: > [{quoted}](name=Ninja Anubis,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=jF02qtzw,comment-id=0001000400000000,timestamp=2019-09-07T08:02:23.762+0000) > > Look at the NB3 video it shows he was winning those games then. "Winning most of his games" implies at least a >50% win rate. But OP.gg shows a 49% win rate currently. It is a lot under 50%? No, but it's certainly not "winning most of his games". If you limit the winrate to recent games, it still doesn't come out to >50%. Out of the past 89 games he had a 43% win rate.
> [{quoted}](name=AeroWaffle,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=jF02qtzw,comment-id=00010004000000000000,timestamp=2019-09-07T08:05:05.403+0000) > > "Winning most of his games" implies at least a >50% win rate. > > But OP.gg shows a 49% win rate currently. It is a lot under 50%? No, but it's certainly not "winning most of his games". > > If you limit the winrate to recent games, it still doesn't come out to >50%. Out of the past 89 games he had a 43% win rate. If a 49% WR is indication of trolling, wouldn't that imply anyone playing a champion with 49% WR or lower is also trolling? Granted, it being trolling wasn't your claim. But I think the reason for the ban needs to be a lot clearer. I think we can agree a lot of league players can be toxic. That creates a difficult situation for anyone who wants to play off-meta including, and I cannot stress this enough, people besides Nubrac. It creates a situation where discussing an off-meta strat can lead to dodges, or being reported after the game. Not to mention this discussion needs to take place during pick/bans, which can create chaos. Imagine trying to play off-meta as first pick, trying to convince players to agree to do it before you have to lock in. I don't think people have as big of a problem with those kinds of strategies when they work. So most people who want to play those strategies are better off not saying anything and trying their best. It's not a good situation, I think we can agree. If players who do that in good faith are being banned, it stops innovation and potentially even fun. I mean Korea does a lot we'd call off-meta, and yet there's a reason there's a "NA challenger is Korea bronze" meme. Off-meta can work. Key words here being "in good faith". In which case there needs to be clear definitions of what that means. So far it's not clear why Nubrac was banned. "It wasn't in good faith" requires that a definition of what that means be established first. If it's because it's a strategie with disadvantages for his team, then the same could be said of any strategy. If someone goes due top, then someone jungling has left their top alone. And I doubt we'd be calling to ban all junglers. The problem lies with people being close-minded, I think. The current environment does not encourage players to communicate these strategies. If not doing so affects other players, the off-meta players should be warned long before being banned. Barring that, clear guidelines of what's bankable n what's not should be a lot clearer. I don't think it's fair to set up a player to be flamed because they want to play off-meta. I think the situation deserves more clarity, regardless of what you think of Nubrac specifically. If we had the tribunal, I'd be fine with the ban since it would be anonymous and determined by the players. If Nubrac remains banned and a clear policy is stated, I'd be fine with that. I don't think Riot should ban players based on an unknown policy or worse, because of a popular player's opinion. I hope we can agree on that.
Cycera (NA)
: I like the idea, even though i've never encountered problems switching in chat. It would definitely clear up the mystery in champ select when every champ on the enemy team is off meta and two or four people switched roles.
> [{quoted}](name=Cycera,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=xWqffjni,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-07-27T00:03:57.376+0000) > > I like the idea, even though i've never encountered problems switching in chat. It would definitely clear up the mystery in champ select when every champ on the enemy team is off meta and two or four people switched roles. It would also help with taking up a less chosen role. Say you have protection from auto-fill and queue up, someone wants to trade roles and you don't mind. An official switch would mean you ended up as a "fill" role, and thus would maintain auto-fill protection. whereas if you get say adc/mid/etc. and agree to swap for support, the current system counts your role as it was originally selected, meaning even though you actually played support you wouldn't be protected from auto-fill because officially you played another role.
: what they should remove is his ability to jump after leaving the brush extending his jump range massivly. Thats just a bland bs mechanic that shouldnt exist.
> [{quoted}](name=PaG VentusKing,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=yoKXenas,comment-id=000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-21T20:15:50.053+0000) > > what they should remove is his ability to jump after leaving the brush extending his jump range massivly. Thats just a bland bs mechanic that shouldnt exist. I mean you're not entirely wrong, but that mechanic actually plays a big part in his jungle pathing. For example it lets you jump to baron, wolves, etc. If the issue is with rengar in the top lane, then why hurt him in the jungle where he's supposed to be played?
coreym11 (NA)
: How am I supposed to peel Rengar?
Been playing rengar a bit lately, these are my tips: 1. Ward. It seems kinda condescending to say, but his ult is camo instead of invisibility, so warding well will let you know where he's coming from. 2. Pay attention to the marker. When he ults, the marker appears on the nearest target. Based on that you can assume where he's coming from, though you should be prepared for that to change if he loops around. But it does let you track him, and moving closer as a tank will either force him into vision range for you to cc (if he Ws he loses ult leap) or force him to burn the ult on you, which should result in him dying to whoever you were protecting. 3. Don't go near bushes, don't chase into an unwarded jungle. Thats where the rengar be. Ping "danger" to allies that do this. 4. Shields are pretty effective unless he gets super fed, which happens when the rengar plays well. But shields can protect early to lower his kill potential and snowballing. 5. Knock-ups and other displacements. Can't cancel those with W. 6. Terrain creation can be effective, but only in some cases. The important thing to remember is that rengar's job is mainly to get picks. He's feast or famine as well. The important thing is to stop him from getting kills early, all of the above should help with that. If you can't stop that, your only option is to group up; rengar has an engage tool with an extremely low CD (the time between leaps is based on attack speed) but he can't use it without vision of a target and he must be in a bush or be using ult to use it. This means a rengar who used ult to kill someone in lane has no escapes. The best way to deal with that is to have someone who can survive his burst but can also retaliate. Imo i think Nasus is decent, and Camille seems to be the bane of me early game. I'm sure there are other, better picks though. Or you could just play {{champion:78}} .
: Plz stop rubbing my nose in being bad... im trying.
If it helps any, you can try playing 3v3. Sadly it still gets the occasional bot, but I always go back to it now n then. Smaller map, fewer champs. Less to keep track of. And you could try jungling. jungle is kinda a bad roll rn in rift, I don't think they changed exp in 3v3. Learning to jungle will also help learn how to pay attention to the map in ways that matter, since you can learn when to gank. Then you can think "would I gank me rn? and if so, how?". Not sure how much help it would be to you, but it's helped me.
KuroCorbeau (EUNE)
: but the issue here is that not enough people play support, so if no autofill exists, no games can be played. The Qs would be extremely long
> [{quoted}](name=KuroCorbeau,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=lFLAfMsJ,comment-id=00070000,timestamp=2019-07-13T12:38:42.335+0000) > > but the issue here is that not enough people play support, so if no autofill exists, no games can be played. The Qs would be extremely long Right now jungle seems to be the least played roll, from what i've seen picking just "fill". Though support is second. The problem with that mentality, is that most players, myself included, would rather wait for a game they can enjoy than play 2-3 games they don't enjoy and have a lower chance of winning. If you've been playing all day getting your secondary roll, only to then get filled, you probably wouldn't even want to play that game out. And when that happens, it can lead to worse performance. Then your team may have to deal with playing from behind. It's not fun for you, its not fun for your team. If you're lucky, you only have to wait 15 minutes to get out of that game. Or you may have to wait 20. Or more. At that point, if a longer queue took 15 minutes, it would be the same delay for a fun game. And no one would have to deal with someone feeding/inting/flaming for those 15 minutes. Of course, it could also be said that if no one wants to play a certain role, then maybe something is wrong with the role making it unfun to play?
Yenn (NA)
: Hitting Rengar with CC during his jump and still dying in half a second does not feel good
I've been trying to pick up rengar, so I've been playing him for a bit. If you're squishy, and rengar isn't behind, you're going to die. Thats his job. That being said, he his cooldowns aren't short enough that he can burst 2 people unless you're in the jungle. If you stay grouped, you punish him after he leaps. Or have someone play poppy. I checked your profile, and you play a lot of squishy champions. Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it would explain a lot of your frustration. His job is to kill _you_. Idk if it applies to you, buy my tip for playing against rengar is to ward. I don't mean "ward in the bushes", because then he jumps on you and you die. Ward in the river, between camps, wherever you can to know where he's going. Also keep in mind that he and kha'zix are similar in that they excel at killing isolated targets. So if you want to split-push, pick someone who can live a "dual" with rengar. Nasus could survive his burst, trydamere. Those kinds of champs. GA/Zhonias can be useful too, though it depends if your team will be able to back you up. Or, if you're feeling up for a challenge; Try playing rengar. He's a lot of fun, and I've found playing a champion is the easiest way to find out their weaknesses.
: How do I ADC?
Not an ADC main, but I do play a lot of support. Usually its the supports job to peel or heal/shield you from an assasin. As the ADC, you shouldn't push alone unless you are very far ahead. It's the nature of the role. If your team keeps forcing fight, you have to be there. Doesn't mean you win them, but a pick or two can pull you or your team back in. Just play like a coward hiding behind your team and autoing, thats your job. As far as playing from behind, I think its very champ dependent. {{champion:22}} for example can still provide vision, allowing you to shove lane more and give your team vision. Letting you play safe while behind. Or you can go the {{champion:133}} route, and roam to help kill weaker enemies and/or take other turrets after farming your cs. Each ADC is a bit different, and you have to learn the niche of each one. Also, learn what your support does. Knowing what they can do will tell you if you're going for a kill or just a trade. For example, a {{champion:78}} support can kill at lvl2, so if she lands a stun you're going for a kill. A {{champion:89}} can all-in at lvl 2. A thresh at lvl 2 usually can't guarantee a kill off hook+flay. So in that case, you know if your thresh lands a hook, you trade and then back off. And eventually you get the damage to kill off 1 hook. Or with {{champion:497}} , learn his shield dash range. Because he wants to go in, do some damage/hit his Q, and then dash back to you. If you leave, he gets caught out and feeds, and then you get killed because the enemy adc is fed. There are always exceptions, but those are the general ideas and I hope they help. Or you can be real cheeky n take {{champion:82}} bot, solo the support and then 2v1 the adc.{{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}}
Comentários de Rioters
Stark916 (NA)
: why change damage colors its ugly
I like the change, at least for magic damage. It's a lot more visible for me, it lets me know what damage I'm doing n stuff. But that might just be me. I wish there was a color slider you could use, that way people can pick the colors that they see best for different damage types.
: Except it ranks up to six.
> [{quoted}](name=SpecterVonBaren,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=uWAGOLkw,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2019-06-24T08:28:01.148+0000) > > Except it ranks up to six. the point is that she gets an extra point at lvl 1 and 2. Level 2 is super important botlane, because if you get lvl 2 before your opponent you can make a play. can't do that vs yuumi because she gets the 2nd ability earlier. Later in the game it doesn't matter as much.
: Yuumi is obscenely unfun to play against
Let's not forget that she starts with a point in W, meaning that she effectively starts at lvl 2, getting 3 abilities once she actually levels up.
: So whats so hard about this game
I've honestly always had trouble with how much is on-screen sometimes. Once you have 10 players using abilities all at once in one place, its kinda hard to know whats going on. I've always liked 3v3 for that, shame that mode is left untouched.
Comentários de Rioters
: I think really the main issue is that nubrac did not warn or ask his teammates (I could be wrong but I have not seen him do it). While yes a sivir has advantages and would probably be fine in a 1v2 against sona taric, a jhin 1v2 against a jinx and a blitz wont go well. If the adc was ok with this strat and knew before hand in champ select, then they could adapt their playstyle and choose a more suitable champ. Nb3 was toxic as heck and deserves a ban, but nubrac could have done a better job making his strat more welcoming towards his teams.
> [{quoted}](name=SeaWeaboo,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=T4bhhsK9,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-06-21T05:04:19.529+0000) > > I think really the main issue is that nubrac did not warn or ask his teammates (I could be wrong but I have not seen him do it). While yes a sivir has advantages and would probably be fine in a 1v2 against sona taric, a jhin 1v2 against a jinx and a blitz wont go well. If the adc was ok with this strat and knew before hand in champ select, then they could adapt their playstyle and choose a more suitable champ. Nb3 was toxic as heck and deserves a ban, but nubrac could have done a better job making his strat more welcoming towards his teams. I agree with you, but I think that as a result he should receive a warning and not a ban. Would he have done the same strat in the example you gave? Maybe not. Given the champ, and the strat being uncommon, communicating may or may not have gone well. In that case, I think saying "Hey this upsets people, please communicate it in further games" is an appropriate response. A ban out of nowhere seems unjust. Would you agree with me there?
: > [{quoted}](name=Thefrostyviking,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2019-06-20T09:51:28.305+0000) > > So was i, that line is a title but it contains a meaning. > > The problem with this mindset is that not communicating this kind of big deal is the same as screwing your teammates over for the sake of your own fun. > > That is in violation of the code. > > Its far simpler actually. > > If the toplaner doesnt want to go bot when asked then he doesnt have to, because he is the toplane. > > The role acts as a shield here......but it is also the sword that hit nubrac. > > Because he picked support but did not play as a support is expected to and caused his team to be miserable. > > If this was such a problem then far more would be banned for these so called "off meta" things like Swain support just recently. > > Literally all you have to do, is ensure your strategy doesnt have a surefire negative impact your teammates to even have a shot at working. > > But even so they have to respect that as they are expected to follow the division of roles, not doing so is trolling- > > It is explicitly stated. > > Nubracs strategy ensured that at the very least his botlane was miserable as hell, and likely his jungler too, midlane possibly as well. > > He was banned for his strategy and for being toxic if i recall some post made by some rioteer right, apparently he had been "delighting" in the negative reactions to his strategy on stream which ....set a negative example. > > Furthermore as mentioned i believe that Nubrac´s strategy, mainly his implementation of it, is in direct conflict with the rule of : > > Given the sheer quantity of games he´d done this in and the amount of consistent reports he had gotten he indeed did deserve it- So I was correct, top lane being a pre-established lane would establish the bot lane as the one at fault, in your eyes. But that meta was created long ago by players experimenting with different things. In the early days of league, you may well have seen a duo mid. When teambuilder existed, you could have 2 support positions, or duo top, or 3 jungle if you really wanted to. I think role queuing is partly at fault here for creating a certain idea of how the game works, when other possibilities do exist. Which matters, because what was wrong then is wrong now and vice versa. If you were racist in the early days of league, you could expect the same consequences then as now even in the process is different. The same cannot be said for roles. So, if that aspect is changing, the guidelines need to reflect it. Because, as I said, the top laner would be in conflict with the catch-all as well. Are you saying that someone can play the game at the expense of others (because that _is_ what the toplane would be doing) without consequence because it fits the meta? Because if so, and you're entitled to that opinion, don't pretend its because of a lack of communication or some other behavior. And then also acknowledge that in that case, anyone playing off-meta would be deserving of a ban if their team reports them for it. I try to detach myself from the arguments I make, but I kinda have to put myself in this one: I'm currently honor 3, and was honor 5 before it reset. I rarely use the chat. Communication, as much as I can see from my own experience, doesn't necessarily affect being someone who is fun to play with and a positive contribution to the team. If chatting would have done more harm than good, its better not to chat. In the case of Nubrac, I think he probably should have made an effort to communicate better, but I think that more on principle and I think it's hard to say if that would have produced a more positive result. As far as we know, he was banned after one game. Now if new information is revealed, then my position might change. However, no amount of posts by people at Riot are going to change the fact that the message indicating the ban only quoted 1 game. Its as if he was banned, _and then_ they looked for reasons to justify the ban. Its a failure to follow the proper process. Now if you've got a link to a data sheet with how many reports there were please share it, otherwise thats just speculation. The problem I have with catch-alls like what's in the summoners code, is that you can make the case others are guilty of that as well. I'm sure there have been times where I have taken a teammates farm in an attempt to carry, I'm sure you've done it too. And suddenly we're guilty of breaking that rule. You either have to find a way to resolve the subjectivity of who's enjoyment is being ruined, or you have to just flat out say that non-meta is ban-able. > they are expected to follow the division of roles, not doing so is trolling
> [{quoted}](name=Thefrostyviking,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-06-20T15:16:50.433+0000) > > Things change with time, it is necessary to change with them quite often. Then the summoner's code should be modified to reflect the current situation. Otherwise people are being banned for a guideline that doesn't exist. At least not to the specificity that should be required. > There are different rules and standards that apply and you need to consider each individual case to judge what is right. The same rules and standards should exist for all players, though individual cases should determine the course of action taken. For example, a player who is normally in good standing should not receive a permanent ban, they should receive a warning. Someone who is consistently toxic should receive a ban provided that had also been warned when they were in good standing. > For your case of the botlaners wanting to swap themselves up top but the toplaner not wanting to then the first rule that applies are the established lanes and the fact that whoever the system decideds get top is the one who gets to decide if he wants to swap or not, nothing else applies there. > He can remaining sitting top even if it makes the other 4 feel like utter shit but it would still be perfectly within his rights to do so. Then don't make it about feelings, and just be honest that you think playing outside the meta is report-able and that it doesn't matter how left field it is or not, only how many people report it. > It most likely would not have produced a positive result because at the end of the day his strategy directly and badly clashes with the standard model of play that at least 2 of his teammates are likely to employ. Again, then don't imply it was communication or lack thereof that got him banned. > But for this case he would have to respect it, its a teamgame and he has to be a team player otherwise he´s not fit to play it with others. Which begs the question, where _**exactly**_ is the line? If I want to play Talon top, and my team could use a tank, am I getting banned? What is the guiding policy here? > You havent heard? Riot themselves wrote somewhere that he has actually been on their radar for sometime (multiple reports and had been flagged) but given the sheer amount of work they just hadnt gotten to him yet......NB3 simply caused them to prioritize him. I have heard, and been given no evidence as to the validity of that. What I do know is they quoted one game in their message banning him. Now, is it possible a proper review of multiple cases would lead to him getting banned? Maybe. But the the way this was handled, and the way you describe it goes a something like this: "You were reported multiple times, we are looking into things to see if you deserve a ban." "A streamer reported you, so we're going to ban you because we have ties with this streamer." "People are upset with this? Oh well you know there were several reports against this person _**that we hadn't verified yet**_, therefor our course of action must be correct." There was a failure to follow the proper process. This one game is not enough to merit a ban with the current summoner's code. The proper solution to me would have been to leave the account unbanned until a proper case review is conducted, not a rushed one. The proper incremental punishments be dealt out as they were merited, and the summoner's code be updated to include a clearer policy. No player should be exempt from the rules, just as no player should be handed out priority punishments. > I actually seriously try to avoid taking my teammates farm because it tends to tilt the daylights outa certain people, one time i do so is when i know its otherwise lost but that´s it. Point is you've probably done it at some point, it's not a personal attack against you. No one is perfect. But when rules are vague, you could end up crossing a line you didn't know existed. And if there is a sizable enough playerbase reporting you for this line that can't be seen, is it fair to ban you without prior warning?
: > [{quoted}](name=novac3721,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c0000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-20T00:18:02.491+0000) > > I was referring to the summoner's code I linked, the article being "enjoy your self but not at the expense of others". So was i, that line is a title but it contains a meaning. > Thats partially correct, Nubrac is at fault for not communicating his strategy to his team. However, the summoner's code and terms of service don't specifically say there is an obligation to do so. It does not address how someone should go about playing something that others may think is a bad idea. Judging by the response, I don't think communicating beforehand would have led to anything different except maybe a dodge. The problem with this mindset is that not communicating this kind of big deal is the same as screwing your teammates over for the sake of your own fun. That is in violation of the code. As for the result of attempting to chat....well sure not everyone will accept it, most might not, but as a teamplayer one has to accept that. Its 5 people working together, not 4 guys trying to figure out what the hells the 5th one is doing with his "genius plan" and survive its consequences. > The toplaner refusing to go bot in this situation is trying to enjoy the game at the expense of 2 other people. You do understand that once you start trying to evaluate someones enjoyment, what compromises it and what doesn't, it just becomes subjective, right? Now if we still had the tribunal, the case could be reviewed by a number of players with potentially differing viewpoints, and a consensus could be reached. But we don't have the tribunal. Instead we have Riot, which makes plenty of decisions the community dislikes. Which is fine I suppose, but its usually done in the confines of the rules that have been established. For example, if someone acts in a racist way they can expect some consequences. Its far simpler actually. If the toplaner doesnt want to go bot when asked then he doesnt have to, because he is the toplane. The role acts as a shield here......but it is also the sword that hit nubrac. Because he picked support but did not play as a support is expected to and caused his team to be miserable. > Well it turns out it does take some thinking, or it wouldn't have blown up on the boards. The fact of the matter is that Riot has not explicitly stated what is and is not ok in regards to champion selection, or what each role can do and how it can be played. Without that, no one should be getting banned for one game. If this was such a problem then far more would be banned for these so called "off meta" things like Swain support just recently. Literally all you have to do, is ensure your strategy doesnt have a surefire negative impact your teammates to even have a shot at working. > I'd refer back to the toplane example, if you the toplaner refuse to move you cause the botlane to be miserable. But even so they have to respect that as they are expected to follow the division of roles, not doing so is trolling- > A 14 day ban without prior warning or discussion, about breaking a rule that's not explicitly stated in the ToS or summoner's code (again, to argue it is puts all players in a grey area, so its not clear enough) ? You are exactly correct, if playing off-meta is ban worthy, we wouldn't have those builds and playstyles. That is why this is a big deal. If he was banned for his behavior, the others should also be banned. If not, it implies he was banned for his playstyle. That is bad news for all the AP shyvanas and mage supports out there. It is explicitly stated. >Enjoy yourself but not at the expense of others. Nubracs strategy ensured that at the very least his botlane was miserable as hell, and likely his jungler too, midlane possibly as well. > Now, I don't want to go back and forth with this over nothing so I'll ask this: > Do you believe Nubrac was banned for being toxic, or for his strategy? And how did you reach that conclusion? He was banned for his strategy and for being toxic if i recall some post made by some rioteer right, apparently he had been "delighting" in the negative reactions to his strategy on stream which ....set a negative example. Yes i am well aware that Nb3 ought to be banned too. Furthermore as mentioned i believe that Nubrac´s strategy, mainly his implementation of it, is in direct conflict with the rule of : >Enjoy yourself but not at the expense of others". Given the sheer quantity of games he´d done this in and the amount of consistent reports he had gotten he indeed did deserve it- I am fairly sure that it´s written in the TOS that we are to follow the summoners code if we dont want to be penalized.
> [{quoted}](name=Thefrostyviking,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001,timestamp=2019-06-20T09:51:28.305+0000) > > So was i, that line is a title but it contains a meaning. > > The problem with this mindset is that not communicating this kind of big deal is the same as screwing your teammates over for the sake of your own fun. > > That is in violation of the code. > > Its far simpler actually. > > If the toplaner doesnt want to go bot when asked then he doesnt have to, because he is the toplane. > > The role acts as a shield here......but it is also the sword that hit nubrac. > > Because he picked support but did not play as a support is expected to and caused his team to be miserable. > > If this was such a problem then far more would be banned for these so called "off meta" things like Swain support just recently. > > Literally all you have to do, is ensure your strategy doesnt have a surefire negative impact your teammates to even have a shot at working. > > But even so they have to respect that as they are expected to follow the division of roles, not doing so is trolling- > > It is explicitly stated. > > Nubracs strategy ensured that at the very least his botlane was miserable as hell, and likely his jungler too, midlane possibly as well. > > He was banned for his strategy and for being toxic if i recall some post made by some rioteer right, apparently he had been "delighting" in the negative reactions to his strategy on stream which ....set a negative example. > > Furthermore as mentioned i believe that Nubrac´s strategy, mainly his implementation of it, is in direct conflict with the rule of : > > Given the sheer quantity of games he´d done this in and the amount of consistent reports he had gotten he indeed did deserve it- So I was correct, top lane being a pre-established lane would establish the bot lane as the one at fault, in your eyes. But that meta was created long ago by players experimenting with different things. In the early days of league, you may well have seen a duo mid. When teambuilder existed, you could have 2 support positions, or duo top, or 3 jungle if you really wanted to. I think role queuing is partly at fault here for creating a certain idea of how the game works, when other possibilities do exist. Which matters, because what was wrong then is wrong now and vice versa. If you were racist in the early days of league, you could expect the same consequences then as now even in the process is different. The same cannot be said for roles. So, if that aspect is changing, the guidelines need to reflect it. Because, as I said, the top laner would be in conflict with the catch-all as well. Are you saying that someone can play the game at the expense of others (because that _is_ what the toplane would be doing) without consequence because it fits the meta? Because if so, and you're entitled to that opinion, don't pretend its because of a lack of communication or some other behavior. And then also acknowledge that in that case, anyone playing off-meta would be deserving of a ban if their team reports them for it. I try to detach myself from the arguments I make, but I kinda have to put myself in this one: I'm currently honor 3, and was honor 5 before it reset. I rarely use the chat. Communication, as much as I can see from my own experience, doesn't necessarily affect being someone who is fun to play with and a positive contribution to the team. If chatting would have done more harm than good, its better not to chat. In the case of Nubrac, I think he probably should have made an effort to communicate better, but I think that more on principle and I think it's hard to say if that would have produced a more positive result. As far as we know, he was banned after one game. Now if new information is revealed, then my position might change. However, no amount of posts by people at Riot are going to change the fact that the message indicating the ban only quoted 1 game. Its as if he was banned, _and then_ they looked for reasons to justify the ban. Its a failure to follow the proper process. Now if you've got a link to a data sheet with how many reports there were please share it, otherwise thats just speculation. The problem I have with catch-alls like what's in the summoners code, is that you can make the case others are guilty of that as well. I'm sure there have been times where I have taken a teammates farm in an attempt to carry, I'm sure you've done it too. And suddenly we're guilty of breaking that rule. You either have to find a way to resolve the subjectivity of who's enjoyment is being ruined, or you have to just flat out say that non-meta is ban-able. > they are expected to follow the division of roles, not doing so is trolling
: > I'd refer back to the toplane example, if you the toplaner refuse to move you cause the botlane to be miserable. And depending who they picked, forcing them to bot lane could be a bad decision if you want to win. In that situation, would the toplaner deserve a ban? Now I'm going to assume your answer is "no", but do correct me if i'm wrong. In that case, you have to explain why it would not be. And if the conclusion is that it's "because top has been established as a solo lane for bruisers/tanks/etc.", then it would imply that not playing meta is a ban-able offense and that it has nothing to do with enjoyment. Nubrac's winrate seems to imply a genuine desire to win, its nothing amazing, but if that doesn't seem enough to convince you it was genuine, I have to ask what would? It's impossible to say if his playstyle screws over his teammates, because they AFK'd. Which, might I add, screws over any teammates who were trying (I believe I saw 3 people in fountain on the stream, that means 1 other person was out 3 players because of their own decisions, all of whom are not banned as far as we can tell). > You do realize that when a game is far gone in high elo across practically every region, players will afk and open. NA mentality is to hold hostage after the game has gone so far down the drain. Multiple people usually don't arbitrarily AFK unless 1) they are griefing ie. Scrubnoob whenever he griefs 2) they want to go next because that game is over.
> [{quoted}](name=BurakkuRozu9,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-20T03:16:49.849+0000) > > You do realize that when a game is far gone in high elo across practically every region, players will afk and open. NA mentality is to hold hostage after the game has gone so far down the drain. Multiple people usually don't arbitrarily AFK unless 1) they are griefing ie. Scrubnoob whenever he griefs 2) they want to go next because that game is over. People have the option to forfeit. I don't care if someone in high elo thinks its okay, that doesn't make it ok. But I'm not here calling for the others to be banned, I'm pointing out the fact that Nubrac being banned was unjust. I mention the afk players because its hard to say how his playstyle would have truly affected them since they left. I understand their response, even if I disagree with it. What I'm hearing is "they went afk because he played teemo support mid!", and thats not the point I was making. Is there anything I said you actually think is wrong? If so, please be more specific. I don't think your reply was relevant to the point I was making. Now, maybe it is. But I'm going to need you to explain why you think it is because I'm sot seeing it.
: > [{quoted}](name=novac3721,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c00000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-19T20:44:02.177+0000) > > That article specifically addresses flaming and poking fun at your team. to quote: It does but fact is that the very title covers the reason Singed, Nunu and now Nubrac got banned. They all wanted to have fun their way but they did so at the expense of others. > If you want to read more into it, which is something we can do, thats fine. But it doesn't say anything regarding an unpopular strategy. The stream shows that NB3 started flaming Nubrac as soon as he saw him mid. That would make, as quoted by the summoner's code, "good communication and teamwork become nearly impossible." Not really, the problem there lies with Nubrac not actually talking with his team about his strategy in champ select at all first, which is what prompts nightblue to flame him when he realizes whats going on. If we are actually serious then nightblue starts dissing his team back in champ select too. > Now, that brings up a question of whether or not someone should be banned for playing an uncommon strategy. Say adc/supp go top instead of bot, would that be bannable? If the toplaner didn't want to do that, are they at fault because they are now in the minority? If you make it about feelings, it becomes a really grey area. In that kind of case, I think informing players about how the situation might affect others and reminding them to be curtious is the correct decision. It would be if they kept doing it while disregarding the opinions of their teammates in the meanwhile, after all they are free to enjoy themselves as long as they dont do so at the rest of their teams expense, the toplaner in this case. If they ask and top says alright then its fine though. > The issue with a ban is that it creates a bias against a player. to quote the summoner's code again: > > When looking at a report, a players prior behavior is, to my understanding, usually taken into consideration. If a player is banned unjustly, it increases the chances of them being banned again, be it justified or not. As a result, an unjust ban at one point can turn into a permanent ban down the line when such a punishment wouldn't have been deserved yet. That´s riot admitting their flaws and sad ones at at that too. > In the same way that someone going 0/10 in your game could make you feel miserable, that person who went 0/10 might be trying their best to win too. And so you have to ask how much of your happiness gets to infringe on that of others (by that I mean they're ability to play the game)? Its okay to establish a line. But it's unjust to ban a player for crossing a line they can't see. I'm not saying Nubrac is 100% in the right, and I hope you don't misunderstand me on that, but given the lack of a clear policy the ban was unjust. I really do disagree, the summoners code demands a good attitude, teamwork and that you do your best to help, dont do bad things and dont enjoy yourself at the expense of your own team. Even if the "self enjoyment" thing derails into discussing chatting in its description the title itself is crystal clear and it sends a message on its own that doesnt take any real thinking to understand. > If you disagree with me, and its fine if you do, I'd like to know where _**exactly**_ you think the line should be. For me its fine to pick whatever you want to whatever role you want and build whatever you want as long as you are seriously trying to win and dont screw your teammates over in the process.....even if you win but cause your own teammates to be miserable for it then its not really a victory. Swain support? AP shyana jungle/midlane? AP sejuani midlane?Xin zhao toplane? Duo mage botlane? AD Lerona toplane? They are all fine, they are unusual but they can archive the purposes of their role and i dont even think people would mind that much. Swain support is even a thing that some high elo swain mains do. But cooking up some "genius" strategy for your own fun that means at least 2 of your teammates are bound to be either completely boned or struggle greatly uphill and then implementing this without even warning them and then even dissing them later when they try to ask what´s going on......that´s far over the line. Not perma ban worthy though, but fully deserving of a 14 day one, and a perma one later if he keeps at it. Honestly if playing off meta was banworthy then we´d never have had stuff like AP shyv, tank asassins or even mage "supports", but clearly that´s not the case so if people actually thought about it then it´'d be obvious that something else is why Nubrac got banned.
> [{quoted}](name=Thefrostyviking,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-19T22:54:14.231+0000) > > It does but fact is that the very title covers the reason Singed, Nunu and now Nubrac got banned. I was referring to the summoner's code I linked, the article being "enjoy your self but not at the expense of others". > Not really, the problem there lies with Nubrac not actually talking with his team about his strategy in champ select at all first, which is what prompts nightblue to flame him when he realizes whats going on. Thats partially correct, Nubrac is at fault for not communicating his strategy to his team. However, the summoner's code and terms of service don't specifically say there is an obligation to do so. It does not address how someone should go about playing something that others may think is a bad idea. Judging by the response, I don't think communicating beforehand would have led to anything different except maybe a dodge. > It would be if they kept doing it while disregarding the opinions of their teammates in the meanwhile, after all they are free to enjoy themselves as long as they dont do so at the rest of their teams expense, the toplaner in this case. > > If they ask and top says alright then its fine though. The toplaner refusing to go bot in this situation is trying to enjoy the game at the expense of 2 other people. You do understand that once you start trying to evaluate someones enjoyment, what compromises it and what doesn't, it just becomes subjective, right? Now if we still had the tribunal, the case could be reviewed by a number of players with potentially differing viewpoints, and a consensus could be reached. But we don't have the tribunal. Instead we have Riot, which makes plenty of decisions the community dislikes. Which is fine I suppose, but its usually done in the confines of the rules that have been established. For example, if someone acts in a racist way they can expect some consequences. > I really do disagree, the summoners code demands a good attitude, teamwork and that you do your best to help, dont do bad things and dont enjoy yourself at the expense of your own team. > > Even if the "self enjoyment" thing derails into discussing chatting in its description the title itself is crystal clear and it sends a message on its own that doesnt take any real thinking to understand. Well it turns out it does take some thinking, or it wouldn't have blown up on the boards. The fact of the matter is that Riot has not explicitly stated what is and is not ok in regards to champion selection, or what each role can do and how it can be played. Without that, no one should be getting banned for one game. > For me its fine to pick whatever you want to whatever role you want and build whatever you want as long as you are seriously trying to win and dont screw your teammates over in the process.....even if you win but cause your own teammates to be miserable for it then its not really a victory. > > > But cooking up some "genius" strategy for your own fun that means at least 2 of your teammates are bound to be either completely boned or struggle greatly uphill and then implementing this without even warning them and then even dissing them later when they try to ask what´s going on......that´s far over the line. I'd refer back to the toplane example, if you the toplaner refuse to move you cause the botlane to be miserable. And depending who they picked, forcing them to bot lane could be a bad decision if you want to win. In that situation, would the toplaner deserve a ban? Now I'm going to assume your answer is "no", but do correct me if i'm wrong. In that case, you have to explain why it would not be. And if the conclusion is that it's "because top has been established as a solo lane for bruisers/tanks/etc.", then it would imply that not playing meta is a ban-able offense and that it has nothing to do with enjoyment. Nubrac's winrate seems to imply a genuine desire to win, its nothing amazing, but if that doesn't seem enough to convince you it was genuine, I have to ask what would? It's impossible to say if his playstyle screws over his teammates, because they AFK'd. Which, might I add, screws over any teammates who were trying (I believe I saw 3 people in fountain on the stream, that means 1 other person was out 3 players because of their own decisions, all of whom are not banned as far as we can tell). > Not perma ban worthy though, but fully deserving of a 14 day one, and a perma one later if he keeps at it. > Honestly if playing off meta was banworthy then we´d never have had stuff like AP shyv, tank asassins or even mage "supports", but clearly that´s not the case so if people actually thought about it then it´'d be obvious that something else is why Nubrac got banned. A 14 day ban without prior warning or discussion, about breaking a rule that's not explicitly stated in the ToS or summoner's code (again, to argue it is puts all players in a grey area, so its not clear enough) ? You are exactly correct, if playing off-meta is ban worthy, we wouldn't have those builds and playstyles. That is why this is a big deal. If he was banned for his behavior, the others should also be banned. If not, it implies he was banned for his playstyle. That is bad news for all the AP shyvanas and mage supports out there. Now, I don't want to go back and forth with this over nothing so I'll ask this: Do you believe Nubrac was banned for being toxic, or for his strategy? And how did you reach that conclusion?
: > [{quoted}](name=novac3721,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-19T17:41:46.302+0000) > > An unjust ban is still an unjust ban, regardless of duration. > This is the summoner's code: > https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/game-info/get-started/summoners-code/ From the code. >Enjoy Yourself, but not at Anyone Else's Expense Isnt this exactly what he did though? He made his botlaners and junglers miserable for his own amusement.
> [{quoted}](name=Thefrostyviking,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c0000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-19T19:30:42.018+0000) > > From the code. > > Isnt this exactly what he did though? He made his botlaners and junglers miserable for his own amusement. That article specifically addresses flaming and poking fun at your team. to quote: > If two players on a team start fighting, good communication and teamwork become nearly impossible. Once communication breaks down, the likelihood of victory is drastically diminished. It isn't uncommon for simple, good natured teasing to spiral out of control into a loss, so do yourself a favor and don't run the risk of sabotaging your own success. If you want to read more into it, which is something we can do, thats fine. But it doesn't say anything regarding an unpopular strategy. The stream shows that NB3 started flaming Nubrac as soon as he saw him mid. That would make, as quoted by the summoner's code, "good communication and teamwork become nearly impossible." Now, that brings up a question of whether or not someone should be banned for playing an uncommon strategy. Say adc/supp go top instead of bot, would that be bannable? If the toplaner didn't want to do that, are they at fault because they are now in the minority? If you make it about feelings, it becomes a really grey area. In that kind of case, I think informing players about how the situation might affect others and reminding them to be curtious is the correct decision. The issue with a ban is that it creates a bias against a player. to quote the summoner's code again: > Remember, taking a jab at your friend in the middle of the game is a lot different than making a glib remark at a complete stranger. Someone who is unfamiliar with what you consider playful may take your comment as an attack and react unfavorably. When looking at a report, a players prior behavior is, to my understanding, usually taken into consideration. If a player is banned unjustly, it increases the chances of them being banned again, be it justified or not. As a result, an unjust ban at one point can turn into a permanent ban down the line when such a punishment wouldn't have been deserved yet. In the same way that someone going 0/10 in your game could make you feel miserable, that person who went 0/10 might be trying their best to win too. And so you have to ask how much of your happiness gets to infringe on that of others (by that I mean they're ability to play the game)? Its okay to establish a line. But it's unjust to ban a player for crossing a line they can't see. I'm not saying Nubrac is 100% in the right, and I hope you don't misunderstand me on that, but given the lack of a clear policy the ban was unjust. If you disagree with me, and its fine if you do, I'd like to know where _**exactly**_ you think the line should be.
: > [{quoted}](name=novac3721,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-19T16:30:19.718+0000) > > Not who you're quoting, but. I think they did make it clear _to that player_. Up until this situation I was not aware of the singed case. If this was in the ToS or otherwise, sure. Since its not, Nubrac deserves the same warning and not a ban. If a rule changes, it needs to be written so that people follow it. Otherwise you can't hold people to the same accountability; they couldn't have known. He was not permanently banend though was he? I recall people saying he got a 14 day one, which is shorter than the singed and nunu ones if i am not mistaken. Furthermore it is actually in the summoners code that you are supposed to be a good teammate, so you have to communicate with said team if you are going to do something abnormal that affects them.
> [{quoted}](name=Thefrostyviking,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c00000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-19T17:19:13.711+0000) > > He was not permanently banend though was he? I recall people saying he got a 14 day one, which is shorter than the singed and nunu ones if i am not mistaken. > > > Furthermore it is actually in the summoners code that you are supposed to be a good teammate, so you have to communicate with said team if you are going to do something abnormal that affects them. An unjust ban is still an unjust ban, regardless of duration. This is the summoner's code: https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/game-info/get-started/summoners-code/ Now, it could be argued that Nubrac did not support his team by communicating effectively, but the same could be said about those who afk. You could say he did not keep an open mind as to the needs of his team, but you could also say his team did not consider his strategy might be valid. Until there's something specific to communication regarding uncommon strategies in the summoners code, I don't think people should be banned without warning. The fact that the message given to Nubrac indicating his ban also only referenced one game also seems to indicate that the ban came out of the blue. At this point I have to ask, do you think people should just have to wait out a ban that was not deserved? Also, do you think a player should be banned for a behavior that they did not know was ban-able? And I ask these two things as generalities, not specifically to this instance, because I think that if we disagree on these things we're just going to argue in circles.
: > [{quoted}](name=Heko The Man,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c00000000,timestamp=2019-06-19T14:24:13.053+0000) > > Singed got unbanned. Case closed. Haish, this is why i wrote "Go and read up on the Singed and Nunu cases if you want an explanation." But since you clearly dont seem to know let me inform you. The Singed got a warning that essentially said " next time and going forward either chat with your teammates and get approval first or get a real perma ban". I think Riot made their stance clear back then already.
> [{quoted}](name=Thefrostyviking,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000c000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-19T15:45:33.548+0000) > > Haish, this is why i wrote "Go and read up on the Singed and Nunu cases if you want an explanation." > > > But since you clearly dont seem to know let me inform you. > > > The Singed got a warning that essentially said " next time and going forward either chat with your teammates and get approval first or get a real perma ban". > > > I think Riot made their stance clear back then already. Not who you're quoting, but. I think they did make it clear _to that player_. Up until this situation I was not aware of the singed case. If this was in the ToS or otherwise, sure. Since its not, Nubrac deserves the same warning and not a ban. If a rule changes, it needs to be written so that people follow it. Otherwise you can't hold people to the same accountability; they couldn't have known.
T2K Baka (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=novac3721,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=000600010000,timestamp=2019-06-19T04:34:25.227+0000) > > By that logic having a 48% WR on a champion is ban-able. Seems like last season you had 48% WR on {{champion:13}} , sorry about your account m8. > > But honestly, a bad strat isn't ban-able. Here the thing buddy, this account isn't important to me. I play this with my friends and climb with a different one. Also I still play him in the MIDLANE, like the role i queued up for. He queued for support and then just went mid and soaked up xp. How is that the same thing? Pretty delusional. Here is the thing, the reason he got banned wasn't the strat itself. It was him: 1. Not communicating the strat 2. Ruining the game for 4 other players which is griefing 3. refusing to listen to others and continue to tilt the team. Simple as this. He ruined the game for 4 others.
> [{quoted}](name=T2K Baka,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=0006000100000000,timestamp=2019-06-19T09:29:48.937+0000) > > Here the thing buddy, this account isn't important to me. I play this with my friends and climb with a different one. Also I still play him in the MIDLANE, like the role i queued up for. He queued for support and then just went mid and soaked up xp. > > How is that the same thing? Pretty delusional. > > > Here is the thing, the reason he got banned wasn't the strat itself. It was him: > > 1. Not communicating the strat > 2. Ruining the game for 4 other players which is griefing > 3. refusing to listen to others and continue to tilt the team. > > > Simple as this. He ruined the game for 4 others. So you're saying that his strategy had the same winrate in a higher Elo as you playing a champion seriously? I agree that he should have communicated more with his team. I also think that if someone is trying something new and doesn't inform their team, for whatever reason, having their game ruined is also partly on the other 4 people. Simple as this, you don't get to afk and then say someone else ruined the game. If they had played it out, they could have won and they could have enjoyed themselves. Now, as to his attitude. I think its a bit of a grey area. 1. Does a player need permission to play a champion they want to play in a certain role, or employ a certain strategy? If so, that would extend to making a TP play, getting rift herald and using it on a certain lane, camping a lane. If not, that doesn't change because its a teemo support mid. 2. Does a player need to listen and do what their teammates tell them? If so, then not ganking a lane that asks for it, not giving blue, etc. become ban-able. If not, that doesn't change because its a teemo support mid. Now, even if you say that he is obligated to communicate more, there are no current rules explicitly stating as much. In that case, you could say that the player deserved a warning. Its unjust to ban a player based on a rule that was not explicitly stated, that they were not aware before the infraction and that they were not _made_ aware of. As far as we can tell, based on the ban message Nubrac received, the ban was in response to a single game. Imagine if you decided to play you Ryze mid, on this account or any other, and later received a message saying you were banned because it was not a strategy that your team supported? Why would your team think that? 48% WR, or the champions current power level. Now in that hypothetical, you'd call BS. I don't see how its any less BS for any other champ, role or strategy and I think at worse it only deserves a warning. Now if you disagree with me here, please tell me why. And I don't consider "he was teemo support mid" to be a valid explanation of why he should be banned.
: Noob here trying to learn jungle pathing early
Some champions simply clear faster, its as simple as that. My recommendation, though keep in mind I'm not a jungle main, is to clear camps as a way to kill time. For example, say you want to gank top: You ping, go clear scuttle/gromp/krugs while your top lane lets them push it, then you gank. That way you gain more EXP/gold than if you were waiting in top bush. Right now jungle farm doesn't give as much exp as it used to, so increasing your lane presence to try and snowball is a good bet. So try to get camps as you do that. Also, if you show up and fail a gank when you've cleared the closest camps, I'd tax the lane. Because if you don't, you have to go back into the jungle with no EXP gain or gold gain and that time not farming/getting kills and assists is putting you behind. Thats all I really know of Jungle, hope that helps.
: Junglers lane camping don't feel adequetly punished in farm and level gains
I think the intention was to make junglers stay in the jungle longer to gain the same exp/gold. The problem is that doing so means when they come out of the jungle they are behind. So you end up with junglers that gank and take towers, because farming isn't a real option. Or you have junglers who can duel, because they can get the opposing teams jungle exp/gold, mitigating the loss from their own. If junglers lost more exp ganking repeatedly, I think a lot of players would simply stop playing jungle. You might even end up with duo top strats. The only way to stop jungle from camping lanes is to give them a reason to stay in the jungle. That can be by increasing exp/gold, or giving them some kind of scaling advantage for doing so. Though I'd prefer the former, since we all know how feral flare turned out.
: > ...but let me ask you this: do all of you seriously think he would get to play his off meta gameplay if he tried to “communicate it to his team?” > It’s insane that many of you folks are insinuating that people will (A) not dodge (B) not troll him (C) cooperate with and accommodate his playstyle. I've successfully pulled off his playstyle a couple times before with a willing team. The whole point is that you can't be reported for asking your team if they'd be willing to try something besides the standard positioning format that we've played with since the end of Season 1. If they agree to try it then there's nothing they can report you for (so long as it's clear that you are trying to win) and if they don't agree to try it then simply be safe and play your role more traditionally^ * ^You can play an uncommon champion in a position (Zyra Jungle, Master Yi Mid, Zac Support, Sona Top, etc.) even if your team decides that it doesn't want to try some nonstandard positioning ideas you bring up -- **it's significantly harder to be punished for playing the role you were assigned in a traditional manner, even if you're playing that role with a nontraditional champion for said role**. I've played this game for ages now and I do my fair share of weird picks (Sona Jungle, Katarina Jungle, Nocturne Mid, Aurelion Sol Top, Blitzcrank Top, Thresh ADC, Kindred Support, etc.) and I have never been punished for this since I follow the common courtesy I detailed above. I genuinely believe that others would not be punished as well if they did the same since it'd be clear they are respecting their teammates and are trying to win. Your behavior in chat can save you even if you happen to have a bad game afterward (it happens to everyone sometimes).
> [{quoted}](name=The23rdGamer,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=brEJp6Fn,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-06-18T14:58:39.555+0000) > > I've successfully pulled off his playstyle a couple times before with a willing team. The whole point is that you can't be reported for asking your team if they'd be willing to try something besides the standard positioning format that we've played with since the end of Season 1. If they agree to try it then there's nothing they can report you for (so long as it's clear that you are trying to win) and if they don't agree to try it then simply be safe and play your role more traditionally^ > > * ^You can play an uncommon champion in a position (Zyra Jungle, Master Yi Mid, Zac Support, Sona Top, etc.) even if your team decides that it doesn't want to try some nonstandard positioning ideas you bring up -- **it's significantly harder to be punished for playing the role you were assigned in a traditional manner, even if you're playing that role with a nontraditional champion for said role**. > > I've played this game for ages now and I do my fair share of weird picks (Sona Jungle, Katarina Jungle, Nocturne Mid, Aurelion Sol Top, Blitzcrank Top, Thresh ADC, Kindred Support, etc.) and I have never been punished for this since I follow the common courtesy I detailed above. I genuinely believe that others would not be punished as well if they did the same since it'd be clear they are respecting their teammates and are trying to win. Your behavior in chat can save you even if you happen to have a bad game afterward (it happens to everyone sometimes). Now I can't speak for your situation, but I do know that Nightblue3 was tilted the moment he saw the teemo mid. Should Nubrac have communicated to his team? Yeah, I think so. But in the same way that he should have shown them the courtesy, they should have shown him some as well, after all he has been winning games with the strat. Imagine someone picking a zed support, or jungle going duo top instead; Those players might not be making the best decision, but assuming they are trying to win, then they don't deserve a ban whether or not they communicate their intention. If Riot were to lock the account and have them contact Riot support, and explain to them how their lack of communication affects other players and then allow them to return to the game immediately, that would be a reasonable course of action. I just don't think what was done warranted a ban, and if it did then Riot needs to make what is allowed and what is not **_crystal clear_**. Otherwise it its an unjust ban.
Midg3t (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Zeppelins circus,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=kYUusw51,comment-id=0000000000000000000100000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-06-18T16:29:17.918+0000) > > The act that he is playing Teemo support alone and people defending it is also what I find weird here. Why not play Pantheon or blitzcrank or lulu I bet if those champs were played duo mid it would have been VERY uncomfortable for their midlaner and far more convincing. > But Teemos presence alone will piss some1 off. And by playing him that way some1 will DEFINIELLY by pissed > Mid Teemo support cannot deny a midlaner mage waveclearing at all and does not scale even into midgame. The game needs to end in 10 mins before the botlane towers get destroyed. It is OBVIOUS this tactic has heavy drawbacks. Ik, but it's DIVERSITY my dude xD Who gives a shit, as long as it's "different" it's good, regardless of how dumb the strat is. And also, lemme remind you that people who defend Nubrac arent competitive and high elo players let alone master+ players. And I can bet my ass that if some1 like that came in they would agree that Nubrac is a fucking troll. Hell, players like Doublelift, Jensen and LS already said that.
> [{quoted}](name=Midg3t,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=kYUusw51,comment-id=00000000000000000001000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-18T18:27:25.874+0000) > > But Teemos presence alone will piss some1 off. And by playing him that way some1 will DEFINIELLY by pissed > > Ik, but it's DIVERSITY my dude xD > Who gives a shit, as long as it's "different" it's good, regardless of how dumb the strat is. > And also, lemme remind you that people who defend Nubrac arent competitive and high elo players let alone master+ players. > And I can bet my ass that if some1 like that came in they would agree that Nubrac is a fucking troll. > Hell, players like Doublelift, Jensen and LS already said that. I wouldn't bring rank into this when you're not masters either. There's a difference between saying its a bad strat, and saying its ban-able. Would I want that in my games? No. Would I report the person afterwards, and want them to be banned? Also no.
T2K Baka (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=I Like Teemo,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2019-06-18T20:40:34.685+0000) > > This is in no way a bad player, if you dont remember some time not that long ago another support player "AdellaideSkyheart" had a very similar thing happen to him, and just like this the community backed him to the fullest they could and yet somehow people just like you went off saying how hes a mennace and trolling... if you got a +80% win rate trolling, why kids in gold tryharding every ranked game hardstuck then? This man "greifed" his way to grandmaster, thats fking impressive no matter how you look at it. he has 48% winrate on teemo. What r u on
> [{quoted}](name=T2K Baka,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=sP62E7iK,comment-id=00060001,timestamp=2019-06-19T01:17:53.786+0000) > > he has 48% winrate on teemo. What r u on By that logic having a 48% WR on a champion is ban-able. Seems like last season you had 48% WR on {{champion:13}} , sorry about your account m8. But honestly, a bad strat isn't ban-able.
PekiCodex (EUW)
: Do YOU support non-meta strategies?
I don't think anyone needs _permission_ to play what they want to play, but I think being told in advance would be proper etiquette. If I'm going solo bot, I need a champ that can 1v2. If I pick a low mobility ADC, which is most of them, I don't want to find out I'm solo once the game starts. That being said, people make poor decisions all the time. If I'm alone in lane, I'd do my best not to die, and try to get ganks/roams to help. Flaming the person playing off-meta isn't going to help them or yourself play better. Never forget River Shen.
: > [{quoted}](name=Destaice,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=kYUusw51,comment-id=000000000000000000010000,timestamp=2019-06-18T09:35:41.081+0000) > > Prove that he was trolling. he got asked to leave mid lane in multiple games but didn't, has been told by multiple teams not to do that strat and persisted with it anyway. you know what, all the people who are defending nubrac here I hope none of you say a thing when you get the daily griefer on your team who insists his strategy is "legit" and "meta-changing"
> [{quoted}](name=preternatural,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=kYUusw51,comment-id=0000000000000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-06-18T10:24:32.545+0000) > > he got asked to leave mid lane in multiple games but didn't, has been told by multiple teams not to do that strat and persisted with it anyway. > > you know what, all the people who are defending nubrac here I hope none of you say a thing when you get the daily griefer on your team who insists his strategy is "legit" and "meta-changing" I do my best not to blame other people for losing games. Even if it is their fault, bad games happen. People in-game can want certain players to do a number of things, that doesn't mean that not doing those things is something that is ban-able. A jungler who doesn't gank a losing lane so that they can push another to try and build up a fed teammate even more/end early, or a midlaner who takes a manaless jungles blue may not be making the right call, but it's not ban-able. So the crux of the arguement is that it's not a "bad decision", but rather a deliberate attempt to grief. From what I can see, the match history shows that it doesn't lose enough games for that to be evident. I think I've said enough that I still don't think it's a good strategy, but consider for a moment that it might be a genuine attempt at innovation.
: > [{quoted}](name=novac3721,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=kYUusw51,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-06-18T08:06:55.799+0000) > > The match history suggests otherwise. Just because his winrate is "decent" doesn't mean we want it. Especially when we are forced with it by a ultimatum without being asked.
> [{quoted}](name=Zeppelins circus,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=kYUusw51,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-18T08:52:43.541+0000) > > Just because his winrate is "decent" doesn't mean we want it. Especially when we are forced with it by a ultimatum without being asked. If you were asked, would you try it? Or would you tell them not to/dodge? I know I'd not recommend it, on that we can agree, I think. The reason why the winrate is important is that it shows that it's not intended to cause a loss. The feeling of being "forced to" comes heavily from the fact that it doesn't sound like a good idea. But if you had a team try it, it could be optimized. You could find what champions/comps it could work with, and there could be some variant that could be viable, even if it may not involve a teemo. Now, this is all speculation. But my point is that innovation shouldn't be a ban-able offense. There's a difference between having a personal opinion about something someone does in-game, and asking that that person should not be allowed to play. For example, if someone on your team picks a fight they can't win. You might think they're an idiot, but that wouldn't mean they deserve to be flamed or banned. Which brings me back to the winrate: Someone playing that role in that way with the intention to troll would be winning far less. That means it's not done with the intention of trolling. That makes it innovation, even if its bad innovation, and shouldn't be ban-able. Otherwise any player at a higher Elo would have grounds to call for a player of lower Elo to be banned because they dislike their champ select.
: Trying your heart out every single game to the best of your ability with roaming support teemo sitting midlane, is griefing.
> [{quoted}](name=p a t r i o t,realm=OCE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=kYUusw51,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-06-18T07:56:48.045+0000) > > Trying your heart out every single game to the best of your ability with roaming support teemo sitting midlane, is griefing. The match history suggests otherwise.
Comentários de Rioters
Comentários de Rioters
: So hes not banned
I love posts where people call for someone to be banned based on their scores, without any other evidence. Sarcasm aside, you can't just demand players be banned for being bad. Is it possible they were running it down? Sure. But there is no actual evidence of that here. When I started playing this game, I never built into other items because I thought you just bought items as-is from the shop. I was that guy with 5 {{item:1036}} because it was cheap and gave me damage. A players build can be the result of a player not understanding the game, or wanting to try new things. That build, and/or the players skill, can result in players doing poorly. Not to mention this is ARAM, so its possible they really don't know anything about the champions they are playing. Now I know people will down-vote me for saying that, but here's the thing: > _**There is a record button in post-game lobby.**_ If you're going to call for a player to be banned for running it down, you should provide some video evidence, since it is extremely easy to get. And that goes for other people opening support tickets as well: Record the game, or segments of the game where the behavior occurred, and submit that video evidence with your support ticket. I get it, people want the tribunal back, but I think there needs to be more than a screenshot of a players bought items and match history before people call for them to lose access to this game. {{sticker:slayer-jinx-unamused}}
Comentários de Rioters
: My concern would be how this impacts the survivability of ranged champions. Part of what lifesteal does is push the "burst these characters" gameplay concept while providing them some ability to get back into the fight or lane if they survive the initial burst. Without solid lifesteal options, assassins and burst mages would more reliably be able to completely remove carries from the fights for longer periods of time, or force them to back and turn the game into a 4v5 for an extended period of time. That feels like a pretty fundamental change in the gameplay flow for marksmen, and also definitely punishes them for having a life-stealing melee character close to them. I wouldn't be opposed to exploring the idea, but I'm not convinced that if ranged characters aren't gated enough that *lifesteal* is the correct place to gate them further.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=o6EJ2qgP,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-03-30T16:44:40.242+0000) > > My concern would be how this impacts the survivability of ranged champions. Part of what lifesteal does is push the "burst these characters" gameplay concept while providing them some ability to get back into the fight or lane if they survive the initial burst. Without solid lifesteal options, assassins and burst mages would more reliably be able to completely remove carries from the fights for longer periods of time, or force them to back and turn the game into a 4v5 for an extended period of time. That feels like a pretty fundamental change in the gameplay flow for marksmen, and also definitely punishes them for having a life-stealing melee character close to them. > > I wouldn't be opposed to exploring the idea, but I'm not convinced that if ranged characters aren't gated enough that *lifesteal* is the correct place to gate them further. I think that would lead to worse teamfights. Most teamfights in which there is an adc vs a team where the adc is absent go in favor of the team with the adc. Meaning instead of having to 100-0 the adc, you'd only need to get them low enough to push them out of the fight. A poke heavy comp could to this fairly easily and, since they have that poke, can threaten the adc if they try to stay in at low-ish HP. Sustained damage is why ADCs are a viable role, if they can't do that people wouldn't play them. I think the only issue is when you see ADCs go to 20% HP, attack a minion twice and heal to full HP. In that regards, I think a better change would be to apply lifesteal after damage is dealt. That way, if a minion has 20 HP, you couldn't heal 400 from it without building over 100% lifesteal. It would also make building armor more effective, since they heal for damage dealt.
: Talon is a polarized champ, too strong in some situations, too linear/weak otherwise. He needs TLC
Not a talon main, but I've been playing him a bit (mostly inspired by Yamikaze tbh, I like how he explains his plays) and feel like I should give my 2 cents. What I find fun about talon is his early game power. Thats not to say I think he's healthy, after all he can't do much if he falls behind and there are better assassins for lategame. But I like how you can make flashy plays as early as lvl 2. I also think that early kill threat is important for players who have to deal with strong scaling champs, because it gives them a chance to get ahead and close the game before they get outscaled. Honestly I'd say the best way to improve talon, and yes this would technically be a buff, would be to give his abilities a bonus at max rank to deal with tankier champs. Though making his W travel time faster could help too. I just think the fun of talon comes from his early game, and I'd hate to lose that just to maybe have a better lategame.
Ilovemobas (EUNE)
: {{champion:115}}. You should use his w on a low health tower with plating. You will love it trust me {{sticker:sg-lux}}
Comentários de Rioters
Comentários de Rioters
: Which Mage/caster should i get?
{{champion:34}} is really fun and lets you learn to improve positioning, with a passive that can help you not feed while you're learning her. Same with {{champion:4}} , at least as far as positioning goes since he plays a bit like an adc.
Comentários de Rioters
: I personally don't feel we should have to stroke the ego of players who want to hold a team hostage. They should be removed from the game and not allowed to continue ruining it for others. I clarified in the OP that I do not mean people who are just having a bad game and addressed those overusing the phrase.
I never said to stroke their ego. Last I checked, saying "you can win lane, don't give up, i believe in you" is not stroking their ego. And how you reply can have an effect on other players. It can turn a bad game into inting. Not saying that makes it okay, but it does make a difference. Maybe the champ they've been wanting to play got banned and they don't think they're gonna have fun. If you help them, and show them they can have fun anyways, they're less likely to int. Otherwise I don't see why someone playing in the same region as me would have such a different perspective on how players act. your OP didn't name any specifics as to what is "inting". A player being 0/6 doesn't mean they're inting. An assasin trying to fight their lane opponent 1v1 when they're behind and dying repeatedly still isn't inting. You may disagree with me here, and it may be my hill to die on, but you're in a team; its part of your job to help your team win, but also, to make them _want_ to win. I think that would be a much better solution than this notion that Riot must punish people, because it creates a mentality that "what if people think i'm inting and I get banned and lose access to my champs/skins/etc." that would push people to only want to play when they can be at their best. Which in turn leads to "my champ was banned/didn't get my role? well i'm going to do poorly anyways may as well feed". That's not saying inting is okay, but it does solve the issues cause by people assumng someone is inting, as well as not encouraging a defeatist attitude in players that could lead to real inting.
: well how many times do you ping? once? twice? a dozen times?
> [{quoted}](name=Inkling Commando,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=9MEj3oPi,comment-id=00070000,timestamp=2019-03-08T21:06:30.549+0000) > > well how many times do you ping? once? twice? a dozen times? twice with "enemy missing" in fog of war, then till it doesn't let me ping anymore.
: Is it just me ...
Out of all my games in the past few weeks, i haven't seen 1 person I could say fed on purpose. Maybe it's different for you. That being said, the damage in game is super high right now. Combine that with the fact that most players don't know how to play from behind, or picked a champ who's only particularly good when ahead, picked a champ who's stats make them nonviable or simply don't have enough experience with said champ (though if that's the case they shouldn't play it in ranked) and you end up with what some people call "inters". If you truly think someone is "inting", try being supportive of them and help them get an advantage. Sure they might be upset they got auto-filled or w/e, but I doubt a fed player is gonna want to feed.
: ping spamming
I ping spam "!" when I see jungler going near their lane. Great results. I don't use chat though.
: Question
Pings. Most games i never use the chat except to say gg at the end. Most of my communication is done via pings. Most people understand danger ping spam, followed by ''enemy missing'' ping in fog of war. Beyond that, you could try farsight to ward as you pass through without losing as much time as warding would take. Or try focusing more on the enemy than on your team. "play safe and ward" can come across as criticism and can tilt your own team. "rengar bot *danger pings*" is less critical of your team, so they're more likely to listen.
Done25 (NA)
: Because you can abuse it to que up as a position you have a low rank in then swap into something you're much better at.
> [{quoted}](name=Done25,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=WVsx874u,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-03-07T02:25:34.250+0000) > > Because you can abuse it to que up as a position you have a low rank in then swap into something you're much better at. Then why not make it queue based on rank regardless of position?
vvasya (NA)
: You know what'd be nice? Changing Guardian-Angel and Banshee-Veil back into pure defense items
I'd rather give them reduced adaptive damage. That way anyone can build them, but you still get AD/AP out of them.
Exibir mais

novac3721

Nível 121 (NA)
Total de votos positivos
Criar uma discussão