: I'm silver but I'm main support so i dont have a support doing that :D cause I'm the support 100% of times. {{sticker:slayer-jinx-catface}} The most i see is people doing like me bot is lost so support leave bot and roam to try help top mid or jg to see if they can carry and win game.
Yeah of course. You are allowed to roam but not completely never show up on botlane xD
: What elo is that bronze, low silver? cause i dont see people on high elo do that :D
No its silver. I decayed to silver I used to be platinum, maybe thats why this is so shocking to me? Cuz I too have never seen this before??
: If she was assigned as adc she can take farm. Even I do a lot of that my adc is bad i leave him 1v2 and go support top or mid (support like a normal support) to try make mid and top win since bot is lost the best you can do is open a ticket to Riot and see what they say. If you open a ticket they probably will say they will review game and you will not know if she got punished cause riot polity unless you see her op.gg if she got banned.
Yeah i opened a case. So she never supported me, just so you know. she never came bot. she went straight top and then mid we are talking like minute 1 she is top... its not that we were losing bot! I was winning bot alone xD but thats not the point... she sat top and kept losing and dying.. and i dont understand her logic
: In the end Riot will say is off meta strategy, i doubt she will get banned play janna adc isn't againt rules. Idk who was assigned each role i just notice that you where on support spot on loading screen and i know sometimes it bug and you are placed on diferent positions but for Janna build and summoner make me think that she was adc and you didn't notice that you was autofill support and she got mad and gone help top since you didn't played a normal support (not farming and support item), that what i suppose by you be on support postion on loading screen it could be you assigned as adc and loading screen positon change but i dont have that info only riot have.
No no, playing janna ADC is not the problem,. HELlL if he wanted i would buy a supp item and play his supp but the problem is that he refused to play on his lane, and refused to communicate why. He went on different lanes, fed and took farm... this is trolling
: A lot of time when adc is bad is better suport top instead adc even if adc need play 1v2 {{sticker:sg-syndra}} And it looks like for me that you where assigned as support, and janna as adc, since on loading order yes game use top jg mid adc support order, janna is on adc place and you on support place. And on Janna match history she play Janna adc a lot of games.
Well i am deffinitely not a '' bad'' adc given that I went 3/0 alone on bot. But the point is, she picked janna and I always go ADC/MID role - I rarely get autofilled and if she even said that I took her role or something, then I would dodge or we would work it out. It still doesnt explain why he goes on and feeds top, mid and takes other peoples farm. Ultimately the goal is winning and he clearly didnt want to...
: Are you sure the Janna was assigned as support? Because looking at their op.gg it looks like she was assigned to top lane and Trynd was assigned as support. They appear to be an adc main who plays ad janna quite a lot.
Im not sure.. Maybe? I didnt pay attention until we went into the game. But if she was, she didnt say anything to tryndamere in chat. Wouldn't they explain what happened? There was no tension at all, just this unexplained trolling from Janna. Even tryndamere kept telling her to go bot... Im thinking that - Even if she was meant to be top, why would she pick janna? and not toplane? And even if she was top and trynda picked top on purpose, why didnt she say it? And come bot for the sake of actually winning the game? Instead she stayed top and fed, along with tryndamere, and I was 1v2 and had the only positive score in team..
Rioter Comments
Mcgalakar (EUNE)
: The problem with that idea is, that the current grading system does not measure your performance towards the winning. It only checks if your KDA, cs, objectives damage, vision score, etc. is higher than average for that champion on that lane. Because of that it doesn't mean that the person with S contributed most to winning, and person with C less. Objective of the game is to destroy nexus. The inting Sion strategy was for some time a great method to win, even if the scores of players abusing it, were around C. In the mid laner with smite strategy, junglers often ended with weak score, as they were giving everything to mid carry. And this two examples were the most obvious ones. But how often someone gets a long lose streak, with weak grades, where in fact he was not the weakest in the team in every game? Situations like this shows that the score that you get from the grading system means nothing in the topic of main game objective: winning the game. So why to base penalty system on something that is faulty? Creating system that objectively measure your performance towards winning the game (not how good are your game elements comparing to other players playing the same champion) is hard to do. Giving penalties just because you have a weaker scores in few aspects than other players playing the same champion in the same lane is a mistake. As objective of every each of players is to destroy nexus, not to have better scores than others.
Ok, but this system i proposed meant that you WOULD LOSE with the score you have. As in, if you have this inting sion strategy and you LOSE either way for 10 games in ranked, and have a bad score, then I think someone is ought to do something about it.. So its not for games that you WON.
: *sighs* Did you know you can be good at the game, or bad at the game and STILL be nice? Ever considered that option?
I know, but i said all i said in the context of.. If being NOT NICE, and good is punishable.. then even if you are nice, but actually bad, there should be some way to help you improve and restrict you for ruining serious games for other players.. at least until you improve.. rather than hoping that you will do it on your own..
: you are not first and not the last, but tbh there never was a one person who changed a fking tiny thing in this game. its riot and its their Lobbying policy. They are doing everything they can to get more money not to make players happy and this game truly playable, wake up man, are you from The Earth? They can and could do so much to improve this game in every aspect with trolls/inters/low skill/smurfs/afkers/flammers etc. etc. you know what? they did very little, you know why? if they want to do big changes - they need to spend much money, change game from the base and whole community. Its more likely they just put their heads under ground and living well while you put money in their pockets, even if heads is hidden.
Wow you are probably the first person that did not protect and excuse riot on this page. Very refreshing to see this comment, thank you. I know most of that, but i still secretly hope they care for their players
Mcgalakar (EUNE)
: I do understand your frustration, we all had moments like [that](https://boards.eune.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/off-topic-en/zaF8Uhb9-lp-refund-when-inter-receive-penalty). {{sticker:slayer-jinx-wink}} The problem with performance as a measure is, that it could be abused by certain champions and roles. Think about players who will just do split push and farming simulator. They could get A, A+ or even S depending on how good they are on that. And they could do things like this from beginning. I don't know how it is in your division, but in bronze or silver, people rage from the game lobby when only someone picks other champion that the raging player wanted. I saw people telling to go Leona or Braum supp, and the moment that support picked Sona or Sorka it was "gg, we lost, report supp". And the afk simulator has started for the next XX minutes. The new idea would make behaviour like that worth more. The other idea that you presented in the response below, seems way more neutral for the system (ranked bans for bad players). But the problem is, how you define bad player? Let's use example: I finished my last game with 3/3/0 score, but when split pushing I was constantly forcing 3 players to my lane (they couldn't do a thing with only 2). That lead my team to always having advantage and pushing. But in many games my KDA would be way worse (like 3/9/3), and I would still force 2-3 players to my lane. Did I perform good or bad? If we could decide objectively what is always good and what is always bad (maybe this is possible, writing a complex code with few thousand possible actions, and splitting them up for a good and bad decision), then sure I will support this idea. The thing that maybe has a potential, is to decide your MMR lose/win based on your performance as an addiction to win/loss. For example, if you played amazing but still lost (even challenger players like Pants, Jay, or Fogged losses games in bronze/silver/gold, you can't always carry), you could not loss MMR at all. It can look like only a small change (in fact, it is a game changing idea), but in the long run, it will bring more advantages to good players. Why? The more steady your performance is, the higher your MMR will be. That means that you will get more LP for win, and lost less in case of lost. It is still a zero-sum game if we speak about LP, but not in the case of MMR. And if you want to climb, your MMR is more important than losing or not LP in one game.
I am not sure what you mean when you say that you cannot measure your performance. There is already a system in place that does it - the grading system. There is also a system that you can find in your stats in your profile that could be used to take into account more than the KDA. So the idea behind what i propose is that players that get grades below B's ( for example) AND LOSE for at least 10 consecutive games in RANKED, get temporarily restricted from playing ranked again. They would be forced to play, say, 5 games in Normal draft queue to unlock their ranked queue again. All this based on the fact that many people do not realize that they are not performing well. Just like if you do not chat restrict a flamer, when he flames, if you do not give a hit to the person that clearly doesn't give their best in ranked, they will continue doing just that. How many times do you find yourself playing with someone on a loss streak, with a negative KDA, bad map awareness, who puts your win at risk. Sometimes peoples ego's get in the way of actually seeing what is happening, and where they are wrong. I NEVER meant that someone who has occasional 1 to 3 games where they did not do well should be punished for this. We are talking about players that perform badly for a certain period of time, without any sign of correction. I just think that a person that verbally abuses you, or goes afk, has the same impact on your game and chances of winning/losing, as a person that does not perform well and they should also be corrected for doing that.
Mcgalakar (EUNE)
: Going with what you propose at point 1, the world championship and position in FIFA ranking in football should not be given to a team that has won matches, but depending on their number of passes, how many kilometers have they run, etc. Nonsensical, it should depends on either you win or lose, because every performance that not give you a win is not a good enough performance. Don't take me wrong, I'm not saying that your cs, roaming, KP, etc. is not important. But the thing that matters is either you win or not. League of Legends is zero-sum game. This means, if one wins, the other must lose something. This is why solo performance system will never work, in high competitive environment creating the system that makes both winner and loser gain something, will lead to injustice, as the reward for winners will need to be lowered to give something to loser. In the end system like this will keep better players stuck in lower division than the deserved for longer.
hey there, thanks for your reply. I explained below and iterated some of my proposals if you wanna have a look. I agree that you shouldnt be judgded only by your input. I think though that you should be rewarded with around 4-5 LP if you perform well ( say get grade S or S+). This is to make sure that the people that try very hard, keep trying and do not get discouraged even when they lose. Lemme know what you think!
TheHammy (EUNE)
: ***
Hi there, Thank you for your reply. I am sorry that you are frustrated with what I proposed. I never meant to offend anyone with this post, but rather help address some parts of the game that could be improved. **Going back to point 1: ** Perhaps some of you are right about this. I think now with what has been said, that indeed if your rank was solely based on your play-style there would be less freedom to try new strategies, and people could become less team oriented, and care mostly about their personal input. **In the light of this, I have another solution to propose:** Perhaps your rank should be based on wins / losses BUT perhaps it should consider how you did as well. There is already a built system for grading your performance ( you receiving an S, A or a B etc.) Therefore, you could for example get 4 to 5 LP even if you lost a game, just because you played well. To reward and promote good players. You could say - you get chests if you do well. But I think that a lot of people would find a lost game not as much of a lost 1 hour of their life if they at least were rewarded for trying. Don't you think? This addresses all the issues you guys mentioned here. The system for grading your performance is already here. The reason this should be a thing is that very often people do not realize that they make mistakes, or have very high self esteem. I often see players that have horrendous 10 game loss streaks and negative kda in each, and still say and think that they are better than you, even though you are doing better. This brings me back to the whole blocking from ranked. I appreciate the time you took to dig up a bad game of mine where I went 2/5 about 3 days ago ( FYI, there was an Afk player in this game but anyway) Now, I would like to highlight that I did not propose that you get blocked from ranked after one game.( whish is what you just highlighted and contradicted your own argument, that '' people have bad games sometimes''. if you read through my post carefully again you will see that I proposed that you should be blocked from ranked when you do not perform well ( kda wise or grade wise etc.) for at least **10 CONSECUTIVE** games. Just like 10 games can define your rank, they can also define how well you play. It is a good sample size. I never said you cannot have a bad game, sometimes its not your fault that you have a bad game, sometimes people troll or go AFK and you have to make up for their absence. Thankfully the AFK problem is being addressed well by RIOT which pleases me. I think that this approach will prevent you for tilting and allow you to take a breath and calm down before you go into a serious game again. As per perma-bans, I think people that are to be permabanned due to toxic behavior ( only flaming, and being verbally abusive) should be perma CHAT banned. Literally chat ban them until 2972. They will not have the freedom to speak but at least they get to keep their money, skins and everything else that they achieved and invested in. It is not entirely fair to perma-ban due to being competitive. League is a very competitive game, sometimes people say things because they are angry but in most cases the people that flame the most are the ones who care the most and want to win the most. There is already a mute button built in by the way.. You should go play CSGO and see what trahstalking REALLY is. So I think you should punish them according to what they did. Do not take their game away, they will just make another account. And i highly doubt your statistics that specify that the amount of permabans is very tiny. I myself know at least 10 people in diamond and up who got permabanned a few times,I mean look how many times Tyler1 gets permabanned.. come on. And may i say that your comments and arguments here are very passive aggressive. You should probably be the last person that supports chat bans or permabans due to verbal abuse.. SO to summarize. Taking you from playing RANKED, when you do not perform well for at least 10 games consecutively would benefit everyone. The tilted person gets time to de-tilt and practice, and you do not get frustrated at them feeding, and flame them etc. etc. its a chain of reactions really if you think about it.
SeanGoku (EUW)
: First of all I want to say that making your performance depend on more than wining or losing will lead to a more farm oriented gameplay style. If people know that doing nothing but keeping their cs and kda in check to get more lp whether they win or lose, they will do that. people will likely play less team oriented. People who actually already want to level up, already know that playing as a team, going for objectives and not feeding is important. But people also know that flaming their team will make them lose more too, and nobody cares about that either. You what what is good for winning in league and what is bad for winning is always changing. New strategies may arise that work, that nobody understands at the time, which would probably score terribly on your "stat-check" scale for league skill, but would actually lead to much more wins. Imagine someone coming up with a awfully sounding strategy, let's just call it "Inting Sion". Now he might come up with the ridiculous idea to permanently push the turret, despite dying over and over. But he magically wins a lot of games with this strategy. Despite winning so much, he might have terrible cs, no kill participation, only the lane turrets to show for his achieved objectives and 0 roaming kills or even presence. And despite all the wins he makes playing this strategy he would terribly fail on your scale. The point is. Winning or losing is THE goal of the game. Currently it doesn't matter which strategies you implement to achieve this goal. But any system that factors in more than your current win/loss and your past wins/losses, will inevitable force you to play specific strategies. And in my opinion that would not be good for the game. I do see the benefit of locking people out of ranked games as an option to punish people who clearly don't try their best in ranked games though. But currently the punishment system has no clear way of catching these players. But i's something one could keep in mind, should it become more effective one day. And since you seem to be interested in the current punishment system too, maybe you have some ideas you would like to share on that topic. I recently started a thread collecting ideas on how to improve the league community. I really love the game, but the community has been ruining the experience for me to the point I hardly play even close to as many games as I used to. Often I wait for at least one or 2 friends to come online, because I cant enjoy the negative environment random players constantly create. Anyway, in case you have some ideas, here is the link to my thread: https://boards.euw.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/player-behaviour-en/nvLruIjw-league-community-in-a-nutshell I'll see you there. Have a nice day.
Thank you for your reply, sean goku. I really appreciate it. I get what you mean. Winning IS all that matters. But as you said, there are some people that do NOT give their best. And there should be a punishment system built for them as well. To train them. especially in ranked. I would love to join your thread and share some of my ideas. Thank you for reading and commenting <3
Rioter Comments

He Soo Sexy

Level 202 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion