. Your paragraph about Hermes is riddled with language that implies anger or discontent regarding the topic. Your whole first response to this topic is written with more emotional flavor than I think you intended, and it shows more emotion regarding your opinion on this matter than sound argument. I simply have a sharp tongue. Is that enough for you or do you want me to expand on LightTrack's psychological profile? Because i'm quite used to being told i'm "angry" when it's just violent sarcasm or straight to the point referencing and i can see why, it doesn't mean i'll change the tone when i mean what i'm saying. I'm not very eloquent when i'm not lying or when in an argument. > We know nothing of the past in Runeterra. We know nothing of the Lunari outside of Diana. While you might assume it's natural, I'd argue counter. I'd also be able to bet that while not everyone in the world without parents grew up to lack empathy for those killed by them, there are those who grew up with parents that did become murderers or rapists, despite the "love" and "discipline" of their parents. So tell me - Which of the two is a natural outcome? Because psychopaths grow out of completely "normal" people aswell under certain conditions. The answer is: It's all up to chance. But for someone who cares about life and living things, it'd be natural to not become a murderous, ignorant psycho drugged with power. Harsh words for a little girl?...who is meant to be a millenia old. Right. "A little girl." > If you as a child could suddenly see the entirely life of a creature, how would that impact your viewpoints on life and death? If you had a view of the mathematics of the world, or understood their need to change, how would that impact your moral viewpoint? Depends on what in specific. Those questions are far too general. And i hate Maths but if i understood it extensively for example, it would propably not change much as i consciously think of a lot of things happening everywhere at once due to small real world mathematical variables. Maths can't morally enlighten anyone unless their mind has something sufficiently relatable to Maths and mine has not. > Her unpredictability is in her specific actions. Her character traits have been fleshed out, so we have a better chance of guessing what she'd do, but not how she'd do it. Yes, her character traits are fleshed out and that is why i can say she is one-dimensional and a very simple, practically useless character in League's universe. Otherwise you could argue that we don't know enough about her character but...we do.
It's possible that her viewpoint on life and death is different, given that she is able to view the lifespan of a creature and outlive generations of humans. To her, it could simply be the way things are. We don't truly know. The issue I take with your sharp tongue is that your words dictate how this conversation goes. If you're going to argue that Zoe is an "ignorant psycho drugged with power" then I expect you to mean that and not just exaggerate due to flavor. My questions were for you to think about. How do you think your worldview would change, or even your opinion, if you were capable of seeing the entire life cycle of an organism, or any organism, as it sat there in front of you? Does that sort of vision impact your philosophy? Would it change your viewpoints on morality? Would actual proof that your worldview is correct change how you see things, or how you act? Her first impression as a person isn't deep. And that's partly because she's a child. We haven't been given a character developing conflict with her. It's her role in the world and how the the world is changed when the power to change the world is given to a child. She's a Legend. Zoe the messenger. Zoe the Herald. Zoe, the Aspect of the Twilight. We could get more stories that flesh out more of her personality, or more of her role as the aspect. I'm fine with either one.
: You know what Zoe reminds me of?
I'm jealous that you wrote this in a much cleaner way than I did and hit all the points neatly. But very nice. I'm glad I'm not alone in this viewpoint.
: Correct. Zoe does not experience time in the same way we do. Obviously, she can travel faster-than-lightspeed--but also she is connected to multiple realities and (if you look carefully) she is connected and able to perceive the past, future and spirit world in a very different way than we can. One of the things that struck me when researching her was the disregard tricksters have for rules and norms --including respecting life-and-death. Loki, coyote, Peter-Pan, etc... After looking into them for a while and checking my Jung-- I noticed that tricksters have subtextual commentary on death and a connection to it as truth bringers, jokers, and rule-breakers. Often because the trickster hold (sometimes subconsciously) a secret knowledge-- i.e. they know death: is not real, is preordained, is part of cycle, etc... Then deciding if part of a tricksters and herald's job is to prepare you for some hard truths and change-- I looked at Zoe as needing to exist as a sort of Zen Koan. Many, many of Zoe's lines have double meanings (including the word "sparkles") and can be understood more than one way. Three side notes: 1) There is a weird space parasite thing some people are hung up on for the Targonians-- I have no idea where that came from. --From my understanding the Aspects _merge_ with a person-- except for Pantheon-- he's a dick-- he only keeps your sense of duty and thirst for glory. (Shrug maybe that makes him the perfect warrior) 2) Everyone somehow believes Aurelion Sol-- hates Zoe. Nope. There relationship is closer to Loki and Thor (in myth not marvel) They are sorta friends-- but he knows not to trust her. And in fact she is his best hope of getting free-- after he learns some stuff he needs. 3) Zoe did not destroy the town, only the guards attacking her and the tower. Bonus: A question for you to consider. In the color text (story) why would this be the way the aspect needed the world-rune to be found?
Hey I've been trying to think of an answer to this question. Is it because the commotion caused by the explosion will increase the chances of a random passerby finding something as powerful as a world rune? In this situation, the other aspects would be stressed out about it and the ensuing events after might humor the aspect?
: I'll admit I wasn't a fan of Zoe, mainly for her personalty, but I wanted to let you know that this thread did change my opinion on her, as well as my thoughts about Aurelion Sol.
I'm glad! It's nice that making this and continuing this discussion has allowed for another soul to consider the other traits and facts, or lack of facts, and their implications regarding Zoe. Glad you found more to think about!
: I'm so done with this topic. You're trying to justiify the murder of innocents by a sociopath. Riot has failed to even show us what Zoe's life was like before she became an Aspect except for that she was lazy and rude to her teachers. You don't know what she was or was not taught, and making stuff up to validate your argument is cheap. You have to keep making up excuses to even begin to try and rationalize Zoe into a slightly sympathetic character. Riot has intentionally chosen to make her this way: bratty, oblivious, and gleefully destructive. Assuming your argument is true, Riot intentionally created her to lack all these redeeming qualities. They purposefully went out of the way to make her as twisted and poorly developed as possible. She murders innocents who don't know what they're dealing with because she was using her magic to mess with kids - they saw her as a threat and moved to drive her away. Zoe is a fucking god. She bats their spears away like nothing and summons a meteor to annihilate them and doesn't bat an eye afterwards. That's the behavior of a fucking sociopath, not a kid. Riot even seems too confused to classify her as a either a kid or teen - which is she? The terminology keeps changing every time. 'She's just a kid' is no excuse for the world-shattering implications she has on the world. If a character has been created to be this problematic and need this many excuses, need this much in-depth discussion that even try and rationalize or explain why she is the way she is, then they're a bad character. A nigh-omnipotent, sociopathic child who uses her power to hurt and kill is world-breaking. No other villain in this world comes even close, and the major ones like Mordekaiser or the Void monsters are clearly explained, make sense within the narrative, and have weaknesses and limits to their influence and power. Everything Riot has told us about Zoe lets us know this is most definitely not the case and that stuff like the guard incident has happened before. Why create this type of character? It's stupid and worldbreaking and reeks of a lack of forethought. Zoe needs a serious narrative backtrack, but I doubt it'll ever happen. By this point I can tell the narrative team is too proud to go back on their mistake, and that makes me sad. This is their first screwup I can remember in a while and I really wish it weren't the case.
Teenagers are kids. I'm not justifying it. I'm stating that you're making more out of it than it is. What makes someone innocent. What makes her a sociopath? What are the defining traits in this scenario that make you believe both of those statements? I never expected you to sympathize with Zoe. I always made the argument that everyone is throwing the standards given to them by their society onto Zoe, without knowing Zoe's society. I doubt I've made up an excuse, so much as I've responded to the made up standards forced upon her by those I'm responding to. You're justified in disliking the implications of her presence, hating the fact that she was chosen as an aspect by meeting the minimum standards, and even disliking that she is almost guaranteed to bring chaos with her. Her qualifications as an Aspect are low, if they exist. Her purpose is to achieve the goals of her aspect, which she knows will happen whether she pursues it or not. A child has a responsibility that will be finished even if she focuses on having fun. Sounds like an easy deal. If a character can generate this much discussion without actually making stuff up, they must be a good character. They can expand upon Zoe easily and take her in multiple directions. She has a bunch of growth potential and they can give her more viewpoints that she may have gained in her journeys. They actually do this with her cyber punk skin and some of the quotes used, which I think is neat. Why would Riot create a character who does whatever they want because the world allows it? Does riot have any other characters that aren't too worried about the rules of the world? Why does it reek of lack of forethought to make such a character? I don't believe they've screwed up. They added a random element into the world of Runeterra. An element of chaos that acts to ensure the mathematics of the world are changed to what they need to be.
: Okay, firstly, Zoe is not a child, she acts like a child, but she is a teenager in body (young teenager, but teenager none the less) and was raised by the Lunari, who did teacher her. Not to mention that she is, chronologically, THOUSANDS of years old. She has lived out more experience then any other human has, and yet, she is still a child who cares for nothing but her own amusement. I expect a Child to have common morals (Don't go around killing people, don't steal, don't destroy another's property, ect) Considering those are crammed into our brains at a very young age. > Did the situation HAVE to end in death? No. But the moral obligations you believe others should hold are you own. Zoe, is a being who can wipe out countless numbers of innocent people. I would like her to use it responsibly. She isn't mentally fit for her powers, and because she blew up a group of people who's only crime was being afraid she was a hostile, alien entity (and while she was not deliberately hostile at first, she did seem to have supernatural powers, so their fear is justified.) and she proved them right. Who's going to tell their families that their Son/Father/brother will never come home? I'm sorry, but if she cannot have moral obligations like that, then she needs to be put down. She's a ticking time bomb, and while she may be helping fight the void, she is a more immediate threat to everyone.
Teenagers are children. Your opinion is more warranted honestly. The implications of her time with the lunari implies they aren't good at getting things deep in her. She'd rather tease them than listen to them. They probably had more power than her, but her interactions prove she cares less about it. And while she may have lived longer than us, has she had to live through the repercussions of her actions like we have? Does she have to meet the families of the soldiers she killed? Does she have to confront their grievances head on, or does she wonder away, unaware of it all? I admit that she's dangerous. We know nothing of what she may do. However, we don't know if picking someone else as the aspect of twilight would be better for the long term.
: - Ignorance. I didn't say she takes pleasure. - Hasn't been raised but she's supposted to be centuries old. Not everyone had parents in the world and i'm willing to bet they didn't turn out retarded the way Zoe did. And i'm pretty sure it's kind-of NATURAL as human beings to understand what suffering is, especially without parents. She had to be a normal kid before becoming an Aspect so what happened then? She just played with her toys for 10 years without ever asking where her parents are? How did she manage? She got lucky and grew up in the Garden of Eden like Lulu, never having to grow up? See, there are too many holes in this logic. > Your understanding of death came to you from your environment. What was Zoe's environment? Would it foster the same moral reasoning and logic as yours? Her environment is expanded not limited. She has the best POV to see all these dark things and she skip along time regardless. > I think she's a child involved in things far bigger than her. Which is exactly why she's useless to the plot as a character. Her unpredictability is about the only character trait she has. Oh and PS: I'm not "angry" writing this. It's how i'd feel towards a girl like her if she was te real dead. It's just how i write.
If your first statement about making excuses involving taking joy and pleasure from murdering ("As if murdering who knows how many people out of joy and fun is excusable because of this.") is not about your opinion regarding Zoe, then why even mention it? I think it's a fair assumption in regards to your implication. If not, please expand upon it and I'll apologize. Even so, You could simply say you agree with me, as I did not insult you. I stated there's no mentioning of her taking pleasure as a response to your statement which I've quoted above. And you did seem angry. Your paragraph about Hermes is riddled with language that implies anger or discontent regarding the topic. Your whole first response to this topic is written with more emotional flavor than I think you intended, and it shows more emotion regarding your opinion on this matter than sound argument. We know nothing of the past in Runeterra. We know nothing of the Lunari outside of Diana. While you might assume it's natural, I'd argue counter. I'd also be able to bet that while not everyone in the world without parents grew up to lack empathy for those killed by them, there are those who grew up with parents that did become murderers or rapists, despite the "love" and "discipline" of their parents. If you as a child could suddenly see the entirely life of a creature, how would that impact your viewpoints on life and death? If you had a view of the mathematics of the world, or understood their need to change, how would that impact your moral viewpoint? Her unpredictability is in her specific actions. Her character traits have been fleshed out, so we have a better chance of guessing what she'd do, but not how she'd do it.
: 'she's just a kid' is such a fucking lazy and callous excuse Zoe murdered people who were scared of her. She tortured that poor squirrel (froze in in time using magic when it was trying to get away? is that how you treat animals?) and treats Aurelion Sol like crap. That's not behavior in a child I'd ever condone or try and make excuses for. I don't get why its so hard for people like you to understand and why Riot is so hellbent trying to press on it because they messed up and inadequately presented her narrative to the public. Zoe deserves hate because she's awful and inconsistent and bratty.
You ignored my argument. I stated that children are taught behaviors and reasons that you hold standard. From her story, it's clear Zoe had no one capable of teaching her. Zoe ended the lives of those that wanted to destroy her. Zoe made an animal she wanted to befriend fall asleep. Kids DEFINITELY pick up animals and catch wildlife in the hopes of taking them home, or just to interact with them. Kids have to be taught that touching baby birds basically kills them because the mother will abandon them. Zoe KNOWS Aurelion Sol and his lies and truths. Their relationship, which also involves her defending his stars from Pantheon, is more complex than "treats Aurelion Sol like crap." Your next statement makes it obvious you ignored my point. "That's not behavior in a child I'd ever condone." If you had a child, you'd TEACH them not to do those things, why they are wrong. You'd teach them how other's feel, and make sure they understand the impact of their actions. Who's teaching Zoe? Who connects with Zoe and is capable of showing her those things? Zoe is not a child being raised to integrate with society. She is a child that a "God" has a given the ability to avoid integrating with society, and has removed the majority of power that adults/guardians/teachers can use to raise a child in their society.
: > She didn't murder "innocents". Innocence is subjective. These are warriors ready to kill without verification. They were in the process of their attempted removal via the DEATH of Zoe's life. They thought she was hostile, and considering what she did to them and the tower, they were right. They have the right to defend themselves from a threat. I don't care what environment she was raised in, because what she did, whether you or the writer believe it or not, was not right. She could have done hundreds of things that wouldn't have resulted in the deaths of the guards, but she didn't. If you have a way to defuse a situation without bloodshed and you didn't do it, it's wrong, end of story.
And yet, you expect a child to think or these things. You expect a child to go through the processes that are TAUGHT to us. They assumed she was dangerous, so they poked the lion. They didn't attempt to communicate. They acted, and had a response that you don't agree with, but happened. It doesn't justify their fear, though you may feel otherwise. Forethought and Consequences are not something that children are naturally capable of doing on their own. Regular children don't theory craft. They act on impulse, or trained behavioral patterns. Did the situation HAVE to end in death? No. But the moral obligations you believe others should hold are you own.
: > [{quoted}](name=Faceroll Tactics,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=6pjlVsTo,comment-id=00020000000400000000,timestamp=2017-11-22T07:55:46.176+0000) > > Comet is aoe, maybe? and can be dodged easily, while aery is targeted
I disagree on this. Comet can be dodged if you're walking a straight line and the skill that hits you does not slow you down. Or if you have a dash. It's a very reliable damage dealer on some champs.
: As if murdering who knows how many people out of joy and fun is excusable because of this. She has no moral understanding or love for life. She's just a selfish brat who has power because a Hermes-knockoff thought it would be funny. Even Hermes took his job seriously! And even children of her age should know killing people is a horrible crime. I understood that pain/death is bad when i was 4 years old. Zoe is like, what, a 9 year old that is centuries old? I do not care you have a Riot response to this. The Writer did a terrible job with this depthless, worthless of an excuse of a "character". She'll be nothing but another contrived plot device excused by "being a child" and when the situation calls for it she won't be a child because "She's actually ancient". You know, they made Jhin and THEN they made Zoe. That sentence is valid and that's what's the problem with forced thematic changes. It forces you to push out something you're not good at on a time limit and the writers are clearly not good at making fun-loving characters as they just turn out to be perceived as insane instead like Lux or Lulu and now - Zoe.
You've a lot more anger about this that may not be related to Zoe. There's no mentioning of Zoe taking pleasure from the death of the guards. You call her selfish, and that may be arguable, but given that she gave up chasing the squirrel, I'm inclined to believe that she isn't a "selfish brat", but closer to a regular child that hasn't been raised to employ proper etiquette. Your understanding of death came to you from your environment. What was Zoe's environment? Would it foster the same moral reasoning and logic as yours? I personally think the writing did a good job of showing Zoe's personality and how she interacts in the world as an aspect. I don't think she's insane. I think she's a child involved in things far bigger than her.
: did you murder innocents or torment leashed animals when you were younger because if so that's kinda messed up dude please elaborate on all this 'I'm sad because Zoe reminds me of me' stuff because Zoe is a sociopath with almost no redeeming qualities
The thing that people ignore when they discuss Zoe is that as a child, Zoe clearly did not have an authoritative figure that could regulate and nurture her into the kind of child YOU expect children to be. Zoe is not from your culture. Zoe does not have your childhood. The lessons you learn are not learned by everyone. You say she tormented a leashed animal. She simply tried to get close to pet it and enjoy it's presence, doing everything in her power to get that close. She didn't hurt it. She even tried to comfort it by saying "Zoe is a friend." She didn't murder "innocents". Innocence is subjective. These are warriors ready to kill without verification. They were in the process of their attempted removal via the DEATH of Zoe's life. As of right now, Zoe neither tortured leashed animals, nor murdered innocents, as verified by red post.
Taeseuk (NA)
: You should try not to take so personal even if you feel a connection. With her and her behavior, I wouldn't want you to end up upset over what people are saying because of it but I do get what you mean. People will always have their opinions on her, some people are going to hate her and that's okay because they're allowed to it just means those that love her will get to figure her out more.
It'll definitely make me sad, simply because the their cause for anger is something that was a major trait I had throughout childhood. I acknowledge how awful I was, so it doesn't bother me more than that. I just felt like making a thread defending Zoe.
Quepha (NA)
: Because I hate Zoe and I like to see that many agree with me.
Taeseuk (NA)
: People always hate on things that are new and they will always find a reason no matter how small to do so it's just the way a lot of people are.
I guess, this one just feels a little more personal. I can actually understand her inability to understand, or the appearance of her inability. She's definitely one of their better characters to me.
Quepha (NA)
: The hate for Zoe makes me happy.
  Rioter Comments
: I'd like to thank Riot for giving me back what they stole.
I'm posting it here so people know. Lux can now have a 23.38 second ult, prior to her on kill cd refund. This is LOWER than her original before they increased it's cd.
Rioter Comments
: Spellthief's Edge discourages AoE poke on multiple champs simultaneously
As an update, I'm finding it easier to just take the coin and zone my enemy when I go for the coin. I'm not sure if it's just because I'm not using it or if it's technically better overall for me as lux to take the coin over the spellthiefs edge.
: hitting lux'e skill requiring much good play lel
This is a bit elitist, no? If I'm able to poke both opponents, is it not a good play? If I'm able to read my opponents and use my skillshots to hit them both, did I not use a skill?
Rioter Comments
: Riot employee behavior
Would you all be okay with a write-up and verbal warning?
: Honestly, you're the type of player I hate. Some games are completely unwinnable and are simply time wasters. I've seen games go 30-5 and my team will not surrender even though we have no towers and their Yi Jung and ADC are 10-1. Holding people hostage in games becomes another tool of toxicity. I have no issues at all in accepting a loss and to grant my opponents the win; they obviously deserved it. Not only by surrendering am I saving myself time, I am saving my enemies time as well. It's honestly the best possible win-win scenario for all players in those type of circumstances. Instead players hold the game hostage while we wait for the enemy to take baron; port back. Take Elder drake; possibly port back again while we fight the super minion wave. Then they come in and finish us off....all of which can take anywhere from 10 - 20 mins of WASTED time. I admire your heroics to the point that I'm sickened by your pride.
You call it toxicity, but you're the one disregarding your teams viewpoint. YOU consider the game to be a time-waster. YOU assume you're being held hostage because the contract you made with your team requires you to finish the game or convince your team to surrender. YOU feel you're saving yourself time, and you ASSUME your opponents value the time as well, so you say you're saving them time. YOU consider it a win-win scenario for ALL players in the game. YOU accuse players of "holding the game hostage" as if that's their viewpoint. And my first point is that YOU can express this viewpoint by simply hitting the surrender button whenever it is available. My second point is that your team may disagree with you, in which you are morally obligated to continue to pursue victory, unless you wish to risk a report. This is because you made the agreement to play this game without toxicity until it is over, no matter your opinion on the state of the game. My third point is that, because of this agreement you made, you will run the risk of being stuck in games YOU deem unwinnable due to others for a variety of reasons, such as obstinance, fear, grief, idealism, anger, etc. In the same vain, you run the risk of losing games you deem winnable because others have deemed it unwinnable. My final point was that, even if you feel the game is over, discussing it is a difficult task. You cannot simply say the game is over in chat, as that's a negative attitude. It's purposely spreading your negative viewpoint/attitude into your teammate's atmosphere. I already stated that you express your opinoni that the game is over by starting a surrender vote, so talking about why it's over is riskyy, imo. I even suggested a healthier action, which is looking for their viewpoints to see if there is something you missed, or a goal you can aim for. My limit until I am willing to surrender is my own. I simply expect you to respect the vote and continue to try and win, as I would do the same for you. The only thing I wish to do is be a good teammate, and aim for victory to the best of my ability, even when I wish to quit.
: This Whole "Never Surrender" (a.k.a "Holding A Game Hostage") Thing Is Getting Out Of Hand
Since this viewpoint hasn't been stated, I'll take the time to write it out. I apologize if any of it sounds aggressive. And, to clarify, I am only talking about ranked. I do not care about your viewpoint in regards to the direction this game is going, win or lose. I do not want to see in my chat that you think the game is over. I don't want to see how you believe the enemy team is super fed, or that things are looking bleak, unless you're making a good joke out of it. Ranked is a game mode for those that want to climb and see the improvement. It's for those with a goal further than "win the current game." This is a mode that rewards you for your struggle and might even make you cry when it's in vain. That being said, everyone enters this mode knowing that winning IS a huge part of the reason you're there. If you think the game is over, hit the surrender button and let the rest of the team show you their opinions with a vote. They will let you know overall if maybe you're not seeing what they are seeing, or if you're right and it's time for the game to end. The vote speaks for itself. You INITIATING the vote speaks for itself. Are you confused about why the vote to surrender failed? Ask your team what they think the team needs to do to win. Give it a shot. You already went into the game and you're stuck until you win/lose/agree to surrender with multiple teammates. Sometimes, that means you'll stop having fun because you desperately want to quit while your teammates do not. Sometimes that means your teammates will not surrender out of spite, or surrender out of spite. But when it comes to using the chat to express your viewpoint, you're treading over thin ice. You're about to express how you believe that the effort of four other members of your team as well as your own will amount to NOTHING. You're about to say you don't believe they have what it takes. Even if you don't think it, even if you're unaware of it, that's what it means when you say you think it's over. You are the equivalent of ALL the side characters in stories who talk about how the match is over and have no faith. The people who tell someone to throw in the towel because they will never reach their goal. One surrender might not mean much to you. But some people might lose more lp than they gain. Surrender isn't something they'd like to do, it may even be something they feel they can't do. This isn't about whether or not people think the game is over. It's about how far you're willing to push yourself before you call it quits. Some people are obstinate. Some are fickle. If you enter a ranked match, you take the risk of having either one on your team. Your job is to push yourself to your limit, and then, push yourself more for those with a higher limit than you, because you made that commitment. This is a team game. You ARE a part of that team, for better or worse, for wins or loses, through the quickest and the longest of games. The sooner you understand the implications of that, the faster you'll grow and understand yourself and your peers. Never Surrender.
Wuks (NA)
: Star Guardian: Invasion | Looking for Group Megathread
Summoner Name/Region: MillforMe / NA Rank: Plat 5 Preferred Role(s): Any Missions Needed: No marksmen, No utility Preferred Time (include timezone):Right now Preferred method of communication (if applicable): Client
Show more

MillForMe

Level 147 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion