Nightjar (OCE)
: yeah you've cited how people could get around the filter, it's certainly quite easy, but I think it still begs the question, why isn't there some basic level of filter already in place? If I decided to look up say, a pirated anime on a 3ds, I could certainly do so, there is only so much nintendo can do, but it isn't as simple as typing it into google and clicking the first result. If I decided to play on a different server whilst on holiday, if you swear in that server's native language, you'll get banned for certain phrases, but if I copy and paste that same phrase into a server with a different native language, hey viola nothing get's flagged at all. I'm not saying, Riot needs to go to great lengths to create the best all encompassing chat filter ever, but it seems counter intuitive to not sync the profanity filters across servers.
Oh I agree, it makes no sense that words banned in one server are allowed on another. Like I can understand cultural differences 'Baka' for example is much more light hearted in English than in Japanese. And if you call someone an Egg in south Auckland, you'll end up in hospital. But if you call someone an Egg in Spain, you might get just a confused look. So that kind of difference I can understand. But "F*ck your mother" isn't really appropriate in any language.. xD
Nightjar (OCE)
: I decided to jump into this hellhole of a comment section, even if the original post isn't good, because these threads are often very transient, pruned very quickly, regardless of quality, or at least they used to be? I haven't been on the boards much lately. I started a thread about the 'Abuse of foreign languages to avoid bans' and romanisation pronunciation to evade chat filters and the relevance of manual review years back, it got erased nearly immediately (why this thread is surviving for so long without being moderated is something I fail to comprehend). Regardless of whether they are chinese or not, abusing the chinese (or any other language for that matter) language or romanized pronunciations to evade bans is wrong and shouldn't be ignored. I might not understand much, your statement doesn't appear to be a swear but idk, but family and friends can, and the things that get posted are generally unsavory. It's also pretty obvious the intent when people are swearing at you, in any language. Each time I felt it was directed at me, I picked up a dictionary/google translate after the game, reviewed the screenshot and been unsurprised. It's been years, and this problem has been shelved for far too long. You don't spend 5 years treating symptoms, stemming bleeding and making skins whilst ignoring a knife in your abdomen.
_You're probably sick of my drivel by now. So if you don't want to read all of this, at least read the bit that's marked. It's quite relavent to using other languages to bypass filters._ -- Personally, I think preaching your cause here does it a disservice. Your concern is (at least in my opinion) a genuine problem that does have very valid questions that should be, at very least, discussed. I wouldn't associate it with posts like this. Take Taika Waititi's "NZ is racist" rant. In other countries, people get beaten and worse for nothing more than their colour. Then he stands up and call half the country 'racists' because they don't know how to pronounce some Maori words properly _(words written in the Roman alphabet I might add, which has different phonics to Te-Reo Maori)_. So all he succeeded in doing was making people roll their eyes at 'racism' because their main exposure to it was just a snowflake's tantrum. So in actual fact he hurt his own cause. Yes, of course it'd be nicer if people knew how to pronounce the words. But labelling it as the same issue that sees people beaten in the streets, is the definition of "the boy who cried wolf". Don't do the same. Pick your moments. ^^ If you started a thread years ago about the problem, I wouldn't relate it to nowadays. I'd start a new thread (when this post has died off). We have different moderators, a different community, hell the game itself is nearly unrecognisable from a few years ago. ----------------------------------------- **Using language to avoid chat filters.** And it may not be quite as simple as "Just block X swear words in X language". As you mentioned before, romanised versions add a whole new landscape. I don't know much about Chinese, but let's look at Japanese for a second. Take my name: Sesshomaru. It can be written like this: 殺生丸 せっしょうまる セッショウマル Sesshoumaru Sesshōmaru Sesshomaru Every single one is viable. And if you want to put "Lord" into it as well, then you can start combining different lettering too. 殺生丸公 殺生丸こう 殺生丸コー せっしょうまる公 せっしょうまるこう せっしょうまるコー セッショーマル公 セッショーマルこう セッショーマルコー When said, they're exactly the same. Or get trickier again, and do something like: 殺生まる公 せっしょう丸こう 殺生まるコー Etc. Now we are getting into the realm of there being too many combinations for me to type out. So you can see how this would be an issue for any detection system. You can also translate just sound, but no meaning to fool an AI system. Eg: ユー シト フェース バスタード That doesn't mean anything in Japanese. But if you say it: "Yuu shito feesu basutaado" How are you going to stop something like that? It's not technically a swear in either English or Japanese. And that's just ONE language to think about. And no doubt there are other concerns to think about as well. --------------------------------------- So while I'm completely with you on finding a solution to using other languages to bypass systems. It may not be as easy as slapping another server's filter over it. It could well be one of the reasons why it hasn't been their top priority thus far. I'd solve world hunger if I could! That's definetly higher on my priority list than where I'm going to have dinner tonight. Yet tonight, I will be solving my own hunger, not the world's, despite it not being the highest priority. The effort involved is just so great. In the hour between 7 and 8. I am capable of solving my hunger, and I'm not capable of solving hunger in Africa. So I'm going to solve the problem I can solve. I'm not putting words in Riot's mouth, but they may have a similar issue. If they really wanted to, they probably could solve this problem. But there's a LOT wrong with this game. And people using a language they don't understand to insult people who don't understand it, may not be the most pressing issue among those many things.
Nightjar (OCE)
: You should not speak of missing the point, as I feel that rather, you have missed the point. You continue to discuss the symptom and not the cause. Some proponents of this conversation are somewhat mislead in their outcomes, I have already and will continue to admit this. However the problem isn't Chinese people, it's the use of Chinese as a way to avoid banning and Riot's continued biased moderation on this matter. I am not going to delve into discuss whether the people using Chinese profanity are actually banned players from Garena server, or are OCE localised players trying to childishly incite anger and racial tensions whilst giggling about the lack of consequence to their behaviors. In all likelihood a mix of both. What is causing this level of response however, is the fact that by use of Chinese profanity, players have made themselves exempt from judgement. They are allowed a position of power over other players, and allowed to ignore the strict code of conduct other players must follow. Furthermore, any attempt to create reasonable discussion on this manner is attacked for racism and trimmed or removed by moderation. This isn't about racism, anyone can throw some swear words into google translate and copy paste, and ofc if you get the banned overflow from another server, it will seem objectively more toxic. If you took the most toxic 1% of any server, no matter which server, they would look the same. And yet still, this matter has had to be brought forth, time and time again, and nothing has been done. Discussion on resolution has not even been broached. Surely GARENA has a profanity filter we could borrow? Yet, still the problem persists, and the thoughtless righteous, have again misidentified the issue and dismissed it. Unaware or even considerate of the underlying cause. With problem resolution, it's not about the symptoms, but the underlying cause. and sometimes to learn this, you need to play devils advocate.
I mean, I haven't missed the point. Quite simply because this discussion is quite genuinely and obviously about the symptom, not about the cause. I agree being able to swear in Chinese with less punishment is a problem, I've already said I agree with you, several times. If you go and make a post about that, then I'll come and support your view. However, someone else made this thread, and clearly they are more worried about the race of the offenders rather than the method of offending. So naturally, I'm going to respond to that particular point. Unless your Garena chat filter will fix (and I quote): > always holding other people hostage by playing bad refusing to surrender. -- giving them advice , they will ignore it and continue to feed. -- usually they are party up as 2 or more people ( they are too bad for solos). Then perhaps it isnt the most relavent topic for this particular thread. Becsuse, once again, this thread isn't about using the Chinese language for swearing. It's about Chinese people ruining the server. Yes the two issues have a crossover, but one isn't the other. Agreed it's frustrating to see symptoms treated, and not the cause. But sometimes symptoms can't be ignored either. The cause of a bad cut may be a sharp knife, but right now the knife laying motionless on the counter is less of an immediate threat than the blood pouring from your finger. The blood isn't the cause of the injury, but keeping it inside you takes priority in that particular moment. Kids swearing and giggling at each other in a language neither of them understand, is less of an issue right this second, than a clear and very public attack on a particular demographic of the playerbase. Focusing on a racist comment here, doesn't make your issue any less important. But it isn't as relavent to this specific scenerio, which is why people have focused their efforts on stopping this strain of racist attitude from spreading, instead of looking at swearing. > any attempt to create reasonable discussion on this manner is attacked for racism and trimmed or removed by moderation. I would hardly call anything in this thread "Reasonable Discussion."? If this post is what you consider appropriate discussion on the matter of avoiding chat filters, then I overestimated you. I can guarantee you, if you create a concise well worded and clearly articulated point, with evidence about the issues of having less chat restriction on other languages. And not outright attack anyone's race or culture (as OP did). You'll have nothing to fear from moderators. No one wants to be sworn at in any language. > This isn't about racism, Most of the time I would agree. Throwing words into Google isn't racism. But this particular post is very much about racism, and that's what people are responding to here. > you need to play devils advocate. I find it amusing that you call me of all people out on not playing devils advocate. All in all, people are often uncomfortable with what they don't understand. And the sad truth is that most of us don't know any language other than English. Having someone throw a language you don't know at you makes people uncomfortable, wether it's swearing or not. If I say to you: 多分、あなたは美しい人ですね。chances are without google you won't know what I said. I could be asking for a gank, or calling your mother something unsavoury. I know what I said to you, and unless you've studied the same language, you probably don't. That makes a lot of people uncomfortable. It makes them feel small, or stupid. And naturally they act defensively. That's the base mindset that we have to deal with, and you have to tread carefully or else you'll make that worse. That's why you can't jump into these matters the way OP did. It doesn't promote any kind of reasonable discussion. You have to approach your issue tactfully and without making people feel small and unsafe. OP is clearly afraid of what he doesn't understand, and his defence mechanism is to go on the attack. And look what that achieved... Make your point well, and without jumping to conclusions, and you'll be much more successful.
Nightjar (OCE)
: Nevertheless, despite your anecdote, it still stands that using verbal abuse, in any language, should be met with appropriate punishment. The fact that you defend this behavior of ignoring issues affecting any groups within the league community, based purely on the poor presentation of the issue, is the disappointing part. Yes this thread is racist, yes this thread is full of highly volatile and toxic players. Admittedly, this wasn't the best presentation of the issue. However the gross negligence and refusal to admit the problem is possibly the largest driver of this animosity. Your perpetuation of this attitude that this problem is not significant, is likely just going to cause this discussion to further devolve into unproductive and confrontational drivel.
You seem to have missed the point a little. No one here is disputing that verbal abuse shouldn't be dealt with, nor are we ignoring it. It just simply isn't the topic of this particular discussion. The topic of the discussion is that "Chinese people are the problem." The title here is "Chinese ruining the game ...again", not "Why is profanity in other languages deemed less offensive than English?" That is a very valid discussion for sure, and one I'm happy to have with you if you want, but it isn't _this_ discussion. The discussion posed by OP is clearly about "who" is ruining the game, not "what" or "how". Just because we are defending the view that it's not 'Chinese people' at fault, doesn't mean that we defend the use of the Chinese language being used for toxicity _(by anyone, Chinese or otherwise)._ Using the language was only a small part of OP's point. The majority of his post was listing a bunch of behavioural issues that pretty much all player demographics produce, and trying to attribute them to one specific race. So from what we can see here, the racist attitude seems to be the more pressing issue in this _particular_ thread. So having at go at us for not specifically talking about something that isn't the direct topic of the discussion seems a little unfounded. It's like having a go at politicians for not discussing poverty, while at a global warming summit. Using the Chinese language (or any other) to navigate detection software, is one issue. Blaming a supposed increase in toxicity on a particular demographic of players, Is a different topic. Just because the word 'Chinese' appears in both, doesn't make them the same.
: Chinese ruining the game ...again
This whole thread is just a travesty. I'm thoroughly disappointed in our community today.. First of all, you have no way of knowing where people are from. One of my close friends that I play league with almost every day is Chinese, and she's as Kiwi as you or I. Funnily enough, when we see such messages in the chat _(which isn't even that often)_, she can usually tell wether that person is actually Chinese, or wether they had just google translated English grammar into Chinese and spammed it in the chat. Turns out, most of these so-called 'Rude Chinese' are are actually just us Kiwis/Aussies, pretending to be clever by using a language we don't understand. And you fell for it... It'd be laughable if it wasn't so sad. It's time everyone here cleaned up their act, and had a good look at themselves.
: is there a way to see the list of players that youve reported that have been banned
No, there isn't. The player behaviour process isn't meant to be a satisfying revenge system. It's meant to help players who have misbehaved to correct themselves and not negatively impact future games. Not all players you report are necessarily worthy of punishment either. Many players do just have off days, and sometimes they blow their top and vent their frustration in a multitude of ways. Adding players to your own personal 'Revenged' list would only promote negative behaviour, with people trying to grow their lists and smite certain players for any small indiscretion. In essence, the player behaviour system is meant to _enhance_ everyones in-game experience, yes this is sometimes achieved by punishing offenders, but that is the method, not the goal. The goal is for everyone to enjoy their games. Having a 'naughty list' doesn't help achieve that end.
Rioter Comments
: the real issue is the fact that they are charging an extra $10 for an icon. we have got to the point that an icon costs 2/3rds of the price of the skin it is connected to....
Yea, no argument there. The RP pricing change also makes it even more expensive. The original Team skins bundle could be bought for under $40. Now you need upwards of $130 to get the whole pack. Agreed the skins are better than back then. But not $90 better.
Socon (OCE)
: Your first statement: "The game is constantly under threat of change, (no one knows when or how their favourite champ/skin will be hit with the rework stick), " Your second statement: I am aware of the concept of boycotting, but at the end of the day the only reason why you should buy a cosmetic item is if you like it. Third statement: That's like... your opinion. Fourth statement: Glad we agree Fith statement: No sorry, the team chooses the skins that reflect their player's performance. They're not empaths capable of feeling how much people like skin or not. At the end of the day, they do commemorate fond moments and performances of a players champion, and that's the reason they picked Kai'Sa over Xayah for Invictus. Its egotistical to think that we create those moments and performances by feeling strongly about it rather than the professional players hours of dedication to pulling it off. It is specifically because of the professional players performance that we feel strongly about them. So invictus chose skins for champions that they felt best fit their performance. So yes there exists a connection, but its not based on the fans, its based on the professional player. And in that way they're not pandering to your emotions, if they were you wouldn't be crying about a skin. Final statement: And no one asked you to make yourself sad. Your happiness is your own responsibility. You're being stubborn about something that doesn't even matter. You'd be happier keeping your collection up to date than trying boycott them but hey, you win right? I'd say save the money anyway, but you do you boo.
> Your first statement: "The game is constantly under threat of change, (no one knows when or how their favourite champ/skin will be hit with the rework stick), " As you can see, I'm not talking about Nerfs/Buffs. Im talking about how at any time your champ could be removed from the game and replace with another champ that shares the same name, and has 1 or 2 _similar_ abilities: {{champion:266}} {{champion:28}} {{champion:39}} {{champion:10}} {{champion:20}} {{champion:78}} {{champion:14}} {{champion:50}} {{champion:44}} {{champion:6}} {{champion:83}} (to name a few) > Your second statement: I am aware of the concept of boycotting, but at the end of the day the only reason why you should buy a cosmetic item is if you like it. I do like it. I also like not having to pay 3000円 for a piece of meat. > Third statement: That's like... your opinion. Quite simply: No. It's not. Shortly after the release of Xayah and Rakan Riot made an official post stating that Xayah and Rakan would always receive matching skins, to keep with the couple theme. Rioters have also commented on multiple reddit and boards threads confirming that it was always Riot's intent to give them matching skins. > but it's not based on the fans, it's based on the professional player. Yet Riot often says no to the pros. Faker wanted Ahri. Shy wanted Riven. Duke wanted Gnar. So it's not really up to the pros either. Riot's main objective is to make money, they do that by selling shit to people who want it. They'd be stupid to not listen to what the people who are actually buying the crap want. > You'd be happier keeping your collection up to date than trying boycott them I'd be happier if in the future Riot kept their word. So i'm willing to have a little unhappiness now, in the hope that the future might be better.
Bacardì (OCE)
: hahaha oh my god 1st world problems
Yes, I do in fact live in a country that belongs to the first world. Therefore, my problems are those of that particular demographic. Good spotting 99!
Socon (OCE)
: 1. You can't expect a champion to never receive a buff or nerf. 2. You should buy a skin because you like the skin. In this case, you buy the skin to support the team that won and the riot devs. 3. Just because Xayah and Rakan are a pair, doesn't mean they need matching skins every single time. Even if it insinuates Rakan is still good without Xayah and Xayah is bad without Rakan. 4. No one is telling you to buy the skin. 5. Team skins are to celebrate the pro players performance for that champion. They're not to pander to your feelings. 6. The only one that cares about your skin collection is you.
> You can't expect a champion to never receive a buff or nerf. In no way did I mention this or anything to do with it. So I fail to understand the relevance of this statement? > You should buy a skin because you like the skin. In this case, you buy the skin to support the team that won and the riot devs. You buy what you want. But you also vote with your money. If you don't like animals being squeezed into cages for their entire life, then buy free range meat and eggs instead. If you value the rainforest, don't buy palm oil products. I value Riot's promises, so even though I want the skin, I'm not going to buy it. (just like I like cheap meat, but if an extra $5 means the pig can have a half decent life, then thats a sacrifice i'm willing to make). > Just because Xayah and Rakan are a pair, doesn't mean they need matching skins every single time. Actually.... it does. Riot specifically said as much when the champs were released. > No one is telling you to buy the skin. No one has to buy anything in league. Yet we do. > Team skins are to celebrate the pro players performance for that champion. They're not to pander to your feelings. Actually the team skins are very much about pandering to the player's feelings. Pro play is something that many players feel strongly about, and if the players didn't care, then Riot would most definitely not be making team skins. Think about the last batch of SKT skins, Riot make skins to congratulate the Pros, and the players felt so strongly about it, that Riot recalled them, changed a bunch of things, made a whole new skin, as well as removing one and replacing it with another that the community felt better about. So how again do the skins not pander to our feelings? > The only one that cares about your skin collection is you. And I am sad. No one asked you or anyone else to be sad as well. But I'm well within my right to explain why.
Rioter Comments
: > Yes it is possible that it wasn't ready for PBE, but then thats just all kinds of sloppy. How? Ultimately, that's what PBE is for. The sooner they get content up the more testing time they have with it. SHould they lose all that test data for the other skins, because one of them isn't ready for PBE yet? Some content stays on PBE longer than others, and not just when serious issues are found. That is just the nature of a test server. >a sure-fire way to kill hype and lose sales Not really. The majority of players don't follow PBE content, and those that are invested enough to follow PBE content, are invested enough to wait another couple of weeks. >Or do they release the current skins and then add her skin later? If bundles are involved, I'm sure they'd wait for the bundle to be complete. Ultimately, it's only speculation at this point. >It sucks for people who bought Gentleman Cho'Gath when it came out... This is a valid point, but the thing is it would be a current standard. It's not like it's outdated and they've since updated standards, it's "this random year of winners in the middle gets an extra skin just because". >And I think purposefully holding back neat content for new skins would be the greater of the two evils. Don't get me wrong, I'm with you. I think they should make an Invictus Xayah skin and be done with it, I'm just also saying that I understand why there's a bit more consideration to be had. >in an ideal world they should go back and tweak old content to bring it up to modern standards It's not just practicality, some of it would actually be impossible. Take the signatures for example, theoretically, they could add those to the old skins, but they may not have any way of contacting some of those players anymore, many of them aren't in the esports scene anymore certainly. Same applies to things like VOs. Sure it'd be nice if older skins had interactions like new ones, but what if Riot no longer has access to those voice actors? Do you find someone who sounds close and limit them in what they can do for the champ/skin, or wait for the VU? >Yes, there will be unfairness no matter what they do. This was pretty much my entire point. Like I said, personally I feel they should make the skin, there's just more to it for Riot to think about.
> How? Ultimately, that's what PBE is for. The sooner they get content up the more testing time they have with it. Skins don't even _really_ need to be up on PBE, some skins (like Odyssey if I remember correctly) just skip PBE entirely. Proving that it isn't essential to have skins on PBE. Unlike gameplay changes the teams know exactly how the skins should affect the game, so any major issues _should_ be pretty easy to find before it even enters PBE. The main changes skins ever get on PBE is when the community demands something change. _(which is clearly happening here, so if they don't do a Xayah skin, then putting invictus skins up in the first place was kinda pointless)_. > those that are invested enough to follow PBE content, are invested enough to wait another couple of weeks. Im not so sure, I remember when Warring Kingdoms Azir (and others from the rooster series) went up on PBE, and stayed there for like 2 months. I was so hyped at first, I was like "fuck yea its the year of my main man, imma grab all this shit." nearly 2 months later I was like "Fuck it gimme my Azir skin already! Fuck the others, fuck the icons, fuck everything else." So having things up too long in advance does kill hype. (like how they announce "The New Batman Solo Film!" and everyone loses their minds. 2 years later and they haven't even finished filming... so yea... it kills hype.) > If bundles are involved, I'm sure they'd wait for the bundle to be complete. That just screws over players who don't follow out-of-client info though. They buy all the skins on day 1 for full price (not even realising there will be a bundle later), then the bundle comes out and they realise they lost $15. > this random year of winners in the middle gets an extra skin just because I mean, it's hardly random. The team skins have been progressively gaining bonuses since they first came out. TPA got skins only. SKT got skins and a ward. and that just ballooned out into borders and signatures and particle effects and a 6th skin. Why would another bonus be so out of place? And it's hardly 'just because' either. They made a promise. And we can all see why the promise was made, its stupid for those two not to have matching skins. > I understand why there's a bit more consideration to be had Oh I agree. But you still have to make a decision in the end. And it seems most people do not agree with the decision they (apparently) made. > It's not just practicality For sure. Which is why I said in an ideal world. Obviously they wont do it. But holding back on future content because of that is not a train I can get on. > This was pretty much my entire point. Like I said, personally I feel they should make the skin, there's just more to it for Riot to think about. Don't get me wrong, I can see Riot's side, I always can. And its fair enough, if you keep making exceptions all the time, you end up with team skins coming out for everyone and every champ involved, and before you know it half the roster is in Invictus colours. But all I'm saying is that they made a promise, and now they have broken it. They may have their reasons _(that they choose not to share with us)_, and they may or may not be good ones! But they still broke faith and they should have to face up to that.
: It's *possible* it wasn't ready for shipment to PBE, given that they wouldn't have had any direction from one of the Invictus players for things like signature and such, which may have delayed things. It's a tricky area though. and kind of a lose-lose from Riot's perspective. If they make a skin for Xayah, do they make a 7th skin for all future winners? Where does that leave past winners, some of whom are already down a skin from the more recent ones? If they don't make the skin, will there always just be that one skin the Xayah and Rakan don't share? (Given that presumably all thematic skins would be designed together, and we're only in this predicament because of the champ skins). If they do make the skin, but don't make a 7th skin for future winners, is that fair/will people be up in arms about that instead? There will be some form of outrage or unfairness whatever they choose to do.
They never specifically stated the number requirements of team skins, but they did specifically state that Xayah/Rakan will always share skin lines. So, from my perspective it seems they have more wiggle room on the skin number side. If they want to keep true to their word that is. Yes it is possible that it wasn't ready for PBE, but then thats just all kinds of sloppy. What happens now? Do the skins stay on PBE for several more weeks waiting for the new skin (who then in turn has to sit in PBE for 2 weeks) which is a sure-fire way to kill hype and lose sales. Or do they release the current skins and then add her skin later? What happens to people who bought the bundle in that scenario? Do they miss out on a skin? Do they get an IOU? Do they just have to pay full price for this random extra skin a month later? My guess is that if it wasn't ready for PBE, they would have delayed the whole skin line from PBE. _(and if for some reason they didn't, i'd expect them to at least have the courtesy to Xayah players to make some kind of announcement that she is in fact getting a skin)._ If they don't make the skin, like you say then they will always have this 1 skin that will never match, and it will piss off all Xayah/Rakan mains for all time, and for the sake of a single skin, why would the dev team risk that? **_They knew the possibilities of Victorious and Team skins when they made their promises, they should have to sleep in the bed they made._** About having an extra skin. Thats just the way things are I guess. It sucks for people who bought Gentleman Cho'Gath when it came out, because for the same price today you can get a skin like Odyssey Kayn, which is just far far far better designed and has more bang for buck. They arent going to refund players, or go back and re-vamp all skins that fall below the modern quality threshold. _(they should. Or at least reduce the current price, to reflect quality.)_ So why would we expect different fairness treatment for team skins? Likewise, It sucks for TPA because they have less skins, no ward, no borders, no particle effects, no voice filters, no recalls. So if they wanna be fair, Riot has a choice, either re-vamp the TPA skins, or purposefully hold back on neat effects for new skins. And I think purposefully holding back neat content for new skins would be the greater of the two evils. They did the best they could at the time for the old teams. Now they are doing the best they can for the new teams. Technology has moved on. It's not fair that my dad didn't have a cellphone when he was a teen and I did. But Apple doesn't owe my dad a phone because of it. Im always a fan of striving for the ideal, and in an ideal world they should go back and tweak old content to bring it up to modern standards. But unfortunately that isn't going to happen, and to miss out on new cool content just to keep things 'fair' to old content, is very much a step backwards imo. Yes, there will be unfairness no matter what they do. But they made that bed, and they should have to sleep in it. If they want to break their promise about Xayah/Rakan, thats fine, it's their game they can do what they want. But they should have to at least acknowledge that they went back on their word, and that they have broken faith. Thats my view anyway.
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
Darlkin (OCE)
: player support non-answers
Okay, so to begin with. You will have to explain to me exactly what the problem is. You have only included the Player Support responses. You haven't included your own messages, or actually told us what the problem is. So any reader here is completely oblivious to the context of your complaint. From what I can see here, there doesn't seem to be anything wrong. Player support have given you clear and concise answers, _(to what I can only assume is a complaint about being penalised)_. They clearly state that they will not be removing the punishment, and they both explain why this is the case, as well as give advice to prevent further penalties being applied. Without you giving us more information, I don't think we can really give you any advice here. I don't know what the issue you're having is, and I don't know what you said to player support that you think wasn't answered.
Gehirn (OCE)
: You can find them talking with players on the Dev Corner posts about certain topics. This is why I've been posting redirects to the Dev corner posts on the OCE boards recently. Regarding Urgot, hopefully [they'll have some thoughts on Friday](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/VyEXF18K-quick-gameplay-thoughts-march-20?comment=001b0000) after the patch has settled.
Thanks for that! Will definitely check that out! Hopefully Japan time links up with when they are answering questions. I meant in more of a permanent presence sort of way though. Like you, you're always around keeping in touch with the community. And if we ever have a pressing need to discuss something with you, you're there. Its a shame representatives of all the dev teams, skins/balance/lore etc don't have a semi-permanent presence in a capacity that can have more personal conversations with people. _(although I understand that OCE's numbers allow for that a little better than NA's)_
: You just dont like majority rule. That's too bad, our society is built on it.
Yes, it's a _brilliant_ system. Masses of people who know next to nothing about politics or economics and the inner workings of countries. Get to decide who runs them. While the people who have specialised their whole lives in political or economic science and have 50+ years of experience in the field's vote, is worth exactly the same as some kid supermarket assistant who spends all his time playing Call of Duty. What could possibly be wrong about the system? No wonder we get shit like Trump and Brexit, people who don't know much get to decide the future of the country, just because theres more of them than the people who actually know what they're doing and understand the issues. Would you trust a 18 year old street punk if he said you needed a heart transplant asap? I probably wouldn't. Would you believe it if it was a cardiovascular surgeon? Yea, I'd be somewhat more inclined. So if you wouldn't trust the street punk with something they know nothing about, why would you trust them to choose the next leader of the nation _(or equally important majority rules issues)_. I'm not saying that people shouldn't get a say in matters that affect them, of course they should. But when does common sense come into it? Is the system fair? Yea. Numerically, it is. Is it the 'best' system? Considering the results. Probably not always. But Politics is well outside the realm of what is acceptable or relevant to be posting about on the boards. So this conversation is ended. Thank you.
: What do you mean "consider everyone else"? I don't have the option to end a game unilaterally. In the worst cast scenario (AFK before 3 min) you still need at least half of the team to agree with you. Most of the time you need between 66% to 75% of the other players to agree with you. Heck, before 20 mins you need 100% of the players to agree with you before you can end the game. In the 20 mins scenario, if 4 people vote "yes", and 1 votes "no", the one that is not "considering" the rest of the team is the lonely voter. What's your opinion about this scenario? I find very hypocritical that you say that I don't consider others, and then you write this: > Quite frankly I don't really give a damn if you surrender or not. I don't really play ranked, and when I do its usually flex with a friend, so we just block the vote anyway. From that comment, it doesn't sound like you actually consider everyone else. It is quite clear that you don't. You block it because you want to and that's it. Doesn't matter if 3 of your other teammates are not having fun and want out. You just block it because you can. Having the surrender option is needed because this is a GAME. This is not a job (and even in most jobs you can quit and walk out). Remember clicking on surrender is NOT the say as going AFK or giving up. That's totally different.
1. A game isn't 5 people, a game is 10 people. And if you are at the point of surrendering, at least 5 of those people are definitely having fun! But just considering your own team, theres still someone trying to win this. Sure in a normals when fun is the objective, by all means 4 people's fun overrides 1 persons. But in ranked the goal isn't fun, the goal is victory. So you shouldn't have the option to take that away from the one person in the team who is still trying to achieve the objective. 2. I never said I wasn't a hypocrite. And it still doesn't make what I said any less truthful, because it doesn't matter what I do, the fact of the matter is that you didn't consider everyone else. You simply asked for a flaw (_remember you quite literally asked someone to point it out)_, I simply provided one. I don't remember me having to live by what I say being part of the conditions. 3. Clicking surrender is _**exactly**_ the same as giving up. 'Giving up' is quite _literally_ the dictionary definition of 'Surrender'.
Nightjar (OCE)
: depends on how fast you're going. Riding a tricycle at a higher speed is easier than a Bicycle with training wheels. But I'll also point out that Caitlynn has to attack move and kite whereas Jihn has to auto and run. Caitlynn's traps do give an indicator, but animation cancelling with them or her net can be difficult to do whilst kiting back or forward, and her animation cancels and resets are just as important to her dps as they are to a Riven. Also I see alot of low elo adcs who turn useless in teamfights because they can't kite worth a damn, and either stand still and 'turret' or they can't attack move and only get out half an auto per second, making them useless. Jihn doesn't have to worry about kiting and attack moving like other adcs, his attack animations are fast and his atkspeed just makes him hit harder, not have to attack move more often, and so he just has to auto and move, taking away one of the near universal requirements and very skill expressive features of attack speed carries, the orb walk. However he is also short range, the 4shots passive is awkward to get used to, his q bounces can be an art, his w requires good map awareness, and his ult is obviously alot harder to use since it requires better positioning and is a skillshot, not a point and click lockon.
We'll like I said, theres not really a huge skill gap between them, they both have things that make them easier and harder than each other. I'll confess to not being an expert on ADC's though. So I can appreciate what you're saying! [Regarding the Bike/Trike.] Yea thats just the thing, they're almost the same, but not quite.
: uhhh what?
Sometimes I really wish the balance team actually came out to the boards and defended themselves. I'd love to see how they try. Instead they hide away where no one can have a discussion with them. Honestly, so many of the changes this year, rather than controlled tweaks to performance, just feel like: _"Well. That didn't work! Soooo... lets just throw this in and see how it goes! :D"_ Not surprisingly, we have seen a lot of reverts this year.
: uhhh what?
Yeah, you're not alone in worrying there... Often with these kinds of changes, they take a champ down a peg or two, then in the next few patches, throw them up another 5. We had our patch and a half of Urgot being tolerable. Now we have to deal with the 5 pegs up version. Also what worries me is not the buff itself to Hecarim, but what they said in the description about it: > We're givin' the pony an extended-combat buff to help out his more bruiser-y builds (not the ones where he rushes out of Fog of War to one-shot you). What that clearly states, is that they _know_ theres a Hecarim build that runs out of the fog of war and 1 hits you. And the fact that they jokingly mentioned it, means that they _know_ it's frustrating as hell. And their answer to the problem, rather than nerfing it, is: _"Maybe, if we try to make his other build EVEN STRONGER, then he will be weaker and more balanced!"_ {{sticker:zombie-brand-mindblown}} {{sticker:zombie-brand-facepalm}}
: Patch 9.6 Notes
My condolences to Fizz mains. I'm sorry you have to suffer though a prestige skin...
: who takes more skill?
Personally, I don't think either of them are particularly skill-intensive champions. They both function in very similar ways. They are both about stacking their autos until the 'big one'. They both use traps to lock someone down to increase their own damage. I think that Jhin requires more skill to play, simply because he can do more. But in saying that, because he is more versatile, he can accomplish more, in more situations than Caitlin, so therefore that would make him easier to play. **So ultimately, I think Jhin is easier to play, but also takes more skill.** If that makes sense. (theres a very fine distinction between the two.) Caitlin requires less mechanical effort. However because she isn't as situationally adaptive as Jhin, it is harder for her to excel in some situations, making her a little harder in that respect. I.e. in a teamfight, she has to think about less than Jhin right? Her play style in fights boils down to; stick traps down then get to max range and shoot shit. Where as Jhin has to pay closer attention to his auto attacks, in order to A): Not be caught reloading at the wrong time, and B): Hit the right targets with the right auto attack. When caitlin gets a big range indicator pop up when someone steps in a trap, he gets nothing and has to constantly be aware of who is around the trap. His range is shorter, meaning he has to constantly weave in and out of the line between battle and safety. So while it takes more skill to do that, he also excels in so many more situations that Caitlin. He can chase like a mad-man, and also kite better than most other ADCs. Where Caitlin doesn't particularly excel at either. From extremely long range _(like, not in the fight anymore kind of range)_, Caitlin has 1 single target ability. Where Jhin can still affect the fight with 4 seperate ult shots each with a mega slow, as well as a potential snare. Not to mention he can dance with danger more, because his free speed boost gives him more freedom when it comes to escaping death. Where Caitlin gets 1 dash/slow, that costs resources and has a cooldown. He is just more useful in a wider variety of situations. So while he requires more mechanical skill than Caitlin, this boon makes him easier to play in the wider scope of things (its like training wheels. It takes more skill to use him, but theres also a lot to catch you if you fail). So what you're essentially asking is: **Whats more difficult to ride; a Tricycle, or a Bicycle with training wheels.**
: > So if I can do it, theres no reason why anyone else can't. This is where your whole arguement fall apart. People dont want to do what you're doing. Is that so hard to understand. > Some people build $20 model aeroplanes with their dads in the holidays. Some people spend years building scale Millennium Falcons and USS Enterprises out of toothpicks. Theyre both still amateurs. It doesn't really matter what their motivation is, they're both still part of the same community. Neither party is or should be superior/inferior to the other, just because they have different reasons for doing what they do. The different is the degree of commitment. AND being committed to a task GO A LONG WAY. Do you understand this simple, simple meaning?? > In my opinion, we should all strive for the ideal. This is a virtual world, it's one of the very few instances in life where we can have full control over the environment we put ourselves in. If we can choose everything and anything we put in it, why settle for anything less than the best we possibly can make it? So yes, our arguments should be for the ideal. You may not achieve the ideal, but you usually get something better than what you had to start with. **AGAIN**, must i reiterate these elementary concepts called motivation, commitment, and effort; That these modes of being is on a different intensity across person to person?? > Our discussion won't solve the surrender issue. Neither of us has the answer that pleases everyone. But if we don't talk about it, if we don't have a conflict of ideas, nothing changes, and the game never improves. The solution is BASED on the western world's philosophy. LET THE PEOPLE VOTE. Majority rule. **And i dont know about you, but in my opinion that is the best system the common man can have.** > I'm sure there were idealists like me within the dev team that always wanted something more, maybe they wanted map skins or permanent visual effects when terrain was hit by abilities. But were brought back by the people like you with a less idealistic approach. And between the two, managed to agree on something that wasn't ideal, but was still an improvement. An idealist is a dreamer, they're capable of amazing innovations. However the down side is, only a small % of them become sucessful. The creative industry demand the best and toss away the rest. It is good to have a dream, but keep it within the working realm of being reasonable. That why pragmatism is a much better viewpoint to have in the fields of: Programing, accounting, lawyer, doctor, ETC...
> Is that so hard to understand. Do you understand this simple, simple meaning?? AGAIN, must i reiterate these elementary concepts?? Quite frankly, I do understand. And each and every time, I have offered rebuttal for it. I have enjoyed this discussion thus far, and we have debated some interesting points, but if it's going to get sour, I'm not really interested. Sorry. {{sticker:sg-ahri-3}}
: > i.e. playing smart and making the games you do play count, instead of throwing time at it grinding through as many games as possible. In either cases, you are going in blind. and when the vision of victory is murky. Logically, starting a new game is the better choice. > Make that time count. Don't waste it playing at anything other than 100% You do not understand the notion of playing vs working... There is this little concept called incentive, and it vary from person to person. > ^ Thats a silly situation, but you can extrapolate it out to see what I mean. If you set your own deadline, thats up to you. But the season ends on X day and whatever you are on that day is what counts. If you wanna meet your goal before that, go ahead, but you cant complain that you didn't have enough time, when you chose it. Why do you think people take out a loan instead of waiting?? Same concept apply, they want the feeling of having it. You are using these robot like scenario and taking out the human element. >Isn't that the nature of a discussion? To evaluate choices and beliefs? Imagine if you will, this discussion: It is, but you are refusing to see it in another perspective. Your evaluation is more of an ideal, than it is being pragmatic. > If you've got a goal you find a way. By getting better at the game. Not by looking at the clock. >Well, thats out of my hands. If they don't want to follow the advice, thats a them problem. But I've said my piece. Your 'advice' is not realistic. You did'nt encompass scenarios where the game SHOULD BE FF. Or rather, you think such cases dont exist. You have this bright eyes view of how all games can be won as the underdog. > You were legit talking about a war of attrition, and mental constitution. Then do a 180 and be like "yea but no one really cares and its all just casual". Dude, if you could understand the context. It make perfect sense. Let me break it down further so it is less of a puzzle for you. When situations in game create emotional burden, you are better off cutting it short for the sake of mental health. After all, most players are casual. Even though the want for a higher rank is there, the desire itself is not a powerful one. So why stress over it and sit through a depressing match; When the alternative is to restart a new setting and go from there. > Also 'casuals' is a terrible term. There are people who play for money, and people who play for free. Any segregation other than that has no meaning in reality. Some people play more than others, but unless you're making bucks off it, it doesn't really make a difference what you classify yourself as, it's still just a hobby. Casual by it definition: Is used to describe a situation where there is an easy-going attitude toward the outcome. Some people play more than others, and **also expect more** than others. Those are not casual players. Casual players are the ones that dont have the drive to achieve the best they can. > Naturally people who **play more**, are **better at **the game and **achieve **more things than** people who play less**. Putting a tag on that is just a "I wanna feel special cos I play more Call of Duty than you!" thing. No, wrong. There are people who play to gain exprience to further their development, and those that play to kill time; And couldnt careless about improvement. You cant put two different motivations on the same boat. Doesnt work that way. > If you play games, you're a "Gamer" thats what the word means. Doesn't matter wether you play Dark-Souls 5 hours a day or Farmville once a week. The whole Hardcore/Casual nonsense is just sad. If you earn money from it, you're a professional. If you don't, you're a hobbyist. Again, different motivations create different modes of being. To simplify it, is to represent an inaccurate look at the situation.
> You are using these robot like scenario and taking out the human element. When I play ranked, the things I've mentioned is _exactly_ how I play. I have a full time job, I have friends/family, I have students, I have to clean the house etc, I have sports to go to. Hell, since the Victorious skin fiasco came about, I've been playing more ESO than league anyway, to spend my money elsewhere. So if I can do it, theres no reason why anyone else can't. > No, wrong. There are people who play to gain experience to further their development, and those that play to kill time; And couldn't careless about improvement. It doesn't matter why you play. If you aren't earning money from it, it's still just a hobby. Some people build $20 model aeroplanes with their dads in the holidays. Some people spend years building scale Millennium Falcons and USS Enterprises out of toothpicks. Theyre both still amateurs. It doesn't really matter what their motivation is, they're both still part of the same community. Neither party is or should be superior/inferior to the other, just because they have different reasons for doing what they do. > It is, but you are refusing to see it in another perspective. Your evaluation is more of an ideal, than it is being pragmatic. Oh I see it from many perspectives. But I've chosen to back this particular one. In my opinion, we should all strive for the ideal. This is a virtual world, it's one of the very few instances in life where we can have full control over the environment we put ourselves in. If we can choose everything and anything we put in it, why settle for anything less than the best we possibly can make it? So yes, our arguments should be for the ideal. You may not achieve the ideal, but you usually get something better than what you had to start with. Our discussion won't solve the surrender issue. Neither of us has the answer that pleases everyone. But if we don't talk about it, if we don't have a conflict of ideas, nothing changes, and the game never improves. We didn't need a new summoners rift. The old one was exactly the same dimensions as the current one. But someone somewhere thought: _"Ya'know, we can do better!"_ And they did. People argued then too, that they didn't need it, and it wasn't practical. And i'd love to see those people play on the old one today. I'm sure there were idealists like me within the dev team that always wanted something more, maybe they wanted map skins or permanent visual effects when terrain was hit by abilities. But were brought back by the people like you with a less idealistic approach. And between the two, managed to agree on something that wasn't ideal, but was still an improvement.
: My take... I play this game for fun. When the game stops being fun I rather forfeit and move to the next one. - Allies go AFK and we can't handle the enemy - Score is 30 to 5 and we die in seconds. - Team are a dogfest, insulting each other, being annoying and find more value on blaming than winning. - Team does not have any cohesiveness. No teamwork, someone never listen. - One person keeps disconnecting or lagging out. I play ranked almost exclusively because I find normal games boring. You can talk about "goals", "always trying to win winning", "why play rank" and all the other non-sense. **The fact are: ** - This is a game, and I play games for fun (even competitive games) - I like playing ranked - I find normal games boring - If I am no longer having fun I rather forfeit and find a new team or a new game. - Everything else you are talking about being the best, having a goal, time and everything else, is irrelevant to me (and to many others). That's your reason to play, I play for fun and what you are saying won't change my mind. **Where is the flaw of my logic?**
> **Where is the flaw of my logic?** There's no flaw in the logic as it affects **_you_**. Because thats all your reasoning is about; yourself. _(Count the number of "I"s in your post. Never a single "we".)_ But there is a flaw if you consider everyone else. They may still be having fun. They may still want to win. Is your fun somehow more important than theirs? Why should you get the option to end someone else's fun? You asked for a flaw. There it is.
: Actually got 14 day banned for this game.
I'm probably falling for some sort of troll here.. But why would getting kills make you immune to player behaviour discipline?
: > Except that league isn't a war. It's not a battle of attrition. Playing league is using time as a resource. And spending time to achieve an objective is the attrition. > You choose exactly when you want to fight. If you get tired or demoralised, don't play another, and come back the next day fully refreshed and ready to go. If they could do that in war, they most certainly would. When people set deadline for themself. Time is not on their side. You're refering to the casual rank players, and those are the ones that want the FF the most. Because wasting time on a losing game while being aimless is silly. In war, people rest when they can afford to. In league, people set time to play and climb rank when they're able. > Don't run into hours and hours of slogging out games. Choose when and how you play: And people have made their choice. But you dont like their choice. You want them to think your option is the superior one. > Play in the times when all the school kids with their raging hormones and big-dikkitis are **at school or in bed**. That alone will cut out 70% of the toxic abuse. People go to work man. > Play when you're not tired or emotional, and are more likely to make bad decisions. That'll stop you getting frustrated at yourself and compounding the problem. > Don't push your luck. If you're on a winning streak, stop playing so you can come back the next day in a positive frame of mind. **Sound advice**, however it is an ideal that is easier said than done. Humans are emotional creatures. Most of the time we follow our feeling rather than a strict path toward triumph. > Be smart about it. That's far more likely to increase your mental well being than surrendering. This is a game not a job, the phrase "be smart about it" can only extend so far. People are not gonna give a shit pass bragging right; And this is mostly kids. Casual players will always be the CORE of any games. You are trying to fit them into a higher category. Which most dont want to be a part of.
> Playing league is using time as a resource. And spending time to achieve an objective is the attrition. So wouldn't it make sense to achieve your goal in the least amount of time possible then? i.e. playing smart and making the games you do play count, instead of throwing time at it grinding through as many games as possible. > When people set deadline for themself. Time is not on their side. Again, make the games you do play count, rather than wasting your time playing at not your best. Also thats a self imposed deadline, hardly a race against time. _"I want to be gold in 5 MINUTES! OMG OMG OMG I DON'T HAVE ANY TIME!"_ ^ Thats a silly situation, but you can extrapolate it out to see what I mean. If you set your own deadline, thats up to you. But the season ends on X day and whatever you are on that day is what counts. If you wanna meet your goal before that, go ahead, but you cant complain that you didn't have enough time, when you chose it. > In league, people set time to play and climb rank when they're able. My point exactly. Make that time count. Don't waste it playing at anything other than 100% > And people have made their choice. But you dont like their choice. You want them to think your option is the superior one. Isn't that the nature of a discussion? To evaluate choices and beliefs? Imagine if you will, this discussion: _OP: "Hey guys, should there be a surrender vote in ranked?" P1: "Yes." P2: "No." P1: "Okay then." P2: "But you should keep doing your thing. Cos you're a swell guy!"_ What does this actually contribute to anything? Nothing. Quite frankly I don't really give a damn if you surrender or not. I don't really play ranked, and when I do its usually flex with a friend, so we just block the vote anyway. But our discussion gets people thinking. And who knows where that thought might lead. Getting people in the habit of thinking is the most important thing here. Not finding an actual Yes or No answer to the problem. > People go to work man. You don't have to tell me. Which is why I said: _"If you're really keen on advancing up through the ranks"_ If you've got a goal you find a way. > Humans are emotional creatures. Most of the time we follow our feeling rather than a strict path toward triumph. Well, thats out of my hands. If they don't want to follow the advice, thats a them problem. But I've said my piece. > This is a game not a job, the phrase "be smart about it" can only extend so far. You were legit talking about a war of attrition, and mental constitution. Then do a 180 and be like _"yea but no one really cares and its all just casual"_. Pick one. If people are playing to the point where they need to preserve their mental wellbeing. Then I wouldn't exactly call them "Casuals". Also 'casuals' is a terrible term. There are people who play for money, and people who play for free. Any segregation other than that has no meaning in reality. Some people play more than others, but unless you're making bucks off it, it doesn't really make a difference what you classify yourself as, it's still just a hobby. Naturally people who play more, are better at the game and achieve more things than people who play less. Putting a tag on that is just a "I wanna feel special cos I play more Call of Duty than you!" thing. If you play games, you're a "Gamer" thats what the word means. Doesn't matter wether you play Dark-Souls 5 hours a day or Farmville once a week. The whole Hardcore/Casual nonsense is just sad. If you earn money from it, you're a professional. If you don't, you're a hobbyist.
: There are times in game when you know you are doom. There might be faint breaths of life here and there, but you know the end is not far away. The FF exist so those type of game dont turn into a toxic verbal arena. > If you quit when things look rough, you're not playing to the best of your ability, whatever rank you achieve, isn't the rank you deserve. Let's us acknowledge that there are games where people gave up too early. But also acknowledge games where the continuing resistant is just a waste of time. One such example is, when **you **are the only fed player on your team. And the so called 'fed' only equate to the enemy team's lowest earner. The support. The more efforts you spent in a no win situation, the more exhausted you will be. It will have a snowball like impact on future matches. > If you don't accept and play out your losses, then your wins are meaningless too. Those who are unable to see defeat, are not fit to lead. It mean, more lives will be lost because the leader is too ignorant to know when to cut loses. In term of attrition, it is better to lose a battle and conserve for the war. When playing ranked games; It is better to accept a worthy defeat then exhaust yourself, at the cost of mental constitute.
> In term of attrition, it is better to lose a battle and conserve for the war. Except that league isn't a war. It's not a battle of attrition. You don't HAVE to have another battle straight after. You choose exactly when you want to fight. If you get tired or demoralised, don't play another, and come back the next day fully refreshed and ready to go. If they could do that in war, they most certainly would. Quality over quantity. It isn't RNG, you have MMR and LP to lose. Sheer number of games isn't going to necessarily advance you. If you want to talk war strategy. talk Brain over Brawn. Don't be the guy who runs into battle bruce forcing it with a machine gun. Be the tactician who is sitting back watching the guy with the machine gun run through the mines you placed the day before. Don't run into hours and hours of slogging out games. Choose when and how you play: _Play in the times when all the school kids with their raging hormones and big-dikkitis are at school or in bed. That alone will cut out 70% of the toxic abuse._ _Play when you're not tired or emotional, and are more likely to make bad decisions. That'll stop you getting frustrated at yourself and compounding the problem._ _Don't push your luck. If you're on a winning streak, stop playing so you can come back the next day in a positive frame of mind._ If you're on a losing streak, know when to cut your losses and call it. Take a break for a day or two, play another game, then come back when you're in the right mindset. _If you're really keen on advancing up through the ranks, change your schedule, so you are playing at times when others are tired and losing it, but you're fresh and ready to go._ Be smart about it. That's far more likely to increase your mental well being than surrendering.
: the difference is, league has a thing called snowballing. real life sports generally don't. enemy players on the field/court don't get stronger/faster/taller as they score. you 100% can still win the next quarter or half or set even though you lost the first. doesn't really work like that in league. as you suggested, there comes a point when there is nothing you can do. it really is up to the team that is way ahead to lose it (by dcing, doing really dumb shit etc). also you say ranked is to win more so than to have fun. that is true, but what is 'winning'? it's more than a single game, it is a grind. as you said, it's generally a coin flip. if you were to give 100% in every single game that is incredibly 1 sided against you, you would get exhausted and simply also run out of time to actually grind. flip side is also true. when you're way ahead, and it is just a matter of time before you win, you appreciate the surrender as it saves you time. also, you are not going to gain and learn much by playing those extra 5 minutes in a game that is 1 sided in your favour. as long as xp, gold, items and, therefore, snowballing are a thing, then FF should always be a thing. not to mention things like people afking etc.
Yea, snowballing is a thing. It plays the same role as endurance in a real game. Players don't get faster/stronger/taller as they score, like you say. But as the game progresses, they do get tired and slower and sloppier, and those people who train for those times, get less slow and less sloppy than the other players. So the same thing happens just in reverse. Also league has a power ceiling. With a few exceptions like Veigar. No champ gets stronger than a 6 item build. So even if the enemy is snowballing, you can ALWAYS catch up in the end. It doesnt matter how much of a gold/xp/item lead they have. You can always catch up. The trick is just to know how to stall out the game long enough to reach that ceiling. Funnily enough, a thing you don't get to practice if you surrender. If your argument is about people who AFK, then just make the surrender vote unanimous. AFKers get kicked from the vote anyway, so it shouldn't be a problem. But I've still won tons of games that were 4v5 from the beginning. > if you were to give 100% in every single game that is incredibly 1 sided against you Except that it's not an actual grind. It's not an RNG chest at the end of some raid. Sheer number of games won't necessarily advance you. Play 2 games of ranked a day, give them your all. Do that every day of the year, play normals to chill and practice. You'll be much better off than throwing hours and hours of average playing into ranked. Its a quality over quantity thing. In my experience, you advance more by playing 10 and winning 8, than by playing 40 and winning 20.
Nightjar (OCE)
: the surrender feature is there just incase, 4 players dc for instance, but the other team doesn't want to end and holds you hostage, or there is a bug that makes the game unwinnable, the immortal nexus. Unfortunately, you have to leave a way out just incase.
Then still have the surrender vote, but make it have to be unanimous. That would be perfectly acceptable in those situations, without compromising gameplay in regular games.
BowWowzer (OCE)
: Remove FF from ranked thoughts
There definitely shouldn't be a surrender vote in ranked. Quite simply, you go to ranked to win. If you're not prepared to try your hardest to win, even in a bad situation, then you don't really deserve to climb. You don't see the All Blacks just walk off the field at half time and go down to the pub because the game is looking like they won't win. The whole argument of "Oh well its so I can get into another game and not waste my time in a game thats already lost." is just an excuse for people not willing to try. I have won countless games where it looked absolutely impossible to win. Theres always a chance _(hey, the enemy might even disconnect for some reason, it's all happened before)_. Playing into a losing game isn't fun, if you don't want to do that, fair enough, the game is supposed to be fun, if you're not having it, stop playing, I won't fault you for that. But, if you want fun, play normals. If you want to do the absolute best you can to win, then play ranked, but don't give up as soon as shit hits the fan. Quite frankly, I don't give a f*ck what dodging or surrendering strategy the challengers/pros do. Name one, just one, sport on the international stage, where quitting halfway through a game is an acceptable thing. You play a game to the bitter end, whatever the outcome. Out of respect for your team, the enemy team, and yourself. If league wants to be a game where dodging and surrendering is an acceptable strategy to climb the ranks. Then maybe it doesn't deserve to be on the world stage. Think about that next time you press that button. My friend and I almost never surrender. And because theres two of us, no one else can pass the vote. And we win SO MANY games that are 'certain' losses. Because we don't quit when everyone else does, we have so much experience playing uber defensively, we know _**exactly**_ how our champs feel when behind and under-farmed/fed, we know how they will perform, and when they will spike again. And we manage to pull games back quite often. If I actually played ranked, then we would probably win a solid 30/40% more 'lost' games than most people we play with. You always see that one Zed that is 0/9 and leaps into battle in exactly the same way as if he was 9/0. Thats what you become when you don't play out your losses. You get really really good at playing well when you're winning. But don't know **** about how to play when you're behind. Don't be that guy. _______________ To look at it from the other side. Yes I can appreciate that statistically in terms of pure numbers, I can see why it's appealing to cut losses and begin the next game. League is a coin flip, most of the time its a 50/50 chance wether you win or lose. If you see the coin about to land on tails, catch it and throw it again right? No need to suffer through the process of having it land and everyone look at your defeat. It makes sense, you can fit more games into less time, more chances to win _(although people don't realise that you have equal chance of losing again as well, in which case you have crammed in more losing games by surrendering)_. But you really have to decide what you play ranked for. Do you play ranked to see the best you yourself can achieve, and be proud of? Or do you just want a shiner border than everyone else? It doesn't matter how. Another of my friends was boosted, he has a far shiner border than the rest of us, but you know what. It doesn't mean anything. Because we know he didn't get it, and he knows he didn't get it. It's not an accurate representation of his skill. But he does have a nice shiny profile and a nice flash skin to keep, no denying that. A skin that I will never have now, and he always will. And it doesn't matter how he got those things, he has them and I don't. **So if it's purely the outcome that you want, then by all means do whatever you can to achieve that. Dodge and surrender and play only the most broken and in meta champs. But don't you dare say that it was you and your hard work that achieved that reward. You exploited the system and thats how you got your edge.** If you quit when things look rough, you're not playing to the best of your ability, whatever rank you achieve, isn't the rank you deserve. Maybe you deserve higher, maybe lower. You may have the rewards, but can you look at them and think _"I sweat and bled for this!"_ I you can, good for you. But don't ruin other people's games just because you can't be bothered trying when things get difficult. This is all just my opinion of course, But I don't believe in the mindset of: _"Oh I'm losing, this one doesn't count! The next one counts!"_ If you don't accept and play out your losses, then your wins are meaningless too.
Rioter Comments
: who has the most cc?
It really depends on what you mean by "Most CC" Do you mean: 1. The champ with the highest number of abilities that have CC? 2. The champ that can keep you under crowd control for the longest amount of time. 3. The champ with the ability to interrupt you the most. For example, as for champs that can keep you CCed the longest, {{champion:22}} might well take the top spot (an educated guess seeing I haven't done the maths. Either way, she's up there!) But even though she can keep you immobile for 3 seconds, I wouldn't call her the "Champ with the most CC". So what you mean by "Most CC" changes what champs we can choose. Personally however, as a 'best of all worlds' contender. my money is on {{champion:154}} He has 1 ability that _**isn't**_ a knockup. But its not about numbers, its about how he uses them. He can't keep you 100% catatonic like Leona can by chain-stunning you. But because of the timing on his abilites, when one ends theres only maybe 0.1/0.2 seconds before the next one hits. So while there is some time, its not actually enough to do anything. So even though he's not keeping you CCed 100% of the time, he might as well be, because you cant do an awful lot in that time. Also unlike {{champion:111}} or {{champion:89}} all his CC is AoE or multi target. So thats a factor too. He is a disrupt god, and I think disrupt is far more deadly than straight CC duration. (although his CC duration is lengthy too). So {{champion:154}} has my vote.
: Why are people letting riot sell 2 epic skins for $200?
Yea, it's disgusting, I don't know anyone who is disputing that. And very few people are as mad about it as me... Prestige skins rob either your money or your time (or both). But you say _"Letting"_. Other than the overwhelming negative feedback the community has already given, and not buying the skin _(neither of which has had much impact thus far)_, what else are we supposed to do? It's Riot's game, they kinda just do what they want, and we have to live with it or stop playing. So unless you're able to convince vast swathes of the community to stop playing completely, I don't see how you're supposed to "stop" Riot from doing what they want? This is why Riot do these things, because it has very little negative consequence for them. They know that the majority of people are not going to stop playing completely just because they released a few overpriced skins. People will be mad for a few weeks, then realise it's staying, and just live with it. Like always, and they know this. So what proposal do you have to make us "stop" them? _(i'm genuinely keen to hear an actual plan of attack, because I want this BS stopped too)_
Aifread (OCE)
: The way the game is now, nerfs to damage are better than buffs. 80% of champs can kill someone within 5 seconds now...
Within 5 seconds? Man I wish I lasted that long against 80% of champs..
Rioter Comments
: > [{quoted}](name=Lord Sesshomaru,realm=OCE,application-id=FjGAIbRv,discussion-id=cQE2qPcr,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-02-07T09:34:57.078+0000) Your formatting is {{sticker:zombie-nunu-hearts}}
^_^ Only thanks to Wuks' effort though: https://boards.oce.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/miscellaneous/AHREUGPW-boards-usage-guide-part-1-boards-markup
ToshiroT1 (OCE)
: When to Pick?
#**_~~Picking situationally~~_** I pick most of the time depending on what my team picks. If you counter pick an enemy, you counter that 1 player, _(and if you fall behind then you don't even do that.)_ and most of the time that counter is only for in lane anyway. But if you pick a champ that synergises well with your team, then rather than making 1 enemy player weaker, you're making 4 allied players stronger. One of your problems might be that most of your champs there all fulfil the same role Ekko/Zed/Fizz/Kat (within reason) do the same thing, jump in, eliminate someone, and jump out. Usually (not all the time), if you can pick Fizz into a matchup, you'll be pretty safe picking either Kat or Ekko too. And the reverse is also true, if you can't pick Ekko into a matchup, chances are Fizz and Kat will also meet the same disadvantages. _***~~So before trying to pick the right champ for the situation, i'd start with expanding the range of champs at your disposal.~~***_ Ill use myself as an example, I'm a mid laner too, I prioritise who I pick, from this level of importance (keep in mind that this is just what I do (or try to)): _***~~1st: Complement our own team's champions. (if my Jungle picks Malphite, then obviously picking Yasuo is a good idea) 2nd: Fill out any holes in our team (e.g. if we don't have CC, I won't be picking Karthus) 3rd: Bring my own flair to the table. 4th: Counter one of more of the enemy champs (i.e. Teemo into Nasus).~~***_ This order changes a little with situations. Sometimes some things just cant be done. And assassins throw in a new situation entirely (ill bet getting to that later). **To give examples:** When I pick Roaming specialists. >### *If our team has a hyper carry in bot lane, like Draven or Kai'Sa, I'll be tempted to pick someone like Aurelion Sol, so I can maintain a relatively consistent presence in bot to give Draven etc the early/mid game cushion they need to get rolling.* When I pick bruisers: >### *If my team is lacking in frontline strength, I have Swain or Vlad to fall back on, which sacrifices some long range poke and nuke potential, but alleviates the pressure off our more fragile backline players while still keeping up some decent AP damage.* When I pick damage/utility mages: >### *If our team is well rounded then i'll pick the class that provides what (I think) mid lane should bring to the game, I.e. ranged poke and CC, so I'll pick someone like Zoe or Azir etc. Seeming I don't have to pick up the slack for anyone else, I can focus on bringing out mid lane's individual strength.* Thats the basic principle, but then you can go deeper and get more champion specific. I.e. if we have a hyper carry bot, but she is Vayne, then I won't go Sol, i'll go Taliyah instead, because then not only can I roam bot often, but i'm playing a champ that makes the most of Vayne's kit, bringing out the potential of both champs. You can tailor how much of something you think you need as well, if we need a bigger front line player than Swain, then I'll pick Galio, and focus more on being a true tank rather than a mage hybrid. Likewise if we don't need quite as much, I'll pick someone like Malz or Ryze, who can still take a few hits, but aren't as squishy as normal mages. Then comes countering the enemy. Once I've looked at the type of champ my team needs, (Artillery, bruiser, roaming etc), and Ive considered what champs synergise (or don't synergise) with my own team, then ill look at the enemy. For example, if we need a poke mage, but the enemy has a Heimerdinger, then I'll narrow the pics to Syndra or Azir who can both fulfil the poke mage role, as well as countering Heimerdinger in particular. _______________________ #**_~~Assassins~~_** Assassins like always, are the class that throws a spanner in the works. They win and lose games drastically. Unless they are poorly designed, assassins fulfil a very specific role in league. Their main and arguably _only_ purpose, is to remove one _(or two if they're strong_) enemy champs from the game, and then get the fuck out _(essentially making the game a 4v4)_. So rather than focusing on helping your own team, you're focusing on breaking up the enemy's. In other words, assassins should be picked when your team's combined combo/teamfight isn't lacking any specific aspects. If your team can pull off a good strategy as a 4 man (i.e. without you), then your job as an assassin is to make the enemy team also a 4 man. With one important difference, you get to choose which 4 enemies are in the fight. Essentially removing a key player from _their_ combo. If they pick Yasuo/Ori/Amumu, their team synergises amazingly (almost certainly better than your team). So you job as an assassin is to select and remove the key player from that combo. _***~~In this situation you should be picking to kill Orianna.~~***_ Ori and Amumu's ults work as a good combo. Yasuo and Ori's ults work as a good combo. But Yasuo and Amumu together don't really help each other all that much. So you need to quickly make that decision and take out the key player to minimise the enemy's combo, allowing your team to have the upper hand. In this situation I would pick Kassadin _(my favourite assassin)_, over more rounded mid lane champs, in order to deal with the pressing threat of a team wide Amumu + Ori + Yasuo ult _(which obviously is more important to get rid of, than filling out holes in your own team)_. If you see a situation like this in champ select, then picking an assassin playstyle is very justifiable. But if your team is lacking certain things (like lacking in poke, or is looking a little squishy), AND the enemy team doesn't have some crazy wombo level shit, then you should be filling in the gaps on your own team, rather than playing the hero and going for the assassin pick. Assassins are _(in theory)_, a high risk high reward pick. If you do it right, it's devastating, if you do it wrong, you might as well not even be in the game. So unless there is someone in the enemy team who HAS TO DIE (like Ori in that example). You shouldn't really be picking an assassin unless you're relatively confident your team can hold its own without your contribution. If your team has holes, and theres no desperate need for you to be an assassin, pick one is a little irresponsible and selfish. Yes, if you're really good (like most classes), you can carry yourself a fair bit as an assassin-only player. But only to a point. Once real teamwork and synergy comes into play, you have to have a wider variety of options to pick from. With the exception of Zoe, all the champs you mentioned fulfil relatively the same role (within reason, obviously they each have their own unique flair). So if you're faced with a situation that doesn't call for an assassin, then you could potentially be robing your team of other needed stats. _(likewise if you play only poke mages, or only tanky champs etc. Its just more obvious with assassins because of the high risk high reward playstyle.)_ __________________________ #**_~~Where to from here?~~_** I've mentioned a lot of things. But don't just jump straight into playing all new champs and trying to consider all these things all at once. Start just by keeping up playing the champs you already are. But during the game, start to think _"What are we lacking, as a team?"_, and "_why?"_. As consistent themes start to crop up, _(maybe you're always short on poke?)_, start to investigate what poke champs you might be interested in, and give them a go. Once you've sorted out a poke champ, try to sort out a bruiser, or a roaming specialist. Once you've got a variety of champs to fall back on. Then start to focus more intently on filling the holes in your team. We all have favourites, and let that guide you. I like mages, so i'm always going to favour them. If I have a choice between a tanker champ, and a poke mage, I'll probably opt for the poke mage. Likewise with you and assassins, if you have the choice between an assassin and a roaming specialist, you'll probably pick the assassin. and thats okay! Don't be afraid of that, thats just your unique flair, and in such situations _***~~you should play what you are comfortable with.~~***_ I've won more games by playing my main into an unfavourable situation than picking a specific counter that I don't have much experience with. So like I said, take it slow, build up a pool of champs you're comfortable with that can plug different holes, and go from there. Don't jump straight in and think _"Im vsing Zed, so I NEED to play Lissandra, even though I've never player her!"_, thats not going to work. Good luck ^^ I hope this wall helped.
Rioter Comments
: Patch 9.3 notes
No Nasus nerfs? Okay then.....
: When I played him it didn't feel like that much more, but I was also playing him support so I hardly had the highest damage in the game. If it's problematic they'll nerf it.
I think the thing that makes me sceptical about towers and his passive, is that unlike Nasus etc, his looks and feels like an AoE ability, that happens around him rather than an on hit one. But I guess if Twisted Fate's red card works on towers then Sylas' isn't too abstract. Agreed though, if it's problematic, they'll stop it. I definitely haven't noticed it being a problem (like I said, I didn't even notice it at all at first). _(I want Azir's W tower damage back... whyyyy remove cool mechanics D,:)_
: Ult is a big issue, large range for a point and click ability Definitely needs to be a skill shot, and a blockable one at that, E second cast range needs an increase IMO, its his only major and safe engage, however the knock up is pointless The heal is a little oppressive, either increase CD, or decrease heal amount SUBSTANTIALLY Q is in a good place, easy enough to dodge, difficult enough to not be classified as skilless Passive shouldn't proc on towers, its actually ridiculous IMO, 600 (without lichbane proc) is stupid, either reduce its damage to structures (like to 50% or something) or remove the ability to use it on towers, his mana costs are too low for it to be like that, you can take out a tower at an insane speed
I don't think the ult is a big problem tbh, because it's more about how he uses it, rather than how he gets it. If he has to put in a ton of effort to grab an ult, and then has to put in a lot of effort to use the ult too, his own kit puts him at the disadvantage, when using an ult should give you an edge. Agreed that the passive shouldn't work on towers (tbh I didn't even know it did, I haven't been using it because I just assumed that it didn't work on them because why would it? it's an AoE.)
: Like all releases, he is strong as hell and will be nerfed in four weeks when sales die down. Zoe: Steals Summoner Spells Neeko: Steals appearances Sylas: Steals ults Riot is out of ideas.
I mean the idea of stealing ults has been floating around the fanbase for years, so it's not something they've just thought of. But if you're taking that approach, what about Jax/Garen/Xin/Voli etc who have been here since the beginning? So its not like they started out with tons of ideas and have been losing them.
Rioter Comments
: Nothings addressed
Why are you playing Ranked? Thats not so clever either, and it seems like the real problem to me. It's the beginning of the season, every Tom Dick Harry and all their dogs are going to be making a mad dash for ranked in the hope that they'll finally get placed in challenger, where they belong. They'll get placed in bronze/iron, play for a few more weeks get demoralised and realise they're not getting out, then stop playing ranked til next year. Also you have the actual good players who get placed lower than usual, and spend the next couple of weeks or so moving back up to where they belong. Either way, right now while the system is in flux, is the time where you are most likely going to have to contend with these people. So why, in the name of "logic" would you start your grind when theres a very high possibility that these two demographics will be placed in/against your teams? It makes absolutely no sense. Be patient. Wait a month: **Wait for** the tiers to even out, give it time for the bad players to fall below your elo and the good players to rise above it. So your games aren't likely to be negatively affected by either. **Wait for** any huge balance anomalies to be evened out over the next two patches. **Wait for** the new champ's hype to have simmered down so you don't have to waste a ban. **Wait for** any ranked issued (theres always some; LP gain/loss bugs, placement errors, etc.) to be ironed out. Let everyone who jumps straight into ranked on day 1 without thinking take the fall for all these problems. Then once everything has calmed down and evened out, then start playing ranked. The people in your bracket will be people who actually belong there and the system has had a month to put them there. Why take these unnecessary risks by starting ranked on day 1? Thats what really makes no sense here.
Rioter Comments
Nightjar (OCE)
: i mean, Zilean bombs, if you include their generous latch range have around the same range as lux's spells, gotta remember that it's 900 range+100latch range and 300 explosion radius, and upto approx 125 latch range if you juggle the latch with the targeting bug, and if you're using the triplecast dbl bomb combo on a minion and if you use the edge of the explosion to clip an enemy, Zilean's maximum effective range is between 1300-1325 range, over the top of a minion wave, with a very short cast time. This sounds very complicated, but since Q is Zilean's only damage spell, Zilean mains get pretty good at this gimmick within a few hundred games of practice. For the most part, this becomes a braindead habit, which is rarely punishing since it also hard shoves the wave and can zone the enemy away from your backline cs. Admittedly it can expend a bit of mana if the Zilean start's carelessly using this combo all the time, but Zilean's tend to opt for items like Ludens/RoA/Seraphs naturally anyway. Lux q has 1175 range and her e zone has an an absolute maximum 1310 range. So I'm not sure what you mean by Zilean having to move up or being outranged? The range difference is basically nothing, and since Zilean can already have increased movespeed from e, and cast whilst moving if he cancels the wind down from his q cast with a move command, it's much harder for the Lux to anticipate and reposition, dodge and capitalize on this very brief window when both champions are mutually in range. Also Zilean has dumb auto attack animation, since the windup for his projectile is very short and all his other spells can be used during the wind down, so it's often not safe to assume you can harass him when he's last hitting a melee creep. Since he may very well be eyeing one of your backline casters, to get his damage off on you, whilst eating the caster creeps and still not missing the melee last hit. Also TF q is nice poke if it lands, but otherwise it's good waveclear, he can use it for both simultaneously, so the acceptable projectile speed and damage is lower. It's a good bonus side effect, if it didn't damage minions or was blocked by minions or only did a small AoE splash damage on impact, it'd be alot worse of an ability. Zoe can be creative on how she wields her q, if she isn't trying to get a massive windup, it can be pretty difficult to dodge. The massive windup is really only when you have other cc on your target such as sleep or Nautilus. Not to mention the psuedo blink adds alot to the surprise factor of Zoe. I personally consider her more of an artillery assassin than a true poke mage. Viktor laser range is 1125, but again, it can be used for both waveclear and poke, at the same time and has a faster travel time, since whilst 1350 speed sounds slower, it's 1350 travelling down 500 units, rather than 1200 travelling down 1175, and once upgraded the repeat damage is a good zoning tool. And I guess I'll correct myself, Lux is pretty long range, but she's sort of a member of the 'annoying range' club than a true poke mage, especially since her spell travel times, mean that opponents will often move back, and make her range sometimes feel shorter (against a 600+ movespeed Zilean, you will definitely feel your spell's travel times being sluggish).
I will admit It sounds like I have a lot less experience with Zilean than you. I see him only now and then, and usually all I see is him ulting himself and leaving the ADC to the wolves. Admittedly I didn't take the double bomb clipping into account, I only used the base range and the initial latch. So with that additional range, he may well be a competitor for Lux! _(we have now gone out of my experience with Zilean so I'm having to take your word for it)_. Assuming you're good with that gimmick I can see how he might be a pain for her. Either way, it sounds like he still has to put in a lot more effort to hit her than she does to hit him though. especially if he has to use 3 spells just to land any damage at all, and even then can only match her range through a gimmick that needs a lot of practice for. So regardless of who **_can_** get the better poke, it still seems like in terms of effort, Lux is still "Input < Outcome" while Zilean is "Input = Outcome". But I haven't played or Vsed a Zilean in mid for a long time, and certainly not with/against Lux in recent memory, so i'm not going to stake my life on that. Twisted Fate's Q is good wave clear, but in my opinion some of the best pokers/harassers can poke without passively pushing too hard. Twisted Fate pushes waves hard just by **_trying_** to poke, so does Xerath, Velkoz etc. Which inevitably opens themselves up to ganks. _(which as immobile squishies is often the last thing you want to do.)_ People like Annie and Vladimir, may not have the best poke, in terms of poke itself. But because they have these completely reusable low CD single target abilities, they can harass the enemy down without touching any minions at all, and thus keep the lane frozen wherever they need while forcing the enemy away from the minions. Where as Xerath/Vel/TF etc, always end up under the enemy tower before long, if they're trying to poke. So while Annie and Vlad etc aren't long range artillery mages, their ability to poke without pushing make them just as scary. So poking abilities with great wave clear aren't necessarily always good. Dont get me started on Viktor's laser, I hate vsing that thing. It's so hard to predict, and it IS fast, like you say. > against a 600+ movespeed Zilean, you will definitely feel your spell's travel times being sluggish No arguing with that. Most spells feel sluggish already, the MS creep in this game has gotten worse and worse. Trying to hit people with abilities like Taliyah's W or Karthus' Q isn't getting any easier.. Movement speed has become a powerhouse of a stat in the past year or so.
Show more

Lord Sesshomaru

Level 10 (OCE)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion