: ”Hey mid, its your fault we are losing. Please go afk so we dont lose lp for ur mess”
> [{quoted}](name=Trist mid opop,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=tLLVFIYF,comment-id=0015,timestamp=2019-11-04T10:39:30.494+0000) > > ”Hey mid, its your fault we are losing. Please go afk so we dont lose lp for ur mess” It's always the jungler. But yeah i can totally see this happening. Making the afk lose tons of LP wouldn't work either, because afking is not always intentional. Even i did a few times. 3, or maybe 4 times over the years, and more than 2000 games in total with both east, and west account.
: Sum of attractive Champions - Female
We all know, that Annie is most attractive of them all, and will always be. Unless they make her grow up.
: Is it fair that if someone AFKs, everybody that is on the Losing team loses LP?
Still could be abused, if someone "takes the hit". Making the afker lose a lot more wouldn't be fair either, because AFK-ing is not always intentional. The decision of who is truly afk also a problem, and defining a timeframe. For example someone disconnects for a minute due game crash, then he shouldn't lose because of it. It could be made, that the timeframe is large. So that you can't just take the hit for the team, but instead the team has to work hard to avoid the losing. Like, if someone goes afk, then whenever he went dark 75% of the time, but minimum up to 18 minutes total game time must be played further before the afker's team can avoid the heavy lp loss. Example: guy goes afk at 4. minute, and never returns. 4*0,75+4=7 So the 75% rule would make it up to 7. minutes, but since it's below 18 the 18 takes priority. If the team survives until 18. minute with the afk not returning, then they avoid heavy loss. Another game the guy goes afk at 15 min.. Right after a surr. vote failed. 15*0,75+15=26,25. This is above 18 so it takes priority. The team must survive until 26,25 min. in order to avoid the heavy lp loss. Goal is to make the team work to avoid the loss. Instead of. Well we lost anyway i just go afk so the team won't lose that much.
: Bring Back the "Unskilled Player" Report Option
Unless you are the best player in the world there is always someone better. Even if you are the best player in the world there is always someone who can counter you. Simply being nearly as good as you are with a counter champ on it's side. And since the current meta promotes early win the lane phase is super important, and you can't really do anything, if the enemy is better. Certain champions just poke you out from turret, or dive you after 6. Then you either try, and feed, or lose turret, and plates in record time. Both outcome will mark you as "report this unskilled guy". Even if you are a silver player facing a diamond smurf.
ZeroSixTeen (EUNE)
: Why is Garen as a champion so hard to take seriously
He needs a complete rework to get up for the rest. With mobility, dashes, jumps, skillshots, skill resets, low CDs, and above all. DAMAGE
: Senna: The "support" ADC
The solution is easier, than you think. No scaling with AD, or attack speed. Yep. That's all. You can give it strong inherent damage, and attack speed, but with 0 scaling there will be no point trying to go that way. Have her skills go with AP, and make sure, that they gona be low enough with high ratio. Then you either go AP for strong abilities, or try to go AD, but remain weak, because any ADC with abilities used will outclass it.
Zed genius (EUNE)
: She will be broken as fuck, but people won't know how to play her so her winrate will be low. Riot will buff her the following patch and then she will be pick or ban for months until they decide to nerf her. That's every new champion/rework.
> [{quoted}](name=Zed genius,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=5xApmeXc,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-10-29T12:52:51.312+0000) > > She will be broken as fuck, but people won't know how to play her so her winrate will be low. Riot will buff her the following patch and then she will be pick or ban for months until they decide to nerf her. > > That's every new champion/rework. Maybe a champion can take the first place in worldwide banrate from Yasuo.
Comentários de Rioters
: New Gamemode Idea
Skillshots EVERYWHERE.
Arcade Lulu (EUNE)
: Except that there aren't 10min, 2h oe 2 day bans The 1st major game play offense leads to a 14 day ban And you don't simply get insta permabanned for being toxic. You always get at least 14 day banned 1st, which clearly warns you that the next offense will lead to a permanent suspension. But the sentence you said as an example? Won't even land a 10 game chat restriction
> [{quoted}](name=Arcade Lulu,realm=EUNE,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=3kPEKHLb,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-10-28T21:09:29.959+0000) > > Except that there aren't 10min, 2h oe 2 day bans > The 1st major game play offense leads to a 14 day ban > > And you don't simply get insta permabanned for being toxic. You always get at least 14 day banned 1st, which clearly warns you that the next offense will lead to a permanent suspension. But the sentence you said as an example? Won't even land a 10 game chat restriction It's in the jokes for a reason. Semi-afks, and int. feeders never get punished.
Comentários de Rioters
: So can we get back scaling / late game / slower paced meta?
Nope we can't. The game should go faster paced instead. 30000 gold for first blood. 3000% stronger buffs. Plates increase to 10000 gold each. Let the game end in the first 10 minutes.
Sucction (OCE)
: > [{quoted}](name=The Kombinator,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=LKItzN8n,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-10-27T14:42:33.665+0000) > > If everyone is strong, then nobody is. Just make the current weak ones stronger. That's called power creep, and what is currently threatening to kill our game. Let's not exacerbate that, thanks.
> [{quoted}](name=Sucction,realm=OCE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=LKItzN8n,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-10-27T15:13:07.897+0000) > > That's called power creep, and what is currently threatening to kill our game. > > Let's not exacerbate that, thanks. It's already happening. Most reworked, or newly made champions are filled with skillshots, super mobility, wall of text synergy, and so on. When it comes to balance there are always two ends for each affected part. No matter how complicated you try to make it. Nerf what is strong. Buff what is weak.
Mmuundi (NA)
: Communism :thinking:
> [{quoted}](name=Mmuundi,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=LKItzN8n,comment-id=00040001,timestamp=2019-10-27T15:17:49.277+0000) > > Communism :thinking: Equality in power is not just good for games like these, but even expected. Do not try to apply the same logic to a game as it is exist in our reality.
Abandon (OCE)
: There are too many strong champions right now. Please balance the game.
If everyone is strong, then nobody is. Just make the current weak ones stronger.
: What Do YOU Want Karma to Become?
Would be nice to have a strong shielder champion. Like being able to block more, than 1 basic attack from enemy carry, or save someone squishy from the assassin without using summoner spell, or an ult with 2,5 minute base cd.
: Some of these champion images look far better than the originals
Jansuo (EUNE)
: Sylas Used Ult On Corki
I'm not against long cooldowns on ults, but this is a bit too much.
: Role queue actually lowers matchmaking quality.
As a support main i can tell you how much BULLSHIT is behind this. Even before the role selection i got support 99% of the time. I tried other roles, and has some basic knowledge about them, but when it comes to gameplay, then as support i'm on gold2, gold1 level, and with other roles i'm probably on silver, or maybe bronze. Strategic decisions has nothing to do with roles. The idea of not going into 1v5, because they gona destroy you has nothing to do with being top, mid, or jungle main. Knowing, that 2 mage aren't going to kill Baron has nothing to do with being ADC main. This knowledge can be gathered everywhere. What truly affects the role selection is the inability to understand the situation of others. Some player might not understand what is like playing on top, and getting pummeled under turret, because they never did that. This can lead to more flaming, and toxic kids. But it's not the reason of making bad strategic decisions in midgame, or lategame. Maybe in early game, but just as at the workplace. I trust the other main to know his role, and not trying to know it better. Even though i have a basic knowledge about it.
: They are burying Pyke.
He is meant to die from a nuke. Not like any assassin builds HP in general. Also, if you can't nuke him, then he returns in like 3 seconds up and ready. Most assassin either recall, or needs long time to be up again.
: lucky? almost everyone of these "got hacked" posts turned out to be the person giving their password away or logging into a page that clearly isnt from the gamedevs. i really wouldnt call it luck, just common sense. in the past years i got so many spam emails that looked identical to my actual bank account that required me to "log in to confirm my account". but in the end, those were just scam mails. and obviously i didnt log in
> [{quoted}](name=Jennifer420,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=9gEaBVa7,comment-id=00000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-20T21:11:51.289+0000) > > lucky? almost everyone of these "got hacked" posts turned out to be the person giving their password away or logging into a page that clearly isnt from the gamedevs. > > i really wouldnt call it luck, just common sense. > in the past years i got so many spam emails that looked identical to my actual bank account that required me to "log in to confirm my account". but in the end, those were just scam mails. and obviously i didnt log in No game since 2018/11/20. Which is almost a year as OP told. The stats on the past 10 games are nothing exceptional either. No reason to believe, that 3. party software were used. Also pretty much all old accounts, that weren't used are facing this issue somehow. My old west account got it with no games since a year (or maybe 2), and you can cross check the used champions to see, that i used that one too back in the day.
: Senna Being the Next Champ is the Perfect 10th Anniversery Champion
Longest running rivals... Twisted Fate, and Graves. Soraka, and Warwick. Kayle, and Morgana. There could be others.
: Someone would probably comment that if you have connection problem, you shouldn't play ranked in the first place. But if i start the game with 39 ms and then get up till 2493 randomly because of a misteryous phenomen why it should be my fault.
> [{quoted}](name=Killer of Night9,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=0VsbK8Rj,comment-id=0001000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-09T10:52:27.155+0000) > > Someone would probably comment that if you have connection problem, you shouldn't play ranked in the first place. > But if i start the game with 39 ms and then get up till 2493 randomly because of a misteryous phenomen why it should be my fault. Depends. First time, or rarely happens, or happens often. If the last one it is your fault, if it happens on ranked. You should look into it, and not play ranked unless you figured out, and eliminated the reason, and managed to have a NON-RANKED game without it.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Kombinator,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KEFFbONc,comment-id=0008000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-09T09:37:59.260+0000) > > In other words. The player is normal, and active. > > Champion pool change doesn't matter unless he is the "ranked exist only" guy. Draft pick doesn't affect ranked mmr, and you shouldn't play champions on ranked without practice on normals first. I've changed my champion pool a few time over the years and everytime i dropped a full tier before slowly getting back to my former level.
> [{quoted}](name=Starcraft243ver,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KEFFbONc,comment-id=00080000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-09T11:13:23.353+0000) > > I've changed my champion pool a few time over the years and everytime i dropped a full tier before slowly getting back to my former level. That's why you play normals first, and not start ranked with first timer champions. You still get less efficiency of course, but not bronze level, if you are in gold otherwise. Unless you intentionally reduce your normal MMR drastically, but as told. Int losings, smurfs, and e-bay accs. are not something any matchmaking system could handle.
: Imagine you start a new account and get a 500 lose streak, you will hit the bottom of the mmr range. Then, since you were a challenger smurf, you go on a 100 win streak, you'll hit master without a doubt, yet you have a 500L-100W record, which is around 17% winrate. It doesnt make your matches not balanced.
> [{quoted}](name=Starcraft243ver,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KEFFbONc,comment-id=00070001,timestamp=2019-10-09T11:28:03.808+0000) > > Imagine you start a new account and get a 500 lose streak, you will hit the bottom of the mmr range. Then, since you were a challenger smurf, you go on a 100 win streak, you'll hit master without a doubt, yet you have a 500L-100W record, which is around 17% winrate. > > It doesnt make your matches not balanced. Smurfing, and int lose is not something any matchmaking could possibly handle.
: Since you refuse to do anything about AFK in ranked,
Had similar idea, but not speifically against afks, but in general against "undesirables". Trolls, int-feeders, afks, e-bay accounts, toxic players etc.. In my idea you could only ban players from matchmade WITH YOU. So if you ban a player, then he might appear in enemy team still. 1. problem: As we know everyone hates good players. People DESPISE when someone has skill, and take it as personal offense to be carried. Even worse when the good player is in enemy team. /s Now to be serious. One argument is that people would ban good players, and that would prevent them from playing. Might be true on super high ranks. 2. problem: Jerks couldn't play at some point, because they would be banned by everyone. And there are plenty of jerks around, that might buy skins. Preventing them from playing might mean profit loss.
: Afks are punished when they do it too often.
> [{quoted}](name=Starcraft243ver,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=0VsbK8Rj,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-10-09T09:31:53.625+0000) > > Afks are punished when they do it too often. Depends on type. Real afk, or semi-afk. Let me explain the difference. Real afk means, that he does nothing. System detects, and if you do it too much, then get punished. Semi-afk is someone who moves just enough so it "does somethin". Like taking 2 steps every few minutes. They aren't contribute anything beside voting yes on surrender most of the time. The latter NEVER gets punished by report system. Without writing toxic stuff chat issues doesn't work. They don't die on start so auto detection will not flag them as feeders either. And they move enough not to be marked as afk. Unless the case is viewed by a person through ticket system they never get anything.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Kombinator,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KEFFbONc,comment-id=00080000,timestamp=2019-10-09T07:30:15.822+0000) > > Ranks should reflect the MMR above a certain number of matches. A relatively low number for true accounts, and a higher number for smurfs. Assuming, that the player doesn't throw matches intentionally. Assuming the player doesnt change his champion pool Assuming the player doesnt decay due to inactivity Assuming this is the same player on the account
> [{quoted}](name=Starcraft243ver,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KEFFbONc,comment-id=000800000000,timestamp=2019-10-09T09:26:42.994+0000) > > Assuming the player doesnt change his champion pool > Assuming the player doesnt decay due to inactivity > Assuming this is the same player on the account In other words. The player is normal, and active. Champion pool change doesn't matter unless he is the "ranked exist only" guy. Draft pick doesn't affect ranked mmr, and you shouldn't play champions on ranked without practice on normals first.
: > Obviously massive rank disparities Ranks are not considered by the matchmaking algorithm, so why do you look at the ranks ?
> [{quoted}](name=Starcraft243ver,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KEFFbONc,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2019-10-08T09:35:51.296+0000) > > Ranks are not considered by the matchmaking algorithm, so why do you look at the ranks ? Ranks should reflect the MMR above a certain number of matches. A relatively low number for true accounts, and a higher number for smurfs. Assuming, that the player doesn't throw matches intentionally.
Comentários de Rioters
KilaraSX (NA)
: I don't think the problem is with playing any AD champs in the lane against him. The problem is that malphite does too much damage while still maintaining tank stats. You think it's fair only being able to dodge an ability once every 300 seconds? Full AP malphite can 1 shot a Katarina. You'd think that he's the assassin.It's full time they gut the damage on ALL tanks. Tanks should just be damage soakers with crowd control and engage. NOT damage dealers.
> [{quoted}](name=KilaraSX,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=xRXvoFRa,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-10-06T02:11:05.412+0000) > > I don't think the problem is with playing any AD champs in the lane against him. The problem is that malphite does too much damage while still maintaining tank stats. You think it's fair only being able to dodge an ability once every 300 seconds? Full AP malphite can 1 shot a Katarina. You'd think that he's the assassin.It's full time they gut the damage on ALL tanks. Tanks should just be damage soakers with crowd control and engage. NOT damage dealers. The problem with AP Malph is the extreme speed+CC. You need extremely good reflexes with high fps+low latency to have any hope to dodge it. And if it hits, then you are dead before you hit the ground. Solutions (each separatedly) 1. Make him true tank. Lowered AP ratios, lowered CD on skills, and ult. Stronger defense. He couldn't oneshot anymore, but he could CC more often, and able to survive better. 2. Make him true AP. Lowered base defenses, ult move slightly slower so you can react, and do something about it. 3. His ult would have lowered CD, and start on 0 CC. Armor, mr, and health could increase it's CC. Lategame tank malph could reach 2,5 second. Without the CC you could use defensive tools during his combo to avoid being oneshot. However if you go as tank, then you could put them on CC for your team's sake.
: No you can't. You can do it 50% of the time, but since a game has only 2 outcomes it's no different than a random guess. Now if you tell me that, looking at the champions picked, the bans and the stats of the champions for each player in the game, you can tell who has the best odds to win at the BEGINING OF THE GAME (and not at the begining of the lobby) I totaly agree with you. But you can't blame matchmaking for this, because bans and champions picks happens AFTER matchmaking has already matched players together. Also as a matter of fact, I never ever dodge the games and even when we sometimes have very weird compositions (I even got a no smite jungler in diamond because he tough he was top), we managed to pull a win in half the case. Now the problem is if at the start of your game you act like your game is already lost, you bias the outcome as well.
> [{quoted}](name=Starcraft243ver,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KEFFbONc,comment-id=0001000000010000000000010000,timestamp=2019-10-07T08:41:09.948+0000) > Also as a matter of fact, I never ever dodge the games and even when we sometimes have very weird compositions (I even got a no smite jungler in diamond because he tough he was top), we managed to pull a win in half the case. One of the reason the weird compisition can win is, because nobody prepared for it. At least the great majority of players on lower ranks have no idea what to do.
Kai Guy (NA)
: Lets take a look at the match averages for the players in recent games to see if this was a gross mismatch. {{champion:122}} Silver 4-3. {{champion:19}} Silver 3. {{champion:51}} Silver 4 - 2 {{champion:222}} (you.) Silver 3 - 1 {{champion:1}} S4-3 Vs. {{champion:82}} S3-g4. Duoed W Diana. {{champion:131}} Bronze 2- Silver 3. Duoed with Morde. {{champion:106}} S3-s2 {{champion:202}} S3-s1 {{champion:25}} S4-s3. All in all pretty similar, outliers being the duo on the enemy with the lowest and highest MMR in the game. Annie having low Data is a high uncertainty account but Dianna looks to be lower MMR then her.So lets try another site. One with Estimates. https://na.whatismymmr.com/ 823±2, 826 ±22, 927 ±26, 760 ±35,797 ±37. VS 807±20, 811 ±10, 864±30(you), 823±21, 823±2 (your "bronze" teammate) Averaged out? 826.6 Vs 825.6 Looks more or less about right ball park, Some Noise from further games played impacting accounts MMR and the fact that loss would have changed results. Nothing looks outrageous thou. Look, MM has to balance out Duos. So seeing a game that's around the Mean value between Bronze and gold seems about right. I have been telling boards all season that Duoing implementation really needs to be updated to function off Assigned hidden MMR not Tiers because the Range gaps create Mismatches. Hopefully you will lean that Titles are a bad metric to use to gauge skill.
> [{quoted}](name=Kai Guy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=KEFFbONc,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-10-03T21:13:33.056+0000) > > Lets take a look at the match averages for the players in recent games to see if this was a gross mismatch. > {{champion:122}} Silver 4-3. > {{champion:19}} Silver 3. > {{champion:51}} Silver 4 - 2 > {{champion:222}} (you.) Silver 3 - 1 > {{champion:1}} S4-3 > > Vs. > {{champion:82}} S3-g4. Duoed W Diana. > {{champion:131}} Bronze 2- Silver 3. Duoed with Morde. > {{champion:106}} S3-s2 > {{champion:202}} S3-s1 > {{champion:25}} S4-s3. > > > All in all pretty similar, outliers being the duo on the enemy with the lowest and highest MMR in the game. Annie having low Data is a high uncertainty account but Dianna looks to be lower MMR then her.So lets try another site. One with Estimates. > https://na.whatismymmr.com/ > > 823±2, 826 ±22, 927 ±26, 760 ±35,797 ±37. VS 807±20, 811 ±10, 864±30(you), 823±21, 823±2 (your "bronze" teammate) > > > Averaged out? > 826.6 Vs 825.6 Looks more or less about right ball park, Some Noise from further games played impacting accounts MMR and the fact that loss would have changed results. Nothing looks outrageous thou. > > > Look, MM has to balance out Duos. So seeing a game that's around the Mean value between Bronze and gold seems about right. > I have been telling boards all season that Duoing implementation really needs to be updated to function off Assigned hidden MMR not Tiers because the Range gaps create Mismatches. > > Hopefully you will lean that Titles are a bad metric to use to gauge skill. You greatly overestimate the value of s8. rank. There are 2 possibilities. 1. Diana simply got this good on his own over the MONTHS. In that case the s8 rank is IRRELEVANT. Which means, that the current ranks are clearly flawed, and the new meta will push the difference even further. 2. Morde smurfing to pull Diana. In that case it's partly their fault. Still their CURRENT rank is clearly not the same. For easier calculation let's pretend, that Bronze4 is the bottom. (2+5+6+7+8)/5=5,6 (5+3*6+9)/5=6,4 The average difference is 0,8 division.
: If you don't want to ban a champion, because you're such an "alpha male", ban something for an ally.
Draft is partly about learning stuff. If you want die-hard winning at any cost, then go ranked. It is good to learn to play against your most hated stuff unless you got something, that extremely hard counters you. On ranked you can't build on having 2 bans either, and i rather lose a draft to my nemesis champion, than lose ranked, because i have no idea what to do with it.
: True damage and %health damage is dumb.
True damage alone isn't the problem. You can counter that with health. % damage however is.... It let Vayne, Yi, and Gnar in small form to melt tanks no matter how tanky you build. I had a game with premade Garen top. Enemy brought a Vayne, Yi, and Camille. I was like. Forget tank items on Garen. With 3 tank slayers they gona ignore it. Build damage only. At least you can deal damage before they melt you in 2 seconds. We won that game by the way, but our Garen was pure damage. No point losing all that damage for an extra 0,1s. survival.
Mogarl (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=DuskDaUmbreon,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=9NgvTW6A,comment-id=000000020000,timestamp=2019-10-07T00:31:34.604+0000) > > They really aren't. > > Source: I was in bronze 1 playing with gold 4 in a lot of games. I was in Silver 2 playing with people in Platinum 4. Extending your logic I guess platinum is just a few steps off from bronze as well? Gold 4 now means little more than silver 5, gold 5, platinum 5, or Dia 5 last season. They're huge bloated zones that hold people that either stopped playing when they reached their division goal, or people that can't play in the division they've found themselves (either by getting carried or getting lucky/unlucky), and are prevented from getting pushed back down quickly by the system. When you start running into 4s that are significantly higher than your division the assumption should be that your mmr is really good or that theirs is spectacularly awful (though it could also be a combination of the two). You should be able to tell based on what division yours and the enemy's teams are in. https://imgur.com/a/n1SccRa [Source on the chart](https://www.esportstales.com/league-of-legends/rank-distribution-percentage-of-players-by-tier) Gold is easily the worst offender here likely because it is the rank required for Victorious skins, but you can see its effect at every single division entrance. What the split is on how much of the bloat should slide forward or backward I don't know, but Gold 4 is definitely the squishiest.
> [{quoted}](name=Mogarl,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=9NgvTW6A,comment-id=0000000200000000,timestamp=2019-10-07T04:36:45.709+0000) > > I was in Silver 2 playing with people in Platinum 4. Extending your logic I guess platinum is just a few steps off from bronze as well? > > Gold 4 now means little more than silver 5, gold 5, platinum 5, or Dia 5 last season. They're huge bloated zones that hold people that either stopped playing when they reached their division goal, or people that can't play in the division they've found themselves (either by getting carried or getting lucky/unlucky), and are prevented from getting pushed back down quickly by the system. When you start running into 4s that are significantly higher than your division the assumption should be that your mmr is really good or that theirs is spectacularly awful (though it could also be a combination of the two). You should be able to tell based on what division yours and the enemy's teams are in. > > https://imgur.com/a/n1SccRa > > [Source on the chart](https://www.esportstales.com/league-of-legends/rank-distribution-percentage-of-players-by-tier) > > Gold is easily the worst offender here likely because it is the rank required for Victorious skins, but you can see its effect at every single division entrance. What the split is on how much of the bloat should slide forward or backward I don't know, but Gold 4 is definitely the squishiest. The effect of the reward smurfing. Some smurf are just players carried by stronger players, or gave their acc. to stronger player to get the reward. Like silver 2 guy ask the plat. guy to carry his \*ss to gold for the victorious skins. Same exist for Plat.. But much less people can carry your acc. to plat, than gold.
: Except...they do add up. And Iron 1 and Silver 4 aren't really that far apart.
> [{quoted}](name=DuskDaUmbreon,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=9NgvTW6A,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-10-06T02:25:26.353+0000) > > Except...they do add up. And Iron 1 and Silver 4 aren't really that far apart. Only 5 division between them.
Comentários de Rioters
: > [{quoted}](name=The Kombinator,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=O3qP7TiO,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-04T08:26:30.217+0000) > > My system punish random reports by reducing the weight of future reports. So you don't get away with it. You just reduce your chance to make someone punished who truly deserves it. My system uses statistical values to determine whether someone needs to be punished, or not. Give the right numbers to all of it's aspects, and it will get most of the people who deserves it. The only part you totally failed is to read the beginning of that. Numbers are just placeholders, and might need to be adjusted. > > Try to imagine a real life example. You are the boss of a company, and one of your employe constatly report small offenses, and sometimes LIES. How would you solve it? > > 1. Listen every time, fill forms, and try to fix them. > 2. Just ignore him at some point. > 3. Fire him. > > My boss would do the third. We don't like people who don't have balls, and wasting time with false reports is a bigger issue. > > The current system tries to use an automated system, that works quite well against the toxic players, and bad against anything else. But if you got a better idea, then share with us. > > Also you misunderstand the whole idea of the report system. It does not meant to prevent feeders. It's meant to punish them. And feeders are just one. There are also the semi-afk players, and trolls. The tiers exist, because false positives are a possibility, and because some people learns their lesson. Your concept was flawed in the first place. No amount of numbers tuning will change that. That's what you don't understand. Those who learn their lesson in the current system don't let it get past a chat restriction. It's as simple as that. Those who don't suffer a 14 day suspension followed by possible permanent ban. Those who didn't have consistently maintained negative behavior far beyond the point of a false positive. It doesn't take one game to be punished no matter how many games are mentioned on the report card. The ONLY exception to this is zero tolerance behavior. In terms of dealing with gameplay based offenses, my only suggestion for improving would be to bring back Tribunal because Riot sure as hell can't afford to hire enough people per region to do it manually.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=O3qP7TiO,comment-id=00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-04T10:20:23.480+0000) > > Your concept was flawed in the first place. No amount of numbers tuning will change that. That's what you don't understand. > > Those who learn their lesson in the current system don't let it get past a chat restriction. It's as simple as that. Those who don't suffer a 14 day suspension followed by possible permanent ban. Those who didn't have consistently maintained negative behavior far beyond the point of a false positive. It doesn't take one game to be punished no matter how many games are mentioned on the report card. The ONLY exception to this is zero tolerance behavior. > > In terms of dealing with gameplay based offenses, my only suggestion for improving would be to bring back Tribunal because Riot sure as hell can't afford to hire enough people per region to do it manually. Yes the tribunal sounds nice. I also suggested a bot-safe version of it, and got downvoted to oblivion. There are 3 problems. 1.: Too much resources, that doesn't pay back. 2.: Bot users, that just auto-punish everything. My version would create false guilty, or false innocent reports for those who make decisions too fast. Reports, that are sure innocent, or sure guilty. Incorrectly judging these would result in auto-ban from Tribunal, and discredit your previous judgement for a time period. 3.: People will forget to use it. Making the whole system worthless. 3.1.: If you give BIG rewards for helping, then you lose even more resources. Another great idea is just making the system perfect. In an ideal world we could create an AI, that watch, and judge every game with reports at 100% accuracy. *WE DO NOT LIVE IN AN IDEAL WORLD* What would make my version work is the fact, that it doesn't actually care, if you are guilty or innocent. It's more like how democracy works. It doesn't care, if you are capable to lead the country, or not. You get enought votes, and you get punished. You get enough votes, and you are in charge. Give the right numbers, and those who truly deserve it would get punished real fast, because even those who report rarely would report them, and their reports would carry big value. False positives would also be minimal, because the guys who report constantly would have their reports' value reduced. So trying to get everyone banned by reporting everyone all the time wouldn't work. It would only kick you in the groin by making your reports worthless. Maybe it's my fault, that i still got balls, but i don't think, that reporting everyone all the time is a good thing. Maybe i'm just not sensitive enough, that i don't report people for small offenses, or don't call int. feeder someone who dies a few times under his own turret, or refuse to report someone who isn't good enough on a normal game. But in real life the police will make you pay, if you call them for no reason. Think about it why.
: Nocturne, Tryndamere, and Udyr are all pretty much just run at them and right click champions.
> [{quoted}](name=AhhShucks,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=YdW98eXj,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-10-03T00:28:13.411+0000) > > Nocturne, Tryndamere, and Udyr are all pretty much just run at them and right click champions. Don't forget to dodge. If you get hit by a Lux, or Morgana Q, then you aren't going to run anywhere for a while.
DrDubb (NA)
: Ranked Matches Feel Predetermined
Truly close games are rare to me as well. Thrown games happens more often. I'm sure everyone saw the situation, that one team wins early good, then instead of going together, and end it quickly they start throwing. Like going solo all the time, going into enemies blindly, turret dive in 3v5, not waiting for anyone to catch up, and so on.
Pika Fox (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=The Kombinator,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fB63hVzu,comment-id=00000002,timestamp=2019-10-04T09:30:17.821+0000) > > Making it optional is the best possible solution. Some people wouldn't care to wait 30. minutes for a game. > > Also how much portion of the players are masters? 0,1%? Everyone would mind waiting 30 minutes to get into a game. If it takes you 30 minutes to get into queue, and someone dodges, congrats, thats another 30 min wait. Youre looking at spending over an hour just to play one game minimum, and thats a time sink no one can meet anymore for consistency. People have lives.
> [{quoted}](name=Pika Fox,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fB63hVzu,comment-id=000000020000,timestamp=2019-10-04T09:37:49.191+0000) > > Everyone would mind waiting 30 minutes to get into a game. If it takes you 30 minutes to get into queue, and someone dodges, congrats, thats another 30 min wait. Youre looking at spending over an hour just to play one game minimum, and thats a time sink no one can meet anymore for consistency. People have lives. When someone dodges, then you get on the TOP of the queue, and not the bottom. Unless you are the one dodging it. Congrat understanding the matchmaking mechanism, and reading the message when someone dodges. It literary says, that you get into the front of the queue. My computer is strong enough to run other games in behind. While playing Tropico 6 waiting time hardly matters. So the "everyone" is false to begin with. Which is where the "optional" status is important. If you don't have time, AND on that kind of rank, then turn it on. But over 99% of the players are not on that kind of rank. In their situation it wouldn't mean that much. Or they could put an option to set the autofil timer. Like you would like to avoid autofill for the first 10 minutes. After that it turns on. But if you have time, then you could set to 60 minutes, or if you seriously hate waiting, then you could set to 1 minutes.
: Support main: "what is this autofill you are speaking of? I don´t even know what a secondary role is."
> [{quoted}](name=Dorans Pants,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fB63hVzu,comment-id=000a,timestamp=2019-10-02T17:04:26.411+0000) > > Support main: "what is this autofill you are speaking of? I don´t even know what a secondary role is." Yeah pretty much like that. I get support like 99,9% of the time. I don't even bother others, because i get it so rarely, that it's worth dodging it.
: Autofill is annoying but sadly is necessary for a game like League. I'm not sure what elo you're in but if they were to remove Autofill then Masters+ games would probably all have 10-20 minutes que timers.
> [{quoted}](name=JustDonnyy,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=fB63hVzu,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-10-01T19:10:12.662+0000) > > Autofill is annoying but sadly is necessary for a game like League. I'm not sure what elo you're in but if they were to remove Autofill then Masters+ games would probably all have 10-20 minutes que timers. Making it optional is the best possible solution. Some people wouldn't care to wait 30. minutes for a game. Also how much portion of the players are masters? 0,1%?
Kai Guy (NA)
: Can supports climb lower Elo S9? Time to test it.
Do it truly solo, and in solo/duo. Some players consider flex as normals. Remove Soraka from the list until plat. I know for sure, that she can carry unless team is seriously bad compared to the enemy. And if team is seriously bad compared to the enemy, then it doesn't matter what you play. I mean for any role. At least this is true up to gold1. I'm gold 2 right now, and i don't play much lately, but i rarely get focused. The only way to counter Soraka in lategame teamfight is to focus her, if you don't, then her lategame heal can easily rival any damage's DPS, and even assassin's burst. But in midgame she is still a force to reckon with, if you ignore her. On lover levels she is even more OP, because people stick to their meta build no matter what, and they usually just target the closest guy. As Soraka you stand behind, and with no heal reduction you can heal a LOT. My experience as main support over 2k. games in total since season 2. Tank: Can win bot HARD, but if lose, then he will lose HARD. Picking it on solo is quite risky. Your teammate might have bad reaction, and that is a sure lose. Also in current meta they scale real bad in lategame. Poker: You beat enchanters in early, and tanks until lvl3. After lvl3 tanks will make you suffer, if you go outside turret, or make any mistake. Also, if you fail to get ahead early, then you gona suffer midgame, and if enemy got any assassin, then you sure lost lategame. It's a sort of trap. It gives you the illusion of winning, because you can win botlane a lot. But it's a lie. You win your lane, and lose the game for it, if enemy got an assassin who isn't real bad on any position. Enchanter: You unlikely win early game. But you unlikely to lose hard either. In later stages you can make your team win as long as there is someone worth defending. That person is not neccessarily the ADC. It's better to hardbuff the fed Yi as Lulu, than trying to keep the worthless adc alive.
: I love how Meta and balance changes is forcing us to forgot about undercover over powered champions
Reminds me of the politic parody of Family Guy, and Simpsons. Not going into details, because forum rules. But in short without concept: We f\*cked up, but we aren't going to change it back. Instead. Let's make a distraction! We made some champions overpowered, but they are popular. Instead of nerfing them. Let's make other champions toxic as hell!
: My teammates aren't bad, this meta is just very unforgiving
One of my idea was to give turrets a defensive aura at least until plates fall. So diving becomes harder, and you can farm even, if enemy is stronger. Right now you can dive enemy on LVL3 in 3v1, or 4v2. So if mid wins, and roams, then even standing under turret won't save you. I remember enemy flaming their Janna after we dive killed her in 3v1 with Leona, Draven, and Lee Sin before lvl6.
: But then cant you make the same argument for ranged champions. Saying they're immune to melee attacks all game where jax vlad yi and trynd are only immune during certain moments. Vlad's W cd time is in the double digits. Yi needs to be constantly auto attacking to get his Q on short cds, Jax can still take dmg and has to lose his immunity to do cc (which spear of shojin unbalances but thats the items problem not the champion). I dont feel the second part is valid because normally a tank will survive the first round of cds and then be in danger of dying so being hit with cc wouldnt kill you in a teamfight because you'd be tanky enough to surrvive that.
> [{quoted}](name=Chainman3,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=EUrtVJKF,comment-id=00000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-03T20:27:21.055+0000) > > But then cant you make the same argument for ranged champions. Saying they're immune to melee attacks all game where jax vlad yi and trynd are only immune during certain moments. Vlad's W cd time is in the double digits. Yi needs to be constantly auto attacking to get his Q on short cds, Jax can still take dmg and has to lose his immunity to do cc (which spear of shojin unbalances but thats the items problem not the champion). > > I dont feel the second part is valid because normally a tank will survive the first round of cds and then be in danger of dying so being hit with cc wouldnt kill you in a teamfight because you'd be tanky enough to surrvive that. Ranged champions aren't immune to melee attacks once the melee champion gets into range, and most melee champion has ways to do that. Vlad's W is 9,6 sec. on full rank 40% CDR. But i might remind you, that Vlad gets a big health pool no matter what, and he has a serious self heal too. So you need to beat him to near death, then wait for pool, then wait for zhonya. The pool, and zhonya alone are 5 seconds. Which is more, than what you can survive as a tank in lategame. Jax only takes damage from abilities, and he has considerable resistance from ult. Losing his immunity for CC is worth it, if you CC enough, and if you don't then just don't recast it. A Jax given the right circumstances will survive better, than any stat based tank in any gear in lategame. On ARAM my Rammus in pure armor+health build died to 5 AD with no Vayne, or Yi among them in 1,9s.. As Leona i die in lategame before W goes down. Which is 6 seconds. By this logic i might just go Tryndamere. 5 second guaranteed survival, and unlike Leona i kill everyone with it, if they ignore me. Which lead us to the second problem. Certain tanks can be simply ignored, if they go for full tank build. You just kill their entire team, and once you are in many vs 1, then you focus him. Leona, and Nautilus are great examples. Their mid, and lategame damage is worthless unless you build damage, and if you build damage, then you gona die almost fast as an ADC. Riot tries to give reason to focus tanks by increasing their damage. Which leads to a serious problem. If they are tanky, and got damage, then it's op. If they are tanky, but no damage, then it's worthless against good players. If they got damage, but not tanky, then they are not tanks. OP's suggestion of blocking stuff simply by being there would allow tanks to be a great help to the team, but without killing everyone on his own. Just like in Smite. In that game most tanks are classified as "guardian", and they are more like the support category. They can't do much on their own. Give them someone who deals damage, and together they can do a LOT. Another way would be give tanks TONS of CC while reducing their damage to dust without AP, or AD. Rammus could stack up 3 taunt, and gain stack every 10 second on base. CD between taunt stacks would be minimal. That way he could taunt 3 people for 3 seconds each, or just keep one person taunted for long. In return you would erase his damage from armor, and increase his damage from AP. He would be a force to reckon with even with minimal damage, because of the strong CC. Give same to Leona Q, and E. Maybe only on higher ranks so she won't be super op in early. She would be a force to reckon with even with 0 damage. Someone who can make a similar difference as a good Yi, or Vayne.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Kombinator,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=O3qP7TiO,comment-id=00000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-03T16:00:31.104+0000) > > Int. feeding is a bigger crime, and should be more focused for punishment. Also there is no guarantee, that flamers turn into that. Sometimes they just stop flaming. > > Also disabling chat only protects against report for being toxic. It doesn't protect from reports for feeding. And as we know from all the white knights. Report system works perfectly, and catches everyone. There is no need to rework it. When i gave such horrible idea to make a system, that can catch anyone, then i got down voted under the metro, because current system is already great. > > So it must be true. There is no reliable way to create an automated system for dealing with intentional feeders. The current system isn't perfect. But it's a far cry better than what you've put up. I checked your system. It's exceptionally convoluted that does nothing but PREVENT punishment. Your system actively deters people from reporting others while creating unnecessary tiers of punishment. There's a reason it was down voted to hell. It doesn't even make intentional feeders easier to detect. It just makes it easier for 4 players in a single game to report the random and get away with punishing him for nothing. I'm not going to bump your thread either because it's pretty damn clear you have no idea how badly your system was designed. Lastly, there are multiple reasons that lead to intentional feeders not being punished. The system is just one of them. The other reasons amount to Riot pushing the meta to where it is today and what other players report as "intentional feeding". There's no way to fix any of those overnight.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=O3qP7TiO,comment-id=000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-03T16:19:51.336+0000) > > There is no reliable way to create an automated system for dealing with intentional feeders. The current system isn't perfect. But it's a far cry better than what you've put up. > > I checked your system. It's exceptionally convoluted that does nothing but PREVENT punishment. Your system actively deters people from reporting others while creating unnecessary tiers of punishment. There's a reason it was down voted to hell. It doesn't even make intentional feeders easier to detect. It just makes it easier for 4 players in a single game to report the random and get away with punishing him for nothing. I'm not going to bump your thread either because it's pretty damn clear you have no idea how badly your system was designed. > > Lastly, there are multiple reasons that lead to intentional feeders not being punished. The system is just one of them. The other reasons amount to Riot pushing the meta to where it is today and what other players report as "intentional feeding". There's no way to fix any of those overnight. My system punish random reports by reducing the weight of future reports. So you don't get away with it. You just reduce your chance to make someone punished who truly deserves it. My system uses statistical values to determine whether someone needs to be punished, or not. Give the right numbers to all of it's aspects, and it will get most of the people who deserves it. The only part you totally failed is to read the beginning of that. Numbers are just placeholders, and might need to be adjusted. Try to imagine a real life example. You are the boss of a company, and one of your employe constatly report small offenses, and sometimes LIES. How would you solve it? 1. Listen every time, fill forms, and try to fix them. 2. Just ignore him at some point. 3. Fire him. My boss would do the third. We don't like people who don't have balls, and wasting time with false reports is a bigger issue. The current system tries to use an automated system, that works quite well against the toxic players, and bad against anything else. But if you got a better idea, then share with us. Also you misunderstand the whole idea of the report system. It does not meant to prevent feeders. It's meant to punish them. And feeders are just one. There are also the semi-afk players, and trolls. The tiers exist, because false positives are a possibility, and because some people learns their lesson.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Kombinator,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=O3qP7TiO,comment-id=000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-02T22:38:44.149+0000) > > It grants immunity of toxic behavior from chat, because you don't see it. And it grants immunity from reports for such things since you can't write. Which also means, that you cannot possibly be a flamer. So cater to the flamers who would then turn into intentional feeders who can no longer be detected because chat was disabled out of their lack of self control. Killing communication doesn't help anyone. It doesn't help remove toxic players because now they'll find other means to be toxic. And it keeps us from removing those who would resort to flaming before intentional feeding. Congratulations. NOBODY WINS if you kill chat. Nobody except the flamers who became intentional feeders.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=O3qP7TiO,comment-id=0000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-02T23:00:10.716+0000) > > So cater to the flamers who would then turn into intentional feeders who can no longer be detected because chat was disabled out of their lack of self control. > > Killing communication doesn't help anyone. It doesn't help remove toxic players because now they'll find other means to be toxic. And it keeps us from removing those who would resort to flaming before intentional feeding. > > Congratulations. NOBODY WINS if you kill chat. Nobody except the flamers who became intentional feeders. Int. feeding is a bigger crime, and should be more focused for punishment. Also there is no guarantee, that flamers turn into that. Sometimes they just stop flaming. Also disabling chat only protects against report for being toxic. It doesn't protect from reports for feeding. And as we know from all the white knights. Report system works perfectly, and catches everyone. There is no need to rework it. When i gave such horrible idea to make a system, that can catch anyone, then i got down voted under the metro, because current system is already great. So it must be true.
Exibir mais

The Kombinator

Nível 124 (EUNE)
Total de votos positivos
Criar uma discussão