Sasser (EUNE)
: I think this game would be far less toxic if all the "nice" people were getting banned instead
Morrhen (EUW)
: I love you. {{sticker:sg-jinx}}
Why, thank you. :)
Morrhen (EUW)
: You forgot that Riot added Ezreal to support champion list. Garen E was removed. No sign of spinning in the cinematic. Galio game model size increased.
Garen spun once before he used Q on Sylas. I guess he accidentally cancelled it to early or just used it to clear the wave to avoid minion aggro. Must be a Grasp of the Undying build and not Conqueror. This might actually suggest that Conqueror is stealth nerfed.
Gojkov (EUW)
: What about Galio, Sylas and Malzahar?
Updated with Sylas and Urgot. I think Galio got a fear on his ult as everybody stopped attacking and it apparently cancelled Sylas R, but i have to check again. I'm not sure about Malzahar yet. Either his W has no CD anymore or this is a new star guardian game mode. I'm still waiting for more info.
: > [{quoted}](name=Zanador,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=IMWgrPv1,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2020-01-09T23:43:46.615+0000) > > Nice. I'm getting close to my own 10th year too (somewhere at the end of january) and it's interesting to see how similarly you handled your accounts. I hoard the champ shards not the capsules and only have 1 account, but aside from that everything seems quite familiar. > > Keep having fun and let's see what Riot has in store in the next decade! :) Thank you yeah I saw somebody sometime ago collection all champions as shards :D that's interesting idea also :D
I think it looks better that way, but those shards can definitely flood the side menu. :D
Rioter Comments
: My League Legacy
Nice. I'm getting close to my own 10th year too (somewhere at the end of january) and it's interesting to see how similarly you handled your accounts. I hoard the champ shards not the capsules and only have 1 account, but aside from that everything seems quite familiar. Keep having fun and let's see what Riot has in store in the next decade! :)
Sefiroz (EUW)
: While I agree that it's not difficult to autofill every once in a while(it very rarely happens) I also think that there could be something in place that only activates autofill during extensive queue time periods(maybe 5+ or 10+ minutes). At certain times the system notices you're not autofill protected and proceeds to not even look 2 minutes for your selected roles before autofilling you. My point is that the autofilling right now, even if pretty rare, seems very inconsistent {{sticker:sg-zephyr}}
That was pretty much the original version. It had to be changed because people just kept restarting their queue if it took longer than 90 seconds or if they got the warning that autofill was active at that time. Your idea is good and it was the first thing Riot wanted as well, but the human element is an important factor.
: remove your autofill!!!
If anyone forced you to lose that match, then it was you when you chose to not practice each role to a passable level at least. In the end it comes down to skill and practice.
Kageth (EUNE)
: and this is exactly why this problem will never end, because people think its okay to go 0/6 adc on lane, say whoops sorry team, and go next to do it all over again without feeling guilt or realizing where the problem is
Feeling guilt is pointless. Anyone who wants to improve should look back at most if not all of their matches and find things they should do better in the future. Emotions are a distraction from this. By the way, even those who won with a stat of 30-0-30 should do the same. Everyone can improve and objectively looking back at the past match is just as important even if you did well.
Pixelbits (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=DelusionalPillow,realm=EUNE,application-id=Mpd1UjGe,discussion-id=EW9i0Bzs,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2020-01-08T01:22:18.059+0000) > > I just explained to you that numbers don't work like this, the ones that will chose to not autofill will ruin the queue times for everybody, so no not everybody win. I get where you're coming from, example: - Player A chooses protected queue - Player B chooses auto fill queue Player A has to wait 10 minutes and player B has to wait 3 minutes, but because player B cannot find a game, he is forced to wait till player A has found a game (or aka, forced to also wait 10 minutes). Yes, in this case I can see a problem, but aren't you overlooking the fact that alot of players play LoL on EUW? When the population is big enough, it shouldn't affect it that much, since there's always people that want queue up. Besides that, it will only cause an problem when there are more people choosing for protected queue than auto fill queue. And if people want to, they can just seperate protected queue from auto fill queue. People that choose protected queue will only be paired up with people from protected queue (the reason why it causes longer queue times) and players that chose auto fill, with people from auto fill. Again, the possibility is certainly there.
Well, you are half right. There are enough people queuing up on EUW, but that's not the same as enough people for every role and especially not the same amount of player for every role. Let's say as a low estimate example that mid is 10% more popular than support, so for every 10 support players we have 11 mids who want protected queue. So after 10 matches are started, 1 mid player is still in the queue. After 100 matches it's 10. Considering that EUW has somewhere around 22-27 million players, how much extra time do you figure this would make as it adds up? And there are the extremities, high and low elo. On the top of the ladder there are naturally few players, so when Riot implemented role selection but didn't include autofill yet, queue times ended up over an hour long. Depending on the server and time, there were streamers who had to wait up to one and a half hour for each match. They were all playing whole different games on stream while they were waiting for a League queue. At the bottom of the ladder the situation is reversed, but similar: there are a lot of players in the queue, but they tend to have very few supports too, since people generally don't enjoy supporting a low elo team. This might have improved a bit with the release of Pyke and Senna who are basically a free ticked to play assassin or ADC and still claim that you are a support. Either way, while there are way more people in the queue, any difference in the role distribution would also add up faster. ----------------- Finally, you might want to look it up yourself or wait for someone who is better informed than i am, but as far as i know, Riot has tried to give players the option to opt out of autofill as a test on one of their servers. The queues got so messed up that the test had to be stopped within days. But in the meantime if you want to check a similar theory at practice, then look no further than Flex queue. Teams of 4 still can't queue up for it, because each would require a solo player to "fill" the last spot (not role, just the spot), and well, solo players already have a separate queue that's a bit closer to being protected, the solo/duo queue. So Flex simply has too few solo players because of an alternative option. Not exactly the same, but a very similar situation.
HÔPÊ (EUW)
: Why I don't enjoy winning anymore.
Assassins used to have two simple jobs: either kill the enemy carry from behind their team before they do too much damage to yours or if your team has a hypercarry, then kill the enemy assassin who is trying to do the same. It was fine even if you died in the process, just get the job done. It was a simple but well defined and important role and what's more, only assassins and a very few other champions could do it. Now since most champions can kill ADCs in 1v1 the job description pretty much changed to "cause as much trouble as you can and don't let them safely ward and group for objectives". This possibly reflects a healthier state of the game and an overall higher player skill level, but the job of the assassins is not as well defined and definitely not something only they can do. In season 3 i picked Akali, LB or Shaco when they were needed in the team and someone had to kill that Kog'Maw as soon as possible. Now if i pick them i do it because i wanted to play them since at least 40 other champion could do just fine in their place.
PurpleOrk (EUW)
: Each one of those bots (and imagine how many there are, that you INSTANTLY join a match the moment you search for it, with 4 bots ready there) is leveling an account to 30, that then will be sold. The new owner obviously has no problem with spending real money in this "free to play" game, so they will buy their favorite stuff like skins and such. The reason for this being such a problem is because it's a MASSIVE income for Riot, and it will never be tackled on bot stage. Sorry if your experience suffers, but business is business.
Bought accounts actually carry a high opportunity cost for Riot, so it's not financially good for them to allow their existence. So they ban bots in waves. An argument can be made for increasing the frequency of these ban waves, especially seeing how much trouble they cause in EUW and coop games and i'm in support of a change like that. But it's also worth noting that there might be technical reasons for the slow ban wave rate and Riot might not be able to talk about the subject for the sake of security.
: Because you assume riot would be the only supplier... all that creates is another arms race, and also seriously undermines riot’s authority (buying accounts is against the rules and will get that account banned, obviously if Riot starts selling accounts they can’t ban bot accounts anymore) It’s just a giant can of worms that riot really don’t wanna open, and for good reason
They could still ban for it, just like they can ban for illegally using official skins. No, the problem comes from a different angle: price + the usual supply and demand. A lot of other games, mainly MMORPGs sell character leveling tokens officially and technically Riot could do that, but that would come with it's own avalance of consequences. If they set the price too high, then they won't do anything to discourage illegal account selling. But if the price is too low, then they risk smurfs causing a lot more problem than they do now. So while i find the suggestion on it's own to be viable, i also think that the consequences could potentially cause way more harm than good.
: How to beat Illaoi in Laning because her E deals a lot of damage from me.
Fighting Illaoi is a bit counter-intuitive, because against most champions you want to focus on doing your optimal damage output. In other words, normally you win trades by doing your own combo right. Against Illaoi your focus is on not letting her to do her own combo perfectly: If she manages to pull your soul with 1-2 tentacles in range, you will be hit for a lot. So make sure to avoid this combo instead of doing your own first. 1. Dodging E is your priority. Morde's spells are slow and he stops moving to cast them, so only use them from the cover of your minion wave or not at all until she misses her E first. 2. Destroy the tentacles when you get the chance. 3. If she pulled your soul, then use your own E as a response. You know where she will be, so you either land your own pull and start your own combo or you slow down hers. 4. Keep your ult as a counter to hers. As mentioned before, if she uses her ult, then answer it with your own and she won't have any tentacles in the arena. At that point you have the advantage. This duel can be just as annoying for both of you, but only if you do things at your own pace and don't allow Illaoi to dictate the terms. Keep your skills to counter hers and remember what you need them to do. You might also want to invest into some anti-heal options in the mid game.
: RITO - The Child Made Company
When i was new to this here internet thing, there used to be a phrase that was often used: "don't feed the troll". It's relevant application means that if you get trolled, don't flame back because that only encourages the troll to continue it's behavior both in your match and in the ones to follow. Maybe the community is in it's current state because young players like you never learned this lesson.
MrLukaUbica (EUNE)
: I hate this community
Sorry, but no. You were never banned for getting bad teammates. Everyone gets them and most of us don't get banned. You were banned for being toxic. And no, not everybody enjoys being toxic or being around people who behave like that. Everyone here agrees with you that Riot should improve their troll detection system, but the behavior of others do not excuse yours.
Ratatouka (EUW)
: why is the icon for alistar's q a penis?
Freud and Rorschach would like to know your location.
: Are macros allowed ?
As Shaked said: Riot's stance seems to be that anything that changes the game between the champ selection and the stats screen at the end can result in a ban. Gameplay affecting macros are included. Chat related ones are probably safe. Keep in mind that Riot can detect macros, but as far as i've heard, they usually ban them in waves along with other cheats so even if someone stopped using macros his account might be already marked for a perma ban for the next wave.
Volter98 (EUW)
: Personally I don't think yi is strong in aram. But if your team lacks cc yi can feel pretty broken yes.
I guess it's the old scenario: when the enemy gets Yi or Katarina, our team only has a few slows at most. When i get to play those two, the enemy team looks something like this: {{champion:53}} {{champion:31}} {{champion:9}} {{champion:89}} {{champion:111}}
Tmenov (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Zanador,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=15w1sAz1,comment-id=0005000000000000,timestamp=2019-12-19T16:33:25.999+0000) > > Ah, Ad Hominem, the white flag of the defeated. Did you realize somewhere that you are wrong and tried to distract the readers? > > Except everyone knows that this is not how the system handles you if your MMR and ranking does not match. If your MMR is gold 2 and you are plat 4, then you will lose more LP for a loss than you gain for a win. You can keep up your 50% win rate or even higher, your loss of rank will come from the LP difference. Once your MMR and rating matches again, either by dropping down to gold 2 or by raising your MMR a bit higher, you will gain the same amount of LP as you lose. > It is not. As long as you try to FORCE a 50% winrate on people, it's not a properly working system. If you were to let it happen NATURALLY however, it would actually be a working system. Forcing a winrate down by matching him with garbage but against higher MMR does not mean 'a working system'. > > Showing that the system is _forcing_ a 50% win rate would require quite a bit of proof. Namely, there are 2 main problems with this idea. > > 1. Smurfs, duo smurfs and boosters can get quite high win rates while a lot of players in Iron IV are significantly under 50%. A system that _forces_ a 50% win rate should stop both of these from happening. Boosting would be impossible if you would start losing immediately after the first few matches despite still having that challenger smurf in premade with you. > > 2. If the system would _force_ a 50% win rate, then if would do it for everyone, not just specific players like you. So if you got matched with players with low win rate in your team, then you would most likely win, since the MM is _forcing_ them back up to 50%. Again, a duo smurf with a high win rate in your team would almost guarantee a loss for you. Oke donkey I can tell you won't be understanding it anytime soon, so let me explain it one more time very simple: You go up, riot forces you back down, so you don't go too ham. You can only do so much with skill level before the simple fact that 'MMR one team = MMR second team' will %%%% you over. You are talking about 'from level 0 to challenger', yet we see 9/10 people doing this with a challenger duo smurf and they usually get stuck somewhere in diamond. No where near challenger. You think '50% forced' means, you are held hostage in the fountain, like you do when you start the game up. AFK disconecting problems etc. What I rather mean with '50% forced' is: They simply queue you up with gold 2 against plat 3. So when I take a look at my team, I see I am the most skilled player on MY team, whereas I would've been the shittiest on the ENEMY team. Now you go ahead and tell me what the odds are of winning. THAT is the 50% 'forced' winrate. So, when I basically go up, against the odds, I will keep on being punished, until my 'MMR = my elo'. So I will always be on the 'already decided by system lost side' until I reach iron 5. I hope, this wasn't too much for your brain to handle.
You might want to stop degrading yourself with childish insults, i think we are both above the age where they still work, right? >You can only do so much with skill level before the simple fact that 'MMR one team = MMR second team' will %%%% you over. How exactly is it a problem if both teams have the same MMR? One would normally think that this the goal of a good matchmaking. Once again you seem to be saying that Riot's system works well. >You are talking about 'from level 0 to challenger', yet we see 9/10 people doing this with a challenger duo smurf and they usually get stuck somewhere in diamond. No where near challenger. Because progression naturally stops as you get closer to your own rating. And it's much easier to stomp Bronze players than Diamonds, is it not? And in each seasons dozens if not hundreds of players across the servers get two or more of their accounts into Master/Grandmaster/Challenger. It's quite a regular thing. >What I rather mean with '50% forced' is: They simply queue you up with gold 2 against plat 3. So when I take a look at my team, I see I am the most skilled player on MY team, whereas I would've been the shittiest on the ENEMY team. Now you go ahead and tell me what the odds are of winning. THAT is the 50% 'forced' winrate. So, when I basically go up, against the odds, I will keep on being punished, until my 'MMR = my elo'. Forced 50% is what the phrase says: forced 50%. It's a system where a player can't have more or less than 50% win rate. What you seem to be talking about are unwinnable matches. Those are definitely real and i haven't seen anyone in Riot or outside of it who ever tried to deny their existence. There are dozens of reasons for their existence, two of which are indeed the limitations and problems of the matchmaking. But if you call one real thing on the name of another, not real thing, then people will obviously disagree with you. BTW, your MMR is always your Elo. In the first few seasons League used to have raw Elo ratings, which were later converted into the MMR when Riot adapted the ladder system. >So I will always be on the 'already decided by system lost side' until I reach iron 5. Which would be impossible with a forced 50% win rate system you claim this game has. At worst you would hover over mid-high Silver which was the base line of new players in ranked the last time we had information on it. In the end it's quite interesting to note that you apparently know the weak points of your theory and you try to deter people from bringing those up by preemptively insulting them. Yet when someone does bring them up, your only response is "that's not true + insult" and you never even tried to refute anything Torpedosheep, i or anyone else said in all the different threads. It's always just denial and insult. It's perfectly fine if you just want to vent, feel free to do so. But please don't mislead the new players by presenting your frustration as universal truth and don't mislead the veterans into thinking that you are ready for a discussion when you are not. Have a nice day.
Tmenov (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Zanador,realm=EUNE,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=15w1sAz1,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2019-12-19T13:56:21.119+0000) > > Well, they never said this. It is a very old misunderstanding on the part of some players. > > It's also worth noting, that your two sentences directly contradict eachother. If the system forces a 50% win rate, then no matter what MMR you are, you will have 50% win rate, so lower MMR can't mean that you will lose more. > > What you are describing here is a perfectly working matchmaking system. Anyone who is better than the starting MMR will have higher than 50% win rate at the start. This is how you climb. But once you reach the level where you can no longer climb higher, your matches will be evened out and you will naturally get a 50% win rate. > Keep in mind that anyone who is higher ranked than you had to cimb through the same mess and some more. > > tl;dr: if you are correct, then Riot's system works well. For the system to be truely bad, you'd have to be wrong on these points. Actually it does Einstein. If your MMR is gold 2 and you are platinum 4, they'll force you down until you're somewhere around gold 2 again. Until then, good luck being stuck with the losing team 9/10 times... and when you're back where you 'belong', you'll start winning a bit more and having actual 'random' queued matches. And for you to say 'what you are describing here is a perfectly working matchmaking system'. That's also wrong. It is not. As long as you try to FORCE a 50% winrate on people, it's not a properly working system. If you were to let it happen NATURALLY however, it would actually be a working system. Forcing a winrate down by matching him with garbage but against higher MMR does not mean 'a working system'. As I already mentioned in my post, you will always have people who live in a first world country and believe there is no world hunger. You are the person was talking about in my post. But hey, we all need that one moron who is willing to stay dumb in order to have people to clean my sewers. Thanks for keeping it clean down there {{sticker:slayer-jinx-wink}}
Ah, Ad Hominem, the white flag of the defeated. Did you realize somewhere that you are wrong and tried to distract the readers? >If your MMR is gold 2 and you are platinum 4, they'll force you down until you're somewhere around gold 2 again. Until then, good luck being stuck with the losing team 9/10 times... and when you're back where you 'belong', you'll start winning a bit more and having actual 'random' queued matches. Except everyone knows that this is not how the system handles you if your MMR and ranking does not match. If your MMR is gold 2 and you are plat 4, then you will lose more LP for a loss than you gain for a win. You can keep up your 50% win rate or even higher, your loss of rank will come from the LP difference. Once your MMR and rating matches again, either by dropping down to gold 2 or by raising your MMR a bit higher, you will gain the same amount of LP as you lose. >And for you to say 'what you are describing here is a perfectly working matchmaking system'. That's also wrong. It is not. As long as you try to FORCE a 50% winrate on people, it's not a properly working system. If you were to let it happen NATURALLY however, it would actually be a working system. Forcing a winrate down by matching him with garbage but against higher MMR does not mean 'a working system'. Showing that the system is _forcing_ a 50% win rate would require quite a bit of proof. Namely, there are 2 main problems with this idea. 1. Smurfs, duo smurfs and boosters can get quite high win rates while a lot of players in Iron IV are significantly under 50%. A system that _forces_ a 50% win rate should stop both of these from happening. Boosting would be impossible if you would start losing immediately after the first few matches despite still having that challenger smurf in premade with you. 2. If the system would _force_ a 50% win rate, then if would do it for everyone, not just specific players like you. So if you got matched with players with low win rate in your team, then you would most likely win, since the MM is _forcing_ them back up to 50%. Again, a duo smurf with a high win rate in your team would almost guarantee a loss for you.
: Who counters Ahri?
A well played Ahri can pretty much handle anything in 1v1. That being said, i'd aslo mention Katarina, Vladimir and Cassiopeia as major sources of headache for her once you have some practice with them.
Tmenov (EUW)
: Hello there! Remember when people say "riot isn't matchfixing"? Yeah they are actually do so. Take a look at the fact that they themselves (riot) confirmed that they will do anything to keep you around 50% winrate and above all: Take a look at the MMR system. Lower MMR = worse teammates guaranteed, so you definetely willl end up losing. I have since started to keep a little logbook, in which I noticed I either stomp a game completely or I end up being stomped (what most of the time is the case). And now people will say: You already started on the backfoot or some shit? No, not at all. I take dragons, push turrets, take heralds, gank much more, am ahead of the jungler, give up the kills to my laners, only to see them turn into 'godlike' people who refuse to group, but would rather keep on going 1v5 so they can make a 'great' play so everyone will say "omg you're so good". Reality however is: They keep on feeding 1v5, and I simply cannot do anything 1v5. So we end up losing. I had a winrate of about 60% by the time I reached platinum, had a huge KD difference between other junglers (positive) and had a huge overall objective control compared to other junglers of the same elo. Now, riot has punished me and I hover around 50%, win (usually a stomp, so there you go 'competitiveness') 1, but end up losing 2/3/4 games. Somehow I have not gotten demoted yet (I guess, praise the lord for that). People who simply refuse to believe the game has gotten worse are often people with the following excuses: - Where are you facts even though the boards are being flooded with bugs, complaints about consistently losing, and trollers and feeders. taking a deeper look into it, you often notice people in their team go 1/9/1 as in my team, basically inters and trollers, but when someone says he is consistently losing and is NOT enjoying the game whatsoever because of the constant losing and being blessed with the trollers, he ends up hearing 'You are just ranting where are you facts'. Funniest part would be: The "Did you know you win 33% more games if you're positive" is flawed into oblivion? I mean, really, where are the sources to confirm this 'fact' for that matter? - You are bad In the context of, you have to carry, even though we are in a COMPETITIVE ENVIRONMENT and the skill level should be about the same? - Carry yourself The above - People on the boards are just salty (or cry babies) people who got stomped in a match So the biggest part of the community is and A LOT of outsiders who straight up make fun of league are aswell. In case you missed out the point, this game is KNOWN to be toxic and have a worthless community. Garbage community, garbage game (full of bugs etc.). - I never encounter trollers or feeders Just because you are blessed to live in a first world country, doesn't mean people in Africa aren't dying of hunger. Take the blindfold off and see how many games are being trolled, inted, afked, while you enjoyed your 'one game without'. The fact that most games rather do have trollers and inters is pretty concerning to me. You'd usually want to say: Most of the games played have none, but once in a while you simply end up having one of those annoying guys. However in league it's different, it's: Usually you end up having inters, trollers, feeders, and once in a while, you have a 'decent' game. I mean, compare league to the following: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Euy7zPm3ypM (MW2 lobby coms). For the people who have NOT played this game: - The games had far less trollers, inters, afks - The game was played seriously, no matter the rage you were giving your teammate whilst trying to win. - People CARED about becoming better and winning - Community was always open for improvement and was always trying to improve the game and actually cared about each other to a certain degree ----- Take a look at the comment section of the youtube video. People enjoyed talking crap to each other and no one cared. Not only that, but it was a great way to vent off some steam. In league however, anything you do or say is bannable. Therefore people abuse the poor programming skills of riot employees by simply not saying anything, but simply feed and troll until they lose. When someone loses his shit because you do so, they go ahead and report you. Troller goes unpunished and the guy who tried winning loses (even his account). I never heard in any game I played "it's just a game" and "it's for fun". These were sentences pulled out of a part of your body where the sun never shines. You played to win and along the way you ranted to steam off and to be able to concentrate. Now, in league you can mute these people, but I cannot mute inting, not caring, 'having fun' etc. can I? Every game I played I have noticed the following compared to league: - Community was toxic - Community didn't care about toxicity (unless straight up IP adresses would be thrown out or some stuff, an actual serious offence) - People played to improve and to win - People were always arguing how to improve the game (on the boards) - People enjoyed the game after all the above In league however, it's very diverse: - Most of the community is being fed up with the crap riot is pulling off - Community is toxic (in the sense of feeding and trolling) - Riot is ruling with an iron fist (whereas games before league made a huge impact on 'toxicity' simply didn't care) - Game is completely unbalanced and not playable (or even fun for that matter) - Boards are often to see who's dumb and close-minded (may it be the complainer or the 'defendant' of riot) Bottom line is: Riot is a dying company (as we can simply see by creating a new account and counting the 'smurfs', or just take a look at the queue times). It's reign is long gone and it is grabbing all the cash they can before going down. The quality of the game is poor, graphics are poor, they do not care about their community. All they truly see is money. I can relate to seeing money to a certain extend, but completely not caring and turning a blind eye to everything, ruling with an iron fist, refusing to draw a line at what's considered toxic and what not, this is just a recipe for disaster.
>Take a look at the fact that they themselves (riot) confirmed that they will do anything to keep you around 50% winrate and above all: Take a look at the MMR system. Lower MMR = worse teammates guaranteed, so you definetely willl end up losing. Well, they never said this. It is a very old misunderstanding on the part of some players. It's also worth noting, that your two sentences directly contradict eachother. If the system forces a 50% win rate, then no matter what MMR you are, you will have 50% win rate, so lower MMR can't mean that you will lose more. >I had a winrate of about 60% by the time I reached platinum, had a huge KD difference between other junglers (positive) and had a huge overall objective control compared to other junglers of the same elo. Now, riot has punished me and I hover around 50%, win (usually a stomp, so there you go 'competitiveness') 1, but end up losing 2/3/4 games. Somehow I have not gotten demoted yet (I guess, praise the lord for that). What you are describing here is a perfectly working matchmaking system. Anyone who is better than the starting MMR will have higher than 50% win rate at the start. This is how you climb. But once you reach the level where you can no longer climb higher, your matches will be evened out and you will naturally get a 50% win rate. Keep in mind that anyone who is higher ranked than you had to cimb through the same mess and some more. tl;dr: if you are correct, then Riot's system works well. For the system to be truely bad, you'd have to be wrong on these points.
Roomys (EUW)
: Crazy Matchmaking
Correct me if i'm wrong, but this was a Poro King match, right? Nice bait tho.
Hatè (EUNE)
: TIL you can kill someone with Bard ult.
Way before season one i saw a few kills with Anivia walls. Had to check with my friends, but they all confirmed it. So yeah, i knew about it, but for obvious reasons it's not too noticeable.
rVeWalker (EUW)
: RANKED SYSTEM IS %%%%ING BROKEN
I'm going to be popular, but for the sake of consistency and curiosity, i have to ask a few questions from anyone in here. First, why do you care about the rank and winrate of your teammates? After all, the matchmaking is bad, it decides the outcome and ranked is broken. So if that happens to everyone, then one of those 45% win rate silver guys can be a plat level player who got screwed by the bad system. In other words, if the MMR system is bad, then the rank and win rate is meaningless. But if you can tell the outcome of the match by looking at these stats of the players, then the MMR has to be accurate, does it not? Second. If the matchmaking is forcing a 50% win rate, then it must be doing so for every player, right? In which case having players with lower than 50% win rate in your team would mean that your team has the advantage, since the system is currently trying to push your teammates towards a win to force that 50%, right? This would mean that having a 20% WR iron player in your team almost guarantees a win, while a 90% WR challenger smurf in gold would almost certainly mean a loss. Just asking.
: Does anyone actually play TFT because it's fun, and not for the rewards?
Did i miss something? Rewards? The way i see it, you either play TFT exactly for the fun or not at all, because there are no real rewards for it. The map skins are only there in that game mode, pets are visible on ARAM, but nobody seems to bother and to get anything flashy you need to pay anyway. So we are left with the emotes, and i don't see how they could be enough reward for playing a game mode one does not enjoy.
Shamose (EUW)
: Sett is like a breath of fresh air when it comes to champion releases.
I think Aphelios pretty much took the passive skills of the next 3 champions, so there was nothing left for Sett.
: What exactly removed from oracle lans? I tried at practice tool but I didn't find out! I would like to know :)
Basically, as you know, you can swap between trinkets for free at any moment in the shop. Originally if you swapped, then the new trinket started with a 120 sec fixed cooldown. This was kind of annoying, since accidentally swapping or changing you mind meant that you still had to wait 2 minutes before using the trinket. In patch 8.8 they change it so the remaining percentage of the CD will be the same before and after the swap. So if you only have 5% remaining from the CD, then you will have 5% remaining no matter how much you swap in the shop. However the Oracle lens has 90 sec cooldown at the start and the Warding trinket has a full 240 (for 2 wards). So if you placed your 2 wards, switched to Oracle, wait 90 sec (for full charge) and then back to warding, then you could get 2 wards again, a full 150 sec faster than normally. This negatively impacted certain roles like support, who naturally swap to Oracle as full time when they have the support item, or most junglers who just used used Oracle anyway, because they couldn't really use this mechanic. There was also a combo with this trick+ghost poro since 9.7. Expired wards leave a Ghost Poro for 60 sec. So if you can place 2 wards every 90 sec which stay for 90 sec then spawn a ghost poro for 60 sec, then in 2/3rd of the time you can have 2 wards and 2 poros on the map without CD. Even supports get jealous of that. As a bonus, these Ghost poros give AD or AP so those who use this method can have some bonus stat very quickly. Apparently the system has been changed in the new patch. So now if you have charged the Oracle for 90 sec and swap, then the Warding will have 90 sec charged too, out of it's normal 240 sec. OP here is not fan of the fact that this method has been stealthily changed and doesn't even mention that in the reddit discussion he linked a vast majority of the people support this change. Personally i agree that this should have been mentioned in the patch notes, but the change seems good.
: So more reworks
To be fair, Akali was kind of the first. She got a very long range dash onto a normal skill instead of her ult.
: What exactly is kill pressure?!?
It's basically the likelihood of that champion killing you when you face them. Let's say that you are on mid and you are up against a Syndra. Well, on lvl1, Syndra can hit you with Q and AA, and maybe she has ignite too, but she would probably need at least 2-3 Q and 3-4 AA + Ignite to kill you at that point. This is not really a kill pressure, since you can just walk away from this at any point. Now on lvl4-5, things change: Now her full combo deals somewhere around 600 HP, so if you fall under that, you can die. If you are close to that critical HP point then her stun would mean you are dead, so that's a medium kill pressure. And on lvl6 the kill pressure gets real. Her full combo with an ignite can kill you from max, so even the threat of getting hit by a quick Q-E is a lethal danger. The question is simply: what are your chances of walking away alive if the enemy goes all in. Naturally this is changed by items, available summoner skills, current HP, position, etc.
: You are bad at the game, it's harsh but it's also objective truth. Now what?
Do you make a comprehensive analysis of each player's multiple recent replays before you state this as "truth" to them? Or do you just confuse skill with performance like too many people do? Even Faker was absolutely demolished in his last match in the tournament, but i'd like to see you say that it's the objective truth that he is bad. So yeah, if you just met someone for one game and you say this, then it's not objective and might not be the truth either. After all, if he was matched with you, then his overall skill level should be somewhere around yours. Or are you objectively bad too?
Zanador (EUNE)
: And old argument, but it gets thrown out of the window by basic economics. League does have a lot of players, but there will always be more potential players who do not yet play it or already left. And if you check anywhere about it, the first and most common comment will be that they don't play because the community is toxic. If Riot could permanently get rid of every flamer, troll and intentional feeder and wash the mark of toxicity off their brand, then they would do so instantly, even if they had to ban 30 million players, because they could drown in the money the new players would bring them. The big greedy corporations are consistently greedy.
That's the easiest one. Bugs are fixed by programmers and engineers. Skins are done by artists. Riot hired the artists as full time workers too, so Riot has to pay them even if they do not make new skins or any other art. Riot wouldn't save a cent by not making skins for a while. Artists can't just fix bugs instead of making skins either.
: Because RIOT want money. Stop lying to yourself man.
And old argument, but it gets thrown out of the window by basic economics. League does have a lot of players, but there will always be more potential players who do not yet play it or already left. And if you check anywhere about it, the first and most common comment will be that they don't play because the community is toxic. If Riot could permanently get rid of every flamer, troll and intentional feeder and wash the mark of toxicity off their brand, then they would do so instantly, even if they had to ban 30 million players, because they could drown in the money the new players would bring them. The big greedy corporations are consistently greedy.
: Flamers are the sensitive ones yet they're the ones being banned because people couldn't handle the truth? Am I right or am I right?
Sorry, but you are wrong. You are absolutely free to tell the truth. You just can't flame while doing so.
: >On the other end the USA simply does not have ID cards or any similar systems i'm gonna assume you meant to say something else. can you rephrase that?
I meant what i said, but i might need to specify it a bit. In the USA the states can issue ID cards, but they are not mandatory for every citizen. Because of this, quite often the driving licence (which do have a federal database as of 2005, but are obviously not mandatory), student ID or passport are used as identification. As such, it is very much possible for a USA citizen to have no official ID cards, especially if their driver's licence has been taken away or if they couldn't get one yet due to being underage. Correct me if i'm wrong somewhere.
: ehm no.
Oh, but yes. Everyone in these topics are saying it, they just don't like to admit it. Flamers flame because they get angry, frustrated, feel helpless, betrayed or another wide range of emotions. Right from the opening post for example: "Nah, man. I'm %%%%ing sick of hiding how I feel about things." Uncontrolled emotions are the source of flaming.
Paper1 (EUW)
: Well darn. Maybe it's not a case of banning accounts then but rather making it more difficult for toxic players to access Ranked, assuming that's what they care about. Force them to play other game modes for a period of time, say a month, then if they come back to ranked and flame again then give them another month. Or if not that, maybe a system where you have to earn tickets to enter into ranked games, and with bad behaviour receives less tickets.
Well, that can do two things: first, it can channel already frustrated toxic players into the normal games and lower the quality of those queues, or if the punishment is time and not match number based players who are determined to play ranked will just create a new account just as they do now. I'm ready to open a bottle of champagne the moment we find a new and working suggestion.
Paper1 (EUW)
: What about making players link their account to at least one device, and when their account is banned their device can no longer use league? I don't think players would go out of their way to buy a new computer every time they make a new account.
That idea has been brought up too but it has a bit too many flaws: For example in the west we usually play on our own PCs, but in every eastern server players most commonly play in net cafes or other similar places. So if the computers were to be banned, then flamers could ruin the netcafé's access to the game, potentially alienating a lot of costumers. And you might want to ask an expert on this, but i've heard that banning a hardware is not without it's loophole either. Even linking phones or IDs wouldn't work either for multiple reasons. Again, in Korea people do have to link their social security number to accounts for any online game, but there is just a massive black market for those so nothing changes. On the other end the USA simply does not have ID cards or any similar systems, so Riot couldn't even do this in their home.
: u all people fail to understan the purpose of rules
: either ur 2 young or u havnt been on internet enough
Neither. Nor am i wrong. Flamers are just a bit too sensitive and emotional.
Paper1 (EUW)
: Hi, not the OP but have read this exchange. I very much want to believe that flamers get banned, but I don't given that most games I play in have at least one. If not that, then others include annoying spam pingers, negative attitude and low effort players. Report system not effective if working at all, because if it was game experience specific to player behaviour would improve but it hasn't.
Hello, players do get banned, quite a lot of them each day too. Just spend a few minutes browsing the player behavior section and you'll find tons of threads where flamers complain for being "unfairly banned". But the effectiveness of the system is a known issue: anyone can just make a new account and continue as if nothing happened. Unfortunately nobody could come up with a way to solve this in a decade, so the situation is not likely to improve unless the toxic players actually realize that they were wrong.
Malah (EUW)
: Someone tilts? Throw it. Move on. Someone disses you? Throw it. Move on. Someone AFK? Throw it. Move on. Exactly, Leave people on chat alone... Everyone can disable chat, mute. Leave them alone and do not ban for bad words! Everyone in stress says bad words and nothing happens. It balancing organism's stress like almost therapy saved in DNA, made by instinct. People cannot be banned for bad words. It's circus. Sport game, have a sportmindset and get ban - Good Luck good people we do not give a f*ck.
You are almost right. Cursing in real life is indeed a natural way to react to pain and other bad stimulation. But _typing_ bad things isn't. You won't see someone hitting his finger with a hammer go to the next keyboard he can find to curse by a reflex. And by all means, if you get tilted, then feel free to curse verbally, in front of your screen. You won't get punished for that. Just don't type anything.
: Hahahaha. Good one.
Was there something specific you didn't understand or do not agree with, or are you just not able to argue my point?
: I mean, you say that like it's a better option to let them flame AND troll. You know what else is true? People play worse when they're tilted. So regardless of your data or social experiments, the people left in the dark by Riot are left suffering silently.
Ok, let's simplify this: permanent chat restrictions = more trolls and feeders. If that's what you wish for, then there is not much point to this conversation. But you are right, people play worse when they are tilted. That's exactly why flamers get banned, because they tilt people. You will have to find a healthier way to deal with your frustration.
: Ok and what does banning serve as a purpose? Why not just serve a permanent chat restriction if you can't be trusted to use chat appropriately rather than taking your account away since that doesn't really solve chat abuse? What? You banned them so they can make a new account with no chat restriction and carry on talking the same way? I never flame until provoked and that's fact. Yet I always get banned and they never do.
This has been tested with multiple different methods. Quite a while ago we had a system which gave players insane amount of chat restrictions, depending on the severity of their toxicity. You can still google cases of 7-9000 match long chat restrictions. Separately from this Riot tried to give players permanent chat bans, and there were even players who asked Riot to put a chat ban onto them because they knew they flamed often and it ruined their chances to win so in theory this should solve their problem. The result in all of these attempts were the same: once people couldn't flame back to a troll or feeder, 90-95% of them decided to start trolling or feeding too. So Riot drew the conclusion: permanent chat restriction will eventually negatively affect the experience of everyone by increasing the amount of trolls and feeders. And so, they ran a few smaller scale experiments with it since then, but last time i've heard they have no plans to ever implement this kind of system.
: We Need A Talk
Because muting is useless. A flamer will not be able to tilt me, but he will probably tilt my teammates who in turn might give up or stop playing to flame back. If i mute someone i need him to be unable to communicate with the rest of my team so they won't get tilted. Since trolls could very easily abuse a system like that, we are stuck with the one we have now.
Shamose (EUW)
: When are normals gonna be normals again?
Yeah, preseason has always been a mess. Ranked is pretty much a "play at your own risk" mode now, because half the people there think that "hey it's just preseason" and now the ranked players get to taste the "hey it's just normals" line too. And so a lot of ranked players flee their original queue. In the end normals get a healthy mix of ranked players, "it's just normals/preseason" players, people who test items/champions and of course a lot of people who are trying to come up with the new meta. Because who knows, with the new lethality item changes AD Heimer jungle might just be the next powerhouse of the new season and i'm going to be rich and famous for finding it first.
wailksa12 (EUW)
: my cousin made the account but since 4 years I just play with this account .. my mistake is that I don't change the email !! and my cousin doesn't use this email or this account that's why he doesn't remember the information. please help me or give me a chance to recover my account it is very important to me I paid money to had Rb
If your cousin created the account then only he is allowed to play on it. The moment he gifted it to you, the account should be perma banned. Riot will not help you, because by their rules, this account should not be playable.
Show more

Zanador

Level 162 (EUNE)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion