: Her range makes that a high risk/high reward part of her kit though. If she doesn't play it well, she gets destroyed. That being said, if you win against her in lane, rotate, and let her free farm minions for 10 minutes, yeah, you're gonna get destroyed later.
> [{quoted}](name=Demon DARK Wolf,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=jBzYTs3z,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2018-12-11T02:59:40.141+0000) > > Her range makes that a high risk/high reward part of her kit though. If she doesn't play it well, she gets destroyed. > > That being said, if you win against her in lane, rotate, and let her free farm minions for 10 minutes, yeah, you're gonna get destroyed later. To play devil's advocate here - she has Condemn and Tumble AND stealth from ult-Q (and MS towards enemies, which with how directions work is basically in every direction). Literally every other ability in her kit gives her self peel. She can mess up positioning and not be punished pretty easily. It's not like Kog'maw or Jinx or Sivir who really can't create a gap once the gap they have disappears.
: Uh you might have posted the wrong pic? That pic shows nothing about what the title of this thread says lol
> [{quoted}](name=IkkakuMadarame,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=VORnyPy6,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-12-11T03:57:38.868+0000) > > Uh you might have posted the wrong pic? That pic shows nothing about what the title of this thread says lol I think he's pointing out that it looks like Mundo stabbed himself in the back with that ice knife thing?
: > [{quoted}](name=Kingfireblast,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=sIpxcfxY,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-12-10T09:30:38.700+0000) > > I haven't played the game that long, but that is quite interesting. Transcendence gives you adaptive damage in return for that extra 20% and those items likely give other useful stats Hardly anything gave cdr so if you were playing a mage unless you wanted to build items that gave cdr with highly reduced ap and maybe no ap and some mana, standard builds gave 10-20% cdr max. Building 40% cdr on a mage was trolly at one point.....
> [{quoted}](name=videorfeak,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=sIpxcfxY,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2018-12-10T10:18:07.668+0000) > > Hardly anything gave cdr so if you were playing a mage unless you wanted to build items that gave cdr with highly reduced ap and maybe no ap and some mana, standard builds gave 10-20% cdr max. Building 40% cdr on a mage was trolly at one point..... Between scaling CDR glyphs (10% at 18 for 6, or 15% at 18 for 9), Morellonomicon (20% CDR back then) you could get 30% or 35% CDR quite easily. 10% more CDR from Blue buff or {{item:3100}} isn't a big stretch for a lot of mages. Sure... there weren't that many options (I distinctly remember Lich Bane being my choice to cap out CDR on Ahri back then, but there were obviously other 10% CDR Items available. Sometimes I went Lucidity) - but it was no where near trolly. Now, if you didn't run scaling CDR glyphs - that was on you. There were no other Glyphs worth going on mages - no reason to go scaling MR (late game if you get caught you're dead anyways), flat MR was generally unnecessary too (unless against a major lane bully like LeBlanc). AP Glyphs didn't give enough to really be worthwhile. The highest win rate rune setups at the time were scaling CDR for mages (9 or 6 + 3 flat MR) and attack speed for ADCs (even though it was a secondary stat for glyphs). You'd take Health Seals against mage lane opponents and Armour seals against AD. Then obviously Magic Pen marks. Quints could be AP or MS. However, most players probably only ran 2-4 rune pages. Having 10-20 obviously made a big difference in your options.
Rioter Comments
: >Since the creation of League, new players have not needed to climb through the depths of bronze. If you did well enough in placements, you could start in medium-high silver or even gold. if you did poorly in placements, you got put in low silver and would feed your way down to bronze. This happened to me when I first hit silver. The default MMR should be bronze ish, not iron, but for god's sake, definitely not silver.
> [{quoted}](name=Marshbouy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=yLdk4BnX,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2018-12-08T21:21:54.099+0000) > > if you did poorly in placements, you got put in low silver and would feed your way down to bronze. This happened to me when I first hit silver. The default MMR should be bronze ish, not iron, but for god's sake, definitely not silver. Just because you weren't adequately prepared for ranked when you first tried it, doesn't mean no one else is. As I mentioned in the OP, I placed Silver 1 and climbed to gold 5 in my first season of ranked. Default in low silver and falling to bronze made sense. Default Iron 4 and needing to climb is... illogical. I was better than bronze players before I hit level 15 (and I know this because I was consistently beating bronze and silver players in normal draft games despite not having runes or even the tier 7 mastery unlocked).
Rioter Comments
Jinxalot (NA)
: Why is Tyler1 a Celeb?
He drew too big of a fan base on Twitch. Riot lost a lot fighting him (i.e. viewership). They flipped ship and went full-on the idea that he has "reformed" and if the most toxic league player can totally turn it around and become "reformed" then so can everyone else. They're showboating him like crazy to try to convince people to reform. Even though his reform is from like 99.99th percentile of toxicity to like the 60th percentile... He only got the opportunity because he has so many viewers/fans though.
: This game would be better off without Yasuo in it
> [{quoted}](name=Blåbæret,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=mYxokdX0,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-12-07T03:24:17.738+0000) > > I honestly don't understand why this champion even exists. Look at his ban rates - when has it ever been below 50%? This champ is nothing but a tumor to everyone who just wants to have fun playing on the Rift. There is no fun with this champ present. It's hilarious how ONE champion can make a game miserable for both teams. Either rework him completely or delete him. People are tired of having to waste a ban on something that shouldn't exist. And then they release Akali in her current state. Probably for the sole purpose of lowering Yasuo's ban rate so they can call him a success?
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Sukishoo (NA)
: It's true, it's posted over in the dev section. I tried a game out on an unranked account as well and it's iron 4, however, it has 60+ points after that single game, so if you continue to win it goes up fast.
> [{quoted}](name=Sukishoo,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=yLdk4BnX,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2018-12-07T13:07:16.249+0000) > > It's true, it's posted over in the dev section. > > I tried a game out on an unranked a count as well and it's iron 4, however it has 60+ points after that single game, so if you continue to win it goes up fast. Even at 60 points per game and free promos, that's a maximum of 600 points for going 10-0, which puts you up to bronze 1. That's still worse than the old starting point. And that requires going 10-0, which would have given you a rank of gold 5 or higher (as high as gold 1) in past seasons. I'd be interested to see if that 60 points starts growing exponentially rather than linearly though. However on the flip side, losing a game or two would likely crush any exponential growth. And even a diamond calibre player does still lose the odd game with bronze/silver players. I watch a diamond 1/2 Smurf take a fresh account to diamond every season and he typically maintains around an 80% win rate while in Silver and Gold MMR.
: there are 2 push the cart events, the first one is back and forth push the cart, the second is push the cart defence, which works where one team trys to push the cart to one side while the other team tries to stop it from moving, and its a 1 min event if the countdown timer reaches 0 then the team defending wins.
> [{quoted}](name=DaenrysTargaryen,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=xux62vgw,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-12-07T00:01:03.714+0000) > > there are 2 push the cart events, the first one is back and forth push the cart, the second is push the cart defence, which works where one team trys to push the cart to one side while the other team tries to stop it from moving, and its a 1 min event if the countdown timer reaches 0 then the team defending wins. Oh wow, I definitely didn't notice this and it makes a lot of sense!! I don't think the timer is very clear then. I've never noticed a timer on my screen for this... Should be more obvious. Thanks for helping me understand though!!
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=ValyrianBlade,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=JkYoaOqM,comment-id=000000000001,timestamp=2018-12-01T14:31:29.409+0000) > > There are definitely patches where Jungle has too much impact. > > You can agree with the sentiment that jungle should have potentially the most impact on the early game, while still believing the gap is too large. > > Also - every role should have equal impact. This is achievable. Jungle can have the most impact early because it's the only role that gets to be present in every lane and influence the whole map. However you can have that impact fall off later into the game if the best tanks are restricted to top lane, and the best carries are restricted to mid/adc. Then while a jungler who made a big impact early can snowball that lead into a win - any game that makes it later would see jungler impact fall off as the higher-impact champions from other roles start imposing themselves in teamfights. Any jungler that wants to have that level of power in teamfights should have to sacrifice early-game impact (whether it's tank junglers with slower clears so they can't gank much, or carry junglers that have weak ganks and just focus on farming in the early game). > > If a jungler can both have a high impact in the early game (strong early ganks) AND scale into a commanding force in the late game (either a strong carry, or a tank wtih a lot of CC) - then that jungler's impact seems too high. All 5 players should have fairly equal "say" in whether their team wins or loses. In many cases, the jungler gets the strongest "say". All roles do have the same impact. It's just that when Riven is top going 5-0 they never leave the lane to help mid or their jungler. Same with 9-0 mid who never leaves mid, 5-0 carry who never leaves bot. etc.
> [{quoted}](name=Horrible Human,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=JkYoaOqM,comment-id=0000000000010000,timestamp=2018-12-01T14:35:26.396+0000) > > All roles do have the same impact. It's just that when Riven is top going 5-0 they never leave the lane to help mid or their jungler. > > Same with 9-0 mid who never leaves mid, 5-0 carry who never leaves bot. etc. In all those cases, the champion either roams (top/mid) or rotates (bot)...
LTK KoRo (EUW)
: Basically this. Jungle IS the most impactful role by design, and only stupid-ass nerfs can change that, but junglers as a champions aren't the most important/the strongest. Even carry junglers aren't... as carry as ADCs/Mages in lategame. If anyone thinks that jungle should be nerfed because it have the biggest impact, then also he should think about nerfing ADCs because they do too much damage, nerf Tanks because they're tanky, nerf Bruisers for having damage in melee range, etc etc.
> [{quoted}](name=LTK KoRo,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=JkYoaOqM,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-12-01T12:35:56.235+0000) > > Basically this. > > Jungle IS the most impactful role by design, and only stupid-ass nerfs can change that, but junglers as a champions aren't the most important/the strongest. > > Even carry junglers aren't... as carry as ADCs/Mages in lategame. > > If anyone thinks that jungle should be nerfed because it have the biggest impact, then also he should think about nerfing ADCs because they do too much damage, nerf Tanks because they're tanky, nerf Bruisers for having damage in melee range, etc etc. There are definitely patches where Jungle has too much impact. You can agree with the sentiment that jungle should have potentially the most impact on the early game, while still believing the gap is too large. Also - every role should have equal impact. This is achievable. Jungle can have the most impact early because it's the only role that gets to be present in every lane and influence the whole map. However you can have that impact fall off later into the game if the best tanks are restricted to top lane, and the best carries are restricted to mid/adc. Then while a jungler who made a big impact early can snowball that lead into a win - any game that makes it later would see jungler impact fall off as the higher-impact champions from other roles start imposing themselves in teamfights. Any jungler that wants to have that level of power in teamfights should have to sacrifice early-game impact (whether it's tank junglers with slower clears so they can't gank much, or carry junglers that have weak ganks and just focus on farming in the early game). If a jungler can both have a high impact in the early game (strong early ganks) AND scale into a commanding force in the late game (either a strong carry, or a tank wtih a lot of CC) - then that jungler's impact seems too high. All 5 players should have fairly equal "say" in whether their team wins or loses. In many cases, the jungler gets the strongest "say".
Dandilan (NA)
: Why midlaners no longer want blue?
> [{quoted}](name=Dandilan,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=jwr0byyG,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-11-30T16:58:29.414+0000) > > Some time ago, if you took second blue as a jungler, you woult get a lot of hate from mid laners. Now even if i offer them blue they say they don't want it. Why do you guys think that is happening? > > Mid mains, are you THAT confortable with your base mana regen right now? There was a while that junglers needed second blue to keep up on XP. We got used to not having it, and now would rather have you not fall behind. The Blue also makes us a big target for a gank, and with all the damage these days we don't want to die with it! We'd rather you give us a gank than the blue :) get me their blue :p
: If League is a pro sport, its players are sorely underpaid.
Wow are your stats ever off. Holy crap. First, a quick google of "Minimum NFL Salary" shows that the minimum is 450K, not 750K as you claim in your post. Second - that's NOT for players that will never step foot on the field. THOSE players, known as "Practice Squad Players" can have their salary found on the second result of the same search: $7600 per week. And I can only assume that they only get paid for 16 weeks, so that works out to $121.6K per season. Third: the top 3 NFL salaries right now? Jimmy Garoppolo, San Francisco 49ers. 2018 Cap Hit: $37 Million. Matthew Stafford, Detroit Lions. 2018 Cap Hit: $26.5 Million. Derek Carr, Oakland Raiders. 2018 Cap Hit: $25.0 Million. Sure, those are all between 8M and 50M as you claim, but you're implying 50M is possible. The top player makes 37M, and then 2nd and 3rd are only at HALF of your maximum... Then tennis... oh tennis. Holy crap. I didn't know a thing about the NFL before writing this post and yet I knew you were full of it by how far off you were on tennis. A tennis player does not make anywhere close to 50M for winning the US Open. Where in the world are you getting that figure from? Roger Federer, the winningest player of all time, has career lifetime earnings of $120M. That's with 99 tournament victories, including 20 slam victories. Djokovic, the highest prize-money earner (due to recent tournaments paying DRASTICALLY more than prior years) has lifetime earnings of $125M with 72 tournament victories including 14 slams. The most recent slam, the 2018 US Open, paid a grand prize of $3.8M. Your $50M figure? Well, that's pretty much the total prize money ($53M) paid by the US Open to ALL Competitors, INCLUDING THE WOMEN. And with equal prizes (somehow... when the men have to play 5 sets and the women only 3, talk about equality...) the men share a 26.5M prize money among 128 entrants. Players earn $54K for qualifying (i.e. playing in the main draw and losing in the first round). While that may still seem like a lot of money for losing, between having to pay their coaches, travel, accommodations, etc... a first round exit is definitely not a pay day. And these numbers have gone up significantly! Only 8 years ago, at the 2010 Wimbledon Championships, the victor received 1M pounds (about $1.3M USD, however at the time it may have been closer to 1.5M USD). A first round loss paid only 11250 pounds. At that time, a first round loss likely meant the tournament lost you money. And tennis has been around for over a century and it's only seeing the increase in the last 8 years or so. League of Legends has only been around for 8 years. Onwards to the rest of your discussion: Most professional athletes make far more off the field than on the field. Federer is paid far more for his endorsements. For example, he recently signed a $300M contract with Uniqlo over 10 years - with a clause that will pay him for the full duration even if he stops playing tennis! Likewise, most successful video game players make their money from their streams, not from prize money. Some may get sponsored. Beyond that though, in video games being "the best" does not necessarily equate to "highest paid" like it does in sports. Streamers earn money for their personality, for making the game fun. Faker probably isn't that interactive or good of a streamer. If you want to compare a streamer to Federer, you'd have to go to someone like Pewdiepie. Pewdiepie earned $12M USD in 2015, and one can only imagine that number has gone up since (unless he's slowed down his content, I don't follow him so IDK). Let's compare that back to tennis. Djokovic, the #1 player this year, earned a total of $15.9M USD in prize money this year. A pretty comparable amount to Pewdiepie's $12M in 2015 (and remember tennis' increase lately, the top player in 2015 probably made nowhere close to 15M). Of course I ignored Djokovic's endorsements here, but I'm sure you get the point. At the end of the day, a league streamer has a very small audience. Even if league is the most popular game in the world (is it still?), your viewing audience is notably less than your playerbase. Most people that watch League probably only follow a handful of games. So a league streamer has a very small population to draw money from. In contrast, lots of people will watch the NBA Finals, The Superbowl, Wimbledon and the US Open of Tennis, the Stanley Cup Finals, The World Series, etc... i.e. not only do video games have probably only 1% of the viewers to start with, the games cannibalize viewers from each other while professional sports can share viewers. So - no, professional League players are not underpaid. Not at all.
: This season's starting to feel like a No Man's Sky level bait-and-switch
> [{quoted}](name=Lux Tizer,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Exk12p83,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-11-29T08:01:56.019+0000) > > Want to be able to play independently again and not have to roam the map with your whole team constantly 5v5 deathballing every objective on the map? Nope > Yes, this is getting quite annoying. Losing games that should have been wins because people don't want to group and get picked off in 1v3s. I got auto filled to ADC last night. Our support was filled to and mid gave him their spot. The new support played brand and won my Lane for me. Enemy ADC afk's at level 4. We get first tower at 8min. Switch to top and get second tower at 11min, then mid tower around 15min. However we're now up 3-1 on towers but down 19-10 on kills. Enemy team's afk returns. Top had been going pretty even before that, mid and jungle were doing badly and constantly bitching at each other. Enemy team has a pyke top and Zoe mid and kha'zix Junge. I was Jinx. Needless to say, top wanted to split and died many times in the 1v2 or 1v3. I tried to pressure more turrets when it happened, but all 3 of their assassins could one-shot me so I almost always died for it, because our mid and jungle never came with me to protect me at all, and brand just died alongside me. Yes, those allies deserved to lose based on macro, but it's annoying that with all this damage there's nothing I can do in that scenario. Assassin's are one shotting you before you can do anything (and annoyingly Pyke has a blink I guess because he always dashed over my chompers and they never stopped him even when laid well in advance), non-assassins take about 0.5 seconds longer.
ItsLio (NA)
: What makes junglers really bad in low elo?
> [{quoted}](name=ItsLio,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=MqHlAneW,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-11-29T02:50:30.913+0000) > please dont come at me with jungling is hard because its NOT. its actually one of the least mechanically intensive positions in the game. Sure you might need a decent amount of game knowledge You just hit the nail on the head. Most players below Diamond 2, let alone Platinum 3, lack good game knowledge. As a mid main, who tried putting jungle secondary for a while (but got it way too much so I went to top secondary eventually) - I don't really know what I can do when I'm the jungler. If I try to tower dive our winning lane will I just die and give them double buffs and gold back into the game? If I gank an even/losing lane will I get counterganked by their stronger early-game jungler and get double-killed? I already know I can't invade on them because I can't 1v1 their jungler. So I basically look to farm, look for obvious gank opportunities, and look to stay close to winning lanes so I can counter gank for them. In generally most of my successful jungle games are my allies doing well in their lanes and me getting fed off of {{champion:120}} E + {{summoner:51}} / Predator running down free kills when my allies couldn't finish someone off. My unsuccessful games I'm similarly getting some kills, but my allies are dying and there's not much I can do to help them other than clean up the kill afterwards. I haven't played enough jungle to really know when a not-obvious gank is a good idea. I'll try them occasionally and some will work, but others will result in me giving up free kills, or wasting time where the enemy jungle main invades my buff while I'm on the map. I get a lot of credit for wins that were super easy because my lanes all did well and I get 10+ free kills due to my MS. I also get a lot of blame when my lanes all played like garbage and died in 1v1s and don't land their CC to help when I try to gank for them. And maybe I deserve the blame because I know I'm not a good jungler (I just know I'd be a much better laner than them). Really though, it all comes down to game knowledge. And it's a lot easier to have game knowledge in a lane where you only really need to know 50-odd matchups at most, versus game knowledge in the jungle where you need to know 50-odd matchups times 150-odd lanes to gank.
: Not to sound ungrateful about the long due Irelia nerfs on PBE but...
> [{quoted}](name=ChuckNorrisGanks,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Xoj748Rp,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-11-28T22:48:07.607+0000) > > Once again you're nerfing the wrong skill or mechanic on a champion. The simple truth is Irelia has a completely overloaded kit. Tell me why she gets 200 attack range which by the way, is the HIGHEST out of all "Melee" champions. Tell me why she can auto me as GP and walk away before i can even retaliate with an auto attack because she outranges me by 75. Why does she get to stack her passive and Conquerer on minions to fuck me into oblivion at lvl 3 if she hits her E so she can dash to me twice with Ignite and kill me? Why does she have 2 ways of marking champions for resets on her Q as well as a 3rd option of reset on killing the Q'ed target? You honestly think the W cooldown and the amount of damage reduction she got were the main issues behind this disaster of balance? I hadn't read the update yet. I came here expecting the nerf to be anything BUT to her W. Then I read that it is her W. Nope, don't agree with you at all here. Yes, Irelia has insane damage and is too reliable at applying it. Yes, that's annoying to play against. Except the problem with Irelia is that when she goes in at a bad time, she isn't punished enough for it. She hits W and takes little to no damage and wastes all of your big cooldowns that were used out of panic, then resumes to killing everyone. Remove her W entirely, and Irelia isn't a problem anymore. She can still snowball and get fed, but would actually need to build defense (outside of GA) (which would lower her damage output), say trinity force into full tank like other bruisers, or continue building offense but relying on making smart decisions to not die. The most annoying thing about Irelia is that she can engage 1v5 as a full damage champion, eat 3-5 of your ultimates, and still be over 30% health to then reset through your whole team and win the fight. Most true tanks can't survive that much focus for as long as she does. Now - the W nerf on the PBE isn't nearly enough. 40% damage reduction instead of 50% is hardly a nerf when she's surviving with over 30% health, not under 20%. That skill doesn't belong at all on her kit in the first place, and her W channel should be more like Master Yi's (i.e. a heal that can be interrupted by CC) followed by a skillshot slow at the end. The damage reduction with CC immunity is simply TOO STRONG with her all in kit. If they absolutely must keep it the base should go down to around 20-30% - but I really think she needs the CC immunity removed to give it counterplay. Her Q, E, and R, though? Pretty sure they're fine. Q with resets was always a thing. E and R were both made to revolve around that more. R can be dodged, it's not overly hard to hit, but you can flash it and punish her heavily for it (oh crap, unless she has her W). E can be dodged and isn't that easy to hit at all. It's pretty dumb that she can kill most champions once she does manage to hit a single E, but again without her W most of those champions would probably have killed her before she landed the E. I'm all for high skill cap champions, and from the times I've played Irelia on ARAMs (and not done well) I would surely say she's a high skill cap. Except that W is just stupid. It's the right place to nerf in my books. Just wish the nerf was a lot bigger. Riot favors their reworked champions way too heavily - they get to stay OP for several patches then when they receive nerfs they're small and they remain top-tier. Meanwhile loads of older champions barely see 1-2 patches in the spotlight before being hard-nerfed to tier 4 or lower.
: Okay. Brand's ult is also a high-impact AoE spell. As is Illaoi's R. Azir's as well. So is Kindred's. Yet none of these abilities are anything like, other than the fact that they're "high-impact AoE ults". Also, simply being able to *do* something more doesn't make a champion more reliable. Reliability is how hard it is to fuck up the ability, not the cooldown. If you want to complain about Fiddle having a similar ability to an ult on a lower cooldown, compare his E to Brand's ult. Very similar execution, higher AP scaling, although ~200 less base damage, and a way lower cooldown, with a silence instead of a stacking slow.
> [{quoted}](name=DuskDaUmbreon,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Nx8g3uAL,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2018-09-16T14:46:07.465+0000) > > Okay. Brand's ult is also a high-impact AoE spell. As is Illaoi's R. Azir's as well. So is Kindred's. Yet none of these abilities are anything like, other than the fact that they're "high-impact AoE ults". > > Also, simply being able to *do* something more doesn't make a champion more reliable. Reliability is how hard it is to fuck up the ability, not the cooldown. > > If you want to complain about Fiddle having a similar ability to an ult on a lower cooldown, compare his E to Brand's ult. Very similar execution, higher AP scaling, although ~200 less base damage, and a way lower cooldown, with a silence instead of a stacking slow. You're not wrong in your definition of reliability, but he isn't either. Reliability at high Elo, especially in pro play, is also about your champion being able to do it's job at the needed time. That means having cooldowns up. For example, Annie's flash-tibbers combo is one of the most reliable engages in the game. When pro games were very slow paced in prior seasons, Annie was a strong pick (especially as support). However with faster pace games, Annie is no longer reliable because her flash isn't off cooldown enough to have the combo up when it's needed.
: funny you said that, because... while some champs are overloaded and all, some of then aren't that much.... i mean, Aurelion Sol kit is so basic compared with some other new champions. he just got a stun, that can't be use in melee range, and a nock back. he E is mostly utility, and his W is the main source of damage. still, i found funny when Mana champs can just spam a lot more of skill that a mana less can. shouldn't they run out of mana?
> [{quoted}](name=Tin of sardines,realm=NA,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=91AxVlE3,comment-id=000e,timestamp=2018-11-28T19:08:25.483+0000) > > funny you said that, because... while some champs are overloaded and all, some of then aren't that much.... > i mean, Aurelion Sol kit is so basic compared with some other new champions. > he just got a stun, that can't be use in melee range, and a nock back. > he E is mostly utility, and his W is the main source of damage. > > still, i found funny when Mana champs can just spam a lot more of skill that a mana less can. shouldn't they run out of mana? Aurelion Sol is an excellent example of how a new champion can be not overloaded and yet still have a fully functioning kit. We've had a few of them, that aside from possibly being overtuned the kit itself was reasonable: Ornn, Ivern, Jhin, Rek'sai, and of course Aurelion Sol. Otherwise I'd argue just about every champion released after Braum has either had way too much put in their kit, or one thing put in their kit that was over-the-top. E.g. Tahm doesn't do too much, just swallowing allies to save them is kind of insanely strong. Gnar is a range AOE CC tank (just not at the same time). etc...
tengma (NA)
: Do some champions/roles get more honors than others?
I think it really depends on elo, and how fun you make the game for your allies. In your Vayne + Lulu example, if the Lulu stays bot the whole game and gets the Vayne fed and spends the whole game only supporting Vayne, then it's likely that everyone else will honor Vayne, and Vayne will honor Lulu. Why would mid/top/jg honor Lulu when she didn't do anything for them directly? Whereas Vayne killed targets that would have killed them, and Vayne took towers quickly, etc... In contrast, if Lulu roamed mid a few times during lane phase and also got the mid laner a bit of a lead, and maybe responded quickly to an invade - then mid and Jungle would honor Lulu instead of Vayne. They both see Lulu actively helping them enjoy their game more, and it's those moments that they'll remember on the end screen. Of course, some people will always honor the person who carried, or even the person that just did well on the last teamfight. I remember a game where I was playing Ahri mid and had a particularly bad Yasuo top lane. He fed lane pretty hard, and both ADC and jungle were being pretty toxic because he was so far behind (well, ADC slightly toxic, jungle extremely toxic). I was keeping quiet and focusing on carrying the game, while not as fed as their top laner I had a pretty significant lead and single handedly kept the game alive from 15min to probably 35min before some of my allies became relevant. Then late game, Yasuo hit a 5 man Tornado, we got a clean ace, and won the game. Immediately after the fight our Jungler says in all chat for everyone to honor Yasuo he single handedly won the game. And I'm sitting there thinking wtf... the same guy you've been harassing all game long for hard-feeding his lane opponent, you're now telling everyone to honor because he made one good play. Of course at the end of the game, I honored support, I got one honor from Yasuo, and the other 3 honored Yasuo so he got the icon thingy pop up. Seems like the first 99% of the game doesn't matter, if you make a play in the game-ending fight you'll get the honors. Finally - at high-ish elo (at least in Plat), people seem to honor the support/tank a lot more often than other roles if nothing exceptional happens. I do it myself admittedly. If a game was a reasonably close game, no one was toxic, no one stood out, then I get to the honor screen and see 4 champions and just think "IDK they were all alright"; I'll generally pick the support or tank (to "thank" them for playing a less desirable but very important role on our team). And 9 times out of 10, that player will get the 3 honors icon. Same thing goes when I feel like I've hard-carried and expect everyone will honor me - the support will get the icon. Even if I'm 12/2/14 in a game that we win 28 kills to 24. And I never say anything, nor do most players that end up getting the honor.
nelogis (EUW)
: > Yorick is likely Chaotic good. Directly from his bio: "The last survivor of a long-forgotten religious order". While Yorick may be "Lawful Good" under the law of that religious order, as the last surviving member he's clearly acting as his conscience (or learnings from that order) direct him "with little regard for what others expect of him" (where others here would be other surviving people, aka not in that religious order since he's the last survivor). Yorick "always struggled to find acceptance" and was "Shunned by his brothers". These are the descriptions of a "Chaotic good" character, not a lawful good one. You have to see that Yorick is living in a rather special place. The Shadow Isles are isolated from the rest of the world, people aren't doing camping trips over the weekends in the Shadow Isles, Hecarim is also not doing holidays in the Demacian beaches or whatever. The next special thing is that the Isles themselfes no longer have a order anymore, there is no society. It's just anarchy. Now see the situation through Yoricks eyes. First of all, he doesn't know anything about the world outside of the Isles, absolutely nothing. It might all be dead and he wouldn't have a clue. Next thing is, the undead are the norm for him and everyone else in the Isles. He gets excited when seeing something that isn't dead (or undead). > "A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. He combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. He tells the truth, keeps his word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished." The problem with that is, that the first sentence when seen from the perspective of the Isles, is just true for Yorick no matter what. He is ultimately the only thing good on the Isles, his followers follow his code, which makes him a good person that acts as expected no? He has commited his life to fight the evil and will do so until his last breath. He helped a washed up pirate without second thought and spoke out to voices of the maiden. He fights the guilty that turned the Isles into a prison. For me, Yorick just fulfills every point of the "lawful good checklist". Of course this only works when you see the situation for the Isles and for the Isles only.
> [{quoted}](name=nelogis,realm=EUW,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=tKXOcZGR,comment-id=000100030000,timestamp=2018-11-26T07:29:47.491+0000) > > You have to see that Yorick is living in a rather special place. > > The Shadow Isles are isolated from the rest of the world, people aren't doing camping trips over the weekends in the Shadow Isles, Hecarim is also not doing holidays in the Demacian beaches or whatever. > > The next special thing is that the Isles themselfes no longer have a order anymore, there is no society. It's just anarchy. > > Now see the situation through Yoricks eyes. First of all, he doesn't know anything about the world outside of the Isles, absolutely nothing. It might all be dead and he wouldn't have a clue. > Next thing is, the undead are the norm for him and everyone else in the Isles. He gets excited when seeing something that isn't dead (or undead). > > The problem with that is, that the first sentence when seen from the perspective of the Isles, is just true for Yorick no matter what. > He is ultimately the only thing good on the Isles, his followers follow his code, which makes him a good person that acts as expected no? > > He has commited his life to fight the evil and will do so until his last breath. > > He helped a washed up pirate without second thought and spoke out to voices of the maiden. > He fights the guilty that turned the Isles into a prison. > > For me, Yorick just fulfills every point of the "lawful good checklist". > > Of course this only works when you see the situation for the Isles and for the Isles only. I guess I would argue that in the context of this post, the setting is in our world. I.e. to want more lawful good characters, OP wants them to follow our archetypes of a lawful good character. I.e. one who is brave, compassionate, and just. One who values human life greatly, believes people can change for the better, but also believes punishment is necessary for crimes.
: > {{champion:48}} - Can parkour over his own pillar by clicking on it It's not like this would be broken.
> [{quoted}](name=Warlord Rhinark,realm=EUW,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=91AxVlE3,comment-id=0009,timestamp=2018-11-25T21:11:24.573+0000) > > It's not like this would be broken. Perhaps he should launch himself from his pillar like a slingshot?
: The rumble one is kinda silly tho. No matter what the cd on his abilities are, he is silenced while overheated. What would be op is if he got bonus attack speed while overheated
> [{quoted}](name=NuggetMilk,realm=NA,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=91AxVlE3,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2018-11-25T06:37:34.024+0000) > > The rumble one is kinda silly tho. No matter what the cd on his abilities are, he is silenced while overheated. What would be op is if he got bonus attack speed while overheated Apologies if it wasn't clear, I meant instead of overheated = silence, overheated = 80% CDR on all abilities.
Mcsquzzy (NA)
: I feel it would be more appropriate for the fiddle ult to have a 0.5 second fear aoe where he lands
> [{quoted}](name=Mcsquzzy,realm=NA,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=91AxVlE3,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-11-24T23:10:14.686+0000) > > I feel it would be more appropriate for the fiddle ult to have a 0.5 second fear aoe where he lands That was my initial thought, but then I worried the fear may make enemies move in opposite directions so he can't keep them all within range :P
Rioter Comments
zPOOPz (NA)
: "or" never said anything about "kys" being mild toxicity...
> [{quoted}](name=zPOOPz,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=OE9eVHeA,comment-id=000500000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-11-24T21:38:36.746+0000) > > "or" > > never said anything about "kys" being mild toxicity... "or any other" Implies the former belongs in the same group as the latter....
zPOOPz (NA)
: no "kys" has ever resulted in instant perma skipping over 14-day. The only time "kys" or any other mild toxicity for that matters results in instant perma is if you already had 14-day previously already. Instant perma implies you can go from 0 punishment history to perma, which is incorrect.
> [{quoted}](name=zPOOPz,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=OE9eVHeA,comment-id=0005000000000000,timestamp=2018-11-24T20:35:30.807+0000) > > no "kys" has ever resulted in instant perma skipping over 14-day. The only time "kys" or any other mild toxicity for that matters results in instant perma is if you already had 14-day previously already. Instant perma implies you can go from 0 punishment history to perma, which is incorrect. I agree that instant perma means you go from 0 punishment to perma. I highly disagree that "kys" is mild toxicity. It is extreme toxicity. Suicide is a very sensitive topic, people have mental health issues. That kind of comment to the wrong person / at the wrong time can cause really bad stuff to happen. All over a video game.
: "Never surrender"-people are starting to get so fucking annoying
> [{quoted}](name=TrikzterzArma,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=X7Bhy3dr,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-11-24T19:36:37.240+0000) > > Just had a game where the enemy team had twice our kills, all dragon, and had pushed to the inhibitors in all lanes, while we've only taken three turrets. People still votes no, and a surrender isn't possible. > > How in the FLYING FUCK is it winnable. What are we supposed to do when 3 in the enemy team can oneshot us? > > This shit happens ALL THE TIME. Accept a loss and move, stop wasting time in a game YOU CAN NOT WIN. I have won a game where my team was farther behind than any team has ever been, and the enemy team was NOT trolling. Literally everything but our Nexus was destroyed, they had every dragon and Baron, and a gigantic kill lead. Their Riven had been hard-fed and reached level 18 when the highest level on our team was level 14. We had all 3 inhibs dead (with double supers crashing into our base) on 3 separate occasions. They got 3 Barons. They took a total of 7 dragons. Admittedly for a good part of that we had our double Nexus turrets up, and our inhibitors respawned shortly after they finally killed our nexus turrets (so they never really got a chance to get to our Nexus). We did, however, manage to stall long enough to get everyone to level 18 with full build, and win 3 teamfights in a row to win the game. That game took 1h17min, and the enemy Riven finished with over 700 farm and over 30K gold. No one on the enemy team DC'd or inted or even made gross mistakes. They simply didn't know how to end against our defense. We had good waveclear (I was Hecarim, we had Lux Mid, and Ezreal ADC). We had good peel (also a thresh support). We managed to peel Riven in our late fights and Ezreal was strong enough to kill her. The rest of her team couldn't handle me. Lux got some good 100-0 picks on their mid-lane Fizz and their ADC. I'll take a 0.1% chance of winning from behind in my promo series or a game where I might get demoted, or frankly almost any game, over a 0.0% chance if I were to surrender. Refusing to try to come back is going to cost you rank in the long run. I do make a decent number of comebacks. 0.1% is a gross underestimate, I probably win closer to 5% of the games that I'm noticeably behind in (and have had surrender votes). I also probably lose around 2-5% of games where my team has a big lead. If you're only taking those losses but not getting the wins, you'll fall in rank. And lastly - I've lost games due to getting surrender voted 4-1, when I was by far the most fed champion on the entire map and could 1v3 any combination of the enemy team, just because my own team was all far behind. They wouldn't play around me. There were games in Silver elo just last season (where I climbed to platinum with about a 60% win rate before it regressed towards 52% once I got to mid-plat) where I would have put my chances at winning close to 60-70% where my team surrendered. At the end of the game, we had a gold lead of about 1-2k, of which about 6k was on me. People surrender FAR too easily. Even in the worst games, you could always have an opponent DC. There's no reason NOT to make them play it out. Likewise, you should be decisive in playing out your victories to deny comebacks as much as possible. Win quickly to minimize chances that an ally DCs (or tilts and starts making mistakes to let the enemy back into the game).
zPOOPz (NA)
: > "kys" is supposed to be an instant perma incorrect
> [{quoted}](name=zPOOPz,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=OE9eVHeA,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2018-11-24T19:53:44.378+0000) > > incorrect "We have a zero-tolerance policy for extreme negative behavior as well as extremely offensive language and remarks made in game towards other players. Since it is a severe disregard for the Summoner’s Code this sort of behavior can result in skipping to a Two week or Permanent suspension. Suspensions of this degree based on negative behavior will not likely be reduced or removed." Source: https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/207489286-Instant-Feedback-System-FAQ- Whether you believe "kys" falls in that description or not is up to you. I think it does. People who have complained about being perma-banned for it would be evidence to support that belief.
nelogis (EUW)
: Do you think Yorick is either evil or chaotic? This guy is as good as it gets. Propably has a more purer heart than any of those demacian "heroes". Just because it isn't a text-book example of lawfully good guy named bob that has never done or said anything wrong in his entire life doesn't mean that they aren't heroes beneath the masks they carry. Yorick is your holy paladin in armor but the armor has become dark from the battles he fought and covered in mist from the curse he has sworn to defeat.
> [{quoted}](name=nelogis,realm=EUW,application-id=6kFXY1kR,discussion-id=tKXOcZGR,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-10-30T12:32:47.144+0000) > > Do you think Yorick is either evil or chaotic? This guy is as good as it gets. > > Propably has a more purer heart than any of those demacian "heroes". > > Just because it isn't a text-book example of lawfully good guy named bob that has never done or said anything wrong in his entire life doesn't mean that they aren't heroes beneath the masks they carry. > > Yorick is your holy paladin in armor but the armor has become dark from the battles he fought and covered in mist from the curse he has sworn to defeat. You've got a lot of upvotes, but I think you're misunderstanding the post here. Admittedly, OP IS wrong about Yorick too. The point is, Yorick isn't "lawful good". Lawful good is defined here: "A lawful good character acts as a good person is expected or required to act. He combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. He tells the truth, keeps his word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished." Meanwhile neutral good: "A neutral good character does the best that a good person can do. He is devoted to helping others. He works with kings and magistrates but does not feel beholden to them." And Chaotic good: "A chaotic good character acts as his conscience directs him with little regard for what others expect of him. He makes his own way, but he's kind and benevolent. He believes in goodness and right but has little use for laws and regulations. He hates it when people try to intimidate others and tell them what to do. He follows his own moral compass, which, although good, may not agree with that of society." Yorick is likely Chaotic good. Directly from his bio: "The last survivor of a long-forgotten religious order". While Yorick may be "Lawful Good" under the law of that religious order, as the last surviving member he's clearly acting as his conscience (or learnings from that order) direct him "with little regard for what others expect of him" (where others here would be other surviving people, aka not in that religious order since he's the last survivor). Yorick "always struggled to find acceptance" and was "Shunned by his brothers". These are the descriptions of a "Chaotic good" character, not a lawful good one. The entire point of the OP is that we don't have lawful good characters. There's great debate among MANY people whether "Chaotic Good" is "better" than "Lawful Good". Lots of younger people (aka people likely to play video games) have a strong preference for Chaotic Good over Lawful good (or in general, have a strong preference for anything over Lawful Good). Most people are, well for lack of a better word, not good. They have faults and rather than doing their best to be good and atoning for their mistakes, they easily forgive their own mistakes by claiming that we're all humans and all make mistakes and it is okay (i.e. they justify doing bad things). Since people like characters who exemplify traits they see in themselves, they prefer heroes who aren't lawful good. They prefer Chaotic good because they feel like their own wants and conscience are "right" and identify with Chaotic good characters who aren't really accepted or viewed as good by society but at the end of the story were right all along and did the good thing. This makes these people feel better about their own actions, as if somehow their poor choices and faults are "right" because they're doing what they want and they'll show everyone they're doing good. However, there are also people who ARE lawful good. Or at least closer to that corner of the spectrum. Or at least people who LIKE Lawful good characters, even if they're say "Lawful Neutral" ("A lawful neutral character acts as law, tradition, or a personal code directs her. Order and organization are paramount to her. She may believe in personal order and live by a code or standard, or she may believe in order for all and favor a strong, organized government.") because they look up to "Lawful Good" as the ideal. There are a severe lack of such characters. Jarvan 4 (who seems to have a lore quite similar to Prince/King Arthur) seems to be one. As does Garen. However as OP mentioned, Garen's recent skin (God-King) is more on the Tyrant side of things, or Lawful Evil: "A lawful evil villain methodically takes what he wants within the limits of his code of conduct without regard for whom it hurts. He cares about tradition, loyalty, and order but not about freedom, dignity, or life. He plays by the rules but without mercy or compassion. He is comfortable in a hierarchy and would like to rule, but is willing to serve. He condemns others not according to their actions but according to race, religion, homeland, or social rank. He is loath to break laws or promises. This reluctance comes partly from his nature and partly because he depends on order to protect himself from those who oppose him on moral grounds. Some lawful evil villains have particular taboos, such as not killing in cold blood (but having underlings do it) or not letting children come to harm (if it can be helped). They imagine that these compunctions put them above unprincipled villains." The most recent champion releases that represent a lawful good character are: Possibly Bard, however it's difficult to know if he's lawful good or neutral good. I'm not sure if he really seeks to punish guilty parties, or just protects the unvierse. Then definitely Braum. Braum was released 5 years ago. That's a long time to get no "lawful good" releases. As for reworks? Debatably Akali, but since her balance keeping group is self-appointed I would argue she's more neutral-good. Debatably Irelia, but she doesn't seem keen on acting as lawful good - rather she does it because she must. She rose against the invaders because she had the power to and would die otherwise, not because she was protecting others. So most likely Poppy, who was reworked 3 years ago. So true lawful good characters were last released 4-5 years ago and last reworked 3 years ago. That IS a long time to go without a lawful good character. Yes, there are lots of other "good guys", but not this specific archetype.
: Got Called a F*g*t Twice and the Person Probs Won't be Banned
I was told "kys" in an ARAM once, the day before the ranked season ended. I submitted the report (I also screenshotted it and submitted it to Riot directly as a ticket). 3 days later I got the notification that my report worked and a summoner had been punished. I just checked again (almost 2 weeks later now) - and that summoner has no games played since that notification. I suppose it's possible he got off with a 14 day ban instead of a permanent ban ("kys" is supposed to be an instant perma) but I doubt it. It seems like the report worked and he has been permanently banned. The system seems to work - just sometimes it does take time.
Rioter Comments
Moody P (NA)
: because if they gave the whole bounty at once the bounty would actually be bigger they split it up into multiple deaths so you don't feed them half an item just for dying once
> [{quoted}](name=Moody P,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hoMdNUV7,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-11-24T14:51:22.659+0000) > > because if they gave the whole bounty at once the bounty would actually be bigger > > they split it up into multiple deaths so you don't feed them half an item just for dying once The increase to bounties though seems near the equivalent of giving the full old bounty at once - that's sort of my point.
Rioter Comments
: The 8 most banned champions all have negative win rates
The low win rates don't mean they're weak. If anything, in combination with the ban rates, it means they're either OP or at least perceived as OP that lots of people first-time them or otherwise play them without practice / incorrectly / into bad matchups. Further, a lot of the people who pick this style of champion opt to go into 1v5 fights to try to solo-carry. Which often loses their team the game. It doesn't mean they're weak. Akali saw boatloads of play at worlds, so she's clearly not weak. She's one of the strongest champions in the game, she just loses because most of the types of players that pick her are not good at the game and just want to 1v5 (instead of playing with the team in a team game). Irelia, Leblanc, and Aatrox were also pretty much pick or ban at worlds and can have the same argument. BUT yea, hugely agree - most of the banned champions are Riot's recent work. So Riot puts in all this effort, but ultimately is constantly making champions so over the top that people ban them. I mean look at Neeko. Her bread'n'butter spam damage ability is AOE and can hit the same target 3 times. She has stealth. She has deception with MS. She has passive damage on autos so she still does damage when OOM or on CD. also grants MS. She has an AOE root that passes through minions. Her ult has a slow, a shield, a stun, and massive damage - all in a gigantic AOE about 7x the size of a Leona ult? And all that didn't even include her passive that lets her trick people by disguising as an ally and taking on their health pool. She would still be a super-fun and viable champion without the slow AND without the shield on her ult, and without the MS on her W. Yet when you look at recent champions, Neeko is probably underloaded in comparison...
Kimihro (NA)
: If Relic Shield's CS counts towards Ally CS then Pyke's Ult Assists should count towards Ally Kills
Actually, it would be a nerf to Pyke because granting them kills would increase their bounty more than the assists do, right? However I think it's a welcome change anyways... these champions ARE stronger, like you said. Their bounties SHOULD be higher too. (Although I think bounties are way too high across the board...)
: You can stack dark harvest twice off sion.
Intentional - a counter to int Sion.
: > [{quoted}](name=ValyrianBlade,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=xFbaFao0,comment-id=0019,timestamp=2018-11-20T02:06:28.073+0000) > > What world do you live in? I'm sure there are plenty of gay people that don't throw their sexuality everywhere, but there are also loads of them that do. I mean - have you ever seen a pride parade? Since when do "normal" people streak naked down the streets in large groups? > > I'm sorry but I have to disagree - I've noticed many gay people that seem to identify as gay so strongly that they feel the need to make absolutely certain that everyone knows they're gay. And yes, I find it extremely annoying - I don't go shoving it down their throat that I'm straight all the time... which would explain why it makes perfect sense that you find Neeko annoying (because it is... really, annoying) - but I find it hard to believe it could be found offensive when it seems quite accurate.... It's almost like gay people were (and are, depending on location) oppressed and killed for being gay and now they can live openly without fear of being killed, so they want to throw parades about it. Also, no, not everyone at a pride parade is naked, try actually going to one instead of just reading articles in an echo chamber about them. Not even 20% of Neeko's lines are about being gay. HOW is that shoving it down your throat??
> [{quoted}](name=Jhins Girlfriend,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=xFbaFao0,comment-id=00190001,timestamp=2018-11-20T02:56:09.225+0000) > > It's almost like gay people were (and are, depending on location) oppressed and killed for being gay and now they can live openly without fear of being killed, so they want to throw parades about it. > Also, no, not everyone at a pride parade is naked, try actually going to one instead of just reading articles in an echo chamber about them. > > Not even 20% of Neeko's lines are about being gay. HOW is that shoving it down your throat?? My apologies, I haven't listened to Neeko's lines (the "shoving down your throat" comment is probably out of place), I was just responding to OP. Which from your first statement, seems like you mostly agree with me (in the sense that people shouldn't be offended by her lines being explicit, as some gay people really do behave that way). And the parade comment - again, why does it matter if I'm using an extreme case? Those individuals don't get arrested or even viewed negatively by others at the parade. They're cheered on for being so open about their sexuality. Why would a champion that's not even 40% of that extent (just assuming as I haven't seen her yet, but I'm pretty confident Riot doesn't have her streaking) be offensive to gay people?
: > [{quoted}](name=ValyrianBlade,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=xFbaFao0,comment-id=0019,timestamp=2018-11-20T02:06:28.073+0000) > > What world do you live in? I'm sure there are plenty of gay people that don't throw their sexuality everywhere, but there are also loads of them that do. I mean - have you ever seen a pride parade? Since when do "normal" people streak naked down the streets in large groups? > > I'm sorry but I have to disagree - I've noticed many gay people that seem to identify as gay so strongly that they feel the need to make absolutely certain that everyone knows they're gay. And yes, I find it extremely annoying - I don't go shoving it down their throat that I'm straight all the time... which would explain why it makes perfect sense that you find Neeko annoying (because it is... really, annoying) - but I find it hard to believe it could be found offensive when it seems quite accurate.... Not that I really want to delve into this because it's a different discussion for a different time, and your examples are wildly offensive and inaccurate, but if you're unaware of what heteronormative is then you should look it up. Since it's generally assumed by most people (including most gay people) that you're going to interact with a lot more straight people than you will gay (because you will just from a statistical perspective), making it "known" that you're gay can be one of the few ways that you're able to actually find other gay people. Straight people don't have the issue of "can I hit on this person and be very certain that they are heterosexual and this won't be an embarrassing and potential dangerous situation for me if I'm incorrect" because it's assumed that everyone is straight unless explicitly stated otherwise. You don't have to "shove it down people's throat" that you're straight because unless you say otherwise it's assumed that you are straight since, statistically speaking, there are significantly more straight people than there are gay. Just based on your response you seem like a typical redneck hill billy womanizer. And I don't mean that disrespectfully, it's just that a lot of the straight people that I know that use this type of rationale and justification for their homophobia typically are. So I disagree with you that you don't shove your sexuality down people's throat, and I find it hard to believe that you could be offended by this stereotype since with my personal and clearly scientific anecdotal evidence you definitely and without a doubt are.
> [{quoted}](name=Hella Gay Nerd,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=xFbaFao0,comment-id=00190002,timestamp=2018-11-20T03:15:24.531+0000) > So I disagree with you that you don't shove your sexuality down people's throat, and I find it hard to believe that you could be offended by this stereotype since with my personal and clearly scientific anecdotal evidence you definitely and without a doubt are. What exactly did you say that was "scientific"? You provided a single statistic which I didn't reference. I wasn't aware why they did this. Thanks for the reasoning - it makes some sense to say that you would otherwise assume someone is straight and that's why gay people 'need' to identify themselves as gay so... strongly? However I'm thinking about situations where you're always among the same group of people and yet constantly pointing it out. We know already. I mean, you could replace "gay" with "vegan" and I don't think you'd disagree with what I said? Yet as far as I can see - the two groups behave very similarly. Aside from the fact that I can't think of a reason why a vegan needs to tell someone that's not serving them food that they're vegan. Just like I (still) don't see why a gay person would then need to identify their sexuality if they weren't interested in the person/people they were identifying their sexuality to. Who knows, maybe my experience has been straight guys pretending to be gay to get into change rooms with women or grab their breasts in public. I just see that behavior and think it's crude. I don't mean to say that all gay people are like this (and would be open to believing that almost no gay people are, and these are straight/bi guys getting what they can - I honestly have no idea and just always assumed these guys were honestly gay) - I just mean that when I see it I obviously find it annoying. I would never grab my girlfriend's breasts in public, why would a gay guy grab a friend's? And finally - to the post I made and the post I was responding to (i.e. to be on topic): OP complained the Neeko was too explicitly gay and said it's offensive (implied: to gay people). I argued it shouldn't be offensive to gay people because some gay people are actually like that (explicitly gay in many interactions). I didn't attack gay people in my post, I made observations about a subset of a group of people to support the point I was making about in game content. You attacked me directly in your comment and made no mention at all to the game content referred to in this thread - there's no sense trying to hide it with "I don't mean that disrespectfully" (especially if you're going to end how you did). Yet - at the end of the day - everything you said in your post supported my comment. Gay people shouldn't take her interactions with offense because they DO behave that way. You literally said it in your post, gay people make it known they're gay in order to find other gay people. So Neeko is doing the same (and people like OP or myself find it annoying, perhaps because we're not always looking for a date and some interactions for us aren't focused on that. Which isn't meant disrespectfully - obviously if there are fewer gay people they would need to look for dates more as they'd be tougher to find). And I feel it necessary to conclude that I haven't even listened to Neeko's voice lines yet. I was simply responding to a thread. And obviously was tired of the "oversensitivity" everyone has these days. If Neeko isn't explicitly gay someone is complaining that we don't have explicitly gay champions and we only know they're gay from their lore but they don't actually "act gay". Then we get a champion that is explicitly gay and we have a complaint about that. Like, you can literally never win with people these days.
HellBell (EUW)
: Unpopular opinion: Neeko’s character feels kinda offensive.
> [{quoted}](name=HellBell,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=xFbaFao0,comment-id=,timestamp=2018-11-19T23:26:50.944+0000) > Why does she have to tell in almost all of her interactions voice lines something like: Hey, look I am a lesbian. I mean, usually gay people are normal, they live and act like everyone else and they don't say that they are gay like every 2nd sentences like Neeko indirectly does. What world do you live in? I'm sure there are plenty of gay people that don't throw their sexuality everywhere, but there are also loads of them that do. I mean - have you ever seen a pride parade? Since when do "normal" people streak naked down the streets in large groups? I'm sorry but I have to disagree - I've noticed many gay people that seem to identify as gay so strongly that they feel the need to make absolutely certain that everyone knows they're gay. And yes, I find it extremely annoying - I don't go shoving it down their throat that I'm straight all the time... which would explain why it makes perfect sense that you find Neeko annoying (because it is... really, annoying) - but I find it hard to believe it could be found offensive when it seems quite accurate....
Akalix (NA)
: If you wanna win in 3s, play "meta" champs{{champion:63}} {{champion:78}} {{champion:86}} {{champion:161}} {{champion:90}} , there is also other strong champs. But, all you need to know if you want victory is to counter pick COUNTER PICK (Example : Don't play immobile or squish champs against dash, teleport, monkey climber, charge enemy champ. Also, J4 is not always a good idea, because Kayn is often taken in 3s and Rhaast could counter you.
> [{quoted}](name=Akalix,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vcg8uUjE,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-11-19T03:12:15.372+0000) > > If you wanna win in 3s, play "meta" champs{{champion:63}} {{champion:78}} {{champion:86}} {{champion:161}} {{champion:90}} , there is also other strong champs. But, all you need to know if you want victory is to counter pick COUNTER PICK (Example : Don't play immobile or squish champs against dash, teleport, monkey climber, charge enemy champ. > Also, J4 is not always a good idea, because Kayn is often taken in 3s and Rhaast could counter you. Interesting... I've actually won all of my games against Kayn - I've found J4 to be a good counter to him. I have enough mobility to counter his ganks and more burst damage / AOE to win the 2v2. He can 'dodge' my ultimate with his (as well as just walk out of it), but in general I wouldn't be targeting to ult a Kayn (I want to target his squishy allies). What I have struggled with as J4 is against beefy teams with AD Bruisers. J4 can't seem to do anything against champions like Irelia, Urgot, Garen, Darius, Illaoi, etc... I can front line against them for a long time by building full tank, but can't deal much damage of my own. If I build damage, I can't survive against them (and definitely can't burst them anyways).
: How do you kill the enemy nexus without winning in a big teamfight?
In your specific scenario (both teams bases open with inhibitors, enemy team has stronger teamfight in open space) - get all 3 lanes (or at least 2 of 3) pushing towards the enemy base. Get whichever inhibitor is being defended the least. Note that I'm assuming you have priority. Otherwise they're just going to group as 5 and walk down mid together. Where your response is going to have to be to have your top lane backdoor while the rest of you defend 4v5 and hope to win the race. If you have priority, then you're going towards their base. You need to pressure multiple inhibitors so they can't just 5v5 teamfight you. Refuse to fight. Disengage wherever they engage and just try to chip at the inhibitors as much as possible. As soon as you get one, you get a free lane of pressure and open up the possibility to backdoor if they get to your base. Although, at the end of the day, if you let the game get to that situation when they have a better team fight, you probably lost after having an opportunity to win it earlier. Better to focus on learning how to close out those games instead.
Rioter Comments
: Got boosted...by accident...
I mean, it's hard to say here. Obviously you were matched into a game with this guy by Riot's algorithm for the first game you played together. That's your defense if you ever DO get banned for this. It's a reasonable defense and would probably stop you being banned. However it's still entirely possible that you realized this guy is getting boosted, and somehow managed to contact him outside of league and offer to pay him to duo with you and boost you further. Not likely, but possible. And that would be bannable, however Riot probably couldn't prove it. They could still ban you since you sort of knowingly let it happen, but IDK for sure. I think the defense is reasonable. However finally, you could have queued at the same time for complementary roles and tried to get match-made the first game and lucked out. Not sure how big the depths of bronze 5 are. Also not sure what time that game was played at (prime-time? or 6am?). Basically - I actually believe you. Why else would you post? However it's possible someone could pull off the same thing intentionally, and that would be boosting for sure.
Shazzbot69 (EUNE)
: Why take scorch over Gathering storm?
Scorch does so much more in laning phase, and in the state that league has been in for this whole season - you pretty much need to hard win your lane and snowball to really increase your win rate. If scorch earns you even ONE kill, that extra gold is going to get you similar stats to Gathering Storm until 30min (24AP at 20min, versus 20AP from an Amplifying tome at 435g [roughly equal to 1 kill]). And that's ignoring the kill xp, extra cs and creep xp from the kill, AND the damage scorch is still giving you. And the fact that you get that Amp Tome probably before 10min and definitely before 20. Scorch also only has a 10sec cooldown, which is probably similar to your trading pattern. Your abilities are up, you trade, set off scorch, then back off. Wait 10 seconds and repeat. So you're getting an extra 10-30 damage on every trade. For champions that poke with a single ability a lot (like Veigar Q, Lux E, Ahri Q, etc...) you're stacking up a lot of damage from that rune. Finally - scorch vs gathering storm really comes down to what part of the game you want to dominate. On late game champions like Veigar you can get away with Gathering Storm because he's meant to stall in lane until he reaches late and blows up anything. On early game champions like Ahri, taking Gathering storm weakens the strongest part of your game in order to get a little extra power in late game (if you happen to get there) - your weakest stage of the game. So a champion like Ahri is WAY better off taking scorch and ending the game earlier, rather than taking Gathering Storm to make her "kind of bad" instead of "quite weak" in the late game. Lux and Brand are both somewhere between Ahri and Veigar for their power spikes, but both I think spike hard in the mid-game and therefore having a better early game and more damage for those mid game teamfights will help them take control of the game. At the end of the day, Gathering Storm may work in some comps, perhaps in games where you want to stall out to late anyways. These games are likely lower win rate games so statistics bring up Scorch as a better choice since games where you get a lead from Scorch are better win rate games. i.e. you're taking scorch when you can bully your lane, and gathering storm when you want to lane super passive in a counter matchup.
: > [{quoted}](name=ValyrianBlade,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vcg8uUjE,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-11-15T00:03:13.958+0000) > > So the stomps aren't an issue - pretty easy to end in a stomp, even if you don't get to. > > The last 2 games though, weren't stomps. Especially game 4. I have no idea why they surrendered, like on the rift people would keep playing because all it would take is one mistake from a single player and the entire tide would turn in a game that close... Someone gets picked for free and then your force a 3v2 and end the game off it. > > It seems like on the treeline though, even when you get a kill you can't do much because the inhibitor towers seem so much stronger. Also not every team has great tower taking ability. That game 4 especially - I have no idea how we were going to end that game. I was getting worried it would last a lot longer (like 50+ min) and then they randomly surrendered. A really noticable thing on TT is waveclear and ability to siege. Typically you try and capitalize as much on kills as you can, but if it boils down to a team turtling while your own team has difficulty cracking it, you probably have to do Vilemaw. But if you have the game at that point, your team is maintaining a general lead over the enemy indefinitely(Free jungle farm and altars) Never forget though, Teamcomp is VERY significant on TT.
> [{quoted}](name=MarkedOfKane,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=vcg8uUjE,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2018-11-15T00:23:18.174+0000) > > A really noticable thing on TT is waveclear and ability to siege. Typically you try and capitalize as much on kills as you can, but if it boils down to a team turtling while your own team has difficulty cracking it, you probably have to do Vilemaw. But if you have the game at that point, your team is maintaining a general lead over the enemy indefinitely(Free jungle farm and altars) > > Never forget though, Teamcomp is VERY significant on TT. Yes it seems to matter WAY more here... E.g. we just lost a game where we had a Lulu top against Garen. The Lulu was plat and she just complained all game about try-harding in a normals by picking Garen. I didn't really get it, but it seemed clear once I realized our Lulu did no damage. Garen stacked MR for her and Veigar, and as J4 I just don't do enough sustained damage to get through Garen's health. I probably should have picked something like Olaf in that case. However I did assume Lulu was going to funnel gold into me (which would have made Olaf a good choice) but then she pinged me back when I came to take her wave after finishing my clear (she wanted to freeze against Garen). Was very confused - perhaps she just didn't know the meta. I tried to research it a bit before starting but I'm seeing it's way more important than on the rift.
Show more

ValyrianBlade

Level 100 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion