SanZero (EUNE)
: Things you must know about penalty system (PART 3)
Let me just say this is an excellent example of just how good Riot's player support is. They thoroughly explained what really should have been a simple concept four different times, all in what looks to be original, case specific, very long responses, three of them after having seen the long responses by other support members. How to defend yourself: Mute. <-- This is allowed. How to threaten and attack other players: Look at what you did. <-- This is not. Simple.
Subdue (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=UnstoppableMaybe,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=4KQOc3It,comment-id=000200000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-18T01:06:35.571+0000) > > If you can't follow the Links provided to find the answers, that's not my problem, because that's on you at that point. Also denying the truth is no surprise from you apparently. $200 doesn't show up in either of those links. And in the one that you posted, you incorrectly list the price of the Little Legends too. Like I said, all misinformation.
> [{quoted}](name=UnstoppableMaybe,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=4KQOc3It,comment-id=00020000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000002,timestamp=2019-07-19T19:25:22.007+0000) > > If you think nobody has EVER spent $200 to max a Legendary to final form, then you are ridiculous, and that's fine with me then at this point. While many can spend up to $170 or more, most don't spend enough to get a Legendary, and stop at around $100 on average without enough Legendaries to evolve just 1 time. > > The best evidence is the proof and witnesses. So if providing evidence you don't like because I wasn't the victim going overboard because I already know the anwer without making the mistake, but others were victims, that just tells me you are mad because I am right without having to be a victim as well. A witness does not have to be the victim to be right. The wise can pass a test without having to make the same mistakes as the victim in some way. Sounds to me like your denial is more personal, and nothing to do with the truth, but the fact you can't stand being wrong to a point, you won't accept the truth, aka insanity. > > This concludes with proof I have been right this whole time, including your facts denial statistically, and in regards to the truth of the "absurd, greedy, desperate, and unnecessary" gambling system. Not only do I not think anybody has ever spent that, **IT IS MATHEMATICALLY IMPOSSIBLE!** Even if you have the absolute WORST possible luck, and have the incredible lack of foresight to buy RP in increments greater than $5/650RP at a time, the most, the ABSOLUTE MOST, it would cost you to get level 3 of any Legendary Little Legend is $203, but that's not the price of a Legendary, Little Legend, that would be the price of THREE Legendary Little Legends, SIX Epic Little Legends, and NINE Rare Little Legends.
: How are people supposed to win if 3 teammates are working with them to play denial?
I think what you're describing is much more difficult than what you're suggesting, and since you can't decide who you're going to fight in each round, the one that's building to counter would basically kill off his allies, freeing up their units, and giving you a chance to compete, so I think it's a self-defeating strategy most of the time. Plus, what do you suppose they would do if you were to switch gears and mimic the counter?
: Because it's cyclical doesn't mean it has to be predictable. The game can shuffle the order in which you'll face opponents, once every cycle. That way, only the last opponent in the cycle is predictable (because you went through all the others already), and tracking it requires effort. And even that could probably be mitigated.
> [{quoted}](name=Amuq the Native,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=UiQjMd6O,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2019-07-19T09:48:24.715+0000) > > Because it's cyclical doesn't mean it has to be predictable. The game can shuffle the order in which you'll face opponents, once every cycle. That way, only the last opponent in the cycle is predictable (because you went through all the others already), and tracking it requires effort. And even that could probably be mitigated. That means if you face the assassin team in the first round it you can ignore defending against assassins for the next 7 pvp rounds,which is basically the same issue.
Unkn0wN (NA)
: most people postion to counter assassins if possible currently anyway - see anyone with a corner camping strategy but yes I think plays like this are good as it forces you to be more versatile in the way you position and play against your opponents
> [{quoted}](name=Unkn0wN,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=UiQjMd6O,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-07-18T19:30:59.427+0000) > > most people postion to counter assassins if possible currently anyway - see anyone with a corner camping strategy but yes I think plays like this are good as it forces you to be more versatile if the way you position and play against your opponents Right, and that makes sense because the assassins are often the biggest threat. However, if you know when you're going to face the assassin, you can optimize for the other compositions and then just reorganize when you are to face the assassins,drastically reducing their effectiveness without affecting your performance against other compositions.
Unkn0wN (NA)
: Put the player you fight each round on a cycle instead of RNG
So, if you're the only one going assassins, rather than everyone needing to balance between protecting key champions while leaving others open because everyone else will be attacking from the front, now they just watch the rotation and move their tanks to the back when they face you, completely negating your strategy at no cost to their performance against anyone else?
Subdue (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=UnstoppableMaybe,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=4KQOc3It,comment-id=000200000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-18T01:06:35.571+0000) > > If you can't follow the Links provided to find the answers, that's not my problem, because that's on you at that point. Also denying the truth is no surprise from you apparently. $200 doesn't show up in either of those links. And in the one that you posted, you incorrectly list the price of the Little Legends too. Like I said, all misinformation.
> [{quoted}](name=UnstoppableMaybe,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=4KQOc3It,comment-id=00020000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-18T01:36:47.472+0000) > > Not true, and you can find the answer from several buyers who actually wasted the money to find Little Legends they wanted, and the fact that you can spend up to $200 to finally max evolve a Legendary is ridiculous, not to mention that not everyone comes to the Forums to explain the problem. However in this Link which I already provided several times, shows the clear as day possibilities and answers whether you like them or not. Deny it all you want, but there are more who don't buy Little Legends currently, than those who buy if you're smart enough to comprehend this given the industries statistics based on failing gambling system results. Think what you want, but the facts are facts. Something you can't coverup, is not only the possibility of players who can spend up to $200 for maxing a Legendary evolved egg, but also that it's an absurd gambling system. Players have already admitted spending close to $200 all over the Forums, and they weren't dumb enough to keep purchasing in hopes for a Legendary to max evolve. > > Since so many are not willing to buy the Little Legends for the Legendaries due to the extreme low chance drop rates, that's a sign they should reconsider, and re-evaluate a proper way to buy the Little Legends based on their true worth like a respectful business that's more successful does. Also some of the comments in the Link were removed, even though the absurd cost is still proven true in the comments from actual buyers who pay close to $200, but aren't willing to pay more to waste money on these Little Legends Legendaries. You can chew on this for a while if you like. > {{champion:4}} > > > https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/teamfight-tactics/p7QvZW11-little-legends-series-egg-guide You're linking to what is at best anecdotal evidence, and at worst nothing at all. I'm not going to comb through pages and pages of posts, especially since you've already admitted it's not someone doing the math, it's someone whining about how much they've spent that you're referencing. Plus, your entire premise is completely wrong. You're not spending $200 for a Legendary. At worst, AT WORST, you're spending $170 and you're getting 18 (EIGHTEEN) Tier 3 Little Legends, 3 of which would be Legendaries, not ONE Legendary.
: If you can't follow the Links provided to find the answers, that's not my problem, because that's on you at that point. Also denying the truth is no surprise from you apparently.
> [{quoted}](name=UnstoppableMaybe,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=4KQOc3It,comment-id=000200000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-18T01:06:35.571+0000) > > If you can't follow the Links provided to find the answers, that's not my problem, because that's on you at that point. Also denying the truth is no surprise from you apparently. $200 doesn't show up in either of those links. And in the one that you posted, you incorrectly list the price of the Little Legends too. Like I said, all misinformation.
: Nothing you just said was anything but venting your sheer ignorance, while proving my point for those with actual logic, and I will have none of your ignorant insanity nonsense. You are angry, but you also lack logic at the same time. There is no reasoning with your ignorance at this point, and those who deny the truth...at least, not until they are in jail for some unnecessary disturbance you may be likely to be apart of, based on your level of intelligence which seems quite low to be honest. It's 100% apparent you fail to comprehend half of anything I say, and if I had you in an interview for work, I would not hire you because you would fail to comprehend enough requirements. Nothing you just said meant much, and I will just let you express yourself at this point, I've done my part, and told the truth. {{champion:4}}
> [{quoted}](name=UnstoppableMaybe,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=4KQOc3It,comment-id=0002000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-17T10:02:11.486+0000) > >-Snip- Formula for all of your posts thus far: "Blah Blah Blah Ad Hominem Blah Blah Blah no response to actual points Blah Blah Blah empty assumptions Blah Blah Blah." But here, I'll dumb it down for you as long posts seem to be a challenge for you to read. **Please show us the math on how you get to $200 for a legendary.**
: I think this subject is to complicated for you right now, and you now have nothing to defend justifying the games absurd gambling system for the Little Legends. You can have your opinion, but the facts outweigh your opinion. Your question shows me what I've posted is to much for you. {{champion:4}} > [{quoted}](name=Subdue,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=4KQOc3It,comment-id=00020000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-16T21:53:46.198+0000) > Edit: > > Also, your comment on how much effort it takes the make the Little Legends is asinine. How many hours did it take to build the game itself? How many hours does it take to maintain the game? To balance the game? To market the game? How much does it cost to run the servers that the game runs on? The cost of the Little Legends isn't just based on the work of the person who designs them. The cost includes all of the overhead that goes with it, because it's not like you're paying for Riot's electric bill directly. I understand your appreciation for efforts here, but all of that is nonsense when it comes to the Little Legends pricing. For example, if it costed me leasing a massive empty Factory Building with parking space, to mass produce some "Pens," and I paid for all the equipment to have pens made by expensive machinery, with employees to manage, and operate the machines...am I going to charge you $5,000.00 for a pen because of the labor to make them, and the bills that come with it for maintenance? The answer is absolutely not haha!! It comes down to how many they want to sell, how much can the item do to justify its cost and the competition in comparison, how attractive is it, how useful is it for the customer, and what makes the customer satisfied with their purchase. Facts are facts, but we're all entitled to our opinion. So if you just throw money at random crap because it took some effort, then feel free to.
> [{quoted}](name=UnstoppableMaybe,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=4KQOc3It,comment-id=00020000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-17T00:56:57.469+0000) > > I think this subject is to complicated for you right now, and you now have nothing to defend justifying the games absurd gambling system for the Little Legends. You can have your opinion, but the facts outweigh your opinion. Your question shows me what I've posted is to much for you. > {{champion:4}} > > I understand your appreciation for efforts here, but all of that is nonsense when it comes to the Little Legends pricing. For example, if it costed me leasing a massive empty Factory Building with parking space, to mass produce some "Pens," and I paid for all the equipment to have pens made by expensive machinery, with employees to manage, and operate the machines...am I going to charge you $5,000.00 for a pen because of the labor to make them, and the bills that come with it for maintenance? The answer is absolutely not haha!! It comes down to how many they want to sell, how much can the item do to justify its cost and the competition in comparison, how attractive is it, how useful is it for the customer, and what makes the customer satisfied with their purchase. Facts are facts, but we're all entitled to our opinion. So if you just throw money at random crap because it took some effort, then feel free to. It's cute that you attempt to sound condescending , but your poor business sense isn't really an argument for anything. You made a ridiculous qualification for why you think prices should be lower based on your analysis of the effort to design a Little Legend, when the design of the Little Legend is probably the LEAST expensive cost that Riot would have to account for. It's not even the only error or exaggeration, or what have you that you've made in this thread. Here's an (incomplete) list of the stupid, and more importantly, WRONG things you've said. 1. Right up in the title: $200 for a Legendary Little Legend. It's at most $170, and at minimum less than $10. And, if you do end up spending up to $170, you won't have JUST the one you were trying to get, you'd have the entire series, which is 18 different Little Legends. 2. You claim that the pricing scheme for Little Legends is a gamble, but it's not. A gamble is when you risk losing something to possibly get something more valuable in return. This is a sale, just like those kids games where you put in a quarter and get a random toy. 3. You repeatedly reference how more people will buy the product if they lower the price. That's true, but it's also pointless. If they made the Little Legends 10 cents each even more people would buy them than at your price ranges, but that doesn't mean it would be **more profitable**. 4. You talk about Riot's "disrespectful greed" but the reality is that Riot is a business and businesses can and should function for a profit. You claim you're a graphics designer, so presumably you're employed. How come you haven't offered to have your pay cut in half? Price should have a floor where cost is, because if you're making less than the cost to operate, you won't be around for long. Beyond that, it should be driven by the market. This whole thread is an absurd misinformation campaign.
: Haha that is a funny comment, you made me laugh! First I didn't say I don't like them, but the meaning useless means that they do nothing for the gameplay experience, so they shouldn't charge as much as other items that do far more during gameplay. River Sprite is by far the most generic looking Little Legend, and I can tell you if the Little Legend everyone had was the Brambleback RuneSpirit (if it were no longer a Legendary) instead of the River Sprite, I wouldn't need any other Little Legends, because that's my favorite until they likely release others I like just as much, which I can purchase if they price them reasonably with logic. {{sticker:galio-happy}} So no, it has nothing to do with how Legendary, or Common it is, it's a matter of if I actually like its qualities or personality personally. It just so happens the 1 I like is a Legendary, and the price is ridiculous! If you really look at your last comment, there isn't much you can defend at this point that makes a valuable point for Riot, that others like myself don't already know. Still I respect your effort, but this is the truth. Not to mention the simplicity difference between champion skins that require lots of animations, and special effects as well, with consideration of stat inputs from coding, and the abilities to balance out. Compared to a Little Legend that is clearly a cash grab, for an easy way to earn money without making Champions and simply a rip off for the price at this point, considering what goes into the champion skins, and the champion itself in comparison to a Little Legend! I can't believe they charge more for a Little Legend, without a guarantee, than a Champion skin which is guaranteed, so I refuse to buy any Eggs until they respect us with a reasonable pricing, or I will gladly buy items from War-Frame instead, or skins of Champions in League of Legends. Simple as that haha!
> [{quoted}](name=UnstoppableMaybe,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=4KQOc3It,comment-id=000200000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-16T22:09:26.671+0000) > > Haha that is a funny comment, you made me laugh! > > First I didn't say I don't like them, but the meaning useless means that they do nothing for the gameplay experience, so they shouldn't charge as much as other items that do far more during gameplay. > > River Sprite is by far the most generic looking Little Legend, and I can tell you if the Little Legend everyone had was the Brambleback RuneSpirit (if it were no longer a Legendary) instead of the River Sprite, I wouldn't need any other Little Legends, because that's my favorite until they likely release others I like just as much, which I can purchase if they price them reasonably with logic. > > {{sticker:galio-happy}} > > So no, it has nothing to do with how Legendary, or Common it is, it's a matter of if I actually like its qualities or personality personally. It just so happens the 1 I like is a Legendary, and the price is ridiculous! If you really look at your last comment, there isn't much you can defend at this point that makes a valuable point for Riot, that others like myself don't already know. Still I respect your effort, but this is the truth. > > Not to mention the simplicity difference between champion skins that require lots of animations, and special effects as well, with consideration of stat inputs from coding, and the abilities to balance out. Compared to a Little Legend that is clearly a cash grab, for an easy way to earn money without making Champions and simply a rip off for the price at this point, considering what goes into the champion skins, and the champion itself in comparison to a Little Legend! I can't believe they charge more for a Little Legend, without a guarantee, than a Champion skin which is guaranteed, so I refuse to buy any Eggs until they respect us with a reasonable pricing, or I will gladly buy items from War-Frame instead, or skins of Champions in League of Legends. Simple as that haha! Literally nothing that Riot charges for affects gameplay experience. What are you comparing them to?
: It's not "devaluing," if the value is based on logic, and how much the Little Legends can do, while also considering what other games offer that specialize in fields like Little Legends such as Poke'mon. In this case it's simply decreasing the price, to a value that is should be. At that point, it would be shameful or devaluing the Little Legends, if they sold cheaper than what they should go for. With all this said if it's not to much for you to comprehend, I would say $25 for a guaranteed Legendary Little Legend of any choice is something I would buy to evolve it 3 times, and I can guarantee you that more people would buy it knowing they get what they're after by paying up to $75 just to have it evolve. However, I might not buy at a price of $25 3x, because I honestly feel they deserve the price range around $10-$15 3x since they aren't a big deal, and other items or skins in the game deserve their price ranges, because they do more for the overall experience than an expressive money grabbing useless Little Legend. Also players would buy other Little Legends than the Legendaries, because some players want to collect all the Little Legends to mix things up, or for bragging rights. Some players also want more than 1 specific Little Legend, that is likely "not Legendary," because they don't care for how the Legendaries may look compared to some cheaper options. The price range for the other Little Legends below Legendaries can be decided after they've established their Legendaries price range, and compare them properly. Once they've attempted to fix this issue, I can tell you more about whether it's reasonable or not overall. Little Legends will actually sell more, if they price them properly, and hopefully you can comprehend this, because evaluation isn't always easy for everyone! Not to mention I would rather see more Champions introduced to the game with new skins, than see Riot focus to much on useless Little Legends. Little Legends should not sell like they matter more than Champion skins, and they won't sell as well unless they drop the price to be reasonable and respectful. {{sticker:garen-swing}} Also why would I spend even $15 on a Little Legend, if I can buy several awesome skins for my favorite champions instead, or save up for more champions to use as they release more? The price range even at $15 is a bit much in this case, so I would say $10 or less for Legendary Little Legends is their best way to sell more to the masses. Consider how EA lost millions of dollars on Star Wars Battlefront 2 and Anthem, because their prices for useless crap was set to high, and the logical masses didn't allow their bs! {{champion:3}} (Reasonable, and guarantees more buyers to try the Little Legends since they're so useless. Nothing screams "try me" than these fair price ranges, or at least around these prices...) Legendaries: $10 Rares: $8 Epics: $6 Commons: $4 (perhaps an added variant type?) All they have to do to make these Little Legends, is give them basic animations through rigging the design, and create their look, so my guess is as a 3D Designer myself, they probably take around 8 hours or less to design in concept, and 3D design it. Then animate it taking another 8 hours with evaluation before release. So 16 hours to make a Little Legend, that doesn't even attack or have story like a Poke'mon! The point is that they should be priced for their worth, not out of disrespectful greed. Please change this Riot. Also I use Autodesk 3ds Max, Autodesk Maya, Photoshop, and Zbrush as my main 3D design software. Then Cinema 4D, Blender, Unreal Engine, and Unity depending on certain tasks, such as FBX import or export. https://i.imgur.com/AoQ4bdy.png[/img] https://i.imgur.com/WTVbsHQ.png[/img] https://i.imgur.com/rOVoSKI.png[/img]
> [{quoted}](name=UnstoppableMaybe,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=4KQOc3It,comment-id=0002000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-16T21:12:09.803+0000) > > Snip. You keep saying Little Legends are useless, but if they are useless, why do you care what they cost? Why would you even buy any of them? At the end of the day, Little Legends just like champion skins are 100% cosmetic, and their utility is entirely in how they're perceived. If everyone has the same thing, it is not legendary, it is just normal. Here's the truthbomb on this skin stuff: The River Sprite is 100% the most unique Little Legend. It has no variants, and none of the other Little Legends look anything remotely like it. However, everyone has it, so it means nothing. Edit: Also, your comment on how much effort it takes the make the Little Legends is asinine. How many hours did it take to build the game itself? How many hours does it take to maintain the game? To balance the game? To market the game? How much does it cost to run the servers that the game runs on? The cost of the Little Legends isn't just based on the work of the person who designs them. The cost includes all of the overhead that goes with it, because it's not like you're paying for Riot's electric bill directly.
: Exactly, so I'm saying I would prefer $10-$15 for buying the "Legendary series egg" guaranteed (not just any egg), because gambling to get it is absolutely ridiculous right now! Since it literally does nothing for gameplay except express like a pet, it only makes sense it's $15 or much less similar to a Hextech Chest which offers even more that Little Legends. It's beta so we can expect changes soon if they aren't as greedy as I think right now.
> [{quoted}](name=UnstoppableMaybe,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=4KQOc3It,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-07-16T20:02:40.051+0000) > > Exactly, so I'm saying I would prefer $10-$15 for buying the "Legendary series egg" guaranteed (not just any egg), because gambling to get it is absolutely ridiculous right now! Since it literally does nothing for gameplay except express like a pet, it only makes sense it's $15 or much less similar to a Hextech Chest which offers even more that Little Legends. It's beta so we can expect changes soon if they aren't as greedy as I think right now. The counter argument would be that making Legendaries that cheap devalues them. If a Legendary is $10, what do you price the Rares at? And if Legendaries are that cheap, who would buy the Rares or even the Epics? Do Legendaries still _feel_ Legendary if multiple people have them in every game?
: Little Legends Insane Gambling System for "1" Legend (2% chance at Legendary, and $200 wasted)!!?
I am not a fan of having to gamble for the Little Legends instead of being able to buy them outright, but your math is WAY off. In any series, there are 18 variants (3 legendary, 6 Epic, 9 Rare). Each variant has 3 levels, and when you've reached the 3rd level of any variant, it is removed from the possible pool. That means completing the entire series will require 54 Eggs. Since you can buy Eggs in batches of 11 for 4900 RP, it would take 5 batches to complete the series (4.9 batches actually, so you'd have an egg leftover). At 4900 RP per batch, that's 24500 RP to complete a series. 24500 RP is about $170 in RP ($100 = 15000, $50 = 7200, $20 = 2800, $170 = 25000 RP). That means a collection which includes the 3rd level of all 18 Little Legends, including 3 Legendaries, in a series costs about $170, which breaks down to about $9.44 per Little Legends, or if you consider each level a separate Little Legend, then it's about $3.15 per Little Legend. I imagine the reason they did the lootbox system is to keep the Legendaries rare, which makes a bit of sense. The Legendaries wouldn't _feel_ Legendary if everyone had them, which is what would happen if they were priced the same as the others. If they didn't do the lootbox system, what would they need to price the Legendaries at to keep them as rare?
: Can we stop with the "Play x rounds to 20 quest"?
The quest is a reward for playing the game, a game which you play /for fun/. If you're not enjoying the quest, don't do the quest. Geez.
: here man, dom fucking nails it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-UBik4mr0o game quality is non-existent anymore. why is that? cause the ladder is fucked with the number of grandfathered in accounts. make it a annual 10 year thing, because people experience life and what not, where the ladder/s get hard reset. where mmr get's hard reset, everyone starts at 1200 and we sort the wheat from the chaff. it's fucking god damn near unplayable no matter which queue i use or account i use, there are no quality games to be found win or lose. it's the fucking craziest thing ever. the games mechanics right now are top notch. there are very little balance complaints. it feels gr8 to handle my own character, but the character has to interact with not only the enemy team but my own team too, and that is where it all goes pear shaped because not everyone is thinking at the same mmr/rank/skill level. and it's fucking tripe with the current setup of the game (which itself is not bad) so fucking reset the goddamn ladder. especially after this nubrac escapade and people playing all the most useless shit everywhere
> [{quoted}](name=preternatural,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=J72VH5zg,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-07-15T23:15:04.136+0000) > > here man, dom fucking nails it. > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-UBik4mr0o > > game quality is non-existent anymore. > why is that? cause the ladder is fucked with the number of grandfathered in accounts. > make it a annual 10 year thing, because people experience life and what not, where the ladder/s get hard reset. > where mmr get's hard reset, everyone starts at 1200 and we sort the wheat from the chaff. > it's fucking god damn near unplayable no matter which queue i use or account i use, there are no quality games to be found win or lose. > it's the fucking craziest thing ever. > > the games mechanics right now are top notch. > there are very little balance complaints. > it feels gr8 to handle my own character, but the character has to interact with not only the enemy team but my own team too, and that is where it all goes pear shaped because not everyone is thinking at the same mmr/rank/skill level. > > and it's fucking tripe with the current setup of the game (which itself is not bad) > so fucking reset the goddamn ladder. > especially after this nubrac escapade and people playing all the most useless shit everywhere The ladder is already soft reset every season. No one in Diamond today was in Diamond at the start of the Season. They climbed to Diamond from around Gold beating other Gold and Platinum players. Unless your argument is that Diamond players can't beat Bronze and Silver players but CAN beat Gold and Platinum players, the only thing that a hard reset accomplishes is Bronze and Silver players getting their teeth kicked in and Platinum and Diamond players having boring, uncompetitive games.
: if the ladder is actually working then hard reset it.
All this would accomplish would be to make games miserable for Silver players and below, as they get stomped hard every single game where they end up with a Plat+ player in it. People have done the experiments already. Heck, climbing the ladder consistently is repeatable to the point where there are people who MAKE MONEY doing it for other people.
: > [{quoted}](name=Subdue,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=9b2J2isw,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-07-15T02:33:10.909+0000) > > Maybe 6 Yordle is a little too strong, but I think it needs to be pretty strong considering how hard it is to get it. First, you need to be at least level 6, and then you have to accumulate a Tier 4 and 3 Tier 3 champions. And, if you don't want to completely melt, At least some of them need to be Silvers. Plus, what you're doing is very visible to everyone who bothers to look at your board, since you'll most likely have a leveled Tristana and several yordles on your bench or on the field, so anyone who's paying attention should start buying up Gnars and Veigars even if they don't need them, just to slow you down. > > If you manage to get a Yordle team together despite all those hurdles, the reward for doing so should be very substantial. pick all Yordles, upgrade them best you can like any match.... doesn't seen that hard to me really
> [{quoted}](name=Kokudilandau,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=9b2J2isw,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-07-15T18:05:49.352+0000) > > pick all Yordles, upgrade them best you can like any match.... doesn't seen that hard to me really The first level of Yordle can't be accessed until you pick up 3 of them, which means if you go straight to Yordle, you end up with something like Tristana + Lulu + Kennen/Poppy/Veigar. But with Kennen/Poppy/Veigar all being Level 3s, within any given round your probability of getting even one of them is only 7.5%. And even if you manage to get them, 3 Yordle only gives you 30% chance to miss, which when you're looking at squishy champions like most of the Yordles, excluding Poppy and post-transformation Gnar, and it's not a huge factor. Compare this to the early game of other strategies: Noble: Two paths to early combos: Vayne/Garen/Fiora+Lucian. This gives a very strong buff in the very early, and Garen is solid with a build or even a Morellonomicon build. Void: Another really strong start with Kassadin/Khazix/Rek/Sai. Transitions easily into Assassins setups. This is the same for many combinations, somewhat reliable early game that can transition into a late game. With Yordles though, you don't have a reliable early game. Most likely you do something like Gunslinger/Pirates or Wild/Sorcerer/ and then try to transition, which involves basically building champions on your bench and switching them in when you managed to build them, while at the same time building what's actually on the field so you don't get wiped before your Yordles are ready. This causes both economy strains and space issues on your bench. So no, it's not just pick all Yordles and upgrade as best you can.
: "I'd rather have a 10 minute queue and be put as my role than a 2 minute queue and be autofilled"
The real issue is that when some people are auto-filled, rather than play the game they'll dodge, which sends all the players back into queue, and starts the process all over again. Because some people are doing this, the people who don't do this are experiencing more auto-fills than they should be. What SHOULD happen is that players who have dodged after being auto-filled should be flagged prioritized for auto-filling when they queue up again, until they've completed an auto-fill game. They should also lose the auto-fill protection that is usually granted by playing an auto-filled game.
: you should only qualify for autofill if your q timer goes above 5 minutes
I think the real issue is people dodging when Auto-Filled, which results in more people needing to auto-fill and game quality degrading. Right now the process is as follows: 1. Game attempts to create a match within an MMR bracket of players in their primary roles. 2. If any roles aren't filled with a player in their primary role, it attempts to fill with players in their secondary role. 3. If any roles remain unfilled by players in their primary or secondary role, it attempts to fill with players who don't have auto-fill protection. 4. If it can't find anyone after step 3 it increases the size of the bracket and repeats steps 1-3. The real issue is that when some people are auto-filled, rather than play the game they'll dodge, which sends all the players back into queue, and starts the process all over again. Because some people are doing this, the people who don't do this are experiencing more auto-fills than they should be. What SHOULD happen is that players who have dodged after being auto-filled should be flagged prioritized for auto-filling when they queue up again, until they've completed an auto-fill game. They should also lose the auto-fill protection that is usually granted by playing an auto-filled game.
: Getting Cheesed by Yordle Late Game
Maybe 6 Yordle is a little too strong, but I think it needs to be pretty strong considering how hard it is to get it. First, you need to be at least level 6, and then you have to accumulate a Tier 4 and 3 Tier 3 champions. And, if you don't want to completely melt, At least some of them need to be Silvers. Plus, what you're doing is very visible to everyone who bothers to look at your board, since you'll most likely have a leveled Tristana and several yordles on your bench or on the field, so anyone who's paying attention should start buying up Gnars and Veigars even if they don't need them, just to slow you down. If you manage to get a Yordle team together despite all those hurdles, the reward for doing so should be very substantial.
: > [{quoted}](name=Subdue,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=e1PhiXWu,comment-id=001000000000,timestamp=2019-07-12T05:02:12.170+0000) > > Right... which is why it's a strategy. If there were no downside it would just be the way to play. Yes, but my point is that the better team guy, at that moment, followed the worse strategy. In my experience, the one with more health almost always ends up winning at least one of the ensuing lengthy series of fights, and therefore the match.
> [{quoted}](name=Kazymandias,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=e1PhiXWu,comment-id=0010000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-14T15:36:38.447+0000) > > Yes, but my point is that the better team guy, at that moment, followed the worse strategy. In my experience, the one with more health almost always ends up winning at least one of the ensuing lengthy series of fights, and therefore the match. I'm pretty sure at this point you're just arguing for the sake of arguing, and with pointless anecdotal evidence at that. I never once claimed that any one strategy is better than any other strategy. I simply pointed out that being lower in HP does not mean someone is "doing badly" as the original post suggests, and that there are reasons to /intentionally/ lose HP to gain other advantages.
: How can you possibly make ranked in such an RNG mode?
How do they have poker tournaments when the cards you're dealt are random...
LeoiJw (NA)
: So literally fold (Quit) every single time you get a bad hand? Such a grand idea.
> [{quoted}](name=LeoiJw,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=gcAfG3wO,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-07-12T16:11:02.541+0000) > > So literally fold (Quit) every single time you get a bad hand? > > Such a grand idea. ^ How to Lose at Poker 101.
tooomine (NA)
: This game is not fun or meaningful.
There's so much misinformation in this post. It's like you played one game and decided you knew everything about the game. I'll name a few: 1. Silver level of most champions is sufficient most of the time, and getting to Silver for any common is easy. Getting to Gold is nice, but not at the cost of falling way behind in levels or missing out on getting a silver of rarer champions. A Silver Gnar for example is much more valuable to your team than a Gold Tristana over a Silver Tristana. 2. Income is limited for a reason. You're supposed to be making meaningful decisions about what to buy, not just buying everything. Do you take the two Tristanas now even though you were planning to go Nobles and have one Vayne and one Garen already? 3. BE value and age of a champion have nothing to do with the tier. Ashe is a Rare and she's also 450 BE. 4. Putting more power into combinations rather than individual champions allows for more counterplay. If you see someone getting strong with a combo, you can try to buy some of their key components to slow them down. Imagine if Katarina didn't need the assassins bonus to melt your team. Then with the acquisition of just 3 champs, someone suddenly stomps your comp. 5. Buying XP is dependent on what strategy you're trying to employ. If you're going Shapeshifter for example, you probably want to buy early levels because your build is more reliant on rarer champions like Shyvana, Gnar, and Aurelion Sol. Same with Glacial. If you're going Nobles, you can afford to focus on Econ more, because your bread and butter champions like Vayne and Garen are commons, and you can get by with a base Kayle and a base Leona.
dAsKiLzZ (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Rycerz,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=waxsskP1,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-07-11T21:57:42.165+0000) > > Yes they do. > > There was a high profile case of a streamer getting banned for trolling his teammates not a month ago. > > The issue is is that it's significantly harder to tell when people are *actually* intentionally feeding or trolling (aside from super obvious cases) or if they are simply having a bad game or actually unskilled. Riot has to err on the side of caution to not punish people that are innocent. > > When a case of trolling or feeding is verified to be accurate, then it is an instant 14 day ban, as opposed to chat toxicity, which has two chat restrictions first before any bans. Its funny how you say he was trolling, but he says he was intentionally playing to win not to lose/troll, also a Rioter said what he was doing was fine. If you can please explain how that works.
> [{quoted}](name=dAsKiLzZ,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=waxsskP1,comment-id=00020003,timestamp=2019-07-12T17:01:51.355+0000) > > Its funny how you say he was trolling, but he says he was intentionally playing to win not to lose/troll, also a Rioter said what he was doing was fine. > > If you can please explain how that works. What's funny is that you're asking for a player review feature and then telling everyone that their review the Nubrac case is wrong. Given that the majority of players agrees that Nubrac deserved the penalty, if we had the player review feature you're asking for, more people would be penalized for doing things you are arguing should be allowed.
dAsKiLzZ (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=CharDeeMcDenniz,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=waxsskP1,comment-id=00020001000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-12T15:21:19.565+0000) > > considering we had to put up with WEEKS of posts about this there is plenty of info available and I'm trying to avoid necro'ing it... > > but if you insist... > > many other streamers have been quoted as saying such. > > check out Hotaru's post here, https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/NYE7tJKH-a-statement-about-nightblue > > in particular, this > > ForestWithin - > > "Half of reddit unironically defending nubrac is so disgusting - the kid actively ruins every game by picking teemo support and laning top/mid. Sitting invis in the middle of lane soaking xp while bot is 2v1 hahahah. This shit isn’t revolutionizing the meta it’s 400 games 48% wr" > > IreliaCarriesU - > > "nubrac has been a troll since season 4, i don't know why anyone is pitying him for the ban... no one signs up to play duo mid and solo adc when they queue for ranked, its an obvious stunt and people are falling for it. if anything nightblue did the high elo community a favor" > > Jensen - > > "imagine having a teemo support soaking xp mid and calling it a 'off meta strat' 🤣🤣 > > hopefully i'll never have to experience this strat :)" > > Doublelift - > > "guys if I was in my promo and game 5 a teemo support ran mid and soaked xp while I got zoned 1v2 I would 100% report it no questions asked" Would you look at that, no proof to show that Nubrac did it on purpose to annoy people, very funny. This is just players disagreeing with his strat. Just because you disagree makes you right and him wrong? You also agreed off meta stuff is NOT against the rules. So explain how ban is justified.
> [{quoted}](name=dAsKiLzZ,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=waxsskP1,comment-id=000200010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-12T15:50:59.485+0000) > > Would you look at that, no proof to show that Nubrac did it on purpose to annoy people, very funny. This is just players disagreeing with his strat. Just because you disagree makes you right and him wrong? You also agreed off meta stuff is NOT against the rules. So explain how ban is justified. Man, when you are so focused on arguing that you don't even realize your position has been reversed. You started this thread with "Why don't trolls get banned," and now you're arguing "You have no proof of trolling!" You asked for a player review system, and now, looking at the extensive response to the Nubrac situation and what the result of player review would have been, you're arguing that the player review would be wrong...
kmada (NA)
: ***
> [{quoted}](name=kmada,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=waxsskP1,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-07-11T21:54:09.210+0000) > > They used to have a system like that called the Tribunal, but not enough people were getting perm banned so they wern't making as much profit on people rebuying champs/skins. > > Now the ban rate is up 300% and profits are up, they are not gonna go back to the old way. > > It's all about the benjamins man. The whole "They permaban players to make more money" conspiracy theory is by far the stupidest, most idiotic one to ever thrive on these boards. It is a theory which assumes that the player getting banned does not believe he deserves to be banned, yet proceeds to create a new account AND _spend more money_. If you randomly got kicked out of a restaurant after paying but before you ate your meal, would you go back to that restaurant? If you randomly got kicked out of a movie theater halfway through the movie, would you go back to that theater? If the cashier at a retail store takes your money but won't let you leave with the products you purchased, would you go back to that store? **Can you name ANY other scenario where a perceived loss of something you paid for would result in you spending MORE at the establishment responsible for your loss?**
: > [{quoted}](name=Subdue,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=e1PhiXWu,comment-id=0010,timestamp=2019-07-12T01:01:39.181+0000) > > The flaw in the argument that the original post makes is that it equates losing HP early on with "Doing badly." HP is a resource in this game, and can be traded for an advantage elsewhere. The concept of forgoing something in the early game for an advantage in the late game is not unique to TFT either. In RTS games like Starcraft for example, it is a common to forgo an early army in exchange for an early expansion. A huge difference here is that you can build a strong army later in Starcraft, while the lost HP in TFT is gone forever. If you lose most of your health before you're strong, all it takes is one accidental wipe by another player and you're out. If it's down to two players, one with a better team but low health, and one with a weak team but high health, the weak team guy has a bunch of tries, the better team guy can't lose even once or he's out.
> [{quoted}](name=Kazymandias,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=e1PhiXWu,comment-id=00100000,timestamp=2019-07-12T04:59:20.264+0000) > > A huge difference here is that you can build a strong army later in Starcraft, while the lost HP in TFT is gone forever. If you lose most of your health before you're strong, all it takes is one accidental wipe by another player and you're out. > > If it's down to two players, one with a better team but low health, and one with a weak team but high health, the weak team guy has a bunch of tries, the better team guy can't lose even once or he's out. Right... which is why it's a strategy. If there were no downside it would just be the way to play.
: It is not random, is just bad design. For example fight the same player on the first 3 rounds is ridiculous.They should fix the fights.
> [{quoted}](name=Light of Madness,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=OBqJd2Ly,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-07-11T06:40:18.815+0000) > > It is not random, is just bad design. > > For example fight the same player on the first 3 rounds is ridiculous.They should fix the fights. You clearly don't understand how random works.
Kalixin (NA)
: 100% Guaranteed unit spawn
No this is silly. If you're the third player, you see two people with 3 star Nidalees already, and you still burn 60 gold on trying to get one, you've made a huge error.
: Rewards For Doing Badly > Rewards For Doing Well
The flaw in the argument that the original post makes is that it equates losing HP early on with "Doing badly." HP is a resource in this game, and can be traded for an advantage elsewhere. The concept of forgoing something in the early game for an advantage in the late game is not unique to TFT either. In RTS games like Starcraft for example, it is a common to forgo an early army in exchange for an early expansion. Lack of an early army makes one susceptible to an early loss if the enemy decides to rush (a very early attack), but benefits the player if the player survives the early game, by allowing them to have an economic advantage over their opponent. Likewise, in TFT a player can forgo a resource, HP and win gold, to gain an advantage elsewhere, items.
Totpoter (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Subdue,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=mLzeATxU,comment-id=00000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-10T23:14:54.303+0000) > > Sounds like cowardice to me. Like I give a shit, it's a fucking game tough guy it's not meant to be taken seriously
> [{quoted}](name=Totpoter,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=mLzeATxU,comment-id=000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-10T23:19:05.967+0000) > > Like I give a shit, it's a fucking game tough guy it's not meant to be taken seriously Pretty ironic coming from someone who has already admitted he only "trash talks" online.
: I ************* secondary.
Are you complaining that you always get your primary, never your secondary, or are you complaining that you never get either, and always end up Auto-Fill?
Totpoter (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Subdue,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=mLzeATxU,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-10T22:38:37.352+0000) > > I think the better question is, when did advocating self harm become acceptable in any social context? Would you say it to a classmate? A colleague at work? Or is it something you save for when you're behind the anonymity of a computer screen? YES! IT IS SOMETHING I SAY ONLINE! It's called trashtalking and it's quite popular in literally all online games, maybe you've heard of it? How can you be this offended by some shit that was said over the internet and not even directed towards you. It's literally a phrase, get over it.
> [{quoted}](name=Totpoter,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=mLzeATxU,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-10T23:11:50.906+0000) > > YES! IT IS SOMETHING I SAY ONLINE! It's called trashtalking and it's quite popular in literally all online games, maybe you've heard of it? > How can you be this offended by some shit that was said over the internet and not even directed towards you. It's literally a phrase, get over it. Sounds like cowardice to me.
Totpoter (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=mLzeATxU,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-07-10T22:05:16.206+0000) > > The act of encouraging another human being to commit suicide for **any** reason (minus a few extremely rare exceptions such as terminal illness, which don’t apply in League ever at all by a long shot) should offend **everyone**. > > It’s absolutely unacceptable to encourage another human being to commit suicide simply because you are unhappy with them. Bruh how can you be this offended by a simple phrase over the internet, no one takes that shit seriously and you know it too this is why people stop playing your game, when a simple 3 letter phrase can get you banned for 14 days
> [{quoted}](name=Totpoter,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=mLzeATxU,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-07-10T22:34:42.001+0000) > > Bruh how can you be this offended by a simple phrase over the internet, no one takes that shit seriously and you know it too > this is why people stop playing your game, when a simple 3 letter phrase can get you banned for 14 days I think the better question is, when did advocating self harm become acceptable in any social context? Would you say it to a classmate? A colleague at work? Or is it something you save for when you're behind the anonymity of a computer screen?
Ginnjo (EUW)
: Problematic Weekly Mission
You don't need any special luck to complete this mission. Round 11 is actually the THIRD carousel if you count the carousel at the very beginning of the game, and it's very easy to get level 6 by this round. Please note that missions aren't credited until the game ends, which means even if you lose (or quit) early, it won't giving you credit until everyone is out of the game.
kriegnes (EUW)
: having a shared pool sucks anyways
> [{quoted}](name=kriegnes,realm=EUW,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=UFbkogPc,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-07-10T21:13:58.561+0000) > > having a shared pool sucks anyways Agreed. Card games are best played where everyone uses their own deck...
: The Solution to the Teamfight Tactics RNG Debate
Or just hide the same number of items within the creeps in each round for each player. Players, if they feel the cognitive imperative to do so, can blame their loss on the randomness of the item they got, while the rest of us more rational players can see fair games as fair.
: > [{quoted}](name=Subdue,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=xcv4Qrev,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-10T15:07:32.351+0000) > > I think Kai explained it extensively, but it's actually pretty easy to understand in concept, if you understand how it works. > > 1. The players in your games generally have similar MMRs. > > 2. Players with higher MMR are generally better than players with lower MMR. > > 3. As you win, your MMR goes up, and as you lose, your MMR goes down. > > 4. Because of #2 and #3 above, as you win, the players you are playing with and against are better and better. > > 5. Because of #4 above, your overall impact on the game decreases. Imagine you're playing basketball with 9 3rd graders. Now imagine you're playing basketball with 9 18 year olds. > > 6. Because of #4 and #5 above, eventually the players you're playing with and against are as good or better than you are. Then, your ability to win is equal to or even less than your opponents, and you start to lose. > > The net effect of this is that players will rubberband between the MMR where they are so much better than the players in the game that they win most of their games and the MMR where they are so much worse than the players in the game that they lose most of their games. The range between these two values depends largely on the player, their playstyle, their temperment and so on. A consistent player has a much smaller range, while a more feast or famine player might have a larger one. Right my point is that i know i'm plat lvl since i've been there every season i played enought to be there, yet when i ranked and get placed silver 2, it can take 2-3 weeks just to get out of silver, most of the time because promos, specially silver 1 is filled with bad player. It shouldn't take me 3 month to go back when i know i'm plat. I don't play lol all that much and don
> [{quoted}](name=DarthArchon,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=xcv4Qrev,comment-id=00010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-10T15:18:27.310+0000) > > Right my point is that i know i'm plat lvl since i've been there every season i played enought to be there, yet when i ranked and get placed silver 2, it can take 2-3 weeks just to get out of silver, most of the time because promos, specially silver 1 is filled with bad player. It shouldn't take me 3 month to go back when i know i'm plat. I don't play lol all that much and don The ranked season is a year long. If it takes 2-3 weeks to climb 2 divisions, and you belong in plat and are starting in silver 2, that's about half a season to get back to plat, which doesn't seem excessive to me. That being said, Op.gg says you haven't ended a season higher than Gold 4 so...
: > [{quoted}](name=Kai Guy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=xcv4Qrev,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-07-10T09:16:30.636+0000) > > Some day I hope I start to see widespread support from boards users when I go on a rant about the massive impact player behavior systems make on quality of gameplay. What do you mean? I know that having seen other post of this kind saying that winning to much in a row and you start getting trolls and inter and it feel true to me. I guess that's a problem with algorithms that even the programmers don't understand.
> [{quoted}](name=DarthArchon,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=xcv4Qrev,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2019-07-10T14:23:11.864+0000) > > What do you mean? I know that having seen other post of this kind saying that winning to much in a row and you start getting trolls and inter and it feel true to me. > > I guess that's a problem with algorithms that even the programmers don't understand. I think Kai explained it extensively, but it's actually pretty easy to understand in concept, if you understand how it works. 1. The players in your games generally have similar MMRs. 2. Players with higher MMR are generally better than players with lower MMR. 3. As you win, your MMR goes up, and as you lose, your MMR goes down. 4. Because of #2 and #3 above, as you win, the players you are playing with and against are better and better. 5. Because of #4 above, your overall impact on the game decreases. Imagine you're playing basketball with 9 3rd graders. Now imagine you're playing basketball with 9 18 year olds. 6. Because of #4 and #5 above, eventually the players you're playing with and against are as good or better than you are. Then, your ability to win is equal to or even less than your opponents, and you start to lose. The net effect of this is that players will rubberband between the MMR where they are so much better than the players in the game that they win most of their games and the MMR where they are so much worse than the players in the game that they lose most of their games. The range between these two values depends largely on the player, their playstyle, their temperment and so on. A consistent player has a much smaller range, while a more feast or famine player might have a larger one.
KCentra (NA)
: 50 Gold in Inventory???
You need 50 unspent gold.
: Completed LvL 6 By round 11
I think this is much easier than people are making it out to be... If you purchase only the number of champions you can actually have on the board (max 4), don't refresh or buy levels early, and stick to 1-cost champions, you get this by round 10 easily with 20-30g to spare, even if you don't get win/loss streaks or pirates.
Minarde (NA)
: That distinction's highly dependent on individual differences (e.g. experience, skill, temperament). You're right that ARAM's randomness is front-loaded whereas TFT's randomness is spread throughout the match. However, there's opportunities to "make decisions that affect how the randomness affects you" both in TFT and in ARAM. Sure, there's times when you outright lose in champ select in ARAM, but there's also times in TFT when you get absolute trash and your opponents get perfect rolls. I think part of the reason some people feel more agency in TFT is because you're solo. There's always the option to blame someone else in ARAM, but in TFT, the consequences of your personal decisions are more noticeable. Moreover, "victory" and "defeat" are less rigid with the 1-8 ranking. Lastly, even if things go terribly wrong, you can simply leave the match without any consequences. Meanwhile, ARAM is handicapped by years of Riot neglect and a casual connotation. As such, players are that much more likely to give up and blame randomness instead of actually trying to win. Basically, rather than "TFT is poker and ARAM is a coin flip," it'd be a bit more accurate to say "TFT is Hold 'em and ARAM is Five-Card Draw." TFT involves small gambles over the course of a match, while ARAM involves adapting to your initial situation. If one is fitting for ranked, the other should be as well.
> [{quoted}](name=Minarde,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=wLi7zA61,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2019-07-10T00:35:40.210+0000) > > That distinction's highly dependent on individual differences (e.g. experience, skill, temperament). You're right that ARAM's randomness is front-loaded whereas TFT's randomness is spread throughout the match. However, there's opportunities to "make decisions that affect how the randomness affects you" both in TFT and in ARAM. Sure, there's times when you outright lose in champ select in ARAM, but there's also times in TFT when you get absolute trash and your opponents get perfect rolls. > > I think part of the reason some people feel more agency in TFT is because you're solo. There's always the option to blame someone else in ARAM, but in TFT, the consequences of your personal decisions are more noticeable. Moreover, "victory" and "defeat" are less rigid with the 1-8 ranking. Lastly, even if things go terribly wrong, you can simply leave the match without any consequences. > > Meanwhile, ARAM is handicapped by years of Riot neglect and a casual connotation. As such, players are that much more likely to give up and blame randomness instead of actually trying to win. > > Basically, rather than "TFT is poker and ARAM is a coin flip," it'd be a bit more accurate to say "TFT is Hold 'em and ARAM is Five-Card Draw." TFT involves small gambles over the course of a match, while ARAM involves adapting to your initial situation. If one is fitting for ranked, the other should be as well. First of all, the aggregate of a person's "individual differences" is MMR, the assumption being that the 10 players brought together are of similar levels of ability. Aside from situations where a person's ability has been estimated incorrectly by the system (a smurf on a new account, for example), It is extremely unlikely that you play your way out of a "bad draw" in ARAM. That said, the more pressing issue is that you have no way to interact with the randomness in ARAM. The coin has been flipped before you even see what the opponent has, and afterwards it's just slugging it out. In TFT, even if you don't get what you want, you have choices, and decisions you make can change your position. The randomness is a randomness that you can interact with. You can slow your opponents by grabbing up champions they need even if you don't need them. If your plan is shared by 4 other people, you can make the call to change gears. You can choose to play weak to take advantage of losing streaks, build up your economy, grab the best choices from the carousel, and spring back into the game. And by the way, poker isn't about the hands, it's about the betting. Whether your hands are strong or weak in poker, you can win, because the game is about psyching your opponents out. The same is not true with ARAM. Note: The only form of randomness in TFT that I think should be tweaked is in items. Against an equally skilled opponent, having a massive item disadvantage is crushing. Once that's tweaked, I think TFT is good to go for ranked.
: Dumbest thing I've heard
TFT is random like poker is random. There are strategies you can employ to deal with and take advantage of the randomness. You're able to make decisions that affect how the randomness affects you. ARAM is like flipping a coin. You have very little control over the random aspect (champ select) and limited ability to play around the randomness.
: Why not just guarantee an item drop from every creep?
The average number of items can remain the same, it just needs to be fixed across players. For example, you should be guaranteed 2 items during the krugs stage, but they should be hidden in two of the krugs. If you fail to kill all the krugs, you may not get both items, but as long as you kill all three you should get your 2 items. The items are still random, so you don't lose the component of "Making the best of..." As for champion RNG vs item RNG, item RNG is much more brutal. There are ways to mitigate champion RNG, such as focusing on Econ to re-roll heavily in the mid to late game, losing matchups giving you a lose streak bonus to aid in this, smart picking during the champion carousel, and flexibility to switch strategies based on what you see other people are doing, with a focus on what fewer (or no one) is picking up. There's literally nothing you can do about item RNG.
: What specifically can I do in this situation?
My choice in this situation would be to gank bot lane hard, and the first time you get a wipe down there, push hard to take the tower. Kog /Taric can switch with Kled then to put some pressure on Nasus and you have space to help Xerath. No guarantees that this would all work out, but if things aren't working out already, change the situation.
: > [{quoted}](name=Pxerkza,realm=EUNE,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=GFViivEE,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-07-05T14:18:26.454+0000) > > you have plenty of choices and options at every point in the game > regardless of champ drops or item drops > > if you are playing those options correctly and making the right choices of positioning and item prioritization and placing them on the correct champions Now define "correctly". As far as I can tell, "correctly" means "will mesh with the random future draws you get". in which case, you're using the wrong adjective. replace with "lucky". >if you don't like it you don't have to feel like you should >it's just not your type of game i agree it isnt my type of game. And its okay, riot can make games I dont like. I just object to them calling it "tactics".
> [{quoted}](name=Quil Evrything,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=GFViivEE,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-07-05T14:51:43.414+0000) > > Now define "correctly". > As far as I can tell, "correctly" means "will mesh with the random future draws you get". in which case, you're using the wrong adjective. replace with "lucky". > > i agree it isnt my type of game. And its okay, riot can make games I dont like. I just object to them calling it "tactics". Players are picking from a shared pool. This means if 4 of you are trying to get Vayne, you're probably not going to get a gold Vayne. You can see this by looking at other people's boards. However, the converse is also true. If you glance through everyone's board and notice no one is building Tristana, you can reasonably assume that if you go Tristana you'll make it to gold, as Tristana is a common and no one else is building her. In this scenario, trying to force Nobles even though you're competing with 3 other players for Vayne is likely poor choice, while switching to Gunslingers with Tristana as the centerpiece might be a better choice.
: RNGesus is not my Religion
I agree that items are the only RNG issue. Champion RNG can (should) be worked around by strategically choosing what champions to amass, but there's very little counterplay to someone have 5 items to your 0. I think the solution is pretty simple though. Hide a fixed number of items connected to a random enemy for each round, and grant the item if that enemy is killed during the round. If you fail to kill one or more of the enemies, you may not get the item(s) for that round. Randomness in the specific item you receive still allows for decision making and potential shifts in strategy.
: Man if you didn't read the thing why are you even answering? Based on your guess what the post is about? Read is again please. To sum up - the post is a theory on why is Riot banning for nothing instead of doing what other developers do (removing chat or letting toxic play with other toxic). The post is about why Riot pumping toxic players again into system is irrational and the suggestion is that they want money from them. What would YOU do if Rito would ban you? Would you quit? Or maybe just make a new account? Why would someone who is addicted to lol quit is just because he got banned? Wouldn't he just make a new account? And if so, what was the point of banning him in first place if he plays the game anyways? Your example with theater is wrong, this is a better example: You are a drug addict and you buy your stuff from some fellaz, but one day after you bought the stuff they beat you up and take it away from you. So what you do as the addict? Go up again to them and pay **again** for the stuff. That way the dealers **forced** you to pay twice.
> [{quoted}](name=Citizen Kayn,realm=EUNE,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=l2NKzNZT,comment-id=00020001,timestamp=2019-07-05T02:15:40.932+0000) > > Man if you didn't read the thing why are you even answering? Based on your guess what the post is about? > > > Read is again please. > To sum up - the post is a theory on why is Riot banning for nothing instead of doing what other developers do (removing chat or letting toxic play with other toxic). > The post is about why Riot pumping toxic players again into system is irrational and the suggestion is that they want money from them. > > What would YOU do if Rito would ban you? Would you quit? Or maybe just make a new account? > > Why would someone who is addicted to lol quit is just because he got banned? Wouldn't he just make a new account? And if so, what was the point of banning him in first place if he plays the game anyways? > > Your example with theater is wrong, this is a better example: > > You are a drug addict and you buy your stuff from some fellaz, but one day after you bought the stuff they beat you up and take it away from you. So what you do as the addict? Go up again to them and pay **again** for the stuff. > > That way the dealers **forced** you to pay twice. Let me get this straight. In this scenario, you're a drug addict. You bought drugs from your dealer, who then proceeded to beat you up and take the drugs back. Then you went back to the SAME dealer to buy more drugs, knowing he will just beat you up and take them back? If the argument you are trying to make is that people who get banned are not very intelligent, I'll have to concede that point to you.
Show more

Subdue

Level 98 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion