: Ranked is fun
I'd rather have remakes than what I've been getting all morning.
: If the reports go to the same queue, why do you need to report them twice?
The point is that the ticket _isn't_ supposd to go to the same queue or I wouldn't have bothered.
Rioter Comments
Jamaree (NA)
: The system needs to stop hiding MMR especially that is what matters for matches, not rank, rank is literally useless in all regards except dick measuring.
dick measuring is also invalid this season due to the jacked up MMR.
Angrød (EUW)
: Ornn needs a Skin
How about give one to Xerath, he hasn't had one since 2015
Rioter Comments
: TFT RNG ITEMS????????
I've gone out 8th place my last two games because the minion rounds gave me gold every time. More gold is great, but items are what make or break a game.
: please no more BOT teammates in 3's
It's because pretty much nobody plays normal 3v3s, and it's the fastest way to level new accounts, so people who sell level 30 account just have a bot play it for them.
Zardo (NA)
: Considering the cait was duoing with a platinum mmr unranked blitz duoq is the issue here, not matchmaking.
Not sure why someone down voted you for explaining precisely what happened. Just because you're unranked doesn't mean that you're going to play against iron players to abuse the system for easy LP. That got fixed at the beginning of the season because of the scumbags abusing that in high elo.
: "I Was Unfairly Banned"
Should also add a 4th line. Did you say something on the instaban list?
Stupify92 (EUNE)
: Master Yi needs a NERF
I think the problem is less yi, more conqueror and rageblade. Yi already gets a phantom hit in his passive, now add a second one on top of it with rageblade, and it's ridiculous.
: > [{quoted}](name=Serevas,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=zMnnviIG,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-05-07T11:31:42.374+0000) > > Honestly I'd love for LP gains and losses to be affected by your performance in game. I'm not talking about a complete relief from lp losses if you lose, but when you're by and far the best performer on your team I just don't feel like you deserve to dump full LP values for the loss. > > I play mid swain almost exclusively at this point, but after a good chunk of time spent playing support I'm learning how to better impact the map and skew the coin flip a little better in my favor. Collectively my last 3 swain games ended up with a KDA of 16.2 (always double digit kills, nearly 30 on one game), so if I got *more* LP for winning so dramatically, I wouldn't complain about that either. My gains are pretty decent right now, but getting 30 instead of 25 certainly wouldn't be bad. My gains aren't bad either. I gain around 20-25 per win and lose something like 15 for a loss. So losing a game and then winning a game will still put me higher than I was before my loss, so its not that big of a deal. But with the amount of time it takes to finish one game, it really bums me out to be doing amazingly in lane and then come out to find theres no possible way we can win because botlane trolled, and then be stuck in that game for 30-40 minutes because they wont FF. Even something as small as reducing the LP loss based on your performance would be good. If I lost 5-10 LP after going full out hard carry and barely losing a game where all 4 of the other lanes fed, I shouldn't be met with a 17 LP reduction. And if I play 10 games in a row of Renekton and it still says that my performance rivals that of top 10 challenger, it should start giving me 50 LP per win. That way, there are less smurfs wreaking havoc on lower ELO and by the time you get to the rank you actually should be in, your performance will drop and your LP would go back to normal. A Masters player in Iron will look like top 10 challenger because he can basically do whatever he wants. But by the time he gets back to Masters, he will have stopped doing so amazingly compared to everybody else in his ELO, and his stats will begin to match his actual rank.
> [{quoted}](name=Tom Kinch,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=zMnnviIG,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-05-07T11:36:28.809+0000) > > My gains aren't bad either. I gain around 20-25 per win and lose something like 15 for a loss. So losing a game and then winning a game will still put me higher than I was before my loss, so its not that big of a deal. But with the amount of time it takes to finish one game, it really bums me out to be doing amazingly in lane and then come out to find theres no possible way we can win because botlane trolled, and then be stuck in that game for 30-40 minutes because they wont FF. Even something as small as reducing the LP loss based on your performance would be good. If I lost 5-10 LP after going full out hard carry and barely losing a game where all 4 of the other lanes fed, I shouldn't be met with a 17 LP reduction. That's exactly how I feel about the whole situation. I've had games where I did really well, but there was just no winning it because at least one lane was literally a caster minion. It would feel nice to see the end game lobby do something like -17 for loss then + 5 for top performer, not top KDA, overall performance. Something like OP.GG does with their "Ace" designation. edit: That's actually how I protect my ego most of the time if I lose a game is check out OP.GG to see if I scored ACE rating or not through them to know if I was doing well or should have done better.
Fyntia (EUW)
: and which champions are good on the top lane ?
Jax, Darius, and Gangplank have been meta or very near to it for 2-3 seasons. They require practice, Darius less than the other two, but all have a pretty high skill ceiling. Can't go wrong with any of them.
: Am I the only one who thinks rank should be based on skill instead of winning games?
Honestly I'd love for LP gains and losses to be affected by your performance in game. I'm not talking about a complete relief from lp losses if you lose, but when you're by and far the best performer on your team I just don't feel like you deserve to dump full LP values for the loss. I play mid swain almost exclusively at this point, but after a good chunk of time spent playing support I'm learning how to better impact the map and skew the coin flip a little better in my favor. Collectively my last 3 swain games ended up with a KDA of 16.2 (always double digit kills, nearly 30 on one game), so if I got *more* LP for winning so dramatically, I wouldn't complain about that either. My gains are pretty decent right now, but getting 30 instead of 25 certainly wouldn't be bad.
: Am I the only one who thinks its unfair that Zed can charge at from a screen away, ult and kill you?
Let me break down a couple points really quickly since I spotted the game you're talking about in your match history. 1. Zed excels at killing ADCs, you picked an ADC to lane against him. 2. He was up over 1k gold over you at 10 minutes. This means you will die very quickly for the rest of the game. Honestly we all have champions that we can't play against for whatever reason. Champions that no matter what we play against them somehow we lose lane. If Zed is one of those for you, I'd consider banning him.
Kazekiba (NA)
: Old Kayle's autos weren't projectiles. new ones are for absolutely no good reason. Old Kayle autos were not blocked by wind wall, because they originated from Yasuo (or whatever Kayle is autoing), but the flame waves - Despite being, you know, a wave and thus not truly projectiles - Are blocked by Wind Wall. For reference: {{champion:1}} W is not blocked by Wind Wall because it is an instantaneous cone. There's no travel time, it is not a projectile. Why can't Kayle's autos work like this {{champion:268}} / {{champion:161}} Autos I believe also don't count despite being ranged, as they are lasers. Not sure but I think Neeko's empowered auto might as well {{champion:240}} R {{champion:89}} R is basically Kayle's old auto on steroids with massive CC because it's, yknow, not an Auto attack of course. {{champion:63}} W/E {{champion:516}} W, though these might be blocked. {{champion:99}} The queen of Yasuos futile windwalling.
I think the new auto attacks being ranged is for a balance perspective. If you become a ranged champion, yet don't have ranged auto attacks. That can become a balancing nightmare when you are specifically based around auto attacking to begin with. I was under the impression that's how old E was coded anyway, looking at the history on the wiki apparently not, which explains why she was such a problem when she was Meta. Frankly, if your damage is oriented around auto attacking, they should be projectiles. Azir is an exception as his auto attacks are basically inputs for melee champions to attack, just at whatever range. I'm not sure why his normal auto attack can't be a projectile, probably some manner of coding nightmare, but that seems pretty solvable since we've done it with Kayle. Vel'koz isn't a big deal as his auto attacks are pretty much a non-factor with regards to damage. Additionally it's not a stealth situation, it's literally in his passive that his auto attacks aren't projectiles. Regardless I would argue that 90% of Kayle's actual problem into a Yasuo lane is that Yasuo is strong at all stages, Kayle takes up until like 25 minutes to become a full fledged champion. That's the same reason I hate having them on my team. They take too long to get going and have typically hard fed the opposing laner, which seems to be either Nasus or Urgot in all of my experiences, and that creates a creature so obese that it needs a rascal scooter to get around the map to kill everyone. Changing how her auto attacks are coded to deal with literally a single situation for 4 seconds every 26 seconds is not at all going to solve her major problem.
Pika Fox (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Serevas,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=WbIjvbwE,comment-id=00000000000000000001,timestamp=2019-05-04T22:49:06.825+0000) > > So if this person does worse because I attempted to help them it's my fault. Logical perspective. Correct. Your lack of communication skills and understanding what is going on and how they will respond is on you, not them.
> [{quoted}](name=Pika Fox,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=WbIjvbwE,comment-id=000000000000000000010000,timestamp=2019-05-05T03:57:47.323+0000) > > Correct. Your lack of communication skills and understanding what is going on and how they will respond is on you, not them. You're making the assumption that my advise is some garbage comment like "Stop feeding" or "Play safe" My communication skills are fine, my advise is solid. Their fragile egos are not my problem, learn to take criticism if you want to be better. It's always a constructive comment, flaming them is pointless.
: Weeaboos ruined league
I'm more disgusted by the fact that the Yuumi second skin is 1350 and is barely more than a chroma with particle effects.
macspam (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Serevas,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=pAm5biP0,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-05-04T15:48:36.783+0000) > > It really doesn't counter her damage any more than it does from blocking all projectiles, AKA what her auto attacks are anyway. The point is old kayle was a counter to yas, new one isnt
Is that really purely based on a single ability or is it based on the fact that Kayle isn't even half of a champion until level 11, and then not a full champion until 16? I'm heavily inclined to say the second part.
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Serevas,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=4rBRaBNU,comment-id=000000000003000000000000000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-04T23:15:18.461+0000) > > I don't want making bad decisions to be punishable, I've made bad decisions, you've made bad decisions, everyone in this game from the depths of iron to the tip top of challenger makes bad decisions. I watched Zven make a bad decision and throw away game 5 of the NA Finals live with hundreds of thousands of other people. > > I don't see why the punishment standards for intentional feeding should be any more severe than a criminal trial. If you believe beyond a reasonable doubt it's intentional feeding, it should be punishable. > > There's a dramatic difference between walking to the enemy tower and feeding kills immediately on respawn, and trying a bad dive. > > If that's not something you can agree with, I'll see you later as there's zero point in the conversation. The punishment standard for criminal actions is "beyond a reasonable doubt". That is the same standard as in League. Immediately returning to lane is not intentionally feeding, period, even if they happen to make bad decisions when they get back.
I didn't say immediately returning to lane. I said immediately returning under the enemy tower. When your time spent alive is only walking into the enemy tower to die, that to me is very far beyond a reasonable doubt. I can't understand how to you it isn't.
rujitra (NA)
: The burden of proof is **intentionally feeding**. If you want people punished for **making bad decisions**, then you should campaign for that to be a punishable offense.
I don't want making bad decisions to be punishable, I've made bad decisions, you've made bad decisions, everyone in this game from the depths of iron to the tip top of challenger makes bad decisions. I watched Zven make a bad decision and throw away game 5 of the NA Finals live with hundreds of thousands of other people. I don't see why the punishment standards for intentional feeding should be any more severe than a criminal trial. If you believe beyond a reasonable doubt it's intentional feeding, it should be punishable. There's a dramatic difference between walking to the enemy tower and feeding kills immediately on respawn, and trying a bad dive. If that's not something you can agree with, I'll see you later as there's zero point in the conversation.
rujitra (NA)
: You do though. The prohibited act is **intentionally** feeding. Not dying. Not running under tower. Not making bad decisions. Not fighting a 1v3. Intentionally. Feeding. For this, you must prove two things - that someone assisted the enemy team and did so **intentionally**. Intent requires reading minds.
If you can't watch a replay and watch the guy run under tower giving free kills to the enemy and call that intentional feeding. If that's really your burden for proof. You might as well just remove the report option and tell everyone to just deal with it as the instances of intentional feeding where the player literally tells you that they're going to int are so minute that the option is pointless.
: Champions you feel should have different voices or sound effects
Dreadnova Gangplank's pistol shot sounds like the rifles in laser tag, and makes the skin feel like a joke to me.
: Has anyone else noticed a sudden increase in AFKs, or am I just unlucky?
I had a batch of them recently, but they all ended up being remakes. It was like 2-3 straight in a row.
: About saying KYS
If you get reported for it you'll 100% get at least a 2 week ban.
rujitra (NA)
: Just because you don't see a good solution does not mean you implement a non-solution, or even worse, do something that will make more problems. Riot can put all the time and effort they want into it, but they still won't have a crystal ball and be able to know if someone is **intentionally** feeding or not.
I mean I personally don't think you need to read minds to judge intentional feeding. The dude who walks straight into tower makes it pretty obvious. I'd personally rather see attempts at something rather than complete non action. Sounds like you're in the opposite camp.
Pika Fox (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Serevas,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=WbIjvbwE,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-04T15:04:48.434+0000) > > No doubt I think my concern is the difference between hard and soft inting. Actually trying and simply getting run over, or not caring at all and simply typing the appropriate things into the chat to trick people into thinking that you might be. > > It's an extremely complicated problem to spot when you get down to it. Personally I can't remember the last time I lost lane hard enough to go 0/5 short of support games where the assists made up for the fact I had that many deaths with no kills, but maybe that's just growth as a player and learning how to minimize the negative impact you have on your own team. If you're 0/5 as anything other than a tank you're going to be exceptionally difficult to carry. > > I'll personally admit that I've made reports that were probably just someone having a bad game, but from my perspective at the time at some point they crossed from bad game to inting. That threshold for me is usually when you won't listen to other players suggestions and continue to die and contribute little to nothing during the mid/late game. I will 100% check your post game stats before considering it, but when an ADC dies 3 times as much and does 1/4 the damage of a typical support. You're going to get the int report. Most players having a bad game wont listen to you, either because they muted you to avoid flame, or just assume youre flaming them. Theyre already tilted, trying to help usually wont help and just make things worse. And thats on you, not them.
> [{quoted}](name=Pika Fox,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=WbIjvbwE,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-04T19:53:13.661+0000) > > Most players having a bad game wont listen to you, either because they muted you to avoid flame, or just assume youre flaming them. Theyre already tilted, trying to help usually wont help and just make things worse. And thats on you, not them. So if this person does worse because I attempted to help them it's my fault. Logical perspective.
: It already _is_ costing Riot time and money, since they're already trying to find a solution to the problem. I don't know how far they've come with it, but the fact remains, it's something that they're working on. > You have to make a sacrifice somewhere to solve the problem. > > ...farming it out to the public to expand resources cheaply... Cheap != good - and the Tribunal is certainly far from good. I've already explained the litany of problems with the idea. > ...or instituting a completely ineffective robotic system that will likely just create more problems. I think that an automated system tuned to avoid false-positives creates less issues than a fundamentally broken system like the Tribunal. > That's really all I see as options unless you've got a 4th that I'm not thinking of. Unfortunately, I can only really assume that the best option is a middle-ground between an automated system and manual review, but even such a system would have its issues. My forte is more understanding the ramifications of how proposed systems would work than it is actually coming up with practical ideas.
So when you have someone hard inting and instead they say in the chat "I'm sorry guys I'm having a really off day today." Then dies under enemy tower yet again with no minions around. The automated system is going to be fine tuned to pick that one out? That's pretty much the exact form of abuse that I'm talking about automated systems not detecting. The opposite side of the coin being that a player who gets flamed on a regular basis that at the beginning of the game just types in /mute all and never talks, feeding because he doesn't know what he's doing, but gets reported in the end and banned for it. You're telling me that you're going to be able to tune a system to deal with those kind of situations? Where I sit it looks like those people would be pretty problematic to an automated system. Unjust bans handed out, followed by justifiable bans avoided. Then support simply gets flooded with appeals, and either you tell people who were unjustly banned to find the nearest rope and urinate in an upward direction, or you have to sink in the resources to go through each appeal, so you're pretty much back to square one all over again of reviewing each case individually is necessary. I'm pretty sure any form of automated system is going to be completely ineffective in anything other than the most obvious cases anyway, regardless of how well tuned it is. I may like to think that my teammates are drooling on themselves and that's why I lose games sometimes, but in reality there are a fair amount of intelligent people who could easily defeat such automated systems. I know the Tribunal in it's previous instance was severely flawed otherwise it would still be around, but when I look at the insurmountable number of complaints, and the level of resources it would take to deal with them effectively enough to create a deterrent effective enough to make trolling and inting an outlier. Perhaps all a new tribunal system would need is a fine tuning to make it truly effective not dissimilar from what you're saying about an automated system. I for one would be thrilled to do it with zero incentives offered. For me the incentive is that fractional percentage chance increase of not having trolls in the very few games I have time to play. Honestly perhaps the automated system could be used to track how each tribunal member punishes, where extreme punish/not punish pulled for reviewed at random. This would be similar to customer service calls being recorded to track that customer service is. Let's be honest statistics are about the easiest thing in the world to track and automate, especially in self created systems.
Quuee (NA)
: The Icons for the Houses
I mean several are quite similar, but they are different.
: Return of the artificial matchmaking
PTA Lethality Shen Support Ap Nautilus Support Iceborn Gauntlet Sona I can't imagine why you're losing games. Something tells me the 3/13 Soraka game was a promo match where you had a 5/21 Rengar for a double ignite bot lane. It really sucks that you're on a lengthy loss streak, and that in some of those you had some pretty hard feeding teammates, but when you're rocking troll builds, you really don't help your case at all.
: Had no idea where to post this but (about league bots)
NA 3v3 is full of bots unless you play ranked, maybe even then I'm not sure. I played a batch of games a while back I think I had 1 actual player aside from myself in 5 games.
: > Spend the time and money on rebuilding the tribunal. There are a good number of reasons why the Tribunal got iceboxed in the first place, and those same reasons make the thought of bringing back the Tribunal in any capacity infeasible. > You end up farming out the long term work to the community and it costs virtually nothing in the long term. Personally, I think that handing off the duty of punishing players for Gameplay-related infractions to the community is irresponsible and an all-around bad idea. As [SupportPlank](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/4rBRaBNU-how-come-riot-only-punishes-the-one-type-of-toxicity-that-can-be-remedied-with-one-click-of-a-button?comment=0002) brought up; > Perhaps if people didn't report for inting just because someone got out matched in a lane, then the system might work better. There's already enough issue with players crying "wolf" over pugs when it comes to gameplay misbehavior. Are we seriously going to trust that they'll have the ability to discern true trolling/intentionally feeding from players just getting their asses handed to them? > If you don't feel like you get enough enrollment you can offer some minimal rewards that scale based on number of cases reviewed **successfully**, meaning that your votes were in line with the final majority. The old Tribunal tried this, too. It failed miserably, and resulted in players simply voting to punish regardless of the behavior shown in the case so that they could get the rewards. The moment you incentivize a certain outcome (I.E, successful reviews) is the moment you skew the community's actions _towards_ that outcome. (I.E, only voting "punish" so that the majority of votes come up punish, and everyone gets rewards.) > You get a batch of trial cases already dealt with by Riot members to guarantee the tribunal member votes are consistent with what you desire for the outcome of the system. Those members go through cases using the replay system and a set of time stamped chat logs formed of Pre-game lobby, game chat, and post game chat. Having Riot-reviewed trial cases would only help insofar as the trial cases persist. Once they're over, it's pretty much free reign for the community to vote on the behavior without Riot oversight, which leads to an issue; 1) You can have Riot only intervene in small cases (like you described, trial case reviews & tiebreaking), leaving much of the responsibility in the hands of the players, which, if we're throwing in rewards, _is a bad idea_. 2) You can have Riot's ultimate oversight on each of the cases to ensure accuracy, at which point, the Tribunal system would be more for the entertainment of the playerbase than it would serve any actual real purpose. It's a lose/lose situation. Leaving punishment in the hands of the community (with such a varied degree of what they consider gameplay misbehavior, at that) is a terrible idea, and having Riot oversight would basically render the Tribunal system pointless, since it's all having to be reviewed by someone at Riot at the end of the day. > You have multiple Tribunal members assigned to a case, Riot will go through cases that are tied in votes, or set up a single additional tribunal member for such cases to solve the tie. As with both statements above (Riot oversight and the ability for the community to discern gameplay misbehavior), having another Tribunal member play the role of the tiebreaker isn't a good idea, since you'd need to _absolutely, positively guarantee_ the impartiality and ability to discern gameplay misbehavior of that tiebreaker in all cases. And that's not something that's easy to do. > Additionally you can consider additional people worthy of review if they were instigators in the whole situation. Particularly if the particular case saw the person being judged drop reports on one or multiple other members of the team. No. If you're reviewing one person's behavior, you're reviewing that person's behavior alone; adding more players to the review serves no benefit to the initial case review. If someone gets reported, their behavior will be reviewed in isolation. There's no good reason to add features to the hypothetical Tribunal system that only sidetrack the reviewers.
Then what's the solution? Because as of right now what exists does little to nothing to solve the problem. You don't like my system, other people say the resources don't exist to solve it, you can't automate it because it's too difficult to track/defeat. So what do we do? Ignore it and hope it goes away? That clearly hasn't worked. You have to make a sacrifice somewhere to solve the problem. Either it's going to be cost and time on Riot's side, farming it out to the public to expand resources cheaply, or instituting a completely ineffective robotic system that will likely just create more problems. You obviously can't rely on the community to grow up and stop ruining people's experiences on their own. That's really all I see as options unless you've got a 4th that I'm not thinking of.
Kazekiba (NA)
: Stealth Kayle nerf? Removing one of her key matchups in solo lanes
It really doesn't counter her damage any more than it does from blocking all projectiles, AKA what her auto attacks are anyway.
TrulyBland (EUNE)
: I see people say this so often, but it's such a pointless blanket statement. If you cannot, by yourself, come up with a solution and therefore determine a specific requirement for time/people/money, then you don't actually know that. You just *want* it to be true. And coming up with a (feasible) solution is actually the primary problem. And it's the kind of problem where you can't just throw money at it to solve it faster. Throwing more manhours at it may... but "faster" still doesn't really tell you whether it will take a day, a year, or a century.
Spend the time and money on rebuilding the tribunal. You end up farming out the long term work to the community and it costs virtually nothing in the long term. If you don't feel like you get enough enrollment you can offer some minimal rewards that scale based on number of cases reviewed **successfully**, meaning that your votes were in line with the final majority. You get a batch of trial cases already dealt with by Riot members to guarantee the tribunal member votes are consistent with what you desire for the outcome of the system. Those members go through cases using the replay system and a set of time stamped chat logs formed of Pre-game lobby, game chat, and post game chat. You have multiple Tribunal members assigned to a case, Riot will go through cases that are tied in votes, or set up a single additional tribunal member for such cases to solve the tie. Additionally you can consider additional people worthy of review if they were instigators in the whole situation. Particularly if the particular case saw the person being judged drop reports on one or multiple other members of the team.
: > [{quoted}](name=Serevas,realm=NA,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=FFicE5Je,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-05-04T14:41:15.397+0000) > > The one that goes 0/10 in my promos. > > In all seriousness though. I've always found the Challenger Ahri splash art to be particularly repulsive, but that's just me. Wait really? I've always thought that splash art looked okay. Not great but not "repulsive" What about the cinematic Ahri? That one is pretty hard to look at.
Personally not a fan of the art style in the cinematics all that much, but I'd take that over Challenger Ahri any day.
Hardstück (EUNE)
: But people often don't see the difference between losing lane and inting for purpose. There is always a reason for someone inting the game out,if they is no reason then idk the person should look for mental help rather than playing league. See why i typed 0/5? Thats usual score of a lost lane and if person is trying they might be able to win and get carried but if someone is flaming him for going 0/5 i wouldn't try anymore...
> [{quoted}](name=Hardstück,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=WbIjvbwE,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-05-04T14:43:00.072+0000) > > But people often don't see the difference between losing lane and inting for purpose. There is always a reason for someone inting the game out,if they is no reason then idk the person should look for mental help rather than playing league. See why i typed 0/5? Thats usual score of a lost lane and if person is trying they might be able to win and get carried but if someone is flaming him for going 0/5 i wouldn't try anymore... No doubt I think my concern is the difference between hard and soft inting. Actually trying and simply getting run over, or not caring at all and simply typing the appropriate things into the chat to trick people into thinking that you might be. It's an extremely complicated problem to spot when you get down to it. Personally I can't remember the last time I lost lane hard enough to go 0/5 short of support games where the assists made up for the fact I had that many deaths with no kills, but maybe that's just growth as a player and learning how to minimize the negative impact you have on your own team. If you're 0/5 as anything other than a tank you're going to be exceptionally difficult to carry. I'll personally admit that I've made reports that were probably just someone having a bad game, but from my perspective at the time at some point they crossed from bad game to inting. That threshold for me is usually when you won't listen to other players suggestions and continue to die and contribute little to nothing during the mid/late game. I will 100% check your post game stats before considering it, but when an ADC dies 3 times as much and does 1/4 the damage of a typical support. You're going to get the int report.
: What's the ugliest Ahri?
The one that goes 0/10 in my promos. In all seriousness though. I've always found the Challenger Ahri splash art to be particularly repulsive, but that's just me.
Hardstück (EUNE)
: OMG RIOT NEEDS TO ADD SYSTEM WHERE THEY BAN 0/5 INTERS AND TROLLERS
Re-instituting the tribunal would be a pretty rapid way to solve that personally. If they don't have the resources to personally look into that kind of crap, farm it out to the community and let them do it for free. You've got the in client replay system, tens of thousands of people willing to execute trolls and inters on the spot for having suffered it themselves. The only thing I see people get banned for is AFK/leaving or Flaming in chat, and like I said in another post. I'd be willing to bet at least 50% of flame is related to getting trolled or inted. If they want to disprove that they should attach specific game references to which ban report resulted in a punishment.
: question about player's perspective on league
A player pops the vote as a joke, but his team all presses yes to go along with the joke too quickly and the vote goes through instead of a couple players saying no.
phongphu (NA)
: About Prestige Skins in Vietnam (as well as other Garena servers)
That's some pretty dishonest and screwed up behavior right there. Pure unbridled greed. I had heard stories about the Garena servers being pretty screwed up before, but not like that.
: Riot has enough time/people/money. They can do better and we deserve better.
I'm not saying they shouldn't, I'm simply saying it was the easiest bandaid to apply and make it look like something is being done. I'd argue that the majority of toxic chat logs comes out of some form of trolling to begin with. Your top lane Riven going all in to the champion she already fed 5 kills to, over and over again. Role stealing, inters. The perma split push player, that's too weak to 1v1 anyone other than the support, and maybe not even them. If you put the effort into cleaning up that behavior I would bet my life you'd see at least a 50% reduction in chat related punishments.
: House quiz
I think it's gone if you've already chosen. It was a link in the house selection page of the client. It's pretty simplistic and generic. Council is about thinking tactically and outsmarting your opponent. United is about supporting your team. Warband is about hard carrying through skill. Faceless was about being weird and doing atypical stuff.
: How come riot only punishes the one type of toxicity that can be remedied with one click of a button
It seems to me it's the easiest problem to fix. You can set up a robot to look for words, behavior is a lot harder to automate and put no further effort into.
Afk on Lane (EUNE)
: Yeah, I think I will do it everytime or just ignore anything from now, there is no point to talk with people or argue.
I pretty much go in optimistically, but when they start mouthing off at me or anyone else I just drop the mute and move on. They're obviously not going to contribute anything valuable through text at that point. Pings are plenty anymore.
Jaspers (EUW)
: I think people have been asking for Xerath for a while now. But I hear Riot are making Dark Star Ezreal first.
> [{quoted}](name=Jaspers,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=z0gJEq76,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-05-04T11:16:51.568+0000) > > I think people have been asking for Xerath for a while now. But I hear Riot are making Dark Star Ezreal first. Yes because Ezreal needs yet more skins. 13 skins once the PBE skin releases.
Afk on Lane (EUNE)
: Why flamers or selfdefenders who are flamed by whole team are more often banned than trolls in team.
Well from what you're saying you flame people back every time. If I were you, I'd mute all from the first time someone started flaming you so that you don't respond, maybe even the beginning of the game.
: Aatrox actually worth playing now?
If you're looking to play him as an Auto attacker, I still wouldn't. He's got nothing to really assist the auto attacking style, in fact now there's even less than before this most recent mini-rework. At least before he had damage amps on ult and E.
: I wish league worked on soft inting and feeding more than toxicity. Here's the trick lads, if people weren't inting/feeding, you would rarely ever see flame. I've had very few games with flame when someone on my team wasn't like 0-4 in 8m
> [{quoted}](name=I Play This Game,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fM1fUWF8,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-04-29T19:45:58.191+0000) > > I wish league worked on soft inting and feeding more than toxicity. Here's the trick lads, if people weren't inting/feeding, you would rarely ever see flame. I've had very few games with flame when someone on my team wasn't like 0-4 in 8m Hey now, we don't talk like that around here. You should be able to ruin everyone else's experience, but if someone ruins your experience you can't say anything to them out of fear of the ban hammer. That's why I started muting people the moment they start doing dumb things and typing in chat blaming others. Better to find every way possible to ignore them. Unfortunately, muting their text, pings, as well as emotes, does a whole lot of nothing to prevent them from tumbling into 5 people followed by the classic. "Team?" or my personal favorite as a former support player "Help?".
: Tahm Kench and Ardent Censar
Probably because it's a support item and is oriented around supporting another champion/your team.
Lapis (OCE)
: What's a good mastery point goal?
Every 100k points until you reach 500k, then go for each million marker. Or if you want to go to the extreme. Try to get the most mastery points on her that anyone has in the world. Not sure how you look that up, but it's worth attempting anyway.
Show more

Serevas

Level 74 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion