: > If you're stupid enough to attack a Rammus you DESERVE to be punished. Ok, how am i supposed to kill him then? > I'm tired of my Q being cancelled from stuns or silences- it's thematically GARBAGE. Ok, how am i supposed to counter his Q then whenever he ganks? > Rammus should use an Energy Bar. A terrible idea for a champion that uses each ability once. He either has enough energy to QEWR(so he might as well have no resource at all) or he can't(and this will be really frustrating for Rammus players). Also, some of the good armor items have mana on them({{item:3800}}, {{item:3025}} , {{item:3110}} ). Players would feel bad buying them on Rammus if he had no mana > Rammus' Q and W should be treated as stances Ok, but their effects will be hard nerfed instead, is that ok for you? > He's an armored shell. Can we treat him as such???? And Kindred is the Death itself, can we treat them as such?
Using abilities is an amazing way to outplay Rammus. Attacking Rammus NEEDS to be heavily punished, that is his concept. How are you supposed to counter his Q? You always were able to.. If he got stunned he stopped moving. But NOW he gets stunned, stops moving and his stance is cancelled out. Rammus should use ENERGY because how his TAUNT works, and making Q and W a "stance" that DRAINS ENERGY. Actually balances him out. You're annoying.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Glamorous Rammus,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ypzGVxNk,comment-id=,timestamp=2019-09-26T06:55:00.878+0000) > > Rammus is not broken. He never was broken. If you're stupid enough to attack a Rammus you DESERVE to be punished. > > I'm tired of my Q being cancelled from stuns or silences- it's thematically GARBAGE. > Tired of the fact he uses Mana and scales off AP. So why make him broken then? > Rammus should use an Energy Bar. Why? > Rammus' Q and W should be treated as stances, and shouldn't Q shouldn't be cancelled out by crowd control. Because balance, because it is the highest MS increase in the game, with hard CC attached to it at that.
Join the debate team.. learn logical thinking. Nobody said he needs to be broken. He's constantly nerfed as if he is. Rammus should use an energy bar because there's nothing "magical" about what he does. Rammus Q is not even fast, it's a fucking sonic meme that people blow out of proportion. If you see Rammus charging in full speed it's because he pressed Q 3 seconds ago.
Comentários de Rioters
Comentários de Rioters
Comentários de Rioters
duelli (NA)
: Instead of making fun of how players tilt lets discuss how to make the game less tilting/toxic
I don't think Riot would try using Honor to create separate lobbies. I think they called it "Prison Island" or something like that.
Comentários de Rioters
Comentários de Rioters
rujitra (NA)
: LOL. Riot has confirmed **multiple times** that your ban was properly placed. You wanting to be allowed to troll without getting banned doesn't mean they're not doing things correctly. I just wish moderators would get you off the boards already - your threads here are just spam or trolling - just like your videos.
> [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=jF02qtzw,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-09-07T01:49:33.230+0000) > > LOL. > > Riot has confirmed **multiple times** that your ban was properly placed. You wanting to be allowed to troll without getting banned doesn't mean they're not doing things correctly. > > I just wish moderators would get you off the boards already - your threads here are just spam or trolling - just like your videos. The way you're handling this seems to be setting a bad example.
Comentários de Rioters
: It always humors me when people whine and complain about autofill. It's such an entitled, coddled reaction. Before role selection was even a thing, YOU WERE REQUIRED TO KNOW ALL THE ROLES. This was because your team had to sort out who did what. This meant that you HAD TO BE PREPARED TO PLAY WHATEVER WAS LEFT. This meant that to do ranked, you actually had to know how to play the game - ALL OF IT. Not just one role. Not just one champion. But to be functionally reasonable in all areas of the game. This made players not only capable of being flexible when needed, but also granted them more widespread knowledge about the game as a whole, such as common warding locations for all the roles, champion familiarity for both that role, and your opponents, and it also made people aware of HOW THE JUNGLE ACTUALLY WORKS. This gave people so much more understanding of the game and made them more reasonable because they then were not ignorant to the world around them. Nowadays? Not so much. That's why people bitch at the jungler, support, etc so much is because they are not forced to know these roles or even understand anything in the game beyond their little tiny boxes. It makes matches that much harder, because people end up being ignorant to tactics and even how their enemies work. There's no general knowledge of all the roles if you're not forced to know how to play them effectively, and it makes you angrier and more frustrated when you're ignorant of how your teammates have to work and manage their roles because you simply don't understand what they're going through. So yeah, I like autofill. It needs to stay. People need to suck it up and learn how to play outside of their boxes and gain a better understanding of the game, instead of having a mental collapse when they one trick Draven and then have to autofill in the jungle.
> [{quoted}](name=Oleandervine,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=GXi6NI0u,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-09-06T19:10:19.785+0000) > > It always humors me when people whine and complain about autofill. It's such an entitled, coddled reaction. Before role selection was even a thing, YOU WERE REQUIRED TO KNOW ALL THE ROLES. This was because your team had to sort out who did what. This meant that you HAD TO BE PREPARED TO PLAY WHATEVER WAS LEFT. I've been playing since 2009. When Garen used Mana. When Veigar rushed Deathfire. **insert Aslan meme** Anyways, the most consistent advice to climb any ELO is find one champion you can play and master them entirely. Learning the game comes with playing it. A Support will get the jist of other Roles just by being in a game and observing how each player contributes. **Autofill** just forces players to play roles that restrict the playstyle we signed up for. I didn't sign up for gunning people down. I hate playing the role of DPS or Carry in ANY game with player classes/roles. I like tanks and heals. That's what I came to do. That's why I play League. There is literally NO POINT of playing when I get filled into Mid or ADC except to keep my account in good standing with Riot so I won't get Leaverbusters or be disqualified from Honor Rewards. It's sickening. The games are holding players hostage, and it boils tempers. Toxicity is much worse than it has been and it's on Riot to figure out where they went wrong. And I'm telling you- restricting people's ability to have fun on a game isn't very helpful. TLDR- People have different playstyles, different Roles make the game worth playing. If you take away a player's ability to play the game (role) they want to play- you take away players from the game. People want to play a game they WANT to play. I don't WANT to play ADC, therefore Autofill is just preventing me from playing the game I signed up to play.
Unker139 (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Glamorous Rammus,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=GXi6NI0u,comment-id=,timestamp=2019-09-06T16:59:58.391+0000) > > I like to break things down to their raw elements to see their purpose. So when I observe "Autofill" the first thing that comes to mind is WHY is it a funnction? > > The answer seem to be to help queue times. But long queue times seems like a player grievance. I don't like long queues, but I dislike even more 45 minute games playing an uncomfortable and unfun role. And I have to be a team player? Not going to happen. Games are supposed to be fun. Not WORK. > > Autofill creates more grievance for me than queue times. > > I will GLADLY wait another 5 minutes to get a role I want. > 5 minutes waiting pre-game > 45 minutes of lousy gameplay > > I haven't talked to a single player that actually supports the idea of Autofill. The closest I've heard are apologies- people trying to come to the aide of Riot with the whole, "They're doing their best" appeal. I'm sorry but Riot ignores its community with these real concerns. > > - Honor Progress > - Autofill > - No secondary option when choosing "FILL" > > The community has great ideas- all the same idea- over and over again- but Riot is silent. Too busy trying to turn a game into a fond memory with the whole anime community. I don't want this game to be nostalgic. I want it to be functional. > > Just remove autofill. Track our Honor Progress. And allow "FILL" mains to bar a role in their "Secondary" role slot. These functions are ruining the game. While I don't like being autofilled, I do support the autofill function in the game. The problem is that you assume that removing autofill will only add 5 minutes to the wait. When you have a bottleneck, the backup will continue to grow until the bottleneck is addressed. If you remove autofill and let's say 10% of the player base wants to play support, once they are all in a game, 50% the total player base is waiting for one of them to finish and queue up again before they can join. If you remember when TFT was introduced and they capped the number of games that could be played at a time. Within two hours, there was a 90 minute wait to get into a game. If you remove autofill, you are putting a cap based on the least played role and everyone else will have to wait. You might wait 5 minutes, but would you wait 90 during peak times? They could remove autofill and give you an estimated wait based on your role. That would work in the sense that you could see how long it will take and choose.....but if you like to play a popular role like mid, you will always have to long wait....even if you decided to sometimes go to a different role, mid will ALWAYS have that. With autofill, you sometimes get filled but you get your first choice more often than not .
> [{quoted}](name=Unker139,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=GXi6NI0u,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-09-06T17:32:30.722+0000) > > While I don't like being autofilled, I do support the autofill function in the game. > > The problem is that you assume that removing autofill will only add 5 minutes to the wait. When you have a bottleneck, the backup will continue to grow until the bottleneck is addressed. I'm just going to ask.. did you play the game before Autofill was introduced? Autofill didn't have much of an effect on queue times at all. More problematic, actually, because people drop lobby after getting autofilled, or someone troll picks because Autofill and someone else drops to avoid the troll. 2 minute queue + 2 minute lobby on a repeat is more frustrating than queue times in S5. > > If you remove autofill and let's say 10% of the player base wants to play support, once they are all in a game, 50% the total player base is waiting for one of them to finish and queue up again before they can join. Statistical anomaly. There is never a real scenario that places all Support players in the world in a game all at the same time. People log in at all hours of the day. > > If you remember when TFT was introduced and they capped the number of games that could be played at a time. Within two hours, there was a 90 minute wait to get into a game. If you remove autofill, you are putting a cap based on the least played role and everyone else will have to wait. You might wait 5 minutes, but would you wait 90 during peak times? False dilemma. You assume removing "Autofill" means that something else will take its place. So you're forming an opinion based on something hypothetical and irrelevant. You're "imagining" a problem that doesn't really exist outside of "TFT". > > They could remove autofill and give you an estimated wait based on your role. That would work in the sense that you could see how long it will take and choose.....but if you like to play a popular role like mid, you will always have to long wait....even if you decided to sometimes go to a different role, mid will ALWAYS have that. With autofill, you sometimes get filled but you get your first choice more often than not . They already give us an estimated wait time that considers the Role we selected.
mark6028 (EUW)
: I'm done. Uninstalled, season 9 just broke me
Love seeing Play players cry about not getting demoted. Meanwhile in Silver we have positive Winrates and can't break into Gold because the game rewards burst and snowball and low ELO players can't keep up with the phasing that happens before 10 minutes almost every game.
Accenix (NA)
: Pyke is fine. Garens passive on the other hand....
> [{quoted}](name=Accenix,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=cW37J0ep,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-09-06T05:54:57.029+0000) > > Pyke is fine. Garens passive on the other hand.... Garen is a tank. Pyke can't even build Health it turns into bonus AD. Pyke needs to just get removed from the game. Look up Tabu, Averdrian (pretty much recycled into Malzahar), and Gavd (basically Zyra's rework) Literally any of these concepts would work better in game than Pyke.
Comentários de Rioters
: "We don't want people grinding for honor" they say as they proceed to tack actual rewards to the honor system.
> [{quoted}](name=BlackKnightJack,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=rkiHB529,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-09-06T15:15:24.120+0000) > > "We don't want people grinding for honor" they say as they proceed to tack actual rewards to the honor system. It's ridiculous.
Comentários de Rioters
: > [{quoted}](name=Glamorous Rammus,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=byNaeKqg,comment-id=,timestamp=2019-08-31T22:46:18.244+0000) > I just see rules as a way to restrict good-intentioned people. If people have good intentions, then there wouldn't be a need to break any rules at all. Anyone can have good intention if they say they have it. But it takes a level head to be able to display good intention. Mentioning you have good intentions is the equivalent of mentioning you're a nice guy. Everyone on the internet knows that the nice guy meme ultimately means they were never nice to begin with. If you have good intentions, people will pick up on it, you shouldn't have to say that you do. > So when I discuss on Boards about, basically, "the rules suck"- I expect people to disagree, and state their opinions. Unfortunately, there is no **discussion**. When someone disagrees, they simply state the stance we already know exists and add nothing to justify the stance given. The discussion is in the hands of both the OP and the people who comment. If people want to participate they will participate. You shouldn't have to expect people to reply and actively converse. If someone wants to converse they will. There really isn't a way to force people to talk and people shouldn't have to be forced to talk. Secondly, give your OP a sound argument. It shouldn't have to provoke a group of people, it shouldn't have to provoke the mods, it shouldn't have to provoke Riot. If you have to do any of those then chances are it's a rant and should belong in rant. >Please, we all need to take the time to read what someone is saying. And not just to form a response. We should read the information a second time if we need to. "Read that again". And if we can see that person's perspective, it helps to always acknowledge their points before debating them if we still disagree. Myself included of course. This circles back to my comment on not having to provoke readers. If I feel provoked when reading an OP, I don't feel inclined to read at all and instead reply with my own thoughts and tell you about how wrong you are. But again, not everyone is forced to read and reply to a post. If someone didn't understand what you were getting at then shrug it off and move on. Not everyone has to see eye to eye but also not everyone has to be commenting in mean spirit. Just don't be a jerk, that is all anyone is asking of anyone.
> [{quoted}](name=l Ryden l,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=byNaeKqg,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2019-09-05T02:04:39.512+0000) > If people have good intentions, then there wouldn't be a need to break any rules at all. I can name very specific examples proving otherwise. Rosa Parks. Gandhi. The term "civil disobedience" implies that good intentioned people break the rules. > > Anyone can have good intention if they say they have it. But it takes a level head to be able to display good intention. Mentioning you have good intentions is the equivalent of mentioning you're a nice guy. Everyone on the internet knows that the nice guy meme ultimately means they were never nice to begin with. If you have good intentions, people will pick up on it, you shouldn't have to say that you do. That's an over-generalization. In fact, we can always assume that there will be a fence and two groups divided from it. Take Rosa Parks- she had people supporting her and people fighting her. People will pick up on what they believe is right, without really considering the reality before confirming their predispositions. > > The discussion is in the hands of both the OP and the people who comment. If people want to participate they will participate. You shouldn't have to expect people to reply and actively converse. If someone wants to converse they will. There really isn't a way to force people to talk and people shouldn't have to be forced to talk. "Facilitate Civil Discussion" appears to be a rule on Boards. So, if you don't have something to add to the discussion then the comment can be removed. > > But again, not everyone is forced to read and reply to a post. If someone didn't understand what you were getting at then shrug it off and move on. Not everyone has to see eye to eye but also not everyone has to be commenting in mean spirit. Just don't be a jerk, that is all anyone is asking of anyone. Shrugging and moving on isn't a problem.
RookieUS (NA)
: How can you learn characters without p*ssing people off?
Step One: Keep your play style in mind. Step Two: Find a Champion that compliments that play style. Step Three: Search for Gameplay highlights for that Champion on YouTube. (Step 3 is repeated through each step.) Step Four: Use the Practice Tool to get the feel of using your Champion and getting used to how the Abilities and Stats work out. Step Five: Play an "Intermediate" Bots game, get used to how your Champion plays with your team, and how you would play against different Champions, without the Enemy team posing much of a challenge the goal here is to get yourself working with your team. Step Six: Play a Normal "Draft" game. "Blind Pick" can cheat you out of playing a good role for your Champion. Draft is closest to Ranked, and allows you experience against other players. Step Seven: Bring it to Ranked. Even Ranked is a learning experience. Keep watching Gameplay highlights, the more you learn the more you learn to observe. Watching the same video as a "noob" will teach you basics, while more experience with the champion let's you pick up more "pro" details. Like a "noob" Alistar can watch a WQ combo and learn how to use it. But later will learn when and how to use it to really set up the good plays.
Comentários de Rioters
Prandine (NA)
: Wanting to have a discussion about something is fine, provided all parties involved are actually willing to listen and be at least somewhat open to other ideas. The problem with you however is that you seem to have a "my way or the highway" type of mindset and are quick to resort to things like insults and name-calling whenever someone disagrees with you. Having a civil discussion =/= lashing out at any and all non-Yesman answers, and no discussion can be had when one or more sides are not willing to remain at least somewhat civil in the face of disagreement or opposing ideas/statements. Being against certain rules and wanting to change them is fine, but lashing out when ones way isn't immediately given is not fine.
> [{quoted}](name=Prandine,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=byNaeKqg,comment-id=0004,timestamp=2019-09-01T10:10:15.922+0000) > > Wanting to have a discussion about something is fine, provided all parties involved are actually willing to listen and be at least somewhat open to other ideas. The problem with you however is that you seem to have a "my way or the highway" type of mindset and are quick to resort to things like insults and name-calling whenever someone disagrees with you. Having a civil discussion =/= lashing out at any and all non-Yesman answers, and no discussion can be had when one or more sides are not willing to remain at least somewhat civil in the face of disagreement or opposing ideas/statements. Being against certain rules and wanting to change them is fine, but lashing out when ones way isn't immediately given is not fine. Are you confusing me with someone?
: > And if we can see that person's perspective, it helps to always acknowledge their points before debating them if we still disagree. Discussion is wonderful. However, you have a history of not being open to what other people are saying, and you come off as belligerent. Be proud of your insubordination all you want, but you're fighting a losing fight against Riot's "rules." They are allowed to have their rules. No amount of bickering and arguing is going to convince a private organization that their Code of Conduct for players is bad. You are in a very, very, vocal minority. > When someone posts about "X Rule" should not exist. A proper response is not to go backward and say "X is a rule". You don't get to dictate how other people have a discussion, just as you don't like to be told what to do. And here's the other thing - you seem to be under the false belief that at the end of a discussion, all parties involved come away in agreement. That is not what happens in every discussion.
> [{quoted}](name=GatekeeperTDS,realm=NA,application-id=6heBIhQc,discussion-id=byNaeKqg,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-09-01T02:27:32.840+0000) > > Discussion is wonderful. However, **you have a history of not being open to what other people are saying, and you come off as belligerent.** blah blah blah.. You start off by insulting me and somehow I'm the one who's belligerent?
Subdue (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Glamorous Rammus,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=000b0000,timestamp=2019-08-31T22:14:56.354+0000) > > Funny how you talk about being civil but you try insulting me with passive aggressive undertones. > > "I'd be willing to bet" is an insinuation, so even if you aren't using vulgar language, you're still being toxic. > And people that get away with this kind of behavior are the reason people like me are frustrated with the system. > If I put you in front of a psychologist, they would say you have anger issues. A person that makes insinuations as a base line to judge other people is prejudiced, and is practicing a "less hostile" form of discrimination. > Because I am frustrated- you insinuate that my opinions are less valid. > And despite keeping a logical stance, you're even claiming my argument is illogical. > The only lack of logic here is displayed by the people chiming in with the thoughtless "reap and repeat" responses. > In fact, your inability to defend that stance with reason- and the fact that your entire argument consists of a repeated conclusion without any premises, shows your argument to be the illogical one. > Except it's the internet, and you have the luxury of sitting at your computer and pretend to be whoever you want to be. So you're pretending to understand how logic works against a guy who captained the debate team. But if this was an "in person" discussion you wouldn't be as comfortable pretending to understand what "logic" looks like. I didn't have to make any insinuations. I didn't assume anything about your behavior. You outright stated in your original post that you do things which the system considers unacceptable. Remember this? > I'm guilty of throwing salt when I get stuck in a game like this. But I've noticed a serious trend- the person rallying for reports is throwing just as much salt, if not more. You're merely arguing that you shouldn't be penalized if the person you're being rude to is also rude to you, and I'm telling you that other people are likely reporting you as well, so you'd get penalized even if that person's report didn't count. As for the why of that, it's pretty simple. Your argument with this other person that you consider the offender doesn't just affect you and that person, it affects all of your teammates. It's annoying and frustrating to see teammates arguing instead of playing, and also arguments within the team are already known to reduce the ability of the team to win. Also, I highly doubt you're on a debate team when you resort to ad hominem attacks in the 2nd line of your introductory post.
> [{quoted}](name=Subdue,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=000b00000000,timestamp=2019-08-31T22:26:58.712+0000) > You insinuate that I start with flaming allies. Unfortunately, just giving advice tilts some people. I find it offensive that you misjudge me. I have a temper I could work on, but I'm good natured until that fuse is lit. And people making mistakes doesn't light that fuse. People flaming for me making mistakes gets me pretty tilted- like my last match up my Malphite versus Rumble. Wasn't doing well, and got flamed and tilted even further. And you'd be surprised how useful an ad hominem line can turn over the debate. In fact, many people in the world of debate can be easily discredited, and have their arguments discredited with them. My opponent is a liar. In fact, you're using this tactic right now. Implying that "a person who" uses ad hominem can't be in "debate". See how you're trying to discredit one argument with an attempt to discredit me?
Comentários de Rioters
Subdue (NA)
: You won't get what you're asking for, because it is illogical and contrary to the data. That said, It wouldn't really matter anyway. My chat is always clean, and I always report both sides of a flame war. I imagine most people do the same, and as such, you'd get penalized about as frequently anyway. Also, have you noticed how most of the people here who disagree with you have kept their side of the conversation civil, while you seem completely unable to do the same? I'd be willing to bet even if the rule was that whoever "started it" would be penalized, you'd still be penalized quite often, as you seem unable to control yourself, even here in a low stress environment.
> [{quoted}](name=Subdue,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=000b,timestamp=2019-08-31T20:09:29.707+0000) > > You won't get what you're asking for, because it is illogical and contrary to the data. That said, It wouldn't really matter anyway. My chat is always clean, and I always report both sides of a flame war. I imagine most people do the same, and as such, you'd get penalized about as frequently anyway. > > Also, have you noticed how most of the people here who disagree with you have kept their side of the conversation civil, while you seem completely unable to do the same? I'd be willing to bet even if the rule was that whoever "started it" would be penalized, you'd still be penalized quite often, as you seem unable to control yourself, even here in a low stress environment. Funny how you talk about being civil but you try insulting me with passive aggressive undertones. "I'd be willing to bet" is an insinuation, so even if you aren't using vulgar language, you're still being toxic. And people that get away with this kind of behavior are the reason people like me are frustrated with the system. If I put you in front of a psychologist, they would say you have anger issues. A person that makes insinuations as a base line to judge other people is prejudiced, and is practicing a "less hostile" form of discrimination. Because I am frustrated- you insinuate that my opinions are less valid. And despite keeping a logical stance, you're even claiming my argument is illogical. The only lack of logic here is displayed by the people chiming in with the thoughtless "reap and repeat" responses. In fact, your inability to defend that stance with reason- and the fact that your entire argument consists of a repeated conclusion without any premises, shows your argument to be the illogical one. Except it's the internet, and you have the luxury of sitting at your computer and pretend to be whoever you want to be. So you're pretending to understand how logic works against a guy who captained the debate team. But if this was an "in person" discussion you wouldn't be as comfortable pretending to understand what "logic" looks like.
: I was not raised to "stand up" against people who point out that I'm doing wrong. If I'm not doing wrong, why would I care that someone reports me? If I am doing wrong, I have no reason to be upset. It's that simple. All you're doing is trying really hard to garner support against people who report you when you're being toxic. And if you're not being toxic...you won't be punished, therefor you shouldn't care.
> [{quoted}](name=The Highest Noon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=00010001000300000000,timestamp=2019-08-31T13:33:07.116+0000) > > I was not raised to "stand up" against people who point out that I'm doing wrong. If I'm not doing wrong, why would I care that someone reports me? If I am doing wrong, I have no reason to be upset. It's that simple. That's probably why everyone on Boards has weak skin. You honestly believe that there's something wrong with you just because someone tells you there is? I find it's better to choose your friends first, and know that you have a few people that actually know you, and actually care enough to be honest with you. Everyone else is just part of the scenery, part of the experience. It's purposeless to change who you are because others can't accept you. And it damages the whole, because the majority fall in where they don't belong.
KABLUMP (NA)
: Their is literally no point to this argument. {{sticker:slayer-jinx-wink}}
> [{quoted}](name=KABLUMP,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=YUMuamjf,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-08-31T01:24:49.371+0000) > > Their is literally no point to this argument. > > > > {{sticker:slayer-jinx-wink}} Here's an example: If someone said, "if you're not an idiot, you will get it." Though it may seem like a hostile way to say something, **The speaker is not implying their audience is an idiot.** ^This **bold font** sentence is another example of how Americans use "person" words differently to apply to a hypothetical. When the person I'm talking about is a hypothetical, it is "their" audience. But the English definition suggests the use of "their" inherently means more than one person.
: > [{quoted}](name=KABLUMP,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=YUMuamjf,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-08-31T01:24:49.371+0000) > > Their is literally no point to this argument. > > > > {{sticker:slayer-jinx-wink}} https://i.imgflip.com/39bxds.jpg
> [{quoted}](name=Metal Janna,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=YUMuamjf,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-08-31T02:35:43.249+0000) > > https://i.imgflip.com/39bxds.jpg {{champion:33}} I love me a Jinx :D
: One does not simply {{sticker:garen-swing}} Replace "one" with "you"
> [{quoted}](name=Cind3rkick,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=YUMuamjf,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-08-31T01:22:44.083+0000) > > One does not simply > {{sticker:garen-swing}} > Replace "one" with "you" you do not simply
: "You" is used to state the general
"One does not simply".. we don't say "one", we say "you".
Comentários de Rioters
: Kai sa an adc
I don't consider her an ADC. I put her with champs like Ezreal- CAC (cast, attack, carry) They need farm to get Tear or Sheen for Mana to sustain their offense. Then Pickaxe instead of BF Sword, or Glacial if the Iceborn Gauntlet.. They don't have a lot of damage on attack, they rely on kit burst for their damage- like mages but they still focus on their attacks otherwise their abilities fall off. Ez has useless attacks. Ez has useless abilities. When Ez uses his attacks and abilities together- then that's where the damage comes from. If he isn't casting before an attack its weak. If he doesn't follow up an ability with an attack, its weak. He needs both Ability and Attack. Kai Sa Is similar.
: they tried unbanning accounts just a few months back actually. not enough people actually stood unbanned.
> [{quoted}](name=FOR JUSTICE,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=oqspFJgQ,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-08-30T19:33:12.965+0000) > > they tried unbanning accounts just a few months back actually. > > not enough people actually stood unbanned. mine wasn't unbanned
Comentários de Rioters
: > [{quoted}](name=Glamorous Rammus,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-08-28T16:02:37.735+0000) > > It can stay automated and still dismiss troll reports. > If a player submits a report, then the submitting player undergoes a report check first. > If submitting player fails to report check, no report is submitted. honestly if its automated why not just CHECK all the buttons and maybe the automated system will find something. idk if reporting checks are considered filters of find X words that are bad.
> [{quoted}](name=Corrector1,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-30T17:45:41.718+0000) > > honestly if its automated why not just CHECK all the buttons and maybe the automated system will find something. > > idk if reporting checks are considered filters of find X words that are bad. You can't do that. You can only check 3 boxes maximum. And that's pretty much how it works. They have flag words that are insta-report, and I'm told they have a more in-depth way of trying to check if there was flaming that wasn't flagged by the bot.
: Is anyone else convinced Riot doesnt know how to balance Toplane?
Kled is a problem imo. Spam abilities with CC and amazing mobility, with a small window to try killing him before he pops Skaarl again.
: How is this a real person? If you are reported and you are punished, that means you deserved to be reported. That's not trolling.
> [{quoted}](name=The Highest Noon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=000100010003,timestamp=2019-08-29T22:41:10.609+0000) > > How is this a real person? > > If you are reported and you are punished, that means you deserved to be reported. That's not trolling. Ignore whether or not the person qualifies for a report. Rewind. Think now about the people that spam "report".. why do you think they're doing this? It's because they know, like the rest of us, that a report can lead to consequences against that account. If this same person is flaming all game, and legitimately trolling- okay? Ask yourself- if the person is this toxic, and this "combustible", do you think they **genuinely** care about player behavior? I would say that they do not. So why would this person bring up "reporting behavior"? I would say it's out of spite, not to use the report function because they're feeling harassed, but to use it as a way to continue harassing players. Now- the issue with this is the smallest things proc as "offensive". Then you have to submit a ticket where you think it was unreasonable. This is what I mean by "Troll Report". I don't think it's reasonable for a player who's been trolling all game should be allowed that judgement. I don't know how you were raised, but I was always told to stand up against this type of behavior. Unfortunately, Riot disagrees, and would rather us play helpless victim for a 30-45 minute game. I do not agree that this is acceptable. It's almost dishonest to say that it's "community standards" if the community isn't allowed to actually voice their concerns, and set that standard. And the word "standard" is terribly abused. When someone is flaming all game, that's the standard for the game, and you can't change their behavior to change the standard.
: I'd love more runes. I'm struggling to see how anyone of those fit to a specific champion or play style. Runes are meant to let each player _pick their playstyle._ (whether Runes current state accomplishs that or not is a different discussion). A helpful exercise can be to try to solve that for one champion. If you can't solve it for one champion, then you can't solve it for anyone. So pick a one support champion, and try to think of a specific play style for that champion, then fit a rune to that play style. How would one of those ruins affect a specific champion?
> [{quoted}](name=PandaNator43,realm=NA,application-id=A8FQeEA8,discussion-id=PY9HPjLA,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-08-29T02:45:30.340+0000) > > So pick a one support champion, and try to think of a specific play style for that champion, then fit a rune to that play style. How would one of those ruins affect a specific champion? Let's use Taric. Bonus Mana Regen in combat helps his Passive- giving him more casting to get that "in your face spamming" tank style. Shields on Allies redirecting damage goes with his Bastion (W)- throwing the shield gives him some defense against high sustain ADCs And with any of the ones I mentioned in the "TANKING" category, Taric has some options depending on how the play style will end up.
: There is no such thing as troll reports. You being reported has no affect whatsoever unless you were participating in punishable behavior, by which case you'll be punished. That's it.
> [{quoted}](name=The Highest Noon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-08-28T16:04:50.231+0000) > > There is no such thing as troll reports. You being reported has no affect whatsoever unless you were participating in punishable behavior, by which case you'll be punished. That's it. People truly are incomprehensive, and sloppy readers. TROLL REPORT: (noun): When a person reports in order to harass other players with game restrictions. If you want players to be punished, then you're a self righteous person. And that self-righteousness is troll.
: You can be reported by all 9 players in your games for every game for the next 20 games, and not once will anything happen to you unless you were doing something wrong. There is no such thing as troll reports. There are reports that punish toxic players and reports that don't punish players at all. That's it.
> [{quoted}](name=The Highest Noon,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2019-08-28T21:09:09.266+0000) > > You can be reported by all 9 players in your games for every game for the next 20 games, and not once will anything happen to you unless you were doing something wrong. > > There is no such thing as troll reports. There are reports that punish toxic players and reports that don't punish players at all. That's it. That feeling you have when you want somebody to be punished? Yeah that's troll.
: Being angry at kassadin again
Who do you usually play against Kass?
: idk if im playing kassidin wrong but i feel i run out of mana before enemies EVEN get into kill range. i dont do enough damage to be a threat early how do they do it?
> [{quoted}](name=Corrector1,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Jdus9PEx,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-08-28T20:43:32.374+0000) > > idk if im playing kassidin wrong but i feel i run out of mana before enemies EVEN get into kill range. i dont do enough damage to be a threat early how do they do it? Read his W. Kass shouldn't run out of Mana unless you're spamming his Ult.
: who is the anti ap version of malphite?
{{champion:38}} is good. Passive MR and Ghost, enemy Spells make E available. Good mobility as far as escapes and engages with R, Q is good on-target poke that gives a spell shield and Silences target for 1 second. W is an AA booster with a built in Mana Pot. E deals damage in a cone and applies a heavy slow. Kass can't sit there and eat the magic, but when you play him correctly he has great survivability versus AP users.
: > [{quoted}](name=Glamorous Rammus,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=00020000000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-28T19:20:36.114+0000) > > LEAVERBUSTER > Try again. The only sure-fire way to remove yourself from the environment is a punishable offense. > Can't mute feeding and play trolling. Can't mute someone's ability to run down lane. > I'm sorry, have you actually played these games? Or do you get a special priority queue status that protects you from games with these trolls? No, you can’t do anything about intentional feeding in the game. When I say “remove” problematic players, I mean muting other players. I’m level 201. I’m definitely playing the game.
> [{quoted}](name=Periscope,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=000200000000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-28T19:39:23.379+0000) > > No, you can’t do anything about intentional feeding in the game. > > When I say “remove” problematic players, I mean muting other players. > > I’m level 201. I’m definitely playing the game. Well that completely ignored the second half of my question. Are you given some kind of priority queueing to save you from "reported" players. Because I legitimately feel like I'm surrounded by people in game, every game, that have tilt all game. Am I in some kind of "bad behavior" queueing?
: > [{quoted}](name=Glamorous Rammus,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=000200000000000000010000,timestamp=2019-08-28T18:08:17.657+0000) > > The trouble with crying "fallacy" is that your argument becomes equally fallacious. "Fallacy fallacy" Just because an argument is fallacious, doesn't mean it isn't true. > > The metaphor applies. > > If someone is trolling me, then I troll them back, then they flex "report", and I report them back.. it fits the metaphor just fine. > Why call the authorities when both sides fired shots? But your metaphor left out that everyone has access to the same tools to immediately remove themselves from problematic situations. Like I said, I rarely see any metaphor that accurately depicts League's unique environment. If two players are being toxic, then both should be reported.
> [{quoted}](name=Periscope,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=0002000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-08-28T18:16:13.335+0000) > > But your metaphor left out that everyone has access to the same tools to immediately remove themselves from problematic situations. Like I said, I rarely see any metaphor that accurately depicts League's unique environment. If two players are being toxic, then both should be reported. LEAVERBUSTER Try again. The only sure-fire way to remove yourself from the environment is a punishable offense. Can't mute feeding and play trolling. Can't mute someone's ability to run down lane. I'm sorry, have you actually played these games? Or do you get a special priority queue status that protects you from games with these trolls?
rujitra (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Glamorous Rammus,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-08-28T16:22:22.064+0000) > > Speak for yourself. The **vast** majority of people in my games are short tempered. If these people are trying to say flaming makes the game less fun then they should stop flaming. Maybe you can show me the statistics showing how your "vast majority" makes this claim. You can speak for yourself. Riot data shows that the vast majority of players both do not want toxicity in games, and that over 80% never get punished. > Hypothetical- you walk down the street and a woman is being assaulted in an alleyway. > Are you supposed to ignore it because if you interfere, then you're guilty of assault? > No, in fact, you wouldn't be guilty at all. There is a difference between assault which causes bodily harm and assaulting back is the only potential remedy to the situation and flaming in a video game. Flaming does not make people play better. It does not make them stop trolling. It does not increase your chance of winning. > More brash assertions. TeamSpeak actually helps communicate. In a game I need my keyboard to play I'd say 90% of my frustration is how to convey a message and still play the game. It doesn't. Data from multiple scientific studies shows that flaming loses games - no matter if it's in voice communications or in text. If you're having frustration over your inability to communicate, it sounds like you need to work on your communication skills. Nobody else can do that for you. > Okay? And that's FINE. If a player is actually showing that they do not tolerate this behavior then cool. But a player that is guilty of the same behavior is admitting with their actions they believe the behavior is okay. These players need to lose their platform for further trolling. It's fully possible for you to report them and have their account evaluated for their behavior. It doesn't make your behavior okay. I can also turn this on you - you are showing you're okay with their behavior by being toxic in retaliation to it, thus you can't use their behavior as an excuse, because to you, it's okay, since you're doing a similar thing. > You're groomed Once again, you take to insulting people instead of discussing. That's a good way to get your thread locked, and I'm done responding to you if you insult people again.
> [{quoted}](name=rujitra,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=000300000000,timestamp=2019-08-28T16:47:44.293+0000) > > You can speak for yourself. Riot data shows that the vast majority of players both do not want toxicity in games, and that over 80% never get punished. Cherrypicked data. I was never part of any such survey. So I doubt the majority is even represented. It's more likely the survey was done on a platform like Boards that doesn't actually represent close to half the player base. > > There is a difference between assault which causes bodily harm and assaulting back is the only potential remedy to the situation and flaming in a video game. Flaming does not make people play better. It does not make them stop trolling. It does not increase your chance of winning. Irrelevant to the actual point. It's not a matter of solutions. It's a matter of present gameplay. I see the gap in my analogy, but a ubiquitous rule of the Universe is one of cause and effect. Player behavior is natural human communication, no matter how uncivil it becomes. Rules are a construct. Natural communication is the lesser of the two evils. > > It doesn't. Data from multiple scientific studies shows that flaming loses games - no matter if it's in voice communications or in text. If you're having frustration over your inability to communicate, it sounds like you need to work on your communication skills. Nobody else can do that for you. You're not comprehending. TEAMSPEAK IS A BETTER TOOL FOR COMMUNICATION, AND I PERSONALLY AM LESS TILTED WHEN I HAVE THIS RESOURCE AVAILABLE, VOICES ARE HUMAN. TEXT IS MACHINE. AND BEING ABLE TO DISCUSS IDEAS QUICKLY THROUGH SPEAK EASES THE STRESS OF HAVING TO SPAM TYPE IN THE MIDDLE OF A GAME.. Why is that hard for you to understand? This is why nobody likes you. Can you try reading before replying? It helps communication. > > It's fully possible for you to report them and have their account evaluated for their behavior. It doesn't make your behavior okay. I can also turn this on you - you are showing you're okay with their behavior by being toxic in retaliation to it, thus you can't use their behavior as an excuse, because to you, it's okay, since you're doing a similar thing. Again, missing the point. Reports are fine, as long as the player genuinely feels the rules apply. If people are breaking rules, it's inherently hypocritical to expect others to follow the rules. And a person who breaks rules expecting everyone else to obey is the troll PERSONALITY. Responses to trolls may be trolling behavior, but they are typically good people with frustrations. PERSONALLY, I don't take outbursts to heart. I know they're frustrated. When a person seems to be persistently raging, it's another thing. But the overall philosophy is simple. If you behave a certain way, then it's because you believe your actions are acceptable. Even if you look back after the fact and regret it. In the moment, you decided it was okay. Do you see how it's hypocritical? > > Once again, you take to insulting people instead of discussing. That's a good way to get your thread locked, and I'm done responding to you if you insult people again. Wasn't an insult. Your remark was genuinely rehearsed.
: > [{quoted}](name=Glamorous Rammus,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=0002000000000000,timestamp=2019-08-28T16:42:56.423+0000) > > So why file a police report if it will just bring charges against yourself? > See where I'm going with this? The trouble with metaphors like this and the League environment is that they are not 100% synonymous, and are typically far from similar. In League, there's nothing you can do to make someone stop something immediately. Even after you mute them, they can still be toxic in game. As such, this is entirely different from your vigilante metaphor.
> [{quoted}](name=Periscope,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=00020000000000000001,timestamp=2019-08-28T17:24:50.921+0000) > > The trouble with metaphors like this and the League environment is that they are not 100% synonymous, and are typically far from similar. > > In League, there's nothing you can do to make someone stop something immediately. Even after you mute them, they can still be toxic in game. As such, this is entirely different from your vigilante metaphor. The trouble with crying "fallacy" is that your argument becomes equally fallacious. "Fallacy fallacy" Just because an argument is fallacious, doesn't mean it isn't true. The metaphor applies. If someone is trolling me, then I troll them back, then they flex "report", and I report them back.. it fits the metaphor just fine. Why call the authorities when both sides fired shots?
: LPQ Status won't go away
bump. someone please explain how I'm supposed to know when this will go away. There's no message anywhere saying how many games this will last.
: > You can't pull a gun on someone, then when they pull a gun on you talk about how they shouldn't have a gun. You are both guilty of brandishing a weapon, which is a crime.
> [{quoted}](name=GatekeeperTDS,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=spWYORXH,comment-id=000200000000,timestamp=2019-08-28T16:36:42.413+0000) > > You are both guilty of brandishing a weapon, which is a crime. So why file a police report if it will just bring charges against yourself? See where I'm going with this?
Comentários de Rioters
Exibir mais

Glamorous Rammus

Nível 44 (NA)
Total de votos positivos
Criar uma discussão