: We're talking about this, no decision made yet though
> [{quoted}](name=Riot MapleNectar,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=VHR8WryG,comment-id=000f,timestamp=2018-10-25T23:22:29.648+0000) > > We're talking about this, no decision made yet though fix scuttler too the timer should be in the HUD and there should be a longer timer so you can actually plan ahead and adjust pathing rather than just get lucky to be on the right side the ground can be marked to show the side it'll spawn on etc.
: It was never about skill. Knowledge is power.
> [{quoted}](name=DimPack,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=fAEEdZz5,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2018-05-12T19:48:39.813+0000) > > It was never about skill. Knowledge is power. Knowledge and skill are not separate.
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: May 4
No way that pre game should be removed. That sets up the game strategically a lot of the time (warding enemy buffs is especially key) and it is JUST a minute. I think it's a terrible idea to remove it but you should do something about afk laners. They really ruin games and should be punished by the system for not watching entrances or doing anything at all useful besides sitting at their turret and waiting. What you can do is also change that 15 second window where you can't leave the fountain to maybe 10 seconds and lower the buff spawn timer by 5.
: Your definition of balance is incorrect. Balance does not mean that every champion has an equal success rate vs every other champion. Balance doesn't even mean that every champion in a role performs as well every time as any other champion in that role. There are a multitude of different factors that go into how a game plays out at every stage and balance is to ensure there are no extreme outliers across a large sample size. Also consider that 'balance' in LoL will always look like a bell curve and a champion's position in that curve will shift not only with balance changes but as the meta evolves as well.
> [{quoted}](name=Gives No Lux,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=o8AXMUVu,comment-id=001e,timestamp=2017-12-07T08:54:38.021+0000) > > Your definition of balance is incorrect. Balance does not mean that every champion has an equal success rate vs every other champion. > That is not at all my idea of balance and never has been. Equal chances to succeed does not mean equal winrate. It means that they all have a reason to be picked in their respective niches and there aren't characters completely overshadowing others. For example, a few patches ago, there would be no reason to ever pick Brand support over Sona. She did even more damage than him early-mid game while also providing great utility as well as offering better scaling. There was virtually no world in which Brand support made more sense even if you wanted a damaging support.
Rioter Comments
Sohleks (NA)
: Playing Corki late season 7 was one of the most depressing things I could do in this game. Defense and regen was so absurdly high all the toning down of his laning teeth left him with the impact of a soggy paper bag. Corki had to farm so immaculately to be relevant and did not provide CC to make an impact. You kinda had to hope the game goes slow which they can in pro level or your foes disrespect your couple of packages. I would be like screw this, why the hell do I bother with Corki. I should just put the time into Cassiopeia... such a lovely competitive ~~cancer~~ staple... Now season 8 is very different. Corki seems to work great again simply based on the fact he got some good kill pressure back just because people are squishy. I do understand how the rune changes favor him but it's also the pure fact Corki whose a safe rounded champion is just generally more lethal than before now. I'm still interested in Cassiopeia though lol ( I wanna run the 5 seconds free mana level up on her and CHEESE people ~ can't believe they're already buffing that. It's gonna be strong on many champs) Though I am thinking maybe because Corki got 10 armor he will matchup better against AD dmg dealer and take advantage of his magic damage output in the matchup. That plane is plated. Is top lane Corki back? lol @ no hp/mr for top laners
> [{quoted}](name=Sohleks,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B5tB9GQH,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2017-11-22T10:41:30.338+0000) > > Playing Corki late season 7 was one of the most depressing things I could do in this game. Defense and regen was so absurdly high all the toning down of his laning teeth left him with the impact of a soggy paper bag. Corki had to farm so immaculately to be relevant and did not provide CC to make an impact. You kinda had to hope the game goes slow which they can in pro level or your foes disrespect your couple of packages. I would be like screw this, why the hell do I bother with Corki. I should just put the time into Cassiopeia... such a lovely competitive ~~cancer~~ staple... > > Now season 8 is very different. Corki seems to work great again simply based on the fact he got some good kill pressure back just because people are squishy. I do understand how the rune changes favor him but it's also the pure fact Corki whose a safe rounded champion is just generally more lethal than before now. > > I'm still interested in Cassiopeia though lol ( I wanna run the 5 seconds free mana level up on her and CHEESE people ~ can't believe they're already buffing that. It's gonna be strong on many champs) > > Though I am thinking maybe because Corki got 10 armor he will matchup better against AD dmg dealer and take advantage of his magic damage output in the matchup. That plane is plated. Is top lane Corki back? lol @ no hp/mr for top laners It's basically just a more favorable meta for Corki. That doesn't mean he's OP. WW is also doing much better without Sejuani and Zac running around (or being much weaker). He too is great vs squishy comps. However, I don't think WW is OP just because he has a favorable meta (probably not even good in Masters+). The same goes for Corki.
LankPants (OCE)
: >51.5% is fairly average and like I said before, his late game stats are also not overwhelming 51.5% is not average by its very definition. Learn the definition of that word. Lolalytics currently puts Corki at the 23rd highest overall winrate, if you assume every champ is played in only one role (this assumption helps your point and hurts mine) then Corki comes in at around the 16th percentile. If you know anything about stats this is very close to 1 standard deviation, something 1 standard deviation away from the average is in no way average. >due to the biases I outlined in the OP As opposed to your very clear biases?
> [{quoted}](name=LankPants,realm=OCE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B5tB9GQH,comment-id=00010000000000010000,timestamp=2017-11-21T07:52:13.952+0000) > > 51.5% is not average by its very definition. Learn the definition of that word. Lolalytics currently puts Corki at the 23rd highest overall winrate, if you assume every champ is played in only one role (this assumption helps your point and hurts mine) then Corki comes in at around the 16th percentile. If you know anything about stats this is very close to 1 standard deviation, something 1 standard deviation away from the average is in no way average. > > As opposed to your very clear biases? You're using the word in an overly narrow sense. When talking about statistics, average is a range, not an exact number. 50% is absolutely average but anything between ~49-51% also falls on that spectrum. You also need to filter out a lot of random trash like Nasus and Gragas mid. Corki is average among the mid laners I consider viable, not the entire roster. There are too many factors that go into winrates to be able to suggest that every champion who isn't exactly 50% winrate is somehow imbalanced. What's the pick-rate and what kinds of players are attracted to that champion? Is it primarily a counterpick or situational pick (champions should excel in their niches)? Do players of that champion tend to have more experience than average? Is the meta especially favorable to that champion? Are people failing to counter said champion properly? etc. Let's look at some other super OP mids in Diamond+ with higher winrates than Corki: Zilean 53.6%! A low pick-rate team oriented champion with a revive doing well in a more assassin meta! Where's the nerf hammer? Xerath 53%! A sniper excelling in squishy metas is doing great and even with a higher pick rate than Corki! Morgana 51.7%! Better nerf now! TF 52.8%! Will this champion ever perform badly? Heimerdinger 52.6% Holy shit! Aurelion Sol 52.2% Always needs more nerfs! Anivia 52.2%! Ice cold man... Pantheon 52%! This super mechanically challenging pick is outperforming Corki by nearly 1%! and let's not forget the runner-ups with ~51% winrate too and clearly in need of nerfs like Corki: Ziggs 51.4%! LOL! Fiddlesticks 51.2%! The cheese... Wukong 51.2%! Interesting! Karma 51.2%! Those shields... Vel'Koz 51.2%! He hits E and then you die from laser vomit! Annie 51.1%! Too OP if you stand next to her! I'm being flippant but as a rule, ~51% winrates in Diamond+ have never been considered an indicator that a champion is out of line by either Riot or players. I think you know that and you're just being a bit hostile as some kind of ego trip. Check Corki's ban rate again and let me know what it is. We have to put to an end to all the suffering and distortion he's causing on the ladder! There is a Corki every game and he's pick/ban! He's suffocating all the other mids out!
: > [{quoted}](name=ofart,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B5tB9GQH,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2017-11-21T05:26:38.738+0000) > > I get that he's better than before but I don't see evidence that he's out of line (he was performing terribly in Diamond+ *before 7.22*). But that's just it. We ARE on 7.22 now, and 7.23 is coming out tonight. For 7.22, these are Corki's win rates from several websites: OP.GG: 50.86% Champion.GG: 53.73% Lolking.net: 53.6% Lolalytics.com: 52.3% Leagueofgraphs.com: 52.7% So, yes, he isn't "OMG, SO BRKN, RITO HOTFX NOW!!1!!11", but he is looking pretty damn strong, especially considering the fact that most of these sites say he was below 50% win rate before 7.22. Also, jumping up 5% in win rate at high MMR is actually insane. If anything, the nerf is geared towards that.
> [{quoted}](name=Paleo Electro,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B5tB9GQH,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2017-11-21T06:25:44.077+0000) > > But that's just it. We ARE on 7.22 now, and 7.23 is coming out tonight. > For 7.22, these are Corki's win rates from several websites: > > OP.GG: 50.86% > Champion.GG: 53.73% > Lolking.net: 53.6% > Lolalytics.com: 52.3% > Leagueofgraphs.com: 52.7% > > So, yes, he isn't "OMG, SO BRKN, RITO HOTFX NOW!!1!!11", but he is looking pretty damn strong, especially considering the fact that most of these sites say he was below 50% win rate before 7.22. > > Also, jumping up 5% in win rate at high MMR is actually insane. If anything, the nerf is geared towards that. In my experience, lolalytics is the only reliable site for stats. All the others are absolutely terrible and highly inaccurate. I already posted the stats for Corki several times in this thread, including at high MMR and none were out of line. His Diamond+ winrate is lower than at lower tiers. That's actually the thing, a 5% winrate jump at high MMR is indeed insane but ONLY if that champion had a respectable winrate to begin with. You wouldn't see me making a big deal out of this if Corki was sitting at a 55% winrate in Diamond+. When you start at an abysmal 46.5% winrate in Diamond+, that 5% jump does not look impressive. 51.5% is fairly average and like I said before, his late game stats are also not overwhelming (48% winrate past 40 minutes). Besides, if players felt he was a problem, his Diamond+ banrate wouldn't be under 0.5%. Corki is often overrated at times when he's simply balanced and viable (due to the biases I outlined in the OP). Where exactly is the evidence that him getting better makes him out of line even in high MMR, where he gained the most?
PhRoXz0n (NA)
: We're still looking at changes to Malzahar, but wanted to see how his keystones shook out (specifically how good he is with comet), as he is one of the best Aery users and so determining how much this would move him and what his next best options are. With regards to Corki and other champs who deal primarily magic damage, but did not run magic pen marks, they just deal a lot more damage in this Preseason due to the lack of magic resist runes (Corki went up almost 5% at high MMR, which for context is essentially equivalent to increasing his Q ability by ~60 base damage). Leona is another one in this category and also got an additional damage source from aftershock.
> [{quoted}](name=PhRoXz0n,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=B5tB9GQH,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-11-21T04:55:49.182+0000) > > We're still looking at changes to Malzahar, but wanted to see how his keystones shook out (specifically how good he is with comet), as he is one of the best Aery users and so determining how much this would move him and what his next best options are. > > With regards to Corki and other champs who deal primarily magic damage, but did not run magic pen marks, they just deal a lot more damage in this Preseason due to the lack of magic resist runes (Corki went up almost 5% at high MMR, which for context is essentially equivalent to increasing his Q ability by ~60 base damage). Leona is another one in this category and also got an additional damage source from aftershock. Thanks for the response! I get that he's better than before but I don't see evidence that he's out of line (he was performing terribly in Diamond+ before 7.22) . I expect that Diamond+ is considered high MMR. Right now I'm getting these stats on lolalytics for Diamond+: 51.61% average winrate, 48.28% winrate past 40 minutes (late game is supposedly a plus for him but this appears to be a myth in practical play). I think the mistake being made is the assumption that he was just fine and balanced in 7.21 so a winrate increase is a bad thing. He had a 46.5% winrate in Diamond+ for several patches and he had a modest pick rate. He's also not the type of champion like Yasuo or Zed who just attracts a lot of players purely for some highlight reel plays. I think his prior AD nerf was due to competitive inertia and not so much because he deserved it. If you really want to do this, what do you think about giving his W trail a slow that scales with levels as I explained in the post? Corki has very asymmetric strengths. He's pure damage with absolutely zero CC and most of it is single target too so he doesn't excel in all teamfight structures. Thus, for him to be decent, he needs to have a lot of damage, especially late game, or he's not worth picking at all. The problem is that all these asymmetric champion designs, as fun as they may be for players like me, inevitably can be frustrating to play against because their one strength tends to be magnified a lot in order to offset the fact that they're not well rounded. Corki doesn't get many complaints but others like him have in the past. People naturally remember painful encounters with a champion much more vividly. It's just how human memory works. The times they win and find a Corki useless and too late to hit his spikes, they'll just think that it's normal because they are so much better players etc. I've seen it in poke all the time. Every loss is the cards, every win is skill. :D I remember that AP Tristana was really hated by some players even though she actually was a pretty weak pick if you just avoided some basic mistakes. All she had was her 1 shot combo and if you itemized properly and didn't snowball her, she was a huge liability with no waveclear or real contribution but people just saw that potential or were scarred by some games where she popped off. Thus, they bandwagoned around the idea that she was OP. She was just a gimmick and I don't regret that she's gone but my point for Corki is that he also has nothing else besides his damage (Package too but that's not reliable or that frequent). Thus, if you want to really reduce player pain due to his asymmetric strength, make him more well rounded at the cost of some damage. My idea for his W to have a scaling slow is an attempt at doing that. He probably still won't max W 2nd just for a small slow but it gives him a bit of indirect power, self-peel if they chase him etc. It's probably quite viable to lower his damage if he starts to have something like that. It doesn't have to be W but it has to be something and then you can nerf his damage. When so much of a champion's power budget is in one area, it's easy for people to think that champion is OP. Illaoi was similar because of her crazy ultimate damage. There were numerous threads about her and yet she didn't perform great overall.
  Rioter Comments
Rykagnar (NA)
: Please Nerf Lethal Tempo
Melee can abuse it? The very fact that they're melee makes it far less abusable on them. It's not even particularly good.
Theorex (NA)
: I'm okay with abilities not having to do damage to proc this stuff too. But some champions were gimped because of that change to Stormraiders. (Ryze and Vlad main problems)
> [{quoted}](name=Theorex,realm=NA,application-id=LqLKtMpN,discussion-id=FKbkB5pu,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-11-13T10:03:48.451+0000) > > I'm okay with abilities not having to do damage to proc this stuff too. But some champions were gimped because of that change to Stormraiders. (Ryze and Vlad main problems) Why would Ryze be worse with this one?
Rioter Comments
: I'd say they pigeonholed it into support at this point.
> [{quoted}](name=astralwit,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=TUA1LHs4,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-11-10T21:28:55.583+0000) > > I'd say they pigeonholed it into support at this point. If it had a mini upgrade like for Ruby Sightstone, then it would be slot efficient on more champions late game.
: I start the game with 22 armor and zed can have a mini hexdrinker
On the other hand, most mages are more useful in teamfights.
oNbAtTlE (EUNE)
: Well,goodbye League of Legends
I like the general direction but it obviously needs some time to be refined. Although, I really hope League won't change at this rate each season.
Rioter Comments
Chermorg (NA)
: As you were informed in your deletion message, your post was literally full of personal insults. Telling someone they are "crazy as a bat" for a legitimate analysis of your punishment is not okay. Per the [Universal Rules](http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/4LgZ2EwM-universal-rules), "Harassment and insults will not be tolerated (“just playing” is NOT a catch-all excuse)." If you'd like to discuss this in real time, you can visit us in the [Moderation Discord here](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/qVlculPP-boards-moderation-discord).
> [{quoted}](name=Chermorg,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=fMA44UHa,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-10-15T22:46:32.822+0000) > > As you were informed in your deletion message, your post was literally full of personal insults. Telling someone they are "crazy as a bat" for a legitimate analysis of your punishment is not okay. > > Per the [Universal Rules](http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/4LgZ2EwM-universal-rules), "Harassment and insults will not be tolerated (“just playing” is NOT a catch-all excuse)." > > If you'd like to discuss this in real time, you can visit us in the [Moderation Discord here](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/community-moderation/qVlculPP-boards-moderation-discord). It was crazy though. What's wrong with calling crazy crazy? That guy even said he was trolling and didn't believe what he was typing. That's a bit like getting mad that a troll who runs into turrets to make your team lose is called a troll. Sometimes it's the truth.
Eedat (NA)
: I just never hover my champion. Theres really no reason to unless its a highly contested pick/ban champ and you're first pick.
> [{quoted}](name=Eedat,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=tdZOjrz4,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2017-10-12T23:32:43.530+0000) > > I just never hover my champion. Theres really no reason to unless its a highly contested pick/ban champ and you're first pick. It can really help shape the team comp. There are definitely reasons. I hate first picking jungle without knowing our comp..
Cunky (NA)
: Banning a champion that your teamate wanted to play
Maybe I don't feel like watching you first time Eve in ranked after her rework? For normals though, I agree that it's messed up.
: > [{quoted}](name=ofart,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=fdq6H7Em,comment-id=000b000000000000,timestamp=2017-10-13T06:59:23.533+0000) > > Camille support was actually even used in LCS games so that just shows how blindly biased you are vs non-meta picks (many just need the right situation). Camille support!? Oh the humanity! And if we allow gay marriage, people will marry their pets!!! Almost everything was picked at some point in lcs history. That still don't change the fact that I'm most likely getting reported if I pick zed ap, camile supp Cuz is a troll pick no matter what happened in lcs history. I'm cutting my team probability to win just cuz I wanna have fun with zed ap. But probably my team is not going to have as much fun watching me feed. And op stated he picks kog maw ap for fun, not cuz is the best pick with his team comp. just for fun. And it shows with his performance. If the pick is well tough and taked with the team, and it works, that's fine, but if is just a troll pick like I wanna have fun with zed ap. bye reported.
> [{quoted}](name=Magicsparkle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=fdq6H7Em,comment-id=000b0000000000000000,timestamp=2017-10-13T07:09:37.613+0000) > > Almost everything was picked at some point in lcs history. > That still don't change the fact that I'm most likely getting reported if I pick zed ap, Cuz is a troll pick no matter what happened in lcs history. I'm cutting my team probability to win just cuz I wanna have fun with zed ap. Camille support was picked in LCS this year. Off-meta and totally nonsensical, such as AP Zed, aren't the same thing. AP Kog is off-meta but not trolling. AP Zed is the definition of trolling.
: > [{quoted}](name=ofart,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=fdq6H7Em,comment-id=000b0000,timestamp=2017-10-13T02:06:43.523+0000) > > Holy! Reading comprehension is SO hard. He's responding to their unsolicited suggestions for HIS build. He even specifically has a statement explaining that if it wasn't obvious from the discussion of Morello and Rylai's. > > Also, just because someone picks non-meta doesn't mean they have to be gods at it. That's an unreasonable standard. You have people who suck at Lee still playing Lee in ranked. Where's the report for them? There are plenty of Lees with hundreds of games and winrates in the low 40s. They are picking something considered decent but are bad at it and if someone plays off meta and is bad at it too, I see no real difference. We don't punish the people who are bad at meta champions but we should punish those who are bad at non-meta champions? You can only go off-meta if you're really good at it? People sometimes play more for entertainment than just raw performance. Moreover, sometimes metas change and something once strong is now really off meta. Ok lets all go draven ap. Camile sup, Chog adc, zed ap, and do not forget to pick ranked, lets just have fun and don not care about our team at all. Then lets act Martyr when we are feeding and innocent about how we are not responsible about us feeding, and then call our team toxic cuz they are mad in chat.
> [{quoted}](name=Magicsparkle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=fdq6H7Em,comment-id=000b00000000,timestamp=2017-10-13T06:51:15.640+0000) > > Ok lets all go Camile sup, Chog adc, zed ap, and do not forget to pick ranked, whatever lets just have fun and don not care about our team comp at all. Camille support was actually even used in LCS games so that just shows how blindly biased you are vs non-meta picks (many just need the right situation). Camille support!? Oh the humanity! And if we allow gay marriage, people will marry their pets!!!
: I don't think this chat is Ban worth it, he might be annoying but nothing that toxic, On the other hand I hate picks like mid ap kog or Camile support, I might have reported u aswel if u are playing bad, I mean if you are going off meta is cuz your good with it, and you know how to deal with the disadvantages/advantage the off meta pick brings to the team. If you are getting ganked stap pushing lane, if they are diving so early game and you cant do nothing about it, is cuz you picked Kog ap mid. And they are taking advantage of it, one of the contributions of mid usually is some form of cc or mobility as mages, that's why Kog ap mid is off/non meta he don't have any of those, So if an off meta starts to feed, in my eyes that's a troll pick., and deserves the report. And nothing personal but for real you picked a non meta cuz is fun, and then you are telling other players how they should build their champs, if you are having fun with an off/non meta pick, let others build whatever they want and have fun with theirs non meta builds too.
> [{quoted}](name=Magicsparkle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=fdq6H7Em,comment-id=000b,timestamp=2017-10-12T23:50:57.295+0000) > > I don't think this chat is Ban worth it, he might be annoying but nothing that toxic, On the other hand I hate picks like mid ap kog or Camile support, I might have reported u aswel if u are playing bad, I mean if you are going off meta is cuz your good with it, and you know how to deal with the disadvantages/advantage the off meta pick brings to the team. > > If you are getting ganked stap pushing lane, if they are diving so early game and you cant do nothing about it, is cuz you picked Kog ap mid. And they are taking advantage of it, one of the contributions of mid usually is some form of cc or mobility as mages, that's why Kog ap mid is off/non meta he don't have any of those, > > So if an off meta starts to feed, in my eyes that's a troll pick., and deserves the report. > > And nothing personal but for real you picked a non meta cuz is fun, and then you are telling other players how they should build their champs, if you are having fun with an off/non meta pick, let others build whatever they want and have fun with theirs non meta builds too. Holy! Reading comprehension is SO hard. He's responding to their unsolicited suggestions for HIS build. He even specifically has a statement explaining that if it wasn't obvious from the discussion of Morello and Rylai's. Also, just because someone picks non-meta doesn't mean they have to be gods at it. That's an unreasonable standard. You have people who suck at Lee still playing Lee in ranked. Where's the report for them? There are plenty of Lees with hundreds of games and winrates in the low 40s. They are picking something considered decent but are bad at it and if someone plays off meta and is bad at it too, I see no real difference. We don't punish the people who are bad at meta champions but we should punish those who are bad at non-meta champions? You can only go off-meta if you're really good at it? People sometimes play more for entertainment than just raw performance. Moreover, sometimes metas change and something once strong is now really off meta.
: "You're build is very bad" Hehe, that's a no-go "You're build is not optimal versus the current matchup, maybe consider a different path such as "X"? Though if that's what you're most comfortable with, I understand; I merely meant to give an alternate build that appeared more viable in your situation. I trust you that you are confident in your abilities to play and build X champ to the best of your abilities" ^^^LITERALLY NO WAY TO GET SALTY AT THAT EDIT: typo on "You're" twice in there, and yeah that's my bad, I'd been off in thought, not going to fix it though so the comment below stays relevant.
> [{quoted}](name=Faustavian,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=fdq6H7Em,comment-id=0011,timestamp=2017-10-13T01:42:26.198+0000) > > "You're build is very bad" > Hehe, that's a no-go > > "You're build is not optimal versus the current matchup, maybe consider a different path such as "X"? Though if that's what you're most comfortable with, I understand; I merely meant to give an alternate build that appeared more viable in your situation. I trust you that you are confident in your abilities to play and build X champ to the best of your abilities" > > ^^^LITERALLY NO WAY TO GET SALTY AT THAT Did you even read the post (and he typed "your")? It was in reference to a hypothetical build they were telling him to go. I also don't think that you can type essays to coddle players to that extent. We're playing in real time and people have to leave their egos at the door. They should expect some niceties to be skipped for brevity. It would be nice if toxic players were like that though. "You sir appear to be less than average in ability but I don't know for sure as I've only seen one game and am not aware of the full context or what you main!!! I hope that you kindly remove the game from your computer if it suits your desire and my first assertion turns out to be correct. In the eventuality that I was mistaken and you are not a bad player, please ignore my former statement and continue to play on! If I ever see you again, I will perform to the best of my ability but be slightly disappointed if it turns out you perform as you have in this game!"
SirPurrr (NA)
: Nearly 1/3 of Kog Players Went AP Before the Latest Reworks
Maybe now that they've gotten around to Aatrox and Urgot (which used to be perma trash tier), they will look at AP Kog. The Season 7 changes might also favor him.
: > This was the only game I was banned for, there are no more log and no more games. This isn't entirely accurate. This is your 11th penalty on THIS account and have also been banned from the boards. You get reported so much that my browser had a difficult time paginating the results. I scrolled through 30 PAGES of reports, and based upon what I saw you are justly reported in about every game you play. The severity of the chat logs shown aren't extreme. They do however show consistent negativity and similar behavior trends to your previous penalties. As such, the system decided, and rightfully so, that you are not learning from your previous penalties. I spot checked your recent games. One game, you loaded in and 28 seconds into the game informed the player they were on an 8 game losing streak, and were bad. You 'soft trolled' a few games, intentionally feeding but trying to stay under the detection radar. You argue with people in literally every game I checked.
> [{quoted}](name=Riot Tantram,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=3jEVVlsY,comment-id=003e,timestamp=2017-08-23T21:13:29.764+0000) > > This isn't entirely accurate. > > This is your 11th penalty on THIS account and have also been banned from the boards. You get reported so much that my browser had a difficult time paginating the results. I scrolled through 30 PAGES of reports, and based upon what I saw you are justly reported in about every game you play. The severity of the chat logs shown aren't extreme. They do however show consistent negativity and similar behavior trends to your previous penalties. As such, the system decided, and rightfully so, that you are not learning from your previous penalties. > > I spot checked your recent games. > > One game, you loaded in and 28 seconds into the game informed the player they were on an 8 game losing streak, and were bad. > You 'soft trolled' a few games, intentionally feeding but trying to stay under the detection radar. > You argue with people in literally every game I checked. This is no argument at all. It's like a cop saying "It's fine that I planted drugs on this guy and got him in trouble because in the past he was caught for stealing and drug offenses." No, it's really not. There is a threshold. If someone hasn't exceeded it by the weight of the evidence, it doesn't matter what they did before. False evidence is never morally acceptable. The fact that he was banned within 3 minutes of the game shows that THIS game put him over the threshold. That is NOT justifiable by any means. This game does not merit a punishment. It's very likely he'd have been LEGITIMATELY toxic in a future game and gotten banned anyway but this did not meet those standards.
: Post chat logs. R word is hate speech.
> [{quoted}](name=TheViper7911,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=BHP3EXay,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2017-07-11T07:51:05.117+0000) > > Post chat logs. R word is hate speech. lol... hate speech... and getting aced by a Twitch R is "rape". It often feels that people use phrases like that so carelessly because they want drama to make their lives more interesting or to feel like they have a mission (get the evil wrongdoers!). The group think is real... In general, people on here will try to find ANYTHING possibly wrong with your behavior and chalk it up to "deserved." (even though they barely know anything about what you mean and what the chat is about) They may often be right but the idea that you weren't an ideal player is a different standard from that of meriting a ban. The problem isn't so much that people are wrong in this thread, it's that it almost always comes from a super biased point of view. You should definitely post logs though.
: Now i dont know much about reporting but wouldnt it be griefing if someone asked to report a person who isnt toxic, and the someone is just trying to worsen the life of the nontoxic person?
> [{quoted}](name=Bionic Glider,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=6Xq714Px,comment-id=000b000000020000,timestamp=2017-07-11T07:43:03.828+0000) > > Now i dont know much about reporting but wouldnt it be griefing if someone asked to report a person who isnt toxic, and the someone is just trying to worsen the life of the nontoxic person? Yes, it would. That's why chat logs are useless as they're presented now. For some, it may be entirely justified to ask for a report (yes, maybe it's not "necessary" but it shouldn't be punishable in obvious cases). On the other hand, there can also be douchebags asking for reports just because they don't like someone and without any real reason. Especially if repeated, that would constitute harassment.
: Just wanted to share that this thread made it into the PB team's group chat and really made some people's day a little better. Thanks for the kind words. :)
> [{quoted}](name=Riot NaKyle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=A2iOEPe1,comment-id=0044,timestamp=2016-03-25T06:41:09.937+0000) > > Just wanted to share that this thread made it into the PB team's group chat and really made some people's day a little better. Thanks for the kind words. :) Sure, but reformed shouldn't be the same as "did not express opinions others strongly disagree with." A lot of reports are for nothing more than disagreements. People will literally report you for saying their champion is awful in the current meta. The champion could be Azir and sit at 42% winrate but nope, "OMG HE SAID SOMETHING BAD ABOUT MY CHAMPION! SO TOXIC!" It's not even a criticism of the player but they will still get you in trouble. The system needs to discriminate between valid reports and BS emotional reports because people don't like dissenting opinions. If you personally attack a player, sure, get punished. Stating something about their champion or having a tarctical disagreement with the rest of the team does NOT qualify.
: Solo Q Health - My 4th Topic Maybe ?
I personally care very little about verbally toxic players as long as they play reasonably and don't afk. The leavers, inters and other types of trolls are 100x worse than anyone who called me a feeding retard. I actually couldn't care less what they say and I don't even have to see it if it covers too much chat. They could literally tell me to off myself and I wouldn't give the slightest bleep as long as they play their role competently and don't intentionally ruin our chances to win via their play (like following me around in my jungle to try to steal camps because I didn't gank their lane).
: Why do people still pick EZ?
You should dodge if you want to win. Not all players play ranked to win.
: Here we are again! The case of_ “Unusual Pick that Throws A Game on Its head”_ vs _“The Teammates going WTF Is Going On”_. [If you’re just tuning in we previously covered this topic with a similar case in December: “Support Singed isn't bannable, but that's not the point”. ](http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/79aGu3wR-support-singed-isnt-banable-but-thats-not-the-point?comment=006b) We feel that the situation between these two edge cases are very similar. But it’s obvious we need to keep updating a few processes to smooth out any rare repeats in the future. And rare is what we’d call this; it’s a very unique edge case that seems to only present itself once every few months among thousands of audits that we process. Let’s re-iterate our stance from before: **Q: Can I get banned for choosing a champion or strategy that is outside the current meta?** A: 100% no. Choosing a champion or strategy outside of the current meta is not a factor we take into account when reviewing accounts. On any given day tens of thousands of players are making unusual picks in the game and they’ll never receive penalties in any form. **Q: So why does this issue keep coming up? What makes it different?** A: Riot Gromp said it best in the previous post when they stated: “...common sense and good sportsmanship say that experimenting players need to clearly communicate intent and win conditions to their teammates.” League of Legends is a team game and sometimes the biggest challenge can be coordinating with 4 other strangers who share a common goal; victory. If a player is going to rewrite the rules for the rest of their team then there is more pressure to properly communicate to everyone what they want the plan to be, and what they think everyone should do to achieve it. But wait! Communication doesn’t stop after you press the Enter button on your keyboard; and that’s where we saw a problem in this particular case. All of us need to be aware of the difference of communicating “with” someone vs. communicating “at” someone. _Telling your team what you’re going to do and then ignoring them isn’t really working with them it’s holding them hostage_. Telling your team what you want to do and actually working towards a common plan is a central part to playing any team based game. In this case what we observed was an expert Nunu counter-jungler throwing the meta on it’s head with a respectable win rate of 53%. While pretty impressive on it’s own, we also found that nearly 50% of their games were reported by teammates as frustrating and unfun. Keep in mind, this isn’t just teammates in losing games, this is teammates across all of his games; victories included. The message was pretty clear to us, this player is serious about_ Making Nunu Great Again_ but they are leaving a trail of dissatisfaction, frustration, and anger in their wake. Winning is not the end all be all of League. We want players to have fun but not at the expense of teammates. Ideally this means players will coordinate among themselves in a given match and react to the unique circumstances they end up in. If a player is consistently forcing “their vision” on the rest of the team **and **refusing to adapt to their needs we reserve the right to intervene. That’s what happened here (and before with the Singed case); players cried out how terrible the experience was for them and we intervened. Moving forward we’re going to keep updating our processes for these edge cases. We will still be on the lookout for situations where a player is creating a really negative experience for everyone else and we will intervene when necessary. In this case it’s undeniable that TakeTheDraw wants to win even if their approach leaves a lot to be desired. The effects on others in his games were enough for us to lock the account and we stand by that. But our agents were not properly prepared with a process to handle this edge case when they wrote in and that is on me. I will be working with the team to clarify an escalation process that emphasizes clearer feedback and opens the door for ban reductions if we believe that someone can make changes to their play style allowing them to continue crushing the meta but not at the expense of their teammates.
> [{quoted}](name=WookieeCookie,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=FrILlWp7,comment-id=00f0,timestamp=2017-02-28T04:43:04.612+0000) > > Here we are again! The case of_ “Unusual Pick that Throws A Game on Its head”_ vs _“The Teammates going WTF Is Going On”_. > > [If you’re just tuning in we previously covered this topic with a similar case in December: “Support Singed isn't bannable, but that's not the point”. ](http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/79aGu3wR-support-singed-isnt-banable-but-thats-not-the-point?comment=006b) > > We feel that the situation between these two edge cases are very similar. But it’s obvious we need to keep updating a few processes to smooth out any rare repeats in the future. And rare is what we’d call this; it’s a very unique edge case that seems to only present itself once every few months among thousands of audits that we process. > > Let’s re-iterate our stance from before: > > **Q: Can I get banned for choosing a champion or strategy that is outside the current meta?** > > A: 100% no. Choosing a champion or strategy outside of the current meta is not a factor we take into account when reviewing accounts. On any given day tens of thousands of players are making unusual picks in the game and they’ll never receive penalties in any form. > > **Q: So why does this issue keep coming up? What makes it different?** > > A: Riot Gromp said it best in the previous post when they stated: “...common sense and good sportsmanship say that experimenting players need to clearly communicate intent and win conditions to their teammates.” League of Legends is a team game and sometimes the biggest challenge can be coordinating with 4 other strangers who share a common goal; victory. If a player is going to rewrite the rules for the rest of their team then there is more pressure to properly communicate to everyone what they want the plan to be, and what they think everyone should do to achieve it. > > But wait! Communication doesn’t stop after you press the Enter button on your keyboard; and that’s where we saw a problem in this particular case. All of us need to be aware of the difference of communicating “with” someone vs. communicating “at” someone. _Telling your team what you’re going to do and then ignoring them isn’t really working with them it’s holding them hostage_. Telling your team what you want to do and actually working towards a common plan is a central part to playing any team based game. > > In this case what we observed was an expert Nunu counter-jungler throwing the meta on it’s head with a respectable win rate of 53%. While pretty impressive on it’s own, we also found that nearly 50% of their games were reported by teammates as frustrating and unfun. Keep in mind, this isn’t just teammates in losing games, this is teammates across all of his games; victories included. > > The message was pretty clear to us, this player is serious about_ Making Nunu Great Again_ but they are leaving a trail of dissatisfaction, frustration, and anger in their wake. > > Winning is not the end all be all of League. We want players to have fun but not at the expense of teammates. Ideally this means players will coordinate among themselves in a given match and react to the unique circumstances they end up in. If a player is consistently forcing “their vision” on the rest of the team **and **refusing to adapt to their needs we reserve the right to intervene. That’s what happened here (and before with the Singed case); players cried out how terrible the experience was for them and we intervened. > > Moving forward we’re going to keep updating our processes for these edge cases. We will still be on the lookout for situations where a player is creating a really negative experience for everyone else and we will intervene when necessary. In this case it’s undeniable that TakeTheDraw wants to win even if their approach leaves a lot to be desired. The effects on others in his games were enough for us to lock the account and we stand by that. But our agents were not properly prepared with a process to handle this edge case when they wrote in and that is on me. I will be working with the team to clarify an escalation process that emphasizes clearer feedback and opens the door for ban reductions if we believe that someone can make changes to their play style allowing them to continue crushing the meta but not at the expense of their teammates. This position is internally incoherent and is mostly motivated by League's "mob mentality" to how players are punished and the reasons for those punishments. There are basically no real rules and what is listed is so vague as to be twisted to apply to anything should the situation arise where the group deems said behavior "annoying." It's not about fairness, standards, ethics, justice or anything like that whatsoever. It's purely based on whether people overall view something as punishable or not. That's a very sloppy framework where nothing actually matters and Riot needs to show a backbone. Consensus does not make correctness. It used to be a consensus that slavery was OK too. This sort of stance is very alienating to me. I want things done on merit and based on certain protocols, not just because enough people complain. This attitude extends way beyond picks. The tyranny of the majority is a very real thing known throughout history. Both sides need to be protected and freedom of expression (as long as it's not hostile) needs to be considered an absolute. I should not live in fear that even expressing a disagreement or voicing an unpopular opinion will get me punished. "100% no" but oh wait, your team needs to agree. Go ahead and experiment/innovate except not. Almost no one ever says "I sure hope my teammate will play an off the wall strategy that I'm not familiar with and hasn't been proven by pros!" so to require acceptance by the team is an unrealistic standard if you want to at the same time claim people are allowed to play off-meta. BTW: Riot has to fix their AWFUL support in player behavior cases like this and others. Literally, all they do is parrot some key phrases like "negative behavior" or "retaliation" with zero understanding of what the situation even is. It's like their paid to just disagree with anything and everything thrown at them so that the system can continue to be called "effective." I am tired of it. If you're going to have these sorts of automatic punishments, there needs to be way more transparency. Full anonymized chat logs (language is meaningless and misleading without context), jury of impartial peers, etc. How can someone trust you with their money if the whole proccess is so one sided?
: It's like Riot just plays balance roulette to keep their game "fun". I used to main Rengar in season 3 and when they gave him his first rework they made it so he couldn't cast Q on towers anymore because he killed them too fast... rofl
> [{quoted}](name=MachoSaurus,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=masQNhF5,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2017-07-09T23:47:07.328+0000) > > It's like Riot just plays balance roulette to keep their game "fun". I used to main Rengar in season 3 and when they gave him his first rework they made it so he couldn't cast Q on towers anymore because he killed them too fast... rofl Yes, it does seem like they make weird balance decisions sometimes. Ideally, it would be purely for objective reasons but there's definite a sense of power being rotated from champion to champion or class to class. It might not be intentional though.
: > People are characterizing disagreeing with someone toxic as inherently toxic. There is a difference between escalating the issue and disagreeing. >You're not a doormat. Have a backbone for both yourself and the world. This absolutely applies.....IRL. This is a isolated environment. You have no need to engage with toxic players. While trying to de-escalate the issue is admirable the OP did not do this instead they aggravated the situation. Once the situation is starting to be made worse the proper course is to stop engaging. The choice of words to me is not toxic. The environment that the player contributed was. The OP had the option to mute report move on. Instead they chose to make the situation worse. That is why it is not appropriate. So I have a few questions for you. How did any of the chat help the issue or help in trying to win the game? How is constantly aggravating the negative environment a positive thing? How is making a situation worse not a negative behavior? >BTW: He had no other logs and had a good honor standing so it seems cheap to just say "oh but I know you must have been toxic in other games even though we have zero evidence!!!"! We have no evidence he has not received other punishments or that there are not more logs. We have the word of the OP only. This is a copy pasted post, While i don't think they were edited they could have been. >It's far more acceptable for 100 toxic players get away with it than for one innocent player to get punished. I would rather see one person incorrectly punished and then go through a review process(which the OP refuses to try) then see 100 guilty players go free. This is not like a crime in real life. This has no punishment other then limited chat for a few games. That is hardly a severe punishment for a innocent person to endure while putting in for a manual review. >There's basically no level of acceptable "collateral" damage when you have no appeal process in place and rule with an iron grip. There is a appeal process it is called a support ticket. Riot has overturned punishments in the past upon manual review.
> [{quoted}](name=Anomander,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=wA80fh7k,comment-id=00010002000100000000,timestamp=2017-07-05T18:34:43.784+0000) > > There is a difference between escalating the issue and disagreeing. > > This absolutely applies.....IRL. > > This is a isolated environment. You have no need to engage with toxic players. While trying to de-escalate the issue is admirable the OP did not do this instead they aggravated the situation. Once the situation is starting to be made worse the proper course is to stop engaging. > > > The choice of words to me is not toxic. The environment that the player contributed was. The OP had the option to mute report move on. Instead they chose to make the situation worse. That is why it is not appropriate. > > > So I have a few questions for you. How did any of the chat help the issue or help in trying to win the game? How is constantly aggravating the negative environment a positive thing? How is making a situation worse not a negative behavior? > > > We have no evidence he has not received other punishments or that there are not more logs. We have the word of the OP only. This is a copy pasted post, While i don't think they were edited they could have been. > > I would rather see one person incorrectly punished and then go through a review process(which the OP refuses to try) then see 100 guilty players go free. This is not like a crime in real life. This has no punishment other then limited chat for a few games. That is hardly a severe punishment for a innocent person to endure while putting in for a manual review. > > There is a appeal process it is called a support ticket. Riot has overturned punishments in the past upon manual review. Nearly any disagreement with a rager can be perceived as escalating so to say that it's fine to disagree as long as there's no escalation is like trying to have your care and eat it too. The player disagreeing can't really win and being responsible for someone else's emotional state isn't his burden to carry. If a disagreement doesn't help the game, that isn't justification for any punishment unless it was expressed in a vulgar or insulting way. Protecting people's emotional states isn't some end all be all of discourse. > Riot has overturned punishments in the past upon manual review. Lol. Link to me one case for behavioral punishment where that happened. I'm guessing the OP's punishment is due to a limitation in Riot's identification of toxicity. > ToddlerPacifier: so why do we not ban him? This was about a champion but the system's probably too dumb to understand that. Thus, it thinks you're threatening a player with a ban and asking for reports. This is well known to trigger punishments.
: I do try to explain why a punishment was given. That's most people's reasons for posting their logs to the boards. Sadly, I don't think anyone's directed this person to submit a support [ticket](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/requests/new), because frankly, one game for a chat restriction is a bit much, in my opinion. I do understand that there's grey area here with what could or could not be toxic given what he might have been responding to, but I still felt he had more negative chat than positive. Overall, in any given game, there could be a toxic person on your team. When that happens, you can either contribute to the problem, or not. This person chose to contribute. I found these lines toxic: > ToddlerPacifier: renekton you lost lane without interference *stfu* > ToddlerPacifier: cry more > ToddlerPacifier: renekton is super toxic > ToddlerPacifier: nearly all my deaths are following up on you > ToddlerPacifier: why can't you be as useful as the Lulu Bard? > ToddlerPacifier: 3 losing lanes means the jungler suffers the most but of course, he gets harassed for it > ToddlerPacifier: pretty much any jungler is useless in this situation > ToddlerPacifier: unreal toxic team > ToddlerPacifier: but that wasn't an issue if we didn't have 3 losing lanes At any point, he could have done many measures to deescalate the situation, and he chose not to. At no point does he try to accept blame, and his *whole* post is about deflecting blame.
> [{quoted}](name=Periscope,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=wA80fh7k,comment-id=00020000000100000000,timestamp=2017-07-05T04:52:45.896+0000) > > I do try to explain why a punishment was given. That's most people's reasons for posting their logs to the boards. Sadly, I don't think anyone's directed this person to submit a support [ticket](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/requests/new), because frankly, one game for a chat restriction is a bit much, in my opinion. > > I do understand that there's grey area here with what could or could not be toxic given what he might have been responding to, but I still felt he had more negative chat than positive. > > Overall, in any given game, there could be a toxic person on your team. When that happens, you can either contribute to the problem, or not. This person chose to contribute. > > I found these lines toxic: > > At any point, he could have done many measures to deescalate the situation, and he chose not to. At no point does he try to accept blame, and his *whole* post is about deflecting blame. You skipped an important line there to support the idea that he took no responsibility. > ToddlerPacifier: nearly all my deaths are following up on you the very next line is: > ToddlerPacifier: so you have **equal **responsibility If someone engages and the frontline tank follows up and dies, he can't be blamed entirely for his death. If he didn't go in at all, he'd probably be accused of KDA farming and trolling. Either way, not accepting what the team chooses to pin on you isn't against any rule. You're allowed to disagree and have opinions. There isn't much purpose to having a robust chat system if the design prohibits even that much. The whole negative attitude bit seems like a stretch since that's described as "griefing" and "giving up." A lot of the report categories are probably abused. I've had a player claim someone on our team "rage quit" while we were ahead and the player accused of rage quitting was winning. There's no justification to say that player rage quit and the most obvious explanation is a DC. I normally don't report people if it looks like a dc rather than an intentional leaver situation. They have the same result but they're not the same thing and the system detects a dc without a report anyway.
: If they work within the new system, then it's possible. Keystone Masteries were actually a light design proof of concept for Runes Reforged.
> [{quoted}](name=Riot Reinboom,realm=NA,application-id=Ag8jgd8Q,discussion-id=R6AeXZeB,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2017-06-01T18:13:50.962+0000) > > If they work within the new system, then it's possible. > > Keystone Masteries were actually a light design proof of concept for Runes Reforged. So future masteries are again going to drastically reduce options like the last time they were reworked or they're just not going to exist at all?
Rioter Comments
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: May 19
> [{quoted}](name=Meddler,realm=NA,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=WwgbLUTA,comment-id=,timestamp=2017-05-19T17:01:19.534+0000) > > **Zac** > > Looks like we definitely overbuffed Zac in 7.10. We're looking at the best way to tone his power down at present, and figuring out just how out of line he is or isn't. Possible that happens in a hotfix, more likely 7.11 changes though unless we get a clear read on what exactly the biggest issue is and it looks urgent enough to not wait. > I don't get it. Zac has a 55% winrate and Ivern's had a winrate way higher than that for several patches without being touched. There weren't talks of a hotfix so why is it OK for Ivern to perform that way but Zac doing so is suddenly a big deal? It seems like playing favorites. Zac's winrate for experienced players is ~55% @ D3 which isn't out of line. Ivern's used to be ~60% with a higher average ELO. The only thing relevant for a champion's strength is the performance of experienced players at high ELO. In fact, if you look at experienced Elise players, they average 56% at D1 ELO. This is much better than Zac given the level of the game. Average winrates are worthless besides looking nice and pretty when showing someone the list of champions. Even if the average winrate of every champion in the game was 50%, the game could be way more unbalanced than it is now. It's so artificial.
: FYI kassadin got nerfed in last patch
Yeah, it's a nerf but he's still fine.
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: May 19
What do you think of Luden's Echo? Now that every champion has scaling MR, it seems a bit weaker.
: FF at 15
Yeah, I'd love better quality games too but that means queue times would increase and some care a lot about that.
Malza (NA)
: When is Riot going to buff Singed?
Singed nearly always has a couple viable cheese strats.
: Add the option for a "player move only" click
Interesting but is it allowed?
: I hope you understand that you're solidifying a meta where **only** early game junglers (like {{champion:60}} and {{champion:64}}) and supportive junglers (like {{champion:20}} and {{champion:427}}) can thrive. Jungle diversity is going to be a thing of the past: mages went into extinction long ago, so I guess that now it's the turn of farming-oriented carries like {{champion:102}}.
> [{quoted}](name=RUCK FICKY,realm=EUW,application-id=A7LBtoKc,discussion-id=FUeAGTc6,comment-id=000900000002,timestamp=2017-04-14T19:19:06.419+0000) > > I hope you understand that you're solidifying a meta where **only** early game junglers (like {{champion:60}} and {{champion:64}}) and supportive junglers (like {{champion:20}} and {{champion:427}}) can thrive. > > Jungle diversity is going to be a thing of the past: mages went into extinction long ago, so I guess that now it's the turn of farming-oriented carries like {{champion:102}}. I kind of agree with that. XP and camp respawn nerfs make only one style viable and that involves a lot of early pressure. Strategically pathing correctly to maximize farm and counter-jungling at the opportune time when the enemy jungler is ganking etc. is no longer a good trade off. You have much less freedom to express a particular jungling style or fine-tune strategy. The true rank 1 player last season explains the problem with JG [here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ulAcw3_jF2w). He was unfairly removed from the ranking lists for toxicity/boosting. Why do I say unfairly? It's true he didn't deserve a Challenger Jacket or a chance to got to the scouting competition because he broke some non-gameplay related rules but he DID earn rank 1. Pretending he didn't because he was a jerk etc. is a lie and a political move. You can choose to not reward him but don't falsify reality to meet your beliefs. For example, if a runner beat the world's fastest time for X on his own and without any doping, you can't say "Oh but he calls everyone else mean names and is an asshole with cooky opinions so we'll pretend he didn't beat the world record." Not liking someone or not choosing to reward a certain type of behavior is fine but lying about said person's performance is a low blow and very unfair.
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: April 14
I hope you [find some time for FIddlesticks too.](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/ZRXiAOo1-fiddle-is-still-awful-go-play-him-20-games-in-plat-and-report-back-to-me-if-you-disagree) He's one of the few champions with TOO MUCH counterplay since he exists just for his ult. and there are many ways to deal with that via wards/displacement/dashes etc. The fact that it has a channel time and can be interrupted makes it even harder vs good teams. This is more about a rework than a particular buff but he also suffers from very inefficient and mana intensive farming which is itself an equally big problem at all levels. I'm always in awe when I see his ~50% winrate because he seems so helpless when behind at all and just very underwhelming in general. If behind, the enemy team gets vision control and you have very few good ult. opportunities. Even entering the JG is liable to getting you 1-shot because you have no escape and are very squishy. I'm guessing Fiddlesticks mains are just gods at him because I have 50+ games on him with a 45% winrate. If I don't snowball it early, I lack impact and get level 6 by 9 minutes when laning's almost over.
: I would rather wait 20 mins in Queue..
Oh, I'm more worried about match quality overall than just autofill. I'd be happy waiting 5 min if matches were closer.
: > It's because the people who play him are very dedicated and have an insane number of average games (more than any other champ). uhuh > go play him 20+ games in Plat+ and report back to me if you disagree so you are silver and have never played him in ranked > He's straight garbage though and it's pretty frustrating that's a interesting viewpoint to say the least now then lets look at some statistics shall we? http://www.leagueofgraphs.com/champions/stats/fiddlesticks 55% win ratio at 10+ games played, mains of the champion claim to high ranks with good win ratios, 50% win ratio on average at gold+. but you were talking about plat+ right so that doesn't matter right? well the higher elo you check the higher fiddlesticks win ratio is.
> [{quoted}](name=nice table,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ZRXiAOo1,comment-id=000d,timestamp=2017-04-14T02:16:57.615+0000) > > uhuh > > so you are silver and have never played him in ranked > > that's a interesting viewpoint to say the least > > now then lets look at some statistics shall we? > http://www.leagueofgraphs.com/champions/stats/fiddlesticks > 55% win ratio at 10+ games played, mains of the champion claim to high ranks with good win ratios, 50% win ratio on average at gold+. > but you were talking about plat+ right so that doesn't matter right? well the higher elo you check the higher fiddlesticks win ratio is. Have you ever heard of this thing called sample size or pick-rate? Fiddle isn't a generalist pick and nor is he popular.
: FYI camille mains have 60% win rate with her despite the nerfs
: PSA: Taric ult = you take no damage.
Yeah... I pointed out something similar a few months ago. Apparently one of them thought Karthus was ulting them...
Bíbs (EUW)
: Is Fiora OP?
borderline OP in the right hands
Show more

ofart

Level 30 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion