Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=woodvsmurph,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=F5b8ypmr,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-06-23T21:43:25.797+0000) > > 1. It is a player behavior issue. > 2. Nobody is forcing you to read anything. > 3. It isn't clickbait. It talks about exactly what it claims to. > 4. It does do what you claim you want - arguing about punishment - if you read... At least write so we can give a damn what you wrote.
I'm sorry boss. I didn't get your last check in the mail, so I didn't realize I was still under some sort of contract to write for your pleasure. Perhaps if you send another check and it gets to me, I can write that editorial singing the praises of dirty gym socks that you asked me to do next. Until then, I'm going to write what I wish.
: No need to spam the [same thing](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/F5b8ypmr-money-and-fame-equals-power) in multiple sections.
> [{quoted}](name=KFCeytron,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=EhW299js,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-06-23T21:57:36.329+0000) > > No need to spam the [same thing](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behavior-moderation/F5b8ypmr-money-and-fame-equals-power) in multiple sections. There is also no need to wear shoes, but I wear them anyways. There is no need to reply to the same post in multiple sections, but you did anyways. And... there is such a thing as marketing. Perhaps you're not old enough to know about it or simply don't care. But different people visit different sections of the boards and therefore, posting the same thing in multiple sections where it can validly belong increases potential for viewership as well as the ability to reach a wider audience. Therefore... perhaps it makes some greater degree of sense to post this in multiple sections than it does for you to follow simply to harass me. But hey... I don't tell you what to do any more than you have the right to tell me. So did you have a point? Or just going out of your way to harass me?
: Matchmaking is so bad that I could probably int and it would look normal
Funny how when I point out something along this line and add in the fact that verbally toxic people are playing like this and don't get punished, you go and take stabs at me. But then you go and complain yourself just because your teammates aren't doing great? Ironic. Come back and complain when you've been blamed for everything by 2-4 of your teammates every game for 2 weeks straight in games like the one you post about here. Come back when not one of said teammates is punished despite such poor play, taking 2v5's and blaming you for not being there... when you're half way across the map and have no tp and just warned them not to engage. When you've had 95% of your games be auto-losses from that kind of play every single game. Do it while being 2v1 or even 3v1 camped. Do it while putting yourself in a position to carry and outleveling, outfarming, and outfighting your opponents consistently while being given no assistance from your team. Do it consistently for 2 weeks. And avoid even once saying something negative or playing like crap. Then I give you some empathy. Until you can honestly do that, then don't come here acting like you've got challenges.
: I believe Nubrac was fine and right, but I disagree that league should punish people for their streams. It's not covered in the league rules, and it's outside of the game itself
That's part of the problem isn't it? People shouldn't be punished simply because a popular or high ranked player says so or because they have a friend at Riot. People of any elo should only be punished for breaking the rules. Similarly, nb3 should be punished if/when he breaks the rules, not merely as a knee-jerk reaction to backlash for him getting Nubrac punished. But rather than uphold the rules and do so for ALL players equally, Riot is playing games or at least some of their employees are.
: no tldr?
If you can't figure that out by looking at it, then you don't deserve me writing one for you lol.
: > [{quoted}](name=Sona Ping,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=WybA6EEo,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-06-23T04:53:47.745+0000) > > Your parents are supporting you so you can take those summer classes and supporting you for your swimming which is your benefit. Meanwhile, are you paying rent? Are you paying your 1/3rd, your 1/4th, whatever it maybe, are you paying your share of the cost to live there? > Are you paying your fair share of the water bill? Are you paying your share of the electrical bill? Have you been paying on the city sanitation bill? Why are your parents having to ask you to do chores like taking care of the dog and feeding him? Food, have you been buying the food all this time, or are your parents providing that and preparing it as well? Who has been paying for and providing all the miscellaneous household necessities, whose cost really adds up? > > I don't know the specifics of your household situation and the breakdown of everything, but you are talking about "respect" when your parents are probably are probably also tired from going to work to provide all of this and when they ask you to do some tasks to return the favor, you yell at them to leave you alone and call them "disrespectful" and "lazy" for interrupting you while you kick back and entertain yourself on _their_ dime. Your post is pretty vague: it just says that parents put forth effort to support children, so children are expected to put forth effort as well. It doesn't say how much is reasonable, though, which is fundamental to OP's point. OP believes they should be able to have some down time without being at their parents' beck and call all day, communicating to establish boundaries. Do you disagree? I think that providing for a dependent (such as a child) is a gift that should be reciprocated, not a business investment propped up by threats or emotional blackmail.
Actually the post is pretty detailed. What a child/dependent should contribute and at what age is dependent upon a number of factors and unique to each family. Culture, heritage, beliefs, age, etc. can all come into play. If you read with intention to understand where the other person is coming from rather than to belittle or promote confrontation, then you would probably understand that better. I believe the poster is pointing out numerous expenses and chores are done by parents/guardians (or even roommates) which we do not always appreciate. This can be the case for both children and adults. The goal being that op or whomever he/she is replying to take some time and consider these things so that they have a greater appreciation of what is being done for them.
: Holy wall of text...not a player behavior issue, man, and a clickbait title to put anyone to shame. Maybe submit this to Buzzfeed? I want my PB board back. Bring on all the folks who want to argue about their punishments.
1. It is a player behavior issue. 2. Nobody is forcing you to read anything. 3. It isn't clickbait. It talks about exactly what it claims to. 4. It does do what you claim you want - arguing about punishment - if you read...
: You do know NB3 got a 14-day suspension a couple days after Nubrac did, right?
Whether he got a suspension or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is that: 1. Riot doesn't address cases equally. Case in point would be comparing the jhin's behavior in the two games I described. A second case in point would be comparing the bard I described to what Nubrac did. Then looking at what Riot did about it. 2. Riot doesn't treat verbal toxicity the same as it does gameplay toxicity. 3. The fact that points 1 and 2 are true should be fixed and players should give a damn about that until Riot DOES do something about it.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=woodvsmurph,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=953m7l9N,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-06-12T17:50:19.033+0000) > > It's not favoritism or not ONLY favoritism as far as skins are concerned. Some champions' characteristics are simply more flexible than others as far as skins are concerned and therefore more skins will be made for them. Compare some champs with many skins (lux, ahri, kai'sa, etc.) to others with few. Then ask yourself, which ones are easier to make a new skin for? > > When you have to say... account for a giant anchor or similar item in their equipment or... they're a centaur so every skin needs to involve 4 legs - you end up having fewer options and/or needing to put more thought into designing a new skin. Rush and you end up with a crappy idea or basically a new paint job on the same skin. > > And there is also the factor of popularity. If only a hundred people in the world drive a car brand, then you can bet you're not going to try popping out a new model every year. Whereas if hundreds of thousands drive your brand, then you can be more safe in assuming somebody will be wanting a new model any given year. Similar scenario with skins. More people play the champ, more profitable it should be designing a new skin for them. Sure once in awhile you might design a new mundo file skin or crabgot skin, but not every year because if it takes same or more investment to make a skin for them and you sell way fewer skins for more or less same price per skin as popstar ahri or kda kai'sa... you make way less money for the same amount of (or even more) work. > > Therefore, it makes more sense and is more justifiable to have a perception of favoritism when it comes to skins. > > When it comes to balancing champions or classes, that is where favoritism has no place. Sadly, not everyone gets that memo. i'm fully aware of these things but this is about the boards playing favourites just as much as the claim riot does. I didn't even mention balance...
> [{quoted}](name=Jerry SeinfeId,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=953m7l9N,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-06-12T17:55:30.956+0000) > > i'm fully aware of these things but this is about the boards playing favourites just as much as the claim riot does. I didn't even mention balance... You want more balance/equality among skins. I.E. lux doesn't get 10 skins for every 1 skin urgot gets kind of thing. So yes... it was mentioned in that sense. What is your point?
Rioter Comments
: Favouritism isn't just a problem at riot's skins team
It's not favoritism or not ONLY favoritism as far as skins are concerned. Some champions' characteristics are simply more flexible than others as far as skins are concerned and therefore more skins will be made for them. Compare some champs with many skins (lux, ahri, kai'sa, etc.) to others with few. Then ask yourself, which ones are easier to make a new skin for? When you have to say... account for a giant anchor or similar item in their equipment or... they're a centaur so every skin needs to involve 4 legs - you end up having fewer options and/or needing to put more thought into designing a new skin. Rush and you end up with a crappy idea or basically a new paint job on the same skin. And there is also the factor of popularity. If only a hundred people in the world drive a car brand, then you can bet you're not going to try popping out a new model every year. Whereas if hundreds of thousands drive your brand, then you can be more safe in assuming somebody will be wanting a new model any given year. Similar scenario with skins. More people play the champ, more profitable it should be designing a new skin for them. Sure once in awhile you might design a new mundo file skin or crabgot skin, but not every year because if it takes same or more investment to make a skin for them and you sell way fewer skins for more or less same price per skin as popstar ahri or kda kai'sa... you make way less money for the same amount of (or even more) work. Therefore, it makes more sense and is more justifiable to have a perception of favoritism when it comes to skins. When it comes to balancing champions or classes, that is where favoritism has no place. Sadly, not everyone gets that memo.
: Galio is too big and heavy to be knocked up in the air
You could make an appeal to turn galio passive into a "immune to all cc" passive or something and that would make sense. But the argument you use falls apart. Allow me to demonstrate: 1. Why does Galio get to move and use abilities even if we never attack him with magic? In the lore it takes magic to empower him to be able to move. So if we go all physical damage champs vs a comp with galio, he should be stuck on his fountain the whole time unless friendly fire is used to give him magic so he can move. 2. Cho'gath can eat galio. Therefore I guess cho'gath should be immune to cc as well. In order to feast upon Galio, he must be big enough to fit an injured galio inside his maw. Which means cho is actually probably big enough that when fully grown he could swallow half of summoner's rift with one bite. Which would also mean he consumes insane amounts of oxygen and food. Which means Runeterra has probably had 90% of it's oxygen depleted depending on how long cho has lived here. Not to mention everything he's had to eat to maintain his size. Therefore, we can conclude that cho'gath has basically killed everything on Runeterra including himself unless he does not breathe. Therefore if cho'gath reaches full size, his team should automatically win the match OR both teams should lose. 3. There are plenty of other colossal champions out there. That's how using your references and logic look when you take that method and apply it more fully. So... appeal that it would be nice if galio had a different passive or something, but don't go referencing lore to suggest some champ should be capable of this or that.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Anchobi (EUNE)
: all wrong, there is no couterplay, open your eyes!!! {{item:2056}} {{item:3649}}
How did you know I fell asleep reading your flawed and boring rant? You must work for Facebook.
: Nerf Sivir. She's become S tier and has no counter play.
Q - dodge. W - keep distance and it can either bounce to you and then no more bounces or won't touch you E- giant cd. Also only blocks single ability as evidenced by Ali combo vs Sivir shield. Compare with Fiora riposte or Jax counterstrike and it's very tame R- gives minimal combat stats. Basically a "run faster" button. Broken because of the utility it gives team? Xayah has her own self peeling in 2 forms (cc from feather stun thing and her ult). Ashe has infinite range stun to start teamfights. Jhin can slow enemies from a mile away to help his team pick someone off. Cait has traps to zone the other team if her team is forcing an objective. But apparently... run really fast is just sooooo broken compared with all of these. But... but the movespeed is so strong for kite/chase. ... She's short ranged. Kallista has a hop whenever she aa's. Lucian and vayne also have low cd mobility (plus stealth for vayne) to help protect them due to being short ranged. Sivir has none of these. She has one very long cd "run fast" button and a long cd single-ability-blocking spellshield. Mana costs. Sivir burns through mana faster than probably anyone besides maybe Jayce. Potent when she can spam... but can't spam nearly as much or consistently as others who have less mana-intense spells or have larger mana pools. Omg she can push a minion wave like nobody's business compared with other adc's... until she runs out of mana after about 2-3 waves. Sounds soooo broken to me. Almost like if you consider the full context... she's got a pretty reasonable kit. Did I miss anything?{{sticker:sg-lux-2}}
: Game of Thrones No-Spoiler Policy
Spoiler alert... somebody dies. (I haven't seen it, but I'm pretty sure this is a valid spoiler.) Also... no unicorns were harmed in the making of the show.
Rioter Comments
: nah ppl will use this to BM. PASS
Cuz they don't do that with emotes already? That's basically the whole reason most people use them. Ex: the last darius vs renekton match I played where I destroyed him like 8 times in lane while only dying once I spammed the Darius "you're next" emote at him because he kept spamming emotes. Then I felt that was a bit far to taunt him with an emote of his own champ every time he died, so I stopped.
Cåracal (NA)
: 20 Karma Skin Concepts
Some are really nice looking and near-complete. Others look like the first rough sketch done on a napkin at a restaurant dinner table. I don't know that all of them would fly or look that good, but at least a few of these are real winners and should definitely be made into actual product. Too bad the one didn't make it out in time for Mortal Kombat release because it would have coincided nicely. Riot's had a few skins like that over the years where they just happen to thematically match some other game/movie/tv show release.
: In order for Kench to get anywhere *near* that level of damage, he has to 3 stack on you and drop the W. That W has a long af cooldown, and if Tahm is 3-stacking you consistently to the point he's outdamaging you on Fiora (who can deal similar %hp *true* damage from just proccing her passive 2-3x, not including all the regular damage that comes with that) or Jax (who can literally *dodge his autos* to *ensure* Tahm can't 3-stack during trades), then I'd have to say it's poor positioning.
Tahm gets a lot of base damage from his kit - q, w, and passive. His w is only on a 10 sec cd if used on an enemy. His q applies a stack of his passive, so it's more like aa, q to slow enemy and get another stack, aa, w. He actually beats most bruisers and fighters until they get 1 or more items in laning phase. If you were around long enough, perhaps you recall a "tank meta" where maokai could go sunfire and frozen gauntlet, jump on an adc and smack them around like he was some burst mage - killing them from full hp by the time he'd done his second q, and take no damage from adc or the tower they were hiding under while being shielded by their support. It was awful and completely unfair for adc's, which is why we saw adc's and bruisers buffed and tanks nerfed to be more focused on their defensive capabilities. When kench gets out of hand with overbuffing him, he treats melee toplaners like maokai treated that adc. The problem isn't his durability... it's his crazy high base damage with minimal-to-no skill required in combination with said durability. And the fact it is spammable because it costs no mana. Maokai does less damage with his kit. Malphite could build ap bruiser and match kench's damage perhaps, but he'd sacrifice durability... and malphite can't spam his abilities the way kench can or he'll go oom much sooner. If you beat a kench as a melee before you get any items, chances are you had help or he's really bad - not simply because you're good.
Warpes (NA)
: i said this about urf years ago, and still do to this day.. but i got downvoted to hell and burned at the stake. urf's instant gratification style is what's wrong with modern gaming in general (and to a degree humanity) these days, yet it's what every game developer is creating or eventually heading towards. there's nothing meaningful, challenging, or satisfactory to invest in and work towards anymore. everything is about maximizing damage, easy gains/wins, quick "outplays" that aren't really outplays, and above all.. fast rewards for little effort. you see it everywhere. compared to how hard games used to be, and how rewarding gameplay was. the rewards themselves were spaced just enough to keep the player much more interested in the accomplishment, but not too spaced so that it's tedious and boring. basically.. how this game used to be. how most games used to be before they headed down the "urf path" and there's been dozens of articles written about this, looking at older games like diablo 2 for instance, and why that game was a perfect example of a (healthier) addiction, as far as gaming goes.. vs diablo 3 which is the exact opposite, and why it didn't work as well as the first 2 (properly spaced, and satisfying, rewards). some even going into how it affects dopamine in the brain in an unhealthy way, vs how older games did. makes you wonder what would happen if someone made a post about comparing this season to being basically urf now, and including all these facts in it, as well as how high dmg is, how fast games go, and how much cdr there is on every item, and over cdr now. however, im sure someone already has or will, cus it's pretty disgusting how urf-like the game really has gotten.
Lot's of people simply don't know. Large chunk of player base is so new, this is the only League environment they've ever experienced. And most of them don't look at game studiously to learn from it so they wouldn't notice it much even if they watched vods from pros years ago. Then there's the culture on boards, in game, and seemingly at Riot which has a few different personality types. - There's the aforementioned blissful ignorance. - There's the goody-two-shoes (keep your head down) that generally know's there's something wrong but figures if they suck up they'll get a reward or avoid some punishment. These guys just spout generic nonsensical responses to any in-depth discussion you have which is critical of some point about Riot and they act like it settles the matter. And when you point out the flaws in their argument with facts and logic, they do the same... because they can't make an honest counter to everything you have to say so they pretend they didn't hear those points. If you're persistent enough, they eventually get fed up with being slapped in the face with reality and tell you you're unreasonable or fixing that isn't within their power or responsibility and pass the buck to somebody else. - And lastly there's the ones who wholeheartedly embrace everything that's wrong. I will say there are exceptions to this - Riot employees and volunteers who genuinely are good people and who do their best to help and to make the game better. But these people are sadly an anomaly in the sea of the three above mentioned categories.
: Old Riot balance team vs New Riot balance team. #Shojin
To be fair, 45%cdr riven has nearly same cd's with or without shojin. Jax and renekton are much more visibly affected by this item existing. Now I would argue that renekton needed something to help him out as without this item he was a bit too underpowered compared with other champs due largely to being so ability-dependent and having longer cd's than most. With the item though, he can go a bit too far in some of the patches and stuff like jax is just 100% abomination with it. The better thing to do would be removal of item and simply lower the cd's of renekton's kit a bit to be more on-par with Riven since both are largely ability-driven. A lot of people hate on adc's especially the likes of late game crit adc's and vayne. And I honestly believe this is rightly so because it's been a long while since armor/tankiness had any impact vs them even when they've built no armor pen. Vayne obvious exception, but her w true damage is a bit too high especially with rageblade in the game. They can kite out most melee much too easily due to actually having higher movespeed when they've gotten their crit items - meaning melee's have to hope to 1-shot or they just get melted before they can use abilities to actually catch the adc if they failed to 100-0 them. And the adc is meanwhile healing up most of their hp while killing off their opponent almost as quickly as a burst mage. Now before you go crying adc hater (well you've honestly probably already done so and stopped reading, but I can try), I would say that shojin kinda makes champs like renekton or jax do that exact thing in mid game fights. So next time an adc main goes complaining about a jax or renekton or riven jumping in and being able to "braindead 1v9", just remember that you essentially do the same thing in the later portion of midgame and beyond. So I would think and hope that both sides having been able to now experience the frustration the other party feels... maybe they'd stop crying for the gutting of the other person's role while simultaneously asking for their own champ/role to be buffed to ridiculous levels. Instead maybe fight for balance for all parties. Not to be stupid op like the current approach is, but to be fixed so they do the job they were intended to do. Bruisers are fairly tanky and have moderate burst or dps capable of frontlining and diving enemy backlines to set up picks with the help of teammates or create space for their team by zoning away key enemy carries. But they don't have 1-shot potential unless fed and spec'ing extra into damage at cost of some of their durabiliity. They can spec extra into durability and become noticeably more durable, but at the cost of some of their damage. Similarly, they can spec overly into damage and/or sustain, but at the cost of some durability - enough that if they do get caught out and bursted by opponents who are nearly full build, they can be deleted like the squishy they are. If the enemy team lacks burst though, then they might be able to out-sustain much of the dps directed at them for a good chunk of time before they die. Adc's down't machine gun down everything in sight, but they do offer consistent dps to both soften up targets for their teammates to finish off with burst or vice versa - finishing off low hp enemies that teammates have softened up for them. Many are capable of kiting out opponents if they carefully use their abilities and/or get help of their teammates, but they don't have the base movespeed to eternally kite opponents without even having to use a dash, condemn, or 90 caliber net to create space. They are item-dependent and scale very well in most cases - with their value increasing as game length goes on provided they can stay alive to get off their dps. But they need the correct itemization that counters their opponents builds - i.e. you probably need something stronger than a ghostblade or just pure crit to cut down a malphite. Otherwise it should just be him standing there smacking you for laughable damage which you sustain up via lifesteal while he tanks your full crit plus lifesteal like it's a feather trying to stab through dragon scales.
: > [{quoted}](name=woodvsmurph,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=Lqcc1Ex5,comment-id=00000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-05-06T17:52:43.263+0000) > > You do realize that R107 isn't necessarily saying that in a bragging manner. Not like "hahaha I get away with this, I'm so evil" as though he's veigar. > That is one possible interpretation yes. > > Another is that he's doing this for the same reason other individuals have who've posted such things on the boards over the years - to point out that Riot's system does a piss-poor job of addressing soft inting or even inting in general compared with how they address blatant toxicity in chat. > You say something like "F that" or "you're a jelly donut" (insert something in place of jelly donut) and you're almost guaranteed to face consequences in a very few games. As R107 shares though, you can go hundreds of games of equally toxic inting and literally face no consequences even if reported. > > There's a small but growing number of players - many of them veterans - who are getting burned out by this fact. Trolling and soft inting or sometimes even more questionable and blatant inting is largely ignored or even defended by naive players, by the inters themselves, and by Riot all in the supposed guise of protecting players having a "bad game" and preventing "false positive" punishment. > Just listen to Dyrus over the seasons. He's a pretty chill guy most of the time, but he rarely plays these days because people int, then repeatedly blame him for stuff that he has no control over as though it's his fault they died when he's doing what he's supposed to be doing. So he mostly avoids playing and if he does play it's because that's what he feels his viewers want rather than primarily because he wants to. This all because inting has been allowed to grow and fester because naive players and others protect such behavior. > And there's plenty of other streamers, pro's, etc. who will tell you a similar story if you listen and look. Sure if you've only started this season or last, you won't notice. But if you go back 4 years or more and play through the story to today, you'll see the same type of thing as I described with Dyrus. Even Faker said a similar story about Korean solo queue. > > So regardless of whether R107 meant what he said as a brag or as proof that they system is bad at dealing with intentional feeders, I think you're missing a big point here. Either way, his comment goes to point out that the system doesn't fully work properly. > Which just goes to make op's comment a moot point. As in "1 + (-1) = 0. > Not trying to hate on op here. But he definitely seems to be a naive person in regards to all this. And that's ok. Maybe he's new. Maybe he has just been fortunate enough to always have wonderfully kind people to play with as teammates. Maybe he plays only casually and doesn't understand or pay attention to the intricacies of the game so he doesn't realize how many of his teammates have inted and only notices the most blatantly obvious ones. And if so, that's fine he's enjoying himself. But that doesn't make his claim valid. Yes, some inting players face consequences, but not nearly as successfully percentage-wise as say blatantly toxic players in chat. R107 here is evidence of that regardless of how you interpret his comment. > > THAT is the takehome point. Sweetie, Riot does not care about toxic players no matter how much time or money they spent on the game, and that is the beauty of it. If you can't not be toxic and can't work with people, then this game is not for you.
Grandma dearest, you are getting old and senile, so I will forgive you not remembering everything. I believe short lists are best to help wonderful elderly people like yourself remember. So... 1. Riot firmly and swiftly enforces consequences against blatant chat toxicity. 2. Riot does nothing about low-key constant harassment or other abuse in chat. 3. Riot does nothing about 98% of griefing and/or inting players. 4. Riot addresses only maybe 2% of the worst cases of inting players who are regular repeat offenders. 5. To say they address things fairly when 1-4 is true is complete bogus. Have a nice night. And don't forget to floss your dentures.{{sticker:slayer-jinx-wink}}
The Iceborn (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=woodvsmurph,realm=NA,application-id=A8FQeEA8,discussion-id=bOxjE6ll,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-05-06T17:55:32.686+0000) > > Welp... I was asked by Riot to move it here when I posted part 1, so Imma stick with this for now. If it weren't an acceptable place, I'm pretty sure they'd have removed it by now. They're pretty good about keeping the forums organized these days - that's one thing I will absolutely and gladly give them credit for. This is my bad yes, this is good here because it is not roleplay ;) I read it and you did really well! Love the story :)
Thanks. Just posted part 3 with more to come hopefully.
: Can you report someone for spoiling GoT episodes?
1. Books have been out for some time now... try reading? 2. Can't you mute chat? (I actually don't know if you can mute non-allies)
Rioter Comments
The Iceborn (EUNE)
: This belongs to Roleplay. You can just copy paste this thread there and remove it here.
Welp... I was asked by Riot to move it here when I posted part 1, so Imma stick with this for now. If it weren't an acceptable place, I'm pretty sure they'd have removed it by now. They're pretty good about keeping the forums organized these days - that's one thing I will absolutely and gladly give them credit for.
: (I was talking about R107 being proud of himself, but you're right too.)
You do realize that R107 isn't necessarily saying that in a bragging manner. Not like "hahaha I get away with this, I'm so evil" as though he's veigar. That is one possible interpretation yes. Another is that he's doing this for the same reason other individuals have who've posted such things on the boards over the years - to point out that Riot's system does a piss-poor job of addressing soft inting or even inting in general compared with how they address blatant toxicity in chat. You say something like "F that" or "you're a jelly donut" (insert something in place of jelly donut) and you're almost guaranteed to face consequences in a very few games. As R107 shares though, you can go hundreds of games of equally toxic inting and literally face no consequences even if reported. There's a small but growing number of players - many of them veterans - who are getting burned out by this fact. Trolling and soft inting or sometimes even more questionable and blatant inting is largely ignored or even defended by naive players, by the inters themselves, and by Riot all in the supposed guise of protecting players having a "bad game" and preventing "false positive" punishment. Just listen to Dyrus over the seasons. He's a pretty chill guy most of the time, but he rarely plays these days because people int, then repeatedly blame him for stuff that he has no control over as though it's his fault they died when he's doing what he's supposed to be doing. So he mostly avoids playing and if he does play it's because that's what he feels his viewers want rather than primarily because he wants to. This all because inting has been allowed to grow and fester because naive players and others protect such behavior. And there's plenty of other streamers, pro's, etc. who will tell you a similar story if you listen and look. Sure if you've only started this season or last, you won't notice. But if you go back 4 years or more and play through the story to today, you'll see the same type of thing as I described with Dyrus. Even Faker said a similar story about Korean solo queue. So regardless of whether R107 meant what he said as a brag or as proof that they system is bad at dealing with intentional feeders, I think you're missing a big point here. Either way, his comment goes to point out that the system doesn't fully work properly. Which just goes to make op's comment a moot point. As in "1 + (-1) = 0. Not trying to hate on op here. But he definitely seems to be a naive person in regards to all this. And that's ok. Maybe he's new. Maybe he has just been fortunate enough to always have wonderfully kind people to play with as teammates. Maybe he plays only casually and doesn't understand or pay attention to the intricacies of the game so he doesn't realize how many of his teammates have inted and only notices the most blatantly obvious ones. And if so, that's fine he's enjoying himself. But that doesn't make his claim valid. Yes, some inting players face consequences, but not nearly as successfully percentage-wise as say blatantly toxic players in chat. R107 here is evidence of that regardless of how you interpret his comment. THAT is the takehome point.
mack9112 (NA)
: Well I mean last season the Matches where decided by the solo laners sooooo
False. Last season most matches were decided by adc. When they "weren't decided by adc" they were decided by mid and jg impacting... adc to give adc a lead so that... adc would decide the game. Meaning... adc was still deciding the game largely. The only real exception to this as the overall average outcome was an individual meta here and there - far outweighed by the adc-centric meta's in both number and duration of time - and world's knockout stage where theShy through sheer superiority of him and his teammates was given a big enough lead that his superiority and advantages in toplane were allowed to be the biggest factor despite it being an adc-centric meta at worlds. TheShy didn't pull this off because it was a toplane-centric meta. No. He pulled it off in an adc-centric meta. Because he and his midlaner were just that freaking good. It's like if you watch some toplane or midlane streamer go smurfing in lower elo and solo carry the game in a meta where the other team's vayne can kill anyone and anything in 5 aa's or less. They didn't win because adc's were weak. They won because they were that much better than their competition and they used it to make themselves such a huge lead that the advantages the vayne is given didn't matter. And I believe that is why the world finals last year were so amazing to watch. For once rather than it being largely about I'm adc, I have X items, we win every teamfight basically minimal skill required it was about I'm toplaner, I have X items, I can carry IF I play SMART and use SKILL. One is a much more an expression of micro-based skill and team-wide macro play where everyone has more equal potential to contribute and all roles can reap the benefits of one person's advantage; the other is a risk-averse dance where leads in roles other than adc (even if much larger than the advantage one adc enjoys) mean basically nothing and we get maybe 2 minutes of action where the outcome is largely already known before the fight starts combo'd with 30 minutes of boring song-and-dance because everyone's too afraid to challenge anyone else over something or call the other team out on their bluff if challenged. Anyone who's played this game for more than a season or two and/or watched for similar length of time would tell you that at best for the most part last year other roles were given equal carry potential in SOME patches. That only serves to illustrate how adc-biased the game has become. When other roles are given equal carry potential to adc... adc's cry that the game is unplayable and that their role is too weak. Never a problem with their build. Never the fact that just maybe the other team's mid, jg, or toplaner is much better than yours and so they can rightfully use that to remove you as a threat if they coordinate properly with their team. Just... adc is weak/unplayable, need buffs so we can 1v5. Lol. When yasuo, trynd, or yi are strong and can 1v5? They're broken. When adc can do that though? That's just adc finally being playable - not even necessarily strong... just playable. Never mind that yasuo, trynd, and yi are essentially melee versions of adc.
FlamingSun (EUNE)
: But why would anyone want to play a team based game where its one adc and 4 support? All of the team members should impact the game, its not league of adc. 1 year ago adc were kinda bad, but now it is better botlane wins. So should everybody who want to impact the game should swich to adc role? I get it that a support's job is to help the adc, but please don't make the toplane and the midlane a lesser support to thr adc. The support role is the least favoured position at all, dont make it worse lol.
I didn't say I support this trend - I don't. I've wholeheartedly argued against it and pointed it out before with various patches and whatnot that supported this trend. Sometimes people saw and agreed with me aside from blind faithful and those who wish adc to be able to braindead 1v5. Other times people didn't and just flamed me and accused me of being blind and ignorant. But anyone who's played and watched pro scene from early years to now would tell you adc role as the carry... the exclusive role responsible for killing more-or-less everyone on other team has only increased over the years. Again... there are exceptions to this, but I'm not talking every individual game or patch. I'm talking overall trend. It makes sense from Riot perspective too based on their supposed goals of shorter and more consistent game times. Because adc's tend to provide more consistent damage from one fight to the next barring when they get deleted. And their power spikes are more consistent than say bruisers or fighters or mages where it varies from 1 item to 3 or even 4 items depending on champ and what build is used. This would lead to more inconsistent teamfight outcomes and also more varied game times if such champs were allowed to be primary carry for the team. I'm 100% for giving all roles strong impact on the game, but I don't have a say in how the game is balanced. I can voice my opinion or concern, but that doesn't mean anyone has to listen. The only way you can really make people listen is collectively. By stuff like viewership of pro games. If there's a sharp difference between viewership of cold calculated risk-averse adc gets X items and 1v9 carries every teamfight to win game and viewership of games that might be considered a bit less calculated where every lane is impacting outcome more equally, then maybe eventually Riot takes the hint and realizes most players and viewers don't want the former because it's boring and the outcome solely dependent on basically 1 person out of 5.
Rioter Comments
FlamingSun (EUNE)
: Toplane lowest impact in a long time
If you haven't picked up on it, over the past few years Riot has been phasing things to largely favor an adc-centric playstyle. There's obviously exceptions and ways around it, but these are largely much riskier and work more in solo queue than competitive play. Think about pro play... it's tanky bruisers or tanks toplane for the most part. Carries are only played when hella strong for the patch and even then, they're on a time limit unless the other team likewise picks a squishy carry champ. Jungler's are mostly relegated to being vision control and setting up their teammates to carry even if they get a big lead for themselves. They use their lead to survive after getting the insec that wins their team the fight. Or they're playing knight's vow tank or redemption olaf where their itemization is more about empowering... the adc than about making them as individually strong as possible. Midlaners used to be able to 100-0 a squishy in mid and late game if they were assassins or burst mages. Now it's 70-90% in most cases. And after that, they have nothing for about 10+ sec during which the fight will have pretty much been decided. They're much more about cc to enable their team to pick off a single opponent faster than the other team can. Just look at stuff like lissandra and galio in the past year or so to illustrate the cc point. Other mids might offer more damage or even outscale, but that's no longer what mid is largely about. Supports are get more gold, but their itemization is still either generic stats or stuff focused almost exclusively around adc-style champs. Bonus attack speed, armor, tank some of the damage meant to be applied to adc via itemization, shield them from burst damage, etc. Much like jungler, support is often more or less centered around being a stat boost for adc. Basically, we've largely been heading towards a state of game where adc is supposed to kill 4-4.5 members of enemy team in order to get an ace. Mid kills the other 0.5-1 member largely by themselves. All others are there for cc, to be caught and killed, to peel or engage for adc (often in combo with midlaner), to be a meatshield that absorbs damage until blown up by adc and friends, and/or to be a walking stat buff to adc. Sure solo queue is a bit different because other roles are more capable of carrying in a semi-coordinated 5v5, but it's still adc-favored game for the most part. That's not to say they don't have their own troubles either, but just that the game is mostly trending towards the idea of adc as the exclusive 1v5 champ at higher level of play. In iron? It's iron and anything can still happen. And honestly, that's the more fun game to watch in my opinion.
: > [{quoted}](name=woodvsmurph,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=yETAzw9Y,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-04-16T21:17:26.587+0000) > > That's just the problem buddy. > > You're throwing out the guy that keeps talking on his phone during the movie or who makes lewd remarks at others in the theater just fine. You SHOULD be doing that and you do which is cool. Nobody has a problem with this. > > But the guy who gets kicked from the theater for telling someone else to F off... while he might agree that he should get kicked for that, he's said that to somebody else for a reason. Because the other guy made more subtle references to the women in the group that he went to the movie with and because he kept kicking the back of their seat the whole film and throwing popcorn down the guy's hoodie. > When that guy noticed a theater employee walking through during the film and asked if the employee if he could do something about the obnoxious person throwing popcorn, kicking seats, and making more subtle references at women... the employee excused all the behavior. > "Oh, he can't help kicking the seat... he's probably just excited." > "He didn't mean anything by what he said about your friends... it could have been perfectly innocent, and I doubt it was 20 references like you claim." > "Well everyone can drop popcorn sometimes, and for all you know I've already talked to him about taking smaller handfuls." > > Individually, or done once by mistake it might be just that. A guy accidentally kicking a seat during a moment of excitement. A guy grabbing too much popcorn and spilling some. A guy making an innocent comment. > Done repetitively and without any sign of remorse for potential "misunderstanding", it isn't a mistake. It is a guy intentionally being an ass to another guy. And if the movie theater doesn't like that second guy telling the first one to "F off", then they'd do well to listen when that guy FIRST TRIED to raise a complaint to the movie theater employee and let them handle the situation properly. But the movie theater didn't do anything about that person. They made excuses for him and made the second guy sound like a jerk. Then it is no wonder that second guy - also just TRYING TO HAVE SOME FUN - takes matters into his own hands and tries to resolve the problem by making his displeasure more blatantly known in the hopes the first guy takes the hint and leaves him in peace. > > But guy 1 never gets punished. Neither in the theater, nor in league. > Guy 2 knows that telling guy 1 to "F off" isn't appropriate behavior for the theater or league, but what's he supposed to do? The theater isn't protecting HIS RIGHT to have some fun. League isn't protecting his right. What makes him less deserving than the first guy? Why does his misbehavior get punished when he tried to resolve the situation respectfully multiple times while the first guy has been constantly disrespectful and non-apologetic from the start yet has nothing done to stop his behavior? > > This is where people have a problem. This is why I quit playing league despite it being my favorite game. Because I've grown sick of you guys defending guy 1 while crucifying guy 2 (me). Guy 1 has a right to have a fun game without me cursing at him? Great, I agree. But I also have a right to enjoy a game without guy 1 low-key harassing and flaming me all game and going out of his way to ruin the game so that I can't even mind my own business and have fun too. If I'm minding my own business and trying to just enjoy the game only for guy 1 to come and do everything in his power to ruin it for me, being confrontational towards me, and trying to get my teammates to join him in harassing me... I think I have a right to be defended too. I have a right for you to give him the axe if he won't fix his poor behavior. But like mr. spill the popcorn, harass women in the theaters, and kick the back of your seat repetitively... guy 1 in league gets a free pass. His behavior is excused by you rather than examined and punished. Even if guy 2 never tells guy 1 to "F off", guy 1 doesn't have anything done to him to reform his behavior. So he goes on ruining more games for more people. Eventually, guy 2 will have enough of running into guy 1's game after game and he'll take matters into his own hands because League/theater isn't handling guy 1's behavior. And at that point... while behavior of guy 2 (telling guy 1 to "F off") may deserve punishment in and of itself... it's justified in the context. > > Firstly, it's justified because he was a gentleman and gave multiple chances for guy 1 to stop being a jackass to no avail. Secondly it's justified because league/theater has shown that they won't take action against improper behavior - ignoring and excusing guy 1's REPETITIVE disrespectful and inappropriate behavior. Therefore, league/theater has no moral grounds to stand on when they then take action against guy 2 for eventually telling guy 1 to "F off". If they'd taken action against guy 1 and dealt with the problem and THEN guy 2 STILL went and did what he did, they'd be standing on moral high ground for punishing guy 2. But having been a bystander to guy 2's plight only to then step in and punish guy 2 for what he does to guy 1 is not standing on moral high ground. It's having double standards. In that scenario... nobody holds moral high ground, although if anyone were to come close to it, it would be guy 2. > > Stop punishing guy 2 and acting like he's some unreasonable hateful jackass. Consider the context. Consider everything he went through that lead him to the point where he was willing to tell guy 1 to "F off". And consider your own actions (those of the theater/Riot) during that time. You don't stand on moral high ground when you choose to protect one person's right to "escape reality and have fun" while letting that same person ruin somebody else's. Either you need to defend everyone's rights or you need to leave everyone to defend themselves only. You can't have it both ways and claim moral high ground. So nice story - for real... as you can see from my post I draw similar examples to illustrate my point often - but Riot doesn't live up to the standards it claims. > > If you care about that, you'll work to change this. If you follow my scenario's logic, you'll understand the double standard I point out and work to change that about Riot. If not, you'll just post some generic response below trying unsuccessfully to out-logic me and justify Riot's current approach of protecting "guy 1" while punishing "guy 2"... or just have my post removed. Here's hoping you're different from the rest and actually give a crap.{{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}} Guy 2 is getting punished for what he said and the volume speech. No one cares including riot if you say to Guy 1, "please stop ruining the game for others" or "quiet down we are watching a movie". They do care if you flame guy 1 and cause a scene ruining the game or movie for everyone. Just because someone is disturbing you, does not mean it is alright to flame.
And if guy 1 isn't listening to that and theater staff isn't doing anything about guy 1 not listening, then they have no right to get upset if guy 2 reciprocates guy 1's bad behavior by likewise showing some bad behavior. Especially if it's in the interest of ending guy 1's behavior rather than just to be a d*@k. If I go physically abuse someone as long as I'm silent about it, then it's ok? Cuz that's what you've essentially told me. The guy who says something is doing wrong and should be punished (guy 2), but the guy doing something wrong (guy 1) and being quieter about it (not even silent, just not saying anything "explicit") is in the right and we must protect him from guy 2. Lol, that makes sooo much sense... said ~~idiots ~~low iq people everywhere. To use another example with your "logic"... It's apparently ok then for me to tell someone to suck my popsicle, but if I say d*@k instead then it somehow becomes not ok. Pretty sure either way it's not appropriate. But ok doorknob. Popsicle is fine and physical abuse is ok as long as I don't say anything explicit when I do that. I'm sure women would love that one. Ma'am, did he say anything to you while he was... doing things? No, ok sorry then but he did nothing wrong. In fact, because you swore at him, he's allowed to press charges against you. Yes... that would make SOOOOO much sense (extreme sarcasm). Cuz... boards logic. Jolly ranchers, do you even think?... No. No you don't.{{sticker:zombie-brand-facepalm}}
: Asides from really hating real world to video game society, sure, lets talk about this. The theater example isn't the greatest since you are wanting results during the movie. Which can happen. Game you have to wait. How the theater handles it will sadly vary from place to place. The one I used to work for and roommate manages at have the record to handle as such. - someone talking typically gets two verbal warnings before being asked to leave. Basically the 3 strike system. - the kicker/thrower/etc usually gets a singular warning as they usually deny they did it. If another person reports then they usually get tossed. Just last week my buddy had to give passes to some guests because they got falsely accused of sneaking in and didn't have their ticket stubs (always hold onto your stubs). Which brings to another point, the movie cost money in most cases. Some theaters do Free Kid Movies in the Summer though. During these the attitude is basically "Free movie sorry. We can't control who comes and doesn't come." ___ The spirit of your argument, as I understand, is don't defend trolls and then punish verbal players. Punish both. I get that. No one will deny that we could use a better system for Gameplay offenses. It sucks when someone who is actually a troll gets away for a longer period of time. We don't want to defend the troll, we want to defend the innocent player who is being accused of trolling by someone who is tilted. Yes, there are occasional right calls that a person is a troll; but there are probably more wrong accusations. In the end, what does yelling at a troll accomplish? They got a rise out of you and a valid report to file. A quick easy thing to check versus a more time consuming and more manual thing to check. Language v Action. Both can deserve punishment, one jist takes longer sadly.
The movie theater example isn't perfect, but it helps some people visualize... and also was used because it went along with op's post to relate the issue most "toxic" (verbal offense) players have with the system. You got about half of what I have tried time and again to explain and are in agreement with me on that much, so thanks. That's far more than most would dare admit on the boards. So pardon me as I elaborate a bit on where we still seem to see differently so that you and others can maybe bridge that gap - and understand I'm not trying to argue with you or anything. I really appreciate your calm and polite feedback. I've spent about 2 seasons campaigning on this point with everyone from in-game, boards, player support, etc. You name it... I've shared my message and largely received nothing but criticism and generic responses which showed people don't even read half of what I write. Riot employees included. Even if they do and they agree... they do nothing. They'll just tell you they aren't in position to do anything about it and why don't you talk to X (which I've already done and been directed to them instead by X) instead. There's just 2 problems between what I've experienced and what you have said or maybe I should say 2 differences. The _**first **_is that no, most trolls never get punished. Either not at all, or not anywhere near the same degree as someone who says something toxic. The age old argument people give me here is that I couldn't possibly know who was/wasn't punished. I only get notified some of the time if people I report are given punishment. While this is true, I've been told it's about 1 in 6 times that you get informed - this coming from Riot employee too so I'd trust the validity a bit more than if it were someone on boards. Even if it's more like 1 in 10, the punishment rate vs report rate is extremely low. Far lower than it should be. Sometimes you even run into these people multiple times and they grief every time they're on your team (and probably when they're not in game with you too). This ruins games for multiple people and skews everyone's mmr which can in turn ruin matches for other people in the future when it happens multiple games in short succession - inflated mmr leading to playing against people you should never be playing against and then you get wrecked and cost your team a game they would have won or the reverse with you carrying/boosting others to an elo they don't deserve simply because you're trying your best to win. Anyways back to the point about report vs punishment rate. You have about 1-4 people feeding in every game on your team whether from just having a bad game, griefing/trolling, or actually running it down or afk. That's my experience - sure not every game do you have troll or int, but it averages out to that between the games you have none and the games you have 2-4. So if I play 300 games a year, that's about 300 people who either had very bad game, were griefing/trolling, or were hard inting. I know better than most what the difference is as anyone carefully reading my posts would understand - I've defended 2/14/2 bot lanes before when mid and jg accused them of inting but it wasn't actually bot's fault; I know kda does not equal inting. So if half of these 300 are just having a bad game, then that still leaves about 150 cases of griefing. Now let's assume the 1 in 6 punishments you get notified is actually more like 1 in 10 to give system benefit of doubt. That would mean I should get 15 reports a season telling me a griefing/troll or hard inting (not bad game - which we don't report) got punished. In actuality, I have gotten less than 10 reports in the past 2 years. Less than 10 when I should have gotten at least 30 or more. This means that such behavior isn't being addressed. I could also go into more specifics. Like player Y does this thing and also says that thing and is still playing next week and the week after as I can check their profile on op.gg or some other site. While player C says that thing and is now banned from game. Clearly things aren't being addressed properly. Or even on the boards. I've done experiments to test bias before and found corruption and double standards not just among players, but among moderators and others in positions of power too. The second difference is that I often find these troll/griefing or hard inting players (again... not people having a bad game) will be just as toxic in chat as anyone who actually gets labeled as toxic. The difference is that they tend to do implicit toxicity or perpetual low-key toxicity rather than a "bleep you". But to argue that some griefing player being hypercritical of a player... going even or gracefully falling behind in something like an ignite grasp teemo plus camping (insert strongest early game ganking jg of the patch) jungler is not being toxic is absurd. Ex: renekton vs grasp ignite teemo plus camping rek'sai... renekton 2/3/0, has gotten 0 help from team, is somehow even or ahead in cs, has map pressure, has asked for one simple gank. Does that renekton deserve to be low-key harassed for being "useless" or accused of having "no brains"? I hardly think so. Especially if it's coming from a bot lane that should hard win the 2v2, has been camped for by their jungler, and is 1/7/0 and down in cs with 0 tower pressure and can't even get a dragon. But that's exactly the type of games I've experienced over and over. Every time you see team going in to make a bad play, you warn them against and they ignore... then blame you. You're halfway across the map, told them not to fight via pings etc., pinged your tp is on cd... and it's somehow you're fault they get wiped 4v3 while you're 1v2 defending your base. Yeah, my bad I didn't tp there when it's still not available for another 2 min and I told you not to pick a fight when you're so far behind. The whole match having team flame you for stupid crap like that as though it's your fault as they grief or int the game away. And it's not just a single match here or there. Or some other point in the game, you'll trade even in a 3v5 to stop the baron and even though you got a triple kill and zoned 2 of the strongest opponents and singlehandedly killed them to buy space for your 2 teammates, you didn't do enough that fight. Like if only YOU played better, your teammates could have aced the other team but you're clearly screwing them over. You cannot tell me that speaking directly or very obviously implying those things repeatedly in chat throughout the game is NOT toxic, but telling someone they're being an idiot in chat once IS toxic. So the point of the second difference is that - at least as far as I'm concerned (maybe you think that kind of low-key toxicity is fine) such low key toxicity or other verbal abuse is often (not always, but well over 30% of time) combined with griefing/trolling or hard inting. And yet even then such a player generally goes unpunished. This is what's really wrong in my opinion. Griefing is bad enough, but when you act like that in chat and do everything you can to get teammates to join you in griefing and verbally abusing someone who has done and said nothing bad to you... you've abandoned your right to them treating you nicely. As we've both said... I or anyone else should be punished for saying something toxic back to them if we do, but not IF nothing is done about their behavior. If their behavior were to be addressed properly, then it's frequency within the game would decline over time rather than stay the same or increase. And if it were to decrease, I have no doubt people wouldn't get burned out with it so easily and say... get triggered after 7 games in a row of such behavior in one week and eventually say something back to one of these griefing or hard inting players that they know they shouldn't say. Sorry for tl;dr, but I hope that helps you understand some differences in our apparent experiences and where I'm better coming from. Thanks again for your reply before and seeming to be a reasonable and honest person. Rare to find that sometimes.{{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}}
: You know how you can tone down damage, CC, and mobility in one fair swoop?
The problem isn't the cdr in and of itself. It's when you get that AND get optimal damage and durability too. Like there used to be a tradeoff. I could either get that extra cdr to reach cap, but have lower damage per combo... or I could have extra damage per combo in hopes of being better able to 1-shot, but have to wait longer to do my next combo. So I think it's more an issue of some items that have cdr either need to drop the cdr, get more expensive (?), or have their damage or some other stat cut down or removed from it. Aside from cleaver, you used to get cdr from defensive items or stuff like ghostblade if you were ad for example. Now you can get same cdr as ghostblade plus way more ad in death's dance. Before it was more like... ad plus lifesteal from bloodthirster or cdr plus movespeed from ghostblade. Basically you don't have to do as many tradeoffs in your build to get the cdr and it doesn't require the same level of thought that it used to.
rujitra (NA)
: “In the real world”
That's just the problem buddy. You're throwing out the guy that keeps talking on his phone during the movie or who makes lewd remarks at others in the theater just fine. You SHOULD be doing that and you do which is cool. Nobody has a problem with this. But the guy who gets kicked from the theater for telling someone else to F off... while he might agree that he should get kicked for that, he's said that to somebody else for a reason. Because the other guy made more subtle references to the women in the group that he went to the movie with and because he kept kicking the back of their seat the whole film and throwing popcorn down the guy's hoodie. When that guy noticed a theater employee walking through during the film and asked if the employee if he could do something about the obnoxious person throwing popcorn, kicking seats, and making more subtle references at women... the employee excused all the behavior. "Oh, he can't help kicking the seat... he's probably just excited." "He didn't mean anything by what he said about your friends... it could have been perfectly innocent, and I doubt it was 20 references like you claim." "Well everyone can drop popcorn sometimes, and for all you know I've already talked to him about taking smaller handfuls." Individually, or done once by mistake it might be just that. A guy accidentally kicking a seat during a moment of excitement. A guy grabbing too much popcorn and spilling some. A guy making an innocent comment. Done repetitively and without any sign of remorse for potential "misunderstanding", it isn't a mistake. It is a guy intentionally being an ass to another guy. And if the movie theater doesn't like that second guy telling the first one to "F off", then they'd do well to listen when that guy FIRST TRIED to raise a complaint to the movie theater employee and let them handle the situation properly. But the movie theater didn't do anything about that person. They made excuses for him and made the second guy sound like a jerk. Then it is no wonder that second guy - also just TRYING TO HAVE SOME FUN - takes matters into his own hands and tries to resolve the problem by making his displeasure more blatantly known in the hopes the first guy takes the hint and leaves him in peace. But guy 1 never gets punished. Neither in the theater, nor in league. Guy 2 knows that telling guy 1 to "F off" isn't appropriate behavior for the theater or league, but what's he supposed to do? The theater isn't protecting HIS RIGHT to have some fun. League isn't protecting his right. What makes him less deserving than the first guy? Why does his misbehavior get punished when he tried to resolve the situation respectfully multiple times while the first guy has been constantly disrespectful and non-apologetic from the start yet has nothing done to stop his behavior? This is where people have a problem. This is why I quit playing league despite it being my favorite game. Because I've grown sick of you guys defending guy 1 while crucifying guy 2 (me). Guy 1 has a right to have a fun game without me cursing at him? Great, I agree. But I also have a right to enjoy a game without guy 1 low-key harassing and flaming me all game and going out of his way to ruin the game so that I can't even mind my own business and have fun too. If I'm minding my own business and trying to just enjoy the game only for guy 1 to come and do everything in his power to ruin it for me, being confrontational towards me, and trying to get my teammates to join him in harassing me... I think I have a right to be defended too. I have a right for you to give him the axe if he won't fix his poor behavior. But like mr. spill the popcorn, harass women in the theaters, and kick the back of your seat repetitively... guy 1 in league gets a free pass. His behavior is excused by you rather than examined and punished. Even if guy 2 never tells guy 1 to "F off", guy 1 doesn't have anything done to him to reform his behavior. So he goes on ruining more games for more people. Eventually, guy 2 will have enough of running into guy 1's game after game and he'll take matters into his own hands because League/theater isn't handling guy 1's behavior. And at that point... while behavior of guy 2 (telling guy 1 to "F off") may deserve punishment in and of itself... it's justified in the context. Firstly, it's justified because he was a gentleman and gave multiple chances for guy 1 to stop being a jackass to no avail. Secondly it's justified because league/theater has shown that they won't take action against improper behavior - ignoring and excusing guy 1's REPETITIVE disrespectful and inappropriate behavior. Therefore, league/theater has no moral grounds to stand on when they then take action against guy 2 for eventually telling guy 1 to "F off". If they'd taken action against guy 1 and dealt with the problem and THEN guy 2 STILL went and did what he did, they'd be standing on moral high ground for punishing guy 2. But having been a bystander to guy 2's plight only to then step in and punish guy 2 for what he does to guy 1 is not standing on moral high ground. It's having double standards. In that scenario... nobody holds moral high ground, although if anyone were to come close to it, it would be guy 2. Stop punishing guy 2 and acting like he's some unreasonable hateful jackass. Consider the context. Consider everything he went through that lead him to the point where he was willing to tell guy 1 to "F off". And consider your own actions (those of the theater/Riot) during that time. You don't stand on moral high ground when you choose to protect one person's right to "escape reality and have fun" while letting that same person ruin somebody else's. Either you need to defend everyone's rights or you need to leave everyone to defend themselves only. You can't have it both ways and claim moral high ground. So nice story - for real... as you can see from my post I draw similar examples to illustrate my point often - but Riot doesn't live up to the standards it claims. If you care about that, you'll work to change this. If you follow my scenario's logic, you'll understand the double standard I point out and work to change that about Riot. If not, you'll just post some generic response below trying unsuccessfully to out-logic me and justify Riot's current approach of protecting "guy 1" while punishing "guy 2"... or just have my post removed. Here's hoping you're different from the rest and actually give a crap.{{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}}
Rioter Comments
: 1. That's inting 2. That would mostly fall into trolling 3. That could be trolling, but the jungler also has no obligation to gank 4. That's called AFK, and the Leaverbuster system accounts for that. 5. If they are legitimately trying, then there is nothing wrong. There is no command that you have to play the meta. No if they actually *are* trolling, then yes, that's a problem. But simply playing a champion in an off role is not that. All of this is completely secondary to the fact that it is *incredibly* hard to accurately judge true trolling or intentional feeding aside from the most obvious of cases, as much more often than not, it is simply a player who had an off day, or wasn't entirely comfortable in the champion or role, etc.. And because Riot **must** err on the side of caution so that they don't punish those innocent players, it takes a significantly longer time to catch true trolls. However, once they *are* caught, it is an instant 14 day ban.
We can put most of these under umbrella aspect of "griefing". Griefing can include many things including but not limited to "inting". "Inting" can furthermore be broken down into "hard inting" and "soft inting" as even a particular Riot employee argued for in a company sponsored video this past year. Hard inting is the classic old T1 run it down mid and just suicide to enemy team the whole game if you don't like how it's going. That's pretty easy to detect and is perhaps one of the only forms of griefing actually punished by Riot. Soft inting is harder to detect and is much more elo-dependent. As in... what is "soft inting" in challenger would be an "honest mistake" in gold or plat. And what is "soft inting" in gold or plat would be an "honest mistake" in bronze or iron. Thus... it is elo-dependent. Soft inting is when one does not simply run it down lane suiciding as quickly as possible, but they do more or less "check out" of the game, stop TRYING to win, (often, not always) stop TRYING to work with their team, etc. The guy that just blind pushes by himself all game when he's underpowered and is in gold or plat knows better than to do that, but he's "checked out" of game so he doesn't care that he's screwing his team over and making it harder for them to win. The guy who realizes his team needs to make a stand or they'll lose their base but is afk farming jg (be it a jungler or a laner) is not making an effort to win. Sure he's maybe not actively sabotaging his team in the same way as someone who is hard inting, but he is accomplishing the same end with more subtle means. With soft inting people argue that you can't detect this, but that's complete bs. Players often know it themselves when they're doing it. Teammates know. Opponents in the game know. You know it because there's a certain standard of skill at each elo. You might not be able to tell if your in a diamond 4 vs a diamond 2 or 1 game all the time if you were just dropped in with no nameplates and no knowledge of the rank of the account you were being asked to play a game on; however, you COULD tell the difference between playing one game in bronze 2 and the next game in silver 2. Why? You can tell because of that standard set of skills that everyone needs to have in order to climb to that elo. You don't see a challenger player going... "what's 1-3-1?". You don't see a plat player asking what a tp flank is. Because they had to learn certain things to GET TO that elo. They might not be as good at every single aspect as some other players at that elo, but there's other aspects where they will be better. While they aren't AS GOOD at certain things, they'll still have a basic knowledge and SKILL FLOOR for those things that are basically required to reach that elo. So when a player fails consistently (we all mess up here and there) to meet that skill floor throughout a whole or vast majority of a match, they are at the very least "soft inting" or some other form of griefing. Imagine if Faker just never warded an entire game, ignored warnings that people were coming to gank his lane, and intentionally forced fights vs the now fed enemy midlaner and his fed jungler by himself. He'd know he was going to lose and cost his team a bunch for dying... again and again and again. His teammates would know it. His opponents would know it. That would be griefing and would get him benched or worse. But in iron tier, that behavior might be more a series of honest mistakes by the midlaner and the other mid having a jg duo rather than actual griefing. So you see here, it's pretty simple to tell one is griefing while the other might be honest mistakes - which we can tell because we have a SKILL FLOOR at each elo, and Faker isn't meeting the SKILL FLOOR for a professional player. Yet in ranked play, this type of behavior exhibited by Faker (in the theoretical example above - which is characteristic of actual ranked gameplay by some individuals) is ignored or even DEFENDED. If you are failing to meet the skill floor of your elo throughout a match, then you are either boosted (got over-rated, bought or stole someone else's account, paid someone to inflate your elo), or you are INTENTIONALLY trying to sabotage your team's ability to with the game. Sure, Faker picks up some minions along the way or appears to try to heroically 1v3 defend the tower vs fed enemies or even lands some abilities on his opponents before he dies... for the 8th time. But everyone knows he could and should be doing better even if he's "having a bad game". He's not playing in a way that enables his team to help him to a degree that would be typical of a pro player. And therein lies the problem. He's not TRYING to win. He's "checked out". This behavior may not fit the description of "hard inting", but it DOES fit the description of "soft inting". This behavior is NOT acceptable according to basically every player in ranked that gives a crap about TRYING. Going 1/8/2 in lane because you fell behind and got picked on but you TRIED and enabled your team to do their best to help you is ok. Going 1/8/2 in lane because you turned off your brain and failed to meet the skill floor for your elo is griefing. And that's no less toxic of behavior than someone telling said player "you're being really stupid". Yet one is allowed and even defended by Riot while the other is hunted like witches in Salem. This is where people get mad. This is what causes much of the toxicity you see in chat. Because people get tired of such griefing game after game after game no matter how nice or silent they are in chat. Eventually somebody runs into one too many such griefing teammates in a row and snaps at them. And then they're burned like a witch. Did they ask for it with what they said? Probably. But why did they say it in the first place? Because Riot FAILED to attack the original toxicity... the dozen inting teammates said "toxic" player encountered on their team over the past handful of games that ruined every one of those games for said "toxic" player. You can "fix" the game by weeding out every "toxic" player and you'll still end up with more toxic players. Why? Because the source of said toxic players is still being left in the game and allowed to corrupt more decent human beings into becoming toxic because they actually give a shit about the game and eventually get fed up of being screwed over by griefing teammates game after game. Imagine what would happen if... the griefing players were dealt with even a little bit. Well now... you'd have less frequent encounters with griefing players because they'd either be feeling pressured to stop by Riot (not just by "toxic"players) or because they'd be banned (temporary or perma). And with that more players feeling frustrated because they CURRENTLY have griefing teammates way too often end up having fewer of them, getting less stressed out when they do have them, and largely avoid snapping. Which leads to what result? Oh, that's right... to "killing 2 birds with one stone" so to speak - root out the griefing players and much of verbal toxicity is also dealt with. Clearly ignoring griefing or defending griefing (Riot's current and long-time approach) hasn't fixed the problem of either griefing OR verbal toxicity. You're trimming the leaves of weeds and leaving the root to grow more leaves. Spray the root and you'd kill the whole weed (root and leaves). It's really that simple. And with things like Riot tracking where and when you died in a match as well as stuff like itemization measuring if a person met or tried honestly to meet or exceed skill floor isn't as impossible as so many people make it out to be. And if you guys still think it is impossible to get any positive matches for this without getting some false positives, then you simply write the program to detect where it will get fewest number of false positives along with actual griefing and use that as step 1 in the system. Step 2 is human review. And yes, this is possible because the system using such a method would drastically weed down the number of reports that a human would have to review to a much more manageable amount. I mean it's that or continue to see toxicity and griefing build up until you've got only 3 groups of people left playing the game and it's essentially dead: pro's and streamers (who mostly hate the game but still play cuz money at that point) players who don't care about win/lose or trying hard but play only to hang out with their friends or for meme's griefers When tons of players make solid logical arguments about this being a problem When streamers will admit as much and say that playing isn't fun for them anymore and they basically play because their fans want to watch League and not some other game When pro's complain they can't get meaningful practice in solo queue like they used to - not just in NA either... Faker said this in an interview about Korean solo queue too and I'm sure there are others ... you have a problem. A problem you've been ignoring for far too long that needs to be addressed properly. Stop making excuses and put that energy into making EFFORT to improve the situation. Stop pawning the problem off on another department at Riot - that's another thing some Riot employees like to do. Start taking ownership and initiative. If you think it's more in some other department's wheelhouse, then YOU go talk to them. Push them. FORCE Riot to take ownership of the problem and make a solution. As evidenced by people complaining about balance every patch and continuing to play, we'll take an imperfect system that you can improve on over the years. But people won't keep settling for NO system.
: > [{quoted}](name=One Punch Ví,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=WBhq1rL7,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-04-08T10:15:24.480+0000) > > Like my adc legit didn't leave bot lane for 30 minutes, said "stay plat youll never win promos" and afk pushed until dead all game. If a single human being even read the chat logs, they'll see me as toxic but my adc as obviously griefing. I don't care if I'm labeled as toxic, the day Riot punishes players for soft inting and intentionally throwing games through their gameplay is the day I won't flame again Yup. The mods and riot all think context does not matter but that is just not true at all. Context is the most important thing in any situation no matter what.
Toxicity in chat because Riot won't deal with griefing players and you're fed up with getting screwed over by it game after game no matter how nice in chat you've been: 1. Instantly punished 2. Offended party could just mute or... not be a jackass by simply avoiding griefing all game Griefing or inting (real inting... not simply bad kda) plus low-key harassment and toxicity that chat filter won't pick up but is obvious to everyone in the game: 1. Excused or even defended 2. Offended party can NOT just mute. They either have to out-carry these people or auto-lose despite perhaps deserving the win more than anyone else on either team in the game due to 1 or more people griefing. So we have 2 ways (punishments and bans) to deal with one type of toxicity... half of which only results because... we have ZERO ways of properly dealing with all but the most extreme and blatant 0.0001% of the other toxicity. Hmm... {{sticker:zombie-brand-facepalm}}
: lack of punishment for griefing
You know... I spent over 2 years explaining this exact type of thing with detailed EVIDENCE and got nothing but grief from the boards. I could still be playing despite having gotten chat restricted a couple times for losing my temper over seeing that type of crap over and over and nothing being done about it, but I'm done with it. I applaud anyone who will still fight for the idea that Riot needs to step up to the plate and actually start dealing with griefing instead of excusing it. I'm happy to see that for once the boards are upvoting such a post rather than spam downvoting and writing mindless stupid replies that show they didn't even bother reading half of what you wrote like I've faced for over 2 years campaigning to fix this issue. But until I see meaningful improvement in the way they treat players and the way they deal with griefing, I refuse to play anymore. Sad because I just found an irl friend who actually plays lol about a year ago, but playing the game even just for fun with them suggest that I support their horrible lazy policy in regards to griefing and their overly harsh policy towards "toxicity" which can be muted. Funny how toxicity of griefing which cannot be muted is not only ignored, but outright defended and excused by Riot while anything explicit in chat gets brought to the gallows even if it was deserved based on what was done and said to the player who snapped from being repeatedly abused both in chat and by gameplay such as your griefing teammates. Best of luck to you, but I don't see anything changing any time soon.
UrPalAl (NA)
: Jayce nerfs are missing the point
By nerfing base hp and hp regen as well as their scaling they are: making him more vulnerable to his opponents' burst damage at early and later levels making him more vulnerable to being slowly chunked out when his opponents do manage to get a good trade onto him Basically, they are making his laning phase weaker by rewarding opponents who get off proper trades vs him by making their damage on him more meaningful. So uh... they are doing exactly what you suggest, just not in the exact method you suggest. And here's a consideration for why they SHOULDN'T do it the way you suggest: Think about nidalee in mid and late game teamfights. How often do you see her hit a spear on a bruiser or tank or even a riven and decide to go all-in off something like that and actually get positive results? Basically never right? Yeah. Because she's a squishy vulnerable ranged champ that relies on her range and strong poke to build an advantage over you so she can EVENTUALLY go in off a good ranged combo and finish you off. Well that's kinda the same story with jayce in ranged vs hammer stance. If his ranged stance is made significantly weaker UNLESS followed up by an immediate melee combo, then so many champs would just wreck him for that during the early phase of the game when he's supposed to be stronger than them (if played properly) and also they'll outscale him. They already incentivize him to do melee through a combo of it offering good finishing damage on opponents, disengage vs certain melee's like renekton, and to restore his insanely low mana pool compared to the mana pool of other such mana-hungry champs. Seriously, could you imagine if ezreal had the mana challenges jayce does? And before you go thinking I'm some jayce main or enthusiast... you're more than welcome to research me - I basically NEVER play jayce. In fact, I'm generally the guy playing AGAINST him up in top lane. So speaking from THAT type of first hand experience, I can tell you that putting some sort of further incentive for jayce to use melee over ranged form for laning phase power would neither be of good service to his opponents nor jayce himself. Either the melee bonuses he'd get would be so great that you couldn't touch the minions away from your tower because jayce would out-duel you in both melee and ranged to such a massive degree or... the ranged into melee combo would work much like nid and while offering a good bonus would not work due to how squishy the guy is vs a much more durable bruiser or tank and he'd just get wrecked for gap closing and swapping to melee without properly poking someone down enough first. The changes to hp and hp regen mean getting a good trade off vs him now increases your ability to win out in the game of trading your hp bar away for his mana pool. They make it require fewer trades vs him to get him low enough in hp that you can all-in him. And they leave laning phase jayce in that position of power that he needs to be viable beyond laning phase IF he's played properly. I don't want him more feast or famine from laning phase on and becoming another problematic champ that either needs regular fine-tuning ever patch or so or else to be left ignored and be largely unplayable or very weak for large portions of a season. Which is exactly where he would be by making him more melee focused or even ranged-into-melee combo focused for laning phase power. And while you might not know it yet, you yourself agree with me too.
: you can play a champ 1000000 times and still have a bad game on them where you just lose. no point to add a blocker to a person's champion pool
That's like arguing that you can still get injured or die in a car crash every once in a trillion times even if you wear your seat belt so... just remove seat belt requirement for when you drive a car. Uh... sure it can happen, but how statistically likely is it? Statistically you are less likely to die in crash or face serious injury if you wear seat belt. By same token, you are statistically LESS LIKELY to throw the game by playing sooooo poorly on a champ if you've actually played them several times before. This is even more true with today's players than it was in the past.{{sticker:zombie-brand-facepalm}}
LajblO (EUNE)
: Stop ,,first time,, in Ranked mode
HOTs made you level a hero/champ up a certain amount before they were playable in ranked.
: > [{quoted}](name=woodvsmurph,realm=NA,application-id=EBBIvmVK,discussion-id=QUs33gYP,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-03-11T04:20:04.630+0000) > > Not too bad. I like the aggression and calculated risk taking. I used to play a lot of morg support and remember snowballing my adc early and then 2v3 flashing into enemy bot duo and their jg at level 6 to grab double kills and blow multiple enemy sums. > But my favorite game had to be where I pulled off an early game like that, then ganked mid and as soon as the 10/1/8 enemy zed saw me, he flashed away. Didn't give a crap about our midlaner, but a support morgana 2 levels down on him scared him that much lol. > Hope you load more content. Montage clips like what you just posted are the best even if you don't play that champ, although I'd shoot for a bit longer of a clip next time. Thank you! I been told I made too long clips sometimes so I just picked some of the highlights. I was actually morg mid that game. Ill try to make more in the future when I have the time!
Well what I mean is that a lot of people make montage vids that last up to around 10 min with clips like the ones you uploaded. So it would be cool to get a longer vid of such plays. I enjoy watching full games too and analyzing them; however, most players don't have that kind of attention span. I think that's why you were told some clips are too long? Like if a play takes 2 min or so to see the full result and it's not non-stop brawling, most viewers have blanked out or fallen asleep lol.?... That's just from my experience of what others like.
DerPunkt (EUW)
: I like this text. A little long but hey. I write long as well. Your analysis of the problem is on point, the lowkey toxicity and the dark places are what we are actually talking about. The kind that grinds you down little by little with every game. The hard core and blatant stuff is easy enough punished and also gives nice IFS massages every once in a while. It also is not just toxicity but the regular everyday grind. It is getting agitated with every game and every play of your teammates that you feel was wrong. It is often not even wrong it is you having another idea and getting wound up by it. We often read about "turret or drake" "turret/inhib or Baron" "baron or elder" "baron and drake or trying to finish" all these decisions. From seeing the regular 2/3 split for these decisions and the discussions here we know, many are equally good/bad but you deciding for one and them deciding for the other grinds you down. Nobody did a mistake, but it feels like one. And losing a game on such a difference in decision making and getting blamed for it, even though you maybe had a good reason to not try to finish but to play it slow etc. This is what often gets you and makes you flame the next guy in the next game to go 0/3 in lane within 5 minutes even though he might never had a chance. I have to say though, I don't agree with your solution. If you look at my match history e.g. you will see chuncks of streaks. In some I go very bad and recently I basically always went on killing sprees a smurf would do. I don't know why. My play has not changed. It just happens that my teams play better around me and my enemies the last couple games did not know how to handle me. But the next support I don't work with well will come. And the next top lane that feeds a Jax to 10 kills before I even meet him the first time will come, and I will go 0/5 and leave lane to end the game 2/10. It will happen. Bad games happen. And games where you will be matched with somebody who just is better than you, cause a higher skilled player dues with his friend who happens to be on your MMR or slightly below it. Nobody is to blame for this, but it will still drive you towards the point of flip. Nobody is to be punished for it, but it is good that if I don't control myself and flip to easy and to often I will get a cool down. So I would say the solution is not to punish more, but to prevent the winding up in the first place. This will not work by giving you a feel of accomplishment for reporting (feed back) it is nice to get your "revenge" but it will not really calm you down, it will just allow you to deal with it more easy, but the next game will see you just as agitated as before. It is a never ending circle of hostility that can only be broken by experiencing something truely great and even than it does not take much to jump to the wound up state again. The honorsystem won't provide relieve as well. it is a long term based system, and it will not do anything while you lost 10 games in a row and now went from your promo to the next precious metal to sitting on the brink of being trash in your bracket. No honor in the world will calm me down when I lost so many games that by now I myself become the losing player because I got tilted. The honor system has other flaws like it only rewards good play and not good behaviour but that is another topic. So how do you reduce that frustration that leads to the low key toxicity? I personally take Issue with the rank system. It is utterly arbitrary in parts. If you know how it works you will get this if you don't get this, try to read up on how LP/rank interact with MMR. 1. The rank ladder was introduced to provide a meaning full grind. Previously we had a giant elo ladder and winning and advancing ment nothing you went from place 100.000 to place 999.856. YOu jumped names you would never encounter. etc. If you lost you wouild go to 100.305. The numbers meant nothing. So the ladders was cut into chunks. During your climb you would encounter the same names,. it was meant to provide you with a meaning full climb. The ladder would try to place you in a division with people from your friends list. The Ranks in the division were meant to provide you with a feel of accomplishing something. instead of jumping nameless faces you would jump people you know and instead of bouncing between meaningless high numbers you would now bounce between a few people and also get an achievement a rank up in between. THis sounded okish, but many people critized it early on. And what do we have now? People don't care about the ladders at all. They care abpout Rank and LP, they hate the process of ranking up, promos make them feel like not gaining anyhting, after all you win your promo, next thing you see is you lose and are already on 0LP and you know what comes if you lose again. You will demote and set to a lower LP, it seems like you lose more LP than you gain, cause you could not earn them in your promo, but lose them in the demotion. That seems frustrating to many. Same goes for Divison climb. 3 out of 5 can be hard to get. Especially after you already had to win so much to get there and you know at some point you will have to lose again, if you are not a smurf you will roughly lose 50% so it seems like a coinflip and with the games you needed to win to get to the promo it seems like a coinflip with a rigged coin. Frustrating again. The ladder grind kills you inside. And now remember what I mentioned earlier. The game with a due, where one is just a bit better. He wins lane, even if it was just slightly, he wins it. He wins game. You lose, you lose as much LP as in a fair game, but this game was unfair. Why? Cause LP have no relation to the actually game but to your MMR. With MMR/ELO in the early days, you would just lose a little less elo in such an instance. And losing 15 opf 1500 does not hurt. But losing 22 of 17 setting you to zero does. As does losing 22 of 88 cause now if you have to win 2 games just to get to the promo where you have to win 4 more. It feels harsh. Where going 1500 to 1478 and back to 1501 and 1523 and back to 1503 does not really feel to bad. Nothing happend. 4 games into the drain, but not to bad you could have gotten bad luck having a just been promoted and now getting demoted and having to win 4 games in a row just to get back where you were, while you MMR looks like I described it for the old system. So eventually you will start to gain more, if you manage to keep winning, but you rarely do. The system just feels very unforgiving. And here comes the low key toxicity, ranked has become a pool of complaint about how much you lose and where you are and think you should be. I liked the old system more, it showed you where you are, it could show you how fast you fell or andvanced accurately and this give you a better feeling where you should be. And people are so afraid of losing their promo now. Every game you ready "thanks ... always idiots in promo games" it has become a freaking meme by now. Promo games are the root of all ranked hostility i'd argue. TL:DR, don fight the symptom, fight the infection, fight the root of frustration. League is not only a team game, but one of the games where you are very reliant on your team. Going OK will lose you your game if somebody went bad, cause now you have to fight a good guy as an OK guy. And going Good will not automatically grant you a win, another good guy can shut you down etc, so your rank seems very influenced by your team eventhough you are the common denominator in your games. So make it seem less punishing when you lose a game cause your team lost, and hostility towards your team will go down cause, they didn't take anything from you, they just didn't contribute enough to win. The single game should not determine your standings or feel like it, your performance over several game should and the system should point this out more.
I appreciate the feedback and that you took the time to read. Just replying now because I took a month to be completely away from lol because it was pissing me off. I get a lot of what you are saying and I think in most cases you're absolutely right. I do think there's exceptions though - there almost always is - and have to say I still disagree about punishing low key toxicity. I've been punished several times for blatant toxicity. And I fully admit that I deserved what I faced. I have never tried to argue otherwise. What I have argued is that I would not be there in the first place if I were given a fair chance to have a peaceful fun game of league just as much as the next guy. I'm more than happy to work with "inting" (what general populace might call inting - not what I would) teammates. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcvp_L30YmA 22 to 9 kills at 15 min mark in enemy team's favor. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoYbM0kMq9c 1/15/1 combined kda of bot and mid lane... while the enemy jg was babysitting their toplaner to try to shut me down. And that after several similar such games - all losses - where I got no help from team and they blame every lost fight on me. Do I rage at team? No, I calmly communicate that they need to stop forcing fights they can't win, just focus on farming up, concede objectives unless sej and I are there, and we can win this. But you get enough losses like that and low key harassment and nobody can be expected to put up with that crap forever. Take a break? I can take a week off and I'll come back to the same thing. So if you are going to go after a player for telling a teammate to stop being r*#arded after they spend 15 min running it down lane repeatedly forcing 2v2's they no longer have any chance of winning and also ignoring pings of the enemy jg coming to their lane to gank them for one outburst... then you by the same token should be addressing the toxicity with equal fervor of said 2v2 teammates for: 1. running it down the lane FORCING the same bad fight over and over now that they have 0 chance of winning (not being engaged on or tower dove... FORCING the fight by engaging on the fed enemy duo) 2. ignoring pings over the top of their champs that the enemy jg is coming to gank them BEFORE they force the engage 3. blaming me for not teleporting into a 1v4 (because one of them instantly got deleted and the enemy mid showed up too to save them after I TOLD them not to engage; bonus... my tp is on cd 4. making constant under-the-radar toxic remarks about me the last 15+ min because omg... I died twice in 15 min to the enemy jg camping me... never mind my 2 kills, cs lead, and the fact I'm giving them an easy laning phase because they don't have to worry about jg camping THEM AND I'm freeing up our jg to make ganks without fear of counterganks. Sure one of those points by itself might not be THAT bad... but put 3-4 of them together and you can't tell me that's not toxic. But players, boards moderators, and Riot support team will all defend such players and their behavior. And one of the biggest bs excuses they use is "just mute". Lol. Ok... if that EXCUSES their TOXICITY, then by the same token it would excuse blatant toxicity - because they can "just mute". So either it's toxic and should be punished regardless of if it can be muted, or it isn't toxic and therefore deserves no punishment. I mean imagine hearing casters in a pro game go talk about a bot lane duo that has been 3v2'd and 4v2'd the entire laning phase, yet they are even in cs and levels, they've done more damage to the enemy tower than has been done to theirs, and they have gotten 0 assistance from top, mid, or jg: Lol, this bot duo... had to burn flash again, didn't they listen to teammate ping 3 sec ago and realize jg was there? Wow, died for 2nd time in 2v4 and only killed enemy jg and support in reply so trash. Don't they realize they're on lane bullies and should have cs advantage? Wow this bot lane didn't even bother to rotate to help their team contest rift herald when the enemy jg stopped camping them for a whole 30 sec to do it. So bad. (split 2v2, force enemy bot and jg to base, grab a tower; team loses a 3v2) And I don't know how this bot duo expects their team to win if they never group up. They just cost their team huge that teamfight. I really don't know what they were thinking there. You'd probably think the casters were insane and very rude. If they were being serious, you'd probably want them replaced with some halfways intelligent casters instead. If you encountered that crap from 2-4 teammates for 8 straight games in a row... for more-or-less the whole game (muted or not)... regardless of adjusting your play to cater to your teammates preferred strats because you're that nice... you'd probably get pissed off and say something to them eventually. So how to avoid putting people in that type of scenario? You stop that behavior. If that behavior got addressed properly - the way they do blatant toxicity - then that type of under-the-radar toxicity would decrease. You decrease that, you have fewer instances of people being driven to make a blatantly toxic remark from being fed up with said toxicity. Moreover, said people would know that something is finally being done to address such toxicity, which makes it easier for them to overlook the few instances they still encounter it rather than blow up. As far as "inting"... that is a bit harder to tell without doing a vod review of the match and it is very elo dependent as far as what would actually qualify. I've said in numerous posts over the past 2 years... bad kda does not equal inting, nor does good kda equal not inting. It's more about elo-dependent skill and decision-making. Like in iron division, I wouldn't expect a toplaner to know that because they lost a duel at level 2 to darius that they can't beat him at level 3 or 4 probably. But in gold elo? The expectations are higher and the person should at least be smart enough not to FORCE a fight on darius out in the open or under darius's tower. In bronze I might not expect a bot duo to play passive and wait for jg to catch them back up in power/xp/items just because they lost a 2v2 at level 4 and again at level 5. But at mid silver, I'd expect them to at least avoid FORCING a fight that likely puts them at 0/3/0 apiece by jumping the enemy bot duo at their tower while having 0 vision of potential ganks by the enemy jg. Sure if you're 0/2/0 apiece bot and you all of a sudden get 3 or 4 man tower dove from a blind spot with no warning from team and you die, that's one thing. And if we aren't talking super high elo, that's not inting. And after a certain point if you aren't getting the help from your team, then yeah you can't even farm under your own tower safely and you'll look like you just inted all game even though that's not true. But from your DECISION MAKING and itemization etc. we can see that you were in fact NOT inting. When I'm talking inting, I'm referring to stuff where it's like the 5th or 8th or whatever time of FORCING the same exact fight or overextending in the same way without backup vs a hard engage comp or several very fed assassins that you can't duel. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. Fool me a third time... I really need to stop dying the same way. That's how I feel - again... elo dependent. If we've lost the last 3 5v5's and I'm blaming adc for "not being there" when they are clearly halfway across the map with no means of joining me, then it's not their fault if I engage a 3v5 that we don't HAVE to take and we lose. It would be my fault, and I would be inting.
Show more

woodvsmurph

Level 114 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion