DutchPro (EUW)
: Yeah but it seems stupid. I have a clip of playing malphite. I ulted but a J4 ulted my teammate standing next to me, causing my ult to fall short. Why is an unstoppable ult stopped by an appearing wall. Normally malphite can ult through terain, so there is no reason for it to stop the ult. I feel like this isn't supposed to happen compared to the things that you described
I can't really say without seeing the footage, but I agree that it does sound completely different. What would make sense, to me, is if the landing spot of the ultimate would have left your Malphite stuck inside the space of a wall, it would push you until you are no longer inside a wall? Same reason for why you can Flash over some far-too-thick walls. Other than that, no clue.
: That is very interesting, I give thanks to you for writing it... (I have experienced that, but I never "truly" knew how it worked, and now I do)
I'm glad it's been useful! I think everyone has witnessed these interactions, but few realize how and why they work. Maybe this helps someone learn how to predict these effects.
: I think I can confirm the fact that getting (heavy-)CC'd during the casting of a movement ability (like (at least) Tristana's W and Ezreal's E) doesn't affect the ability itself, but still retains the effects (like stun and root) after the ability is "finished" (Was that any useful or did I just re-explain what you explained?)
Checked some YouTube vids and you're correct in adding the part about damage and effects. Ezreal will negate the pull but take damage and be stunned.
: Being an Udyr main since Season 3, I learnt to attack move click in bear stance when WW is nearby, As he flies and ults me, I'd bear slap him over the face, insta-cancelling his ult. Bit of a random post,what you did there... however might be quite informative to some newcomers xD
I suppose it is, lol. Just got inspired to write it, so why not. I don't think I've ever seen anyone else talk about these interactions being under a noticeable, predictable rule; instead people talk about bugs and lag. I'm convinced that these interactions are supposed to work like this.
11wildy (EUW)
: The Darius example I've noticed a lot. But shouldn't it work the same for Garen ult? I've seen people flash away after I've casted my ult so many times it's not even funny.
I'm not sure, Garen isn't one of my more played champs. I think that I've seen it work like Darius' most of the time though?
: I think you shouldn't call step 2 channeling. This term has specific meaning seperate from casting animation. Channeling can be interrupted by CC - see Katarina's ultimate or Anivia's for example. They keep going on because they are being channeled. This is why Fiddle can be interrupted before the ultimate goes off and Lux or Ezreal can't. Final Spark and Trueshot Barrage have no channel time, just cast time.
You're right, made necessary edits. Thank you! {{sticker:slayer-pantheon-thumbs}}
Shukr4n (EUW)
: I disnt understand 100% the thead conclusion. . Maybe too early for me.. dunno Lux ult iant interrupted while channeling. Any conclusion about her?
Not 100% sure. Could be that, like Warwick, Lux has an "instant" cast time, and the red laser-pointer exists during the "flight time", when the ability is already launched and therefore not interruptable. [edit] And I might treat Lux's ult like a global skillshot, i.e. Independent from the champion's state post- step 3. Like Ezreal and his ult.
Rioter Comments
Nakoruru (EUNE)
: First of all, runes are not something you pick once and for life. Just give it a try at custom game (where you can wind up the time) or at normal game. There's rune stats panel next to your portrait which will tell you the same I'm going to: The rune displays total bonus for each milestone.
> The rune displays total bonus for each milestone. Thank you, that's all I needed. Quick question, quick answer, yeah?
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: I believe this is true and untrue at the same time, matchmacking (from what i've previously read) only cares about mmr, but the thing is, what's mmr ? mmr is the "sum" of a lot of different factors, to not let people manipulate matchmacking rito doesn't tell us what exactly makes up our mmr, but stuff like rank, wining streaks, loss streaks etc, might or might not be part of what makes your mmr Hence, saying that matchmacking only cares about your mmr is true, but saying that it doesn't take into concideration what makes up your mmr would be wrong Imo
Great point. This might also be why matchmaking explicitly does not take into account rank, wins/losses, kills etc, separate from mmr; those may all be already considered when calculating mmr. I guess at that point it's just slavery with extra steps.
: there is always the option to dodge if you're in a role you're not comfortable in and lose 3 lp or potentially lose around 20lp by playing it out.... i'd rather dodge and wait a few minutes and re-queue
Honestly, a valid strategy for anyone who accepts the penalty of waiting.
Enjutsu (EUNE)
: I see others have awnsered most of your questions so i jsut want to add something else. [Ask.riot Will you ever implement ranks for different roles](http://nexus.leagueoflegends.com/2017/05/ask-riot-what-about-sexy-guys/) What you're aking is basiclly that.
Absolutely in the right ball-park, though my consideration is in line with what Riot there suggested in terms of a linked, overall score. I didn't mean having separate borders and icons and ranks per role; you'd still officcially be a Plat 1 player. Maybe the adjustments would have be smaller because of this, I don't know.
: >This is very interesting, as I have since the beginning been under the impression that matchmaking takes into account a lot more than base mmr. That is to say, I've been under this impression for close to 5 years. Team Builder came out about 4 years ago and as far as I am aware did actually modify your MMR based on whether or not you were trying a new champion/position, which might be why. Definitely agree that players who main a position will be stronger in that position than other positions (I'm like this with mid). On the whole though I don't think it makes sense to alter a players MMR in this way. One potential (but narrowly exploitable) case would be if a player had a smurf (or was a second account, or something) and queued in promotional series on a secondary role. This would reduce the skill level of players that the player was playing with (or against) and thus modify the chances of winning in the players favour, potentially. Additionally this would make switching roles every few months the easiest way of climbing ranked. (Note that I don't work on the team that decides any of this).
Oh shet, we have red attention. The possible secondary role exploit is certainly an issue. Then again, that might need to be looked at within the context of how disruptive smurf accounts are as a whole, and whether the secondary role queuing makes enough of a difference on top of the existing smurfing advantage. One "exploit" I have been taking advantage of, myself, is being present by the queue timer and refreshing it each time it reaches the estimation. Since I'm judged by my midlane skill, I want to ensure that I get what I'm judged for. I will say that switching roles every few months sounds appealing as a concept. It would promote versatility, maybe we'd even see more people with a newfound respect for their supports. Ha, who am I kidding. I figure there has to be limitations to the concept, but maybe there's potential in it. Can't say I have the expertise to tell.
Smerk (EUW)
: Well, it's basically all written there https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/201752954 > Does the system use any information from the Leagues system when building matches for Ranked queues? > > No. The system does not use your LP, progression status, tier, division, or any other piece of League information. And about this > you cannot be matchmade with or against players beyond 1 rank above or below your own (e.g. golds can't play with bronzes or diamonds, in ranked) well, it's true, but not because of some restriction that matchmaker has, it's just not possible to have gold MMR while being in bronze or diamond
This is very interesting, as I have since the beginning been under the impression that matchmaking takes into account a lot more than base mmr. That is to say, I've been under this impression for close to 5 years. In any case, I think my original concern may still be valid; a player's mmr may vary greatly depending on position. What do you think? Since the new client is very good at tracking Mastery, and improvements have been made to allow queuing up in a particular position, could the "Join Queue" action send a package to the matchmaker, containing the player's distinct mmr for each position on the team? Or should it instead be valued higher to have a player be equally competent in every role?
Smerk (EUW)
: Right now matchmaking only cares about MMR. It tries to give everyone his primary role, but overall it doesn't care. All other things, like rank and solo/duo are completely ignored
What you are saying conflicts with the information I have recieved from multiple other sources. I would love to read confirmation, if you can provide it? I know with certainty that at least rank _is_ taken into account, as you cannot be matchmade with or against players beyond 1 major rank above or below your own (e.g. golds can't play with bronzes or diamonds, in ranked)
  Rioter Comments
Febos (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Clapper,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=J1QzN2mk,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2017-09-17T22:52:20.924+0000) > > At any rate, someone like you, _who I assume, based on your own words_ holds themselves to a high moral standard, would never bully the poor little people in SoloQ with your premade friend, right? I don't hold myself on high moral. I have many flaws, but being selfish is not one of them. Other than that, you'd be correct. I would rather not play with a Duo. Not because I don't want to "bully" Solo players, but because playing Solo makes the match-making that much forgiving for me. Sure, I may be matched with Duos on either team, but their individual skill will most likely be inferior to mine. That narrative of "Duos bulling Solo players" is nonsense. > Not basing on, but supporting with. I'm surprised that you misunderstood that. Smurfs, boosters, etc, are so insignificant in the large population of players what their effects are null, thus supporting any argument with that is pointless.
> Smurfs, boosters, etc, are so insignificant in the large population of players what their effects are null, thus supporting any argument with that is pointless. I strongly disagree, in statistical analysis even "outliers" need to be noted and considered. You seem to forget that this matter was brought up in relation to matchmaking; computer-determined, algortihm-based, _statistical_, and absolutely tweaked to consider unnatural shifts in an account's skill preformance. This need not be a large cornerstone of the argument, but I do want to bring it along for the ride. Edit: I'm also very very sorry that my colourful language in the word "bully" once again provided a hook for you to latch onto.
Febos (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Clapper,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=J1QzN2mk,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2017-09-17T04:46:36.855+0000) > > I find this pretty funny, cause somehow the assumption is that selfishness is bad. Be selfish all you want, you have no obligation to accommodate the wishes of anyone else. You are defending "selfishness" as if it was a good thing. News flash, it isn't. Selfishness is a "good" thing when you are on the better end of the deal. Our ego is one of the things that can corrupt us and selfishness is just another word for "big ego". > [{quoted}](name=Clapper,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=J1QzN2mk,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2017-09-17T04:46:36.855+0000) > > However, what Febos here is failing to account for, is that there may be a surprisingly big amount of players who are frustrated with "SoloQ&quot. > ... > I could wager real money that the vote for/against a _solo_ SoloQ would be very close, and I'd of course hope to see my own side hold the majority. Do you have the numbers? Because I don't. Feel free to provide me with those if you have them. Regardless of which "d*ck" is bigger, you can't please both sides. I agree with you though, the ammount of players that prefer Solo vs Duo may be almost 50/50. > [{quoted}](name=Clapper,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=J1QzN2mk,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2017-09-17T04:46:36.855+0000) > > There's more to this than "wah I want voice chat wah". I in fact dread the thought of voice chat, and am likely to perma-mute it upon its inevitable release. But that's exactly what the OP is complaining about. He's complaining that Duos have an advantage over Solos, even after all the skill balacing the system tries to achieve. That advantage, in the OP's words, is attributed to the ability to communicate through voice-chat. > [{quoted}](name=Clapper,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=J1QzN2mk,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2017-09-17T04:46:36.855+0000) > > I believe we have enough matchmaking complications with smurf accounts, shared accounts, boosting and the like. > Separating those who want a genuine lone wolf -experience from the rest would be nothing but healthy for the game. And I absolutely believe Riot has the resources to make it happen, **the demand is just not loud enough yet**. Smurfs, shared accounts, etc, are a minority. Don't base your argument around them. The second part is where you start to contradict yourself. If so many players want the Solo experience why aren't them louder? I mean, people asked a few things for a long time and they happened: sandbox, replay system, better masteries, solo/duo and dynamic queues, gamemodes, more lore, more transparancy, etc. Things like "better lore" were asked by a minority. If Solo players are such a sizeable group (I'm not saying they aren't), why hasn't what they've asked for happened yet? Maybe because it isn't black and white like you think. *** Back when Dynamic Queue was still a thing, I was against the idea of briging back Solo/Duo AND keeping Dynamic. I was certain they couldn't sustain both queues in a healthy manner. So far it seems I was wrong. If you want to introduce yet another queue type, then of course I'll be against it, for the same reason I was before. If they can assure an healthy and balanced queue for all modes, then go ahead and make as many of them as you want. I'm was never against the Solo Queue idea. I'll just keep saying "look at the bigger picture". *** > [{quoted}](name=Clapper,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=J1QzN2mk,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2017-09-17T04:46:36.855+0000) > > The only "sides" that exist in the ranked community, relevant to this discussion, would be the frequent SoloQ-ers and the frequent DuoQ-ers. I wonder which side is more numerous. > So, let's not be bad researchers and just assume that OP here is the odd one out. > However, I don't think a majority vote is necessary. Anywhere in the range of 35-45% (a realistic expectation) is well enough to justify the establisment of a _solo_ SoloQ. Let's imagine the reverse. Imagine there's no such thing as Duo Queue, only Solo. What happens to those that want to play as a Duo, such as ADC+Support or X+Y? Would you make a new queue, Duo Queue, just for those players? If so, it couldn't be just for Duos since each team as 5 players and not a multiple of 2. In that case, you'd need Solo/Duo Q, the system we have now. At this point you have the first one, Solo Q, and the new one, Solo/Duo Q. Those two are overlapping. Do you really think a Solo player would ever want to play in the Solo/Duo Q mode? This is not even considering if both queues have enough players to sustain them. As you can see, if Solo Q exists, Solo/Duo won't, at least logically it shouldn't. That's the "bigger picture" I keep talking about. To have one you can't have the other, at least not in a healthy and longlasting way. *** The same argument could be made for Flex Q. It exists alongside Solo/Duo, so maybe Solo and Solo/Duo could work. But as I was skeptical before I'm still now. I don't think you can sustain overlapping queues. ######That's one of the reasons why they restricted Flex Q to groups of 3 or less. In a group of 4 it's harder to find the 5th player. *** For the OP I'm pretty sure the solution is what I said: voice-chat. For you it may be something different: remove Solo/Duo and keep Solo alongside Flex. That way you can have the "lone-wolf" and the group experience.
> You are defending "selfishness" as if it was a good thing. News flash, it isn't. Extra, extra! Yeah, it is. The discussion of human psychology is way too complex to bother with in this thread, but remind yourself of the features humans posess, that have brought us this far. One of those features is selfishness. Besides, it's an incredibly natural state; just look at wildlife, and the food chain that we stand on top of. Consider me old and jaded, but I can't be bothered with moral high horses regarding good and evil. I'll pursue what benefits me the most, and %%%% those who don't like it. And if you wonder why I don't rob and steal, seeing as I'm so very selfish, that's because I'd get caught and punished, and that wouldn't benefit me at all. > For the OP I'm pretty sure the solution is what I said: voice-chat. For you it may be something different: remove Solo/Duo and keep Solo alongside Flex. That way you can have the "lone-wolf" and the group experience. Well hey, thanks for reiterating the point I was getting at. Flex queue is distinct from the other queues because you have a far more fluid system of premades. With Flex in existence, and holding its very own ranked ladder, it's hard to see an excuse for duos to be allowed into SoloQ. I consider it an exploit. There is no need for a DuoQ, either. Just send duos into Ranked Flex where nearly everyone else is in the same boat. Unless you consider 3-man premades unfair? And on the topic of selfishness; hey, congrats, you get to bring a higher elo friend to piggy back you up the ladder. Well done, you've selfishly used what I call an available, legalized exploit. I'm not being sarcastic. Since it's provided by the developers, you haven't broken the laws of the land. At any rate, someone like you, _who I assume, based on your own words_ holds themselves to a high moral standard, would never bully the poor little people in SoloQ with your premade friend, right? Of course not, you are above such exploits. You are the kind, fair, and benevolent person who takes their premade to Flex. If you felt a sting in your kind heart, consider the implications; you may not be as selfless as you percieve yourself. If it has to be explicitly declared, my concern here is to _change the laws of the land,_ and remove this "exploit" in a proper, democratic manner. If my side of the argument is too small to make the change, that's unfortunate. But, in the spirit of a selfish world view, I can accept that outcome. Because you don't have to give a heck about what someone wants, not until that group is big enough to have you concerned. To answer your curiosity about why the voice isn't loud enough yet, I'm sure you're clever enough to think of a few reasons. I personally believe it's only a matter of time, like many things. > Smurfs, shared accounts, etc, are a minority. Don't base your argument around them. Not basing on, but supporting with. I'm surprised that you misunderstood that. Oh, and emotional players like OP are the very reason I dread the inevitable inclusion of voice chat. I believe once that exists, premades will continue to frustrate solo players, and then all of us will get to listen to the beutiful serenade of {{sticker:sg-shisa}}
Febos (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=QuantumHorse,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=J1QzN2mk,comment-id=,timestamp=2017-09-17T03:30:22.996+0000) > > Why is this such a difficult concept to understand Riot. No buddy, you are the one that needs to understand how this stuff works. Let's go with the flow of your idea then. Imagine you have 4 groups of Duos, 8 players in total. You can assign 2 Duos for each team, but then who fills the last two spots? How can you find a 5th player for each team that ISN'T Solo? It's impossible. What you are asking for just doesn't exist. In an ideal system Solo players would only be matched with Solo players, but for that Duos can't exist. For you this might be fine, but at this point you are just being selfish. Besides, you are not looking at the bigger picture. Over a large ammount of games the ammount of "unfair" games would be equalized for both sides. > some players think that one team having the ability to communicate through discord/teamspeak etc and our team does not is completely fair. > ... > In a game where communication is a key factor, I believe it is time that Riot acknowledged how much third-party voice clients are ruining the game. Well, you can communicate with your team through other means. But I wonder, maybe you are complaining about the wrong thing. Why aren't you complaining about the lack of voice-chat in League? Wouldn't that be a better solution for your "problem"? We could eliminate the source of this "unfairness" by having a built-in voice-chat in League. Food for your thoughts. > The answer is this... Riot, make a Solo Only Queue for draft mode pick on both normal and ranked so that we do not have to put up with this on a daily basis. Wow wow. Slow down fella. I can partially support you in the "Solo Only" for ranked, but asking the same for normal games? Are you for real? Normal games are for casuals. That system is fine as is. Going back to what I said earlier, you are just being selfish. You may want the "Solo Only" experience, but there are others that don't. If you don't have, or don't want, friends to play League with you that's your problem. Don't expect everyone else to be on board. Now, that isn't to say that "Solo Only" mode couldn't be a thing for Ranked, but you need to look at the bigger picture. > Nobody EVER comes out an says what a massive advantage having a premade with voice communication is in this game. Maybe because it's obvious? You don't go around saying "Look guys, the sky is blue", or do you? You are blowing this out of proportion. It's true that having a premade, with or without voice communication, helps a lot, but at the end of the day the system was built in such a way that it accounts for that. Did you know that premade parties are matched with higher individual skill players? > How exactly is that fair. I would happily have a longer queue time, if it meant having a fairer, more balanced and more fun matchmaking experience. Again, you are just thinking about yourself. You may not care to wait a few more minutes, but others do. Regardless, it seems to me that your problem is the following: premades have the ability to communicate through voice and that's unfair. The solution: built-in voice-chat.
I find this pretty funny, cause somehow the assumption is that selfishness is bad. Be selfish all you want, you have no obligation to accommodate the wishes of anyone else. That said, the same works in reverse; Riot doesn't have to give a %%%% what one person prefers. What in my opinion is immature, almost as immature as OP's emotional tone, is judging someone for being selfish. However, what Febos here is failing to account for, is that there may be a surprisingly big amount of players who are frustrated with "SoloQ" being nothing more than a name. I count myself among those ranks, and absolutely wish to see a _solo_ SoloQ in ranked (for reference, the games I play are between 95% and 99% Ranked SoloQ). Now, I'm not quite as emotionally invested as OP here, but I do agree with him. There's more to this than "wah I want voice chat wah". I in fact dread the thought of voice chat, and am likely to perma-mute it upon its inevitable release. There's little logic in "accounting" for premades, when this leads to far more complicated decisions regarding whose solo-mmr is equal to two premades' mmr. I believe we have enough matchmaking complications with smurf accounts, shared accounts, autofill, boosting and the like. Separating those who want a genuine lone wolf -experience from the rest would be nothing but healthy for the game. And I absolutely believe Riot has the resources to make it happen, the demand is just not loud enough yet. When we use basic logic, of course it seems fair and balanced that if everyone can duo, "both sides" are equal. It's only unfair if "one side" can duo and the other can't. Problem is that there are no "sides" outside of matchmaking. As soon as the game is over and until the next one starts, there's just individuals. The only "sides" that exist in the ranked community, relevant to this discussion, would be the frequent SoloQ-ers and the frequent DuoQ-ers. I wonder which side is more numerous. So, let's not be bad researchers and just assume that OP here is the odd one out. I could wager real money that the vote for/against a _solo_ SoloQ would be very close, and I'd of course hope to see my own side hold the majority. However, I don't think a majority vote is necessary. Anywhere in the range of 35-45% (a realistic expectation) is well enough to justify the establisment of a _solo_ SoloQ.
Sideswip (EUW)
: You think i just wanna leave because i'm tired of flaming at the flamers? All you're saying is that skins should replace game-modes. I'm a very calm person, but watching the comunity flame at eachother game after game for the last 3 or 4 freaking seasons rly started to affect me as well. Hell..they flame even in normal games. They need to make something new..like a permanent URF, because remaking the aram map 6 times is not "something new", making even more skins is "not something new" and adding a color palette is "not something new". Eat the same freaking ice-cream since the since the end of season 1 and see if you like it. The community needs to me fixed(at least the community, but this would be a huge thing to start with). My point is that...as boring as the game become recently, the worst part is still the community. The players the yell on the chat since the 2nd min in-game or the "i do afk" type bother me a lot. You don't understand most of it because you don't try try to find a solution to it. you are one of those that barely spots the tip of the iceberg and if you get a new skin, you look the other way around. I am tired of trying to help both sides in a conflict in-game, to convince players that going afk is not the real solution, but nowadays i have to do this every game.
I know this reply comes quite late, I have spent a few months off of league entirely. It not that I don't understand. It's that I don't much care. Is it my problem that some children can't get along on my team? Wait about 20 more minutes, and no, it no longer is. Once you zoom out a bit, looking at the game as a whole rather than single matches, things fall much more into perspective. The game is about far more than destroying a nexus. Of course it gets boring if you think like that! Killing a nexus over and over and over and... ugh. But no, the game is on a far larger scale than that. In fact, I would argue that making rune pages and masteries, strategizing for specific matchups, and even considering how to make a funny team comp viable, doing that means you are already playing the game. And you haven't even started matchmaking yet! The game could still benefit from a casual queue, where winning nets players exactly nothing, absolutely jack sh*t. The simple tweak of removing winning rewards and loss punishments would likely cull the players who flame and grief. Someone feeds? So what, I wouldn't have gotten any IP anyway. Imagine a queue where you can play any champion, with any skin, against real players in very real matches (but with zero tangible rewards). In fact, a queue like this kinda exists already: the PBE. The root problem is that some people want to play casually in a competitive game. The only real solution is a "kiddie pool" where these players can enjoy themselves to the fullest, without competitive pressure. The bottom line, which I'll finally leave this debate with, is this: The game, or the community, will not change for the better as long as it is so fiercely competitive. Pick {{champion:7}} and 5 people will already be wishing death upon your family before the loading screen has come up. Why? Because they want to _**win**_, everyone wants to have an impact on the game. And they know you'll be assassinating every squishy you see for the next 30 minutes. Nobody wants to spend a third of the match time dead. As long as we play to **_win_**, we'll be flaming everyone that stops us from doing just that. And I don't think I need to type out why League will never turn full casual like HotS. The best they can do is a kiddie pool.
Sideswip (EUW)
: I'm seriously thinking about leaving the legue. I've been playing the game singe season 1, tons of wins under my belt and achieved the "high elo". The comunity is trash nowadays, nothing new added to the game and the thing that pissed me the most is "chroma skins" for RP. Every year has a single meta where you either pick the same 15champs or you get reported. Every new thing they add it to the game costs RP, no new improvments or something to incourage you to play. Blizzard has less experience with MOBAs yet their game is way more fun. And don't give me that "LoL is a free game" piece of crap because it's not like they make no money out of it(hell..it's actully one of the most profitable games on the market)...they could use those money to buy some creativity
1. I agree, the community is to a large extent repulsive. But if you aren't part of the fix, you're part of the problem. Nothing is going to improve if you just sit and complain. - 2. In this month alone, Riot has pushed out the second ever Urf, Battlegrounds, the second Party IP weekend ever (as far as I know), 11 new skins (one of them legendary) with another 4 coming in patch 5.8, 8 champion updates, visual or other, with more on the way (looking at you, Ashe). Yeah, nothing new added to the game. At all. {{item:3070}} - 3. Sorry to break it to you, but people like money. Riot loves money. I love money. You would not complain about RP if you didn't love money too. You can sit on a bench in the park for free, but you can't grab an ice cream without paying for it. Enjoy the F2P bench, pay for bonus ice cream skins, or leave. - 4. Within the realm of MOBA's, HotS is vastly different from LoL. Their focus is on casual, short games on a far more simple level than LoL. No items, the entire team shares their XP, permanent level up choices, these factors lead to a game that is naturally designed to be more casual. League is far from casual, that's why we have Worlds (HotS likely never will, not on the same level). Where you'll play HotS for a few games to kill time and have a laugh, LoL tends to demand a lot of time and commitment, and a more serious attitude. Not your cup of tea? Au revoir. {{summoner:6}} - The only complaint I've had about League is the heavy load their programs put on computers, especially after a few hours. Slap League, Razer Synapse and your generic team speak program on all at once, and my 8gb of RAM is barely enough to handle it after some time. Once my frames stop dropping to 3 whenever i purchase an item, I'll hail this game above all others. - Quit complaining about not getting endless free ice cream, if you want to play MOBA's casually then **_please_**, do move over to HotS. Surely you won't get bored of **THAT** in four seasons.

Clapper

Level 40 (EUNE)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion