Sea Beggar (EUNE)
: > Or if her AD carry is really far behind, protect her ultra strong AP mid, or her bruiser jungler, or maybe execute that perfect flash + R combo that displaces the enemy ADC and wins the game for her team. There is no "only correct way" and having that mindset will just be a source of frustration to you. aight I dont feel like talking game strategy with silver players, this wasnt the point of my thread anyway and u seem to be ignoring points I make anyway and just beating on a strawman > = you intentionally do not try to win = you are actually hurting the game at least as much as the person you suspect of "maybe inting in a subtle way". of course I am, I see that the game is lost so I want it to be over as soon as possible so I can go next or use my time for something else
> [{quoted}](name=Stoky555,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=jfUqwd3a,comment-id=00010000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-09-07T10:31:01.107+0000) > > aight I dont feel like talking game strategy with silver players, this wasnt the point of my thread anyway and u seem to be ignoring points I make anyway and just beating on a strawman > "Shit, he totaly won that argument and is proving me wrong. Let's try to cover it up by beating on his Elo". And I agree, the point of your thread seems to have been seeking approval on the boards as some kind of justification for your negative behaviour in game. Now that no one agrees with you and everyone have suggested that you don't do that shit any more, what you gonna do :)?
do0kie (EUNE)
: Why high ping players are allowed in ranked?
If you ping is constantly very high it is very likely that it will affect your gameplay. That would mean that players with a constantly high ping will have a lower Elo than players with a constantly low ping. They won't ever be matched. Problem solved? If you however get random ping spikes in game, well though luck, that shit will happen and there is no way to prevent it. At least it will be evenly distributed so that sometimes you will suffer from it and other times you will benefit.
Sea Beggar (EUNE)
: > I base the statement on logic. Since there is an infinite amount of ways to play the game there is also an infinite amount of ways to win the game, ergo an infinite amount of "correct plays" as well as "incorrect plays". I obviously wasnt talking about "you move a bit to theright instead of a little bit to the left" kind of plays yes there is ton of ways to win a game, but for a janna supp for example, only correct way to play a teamfight is to protect her ad carry. if your janna tries to assassinate their mid by flashing on him with Q W and dying, but still u manage to win the game, she didnt discover new correct way to play, she just got carried while playing incorrectly. Why is this so hard to grasp for you? > And what you are telling me is that if someone on your team is not trying their hardest, YOU will intentionally try to lose the game? no I just wont try my hardest either because the game is already over and if I try my hardest to make it 40 min only for it to be lost by inter Id rather have it over quickly
> [{quoted}](name=Stoky555,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=jfUqwd3a,comment-id=000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-09-06T12:49:48.861+0000) > > I obviously wasnt talking about "you move a bit to theright instead of a little bit to the left" kind of plays > > yes there is ton of ways to win a game, but for a janna supp for example, only correct way to play a teamfight is to protect her ad carry. if your janna tries to assassinate their mid by flashing on him with Q W and dying, but still u manage to win the game, she didnt discover new correct way to play, she just got carried while playing incorrectly. Why is this so hard to grasp for you? > > [{quoted}](name=Stoky555,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=jfUqwd3a,comment-id=000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-09-06T12:49:48.861+0000) > Or if her AD carry is really far behind, protect her ultra strong AP mid, or her bruiser jungler, or maybe execute that perfect flash + R combo that displaces the enemy ADC and wins the game for her team. There is no "only correct way" and having that mindset will just be a source of frustration to you. [{quoted}](name=Stoky555,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=jfUqwd3a,comment-id=000100000000000000000000,timestamp=2017-09-06T12:49:48.861+0000) > no I just wont try my hardest either because the game is already over and if I try my hardest to make it 40 min only for it to be lost by inter Id rather have it over quickly = you intentionally do not try to win = you are actually hurting the game at least as much as the person you suspect of "maybe inting in a subtle way". I think the one person you have to ask if they are "inting" is yourself.
Sea Beggar (EUNE)
: > here is no such thing as "only one correct play" what do you base this random statement on? > No need to ever ask that question. if he decided to not tryhard and just walk around not doing anything, it is pointless for me to try my hardest... in high diamond elo games the game is done when 1 person isnt pulling their weight so its better for me to accept defeat withotu wasted effort so I dont tilt myself.
I base the statement on logic. Since there is an infinite amount of ways to play the game there is also an infinite amount of ways to win the game, ergo an infinite amount of "correct plays" as well as "incorrect plays". What do you base your statement about "only one correct play" on? And what you are telling me is that if someone on your team is not trying their hardest, YOU will intentionally try to lose the game? Do you even hear yourself? IF you can't tell for sure if a person is intentionally feeding or not their impact on the game will probably be less than that of a player trying their best but failing hard. Why would it matter then? Let's say a person performs badly but isn't inting, will you also stop trying to win that game?
Voldymort (EUNE)
: mean-ness: "i think your hair is ugly" condessension: "i am better than you in every single way" flaming: http://imgur.com/a/bNoMy http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m32n28lt5r1qmrbuso2_250.gif flame*
I don't know if you're just trolling or not but either way this will be my final respons, I hope you can try to be honest with yourself at least. If someone comes to these boards complains about a ban and shows a chat log where he wrote to a team mate: "You are ugly and I am better than you in every single way", what would you say to them? Why do you seem to think (if that' what you really do?) the same rules doesn't apply to you?
Voldymort (EUNE)
: >A very common defense for trying to justify flaming is that the person "deserved it". That is exactly the same argument you use as to why you are being sarcastic, condesending and outright mean towards flamers on these boards. except sarcasm, condessension and/or mean-ness aren't the same as flaming
Are you sure :)? What would you say to a flamer defending himself with that argument? "I was only mean and condesending, not flaming"
Sea Beggar (EUNE)
: > If you have to ask, they're not inting not true for me in my elo people usually "int" more subtly, like trying to take adc cs or tiping off ganks on purpose by standing on wards we know are there, or refusing to group in situations where group is only correct play
Nah. There is no such thing as "only one correct play" and not grouping =/= inting. If the support is taking farm from the ADC, the ADC (and probably the rest of team) will now this. Again there is no need to ask. If you're not sure if a person is inting or not, assume he isn't. What I think I am hearing here is that you seem to consider anyone playing in a way that doesn't please you to be "inting" and use the question to flame them in a passive aggressive way, and that is of course not a cool thing to do. My suggestion here (if you are open for suggestions) is to never ask that question and assume everyone to be NOT inting until you are sure of it. If you are sure, report and move on. No need to ever ask that question.
Voldymort (EUNE)
: >Ah, I see how it is. no you don't >Let's say you play a game of League and your midlaner is feeding his arse off while also being rude and abusive towards your entire team. You react defensively to this by responding to his flame in chat and get reported and punished for this. But wait! Why are you punished? Didn't the toxic player DESERVE to be flamed in return? >Does this sound familiar to you? this sounds familiar to me because i see this rethoric both on these boards and on league of legends facbebook groups **all the time** not in the way **you** believe it to be familiar. i don't respond to flame with more flame because i'm not a child :) stop assuming when you're trying to make a point :)
I think that you might have missunderstood me and I in turn you. I did not mean to imply that YOU personally would respond to ingame flame with flame (and I am sorry you read it that way), I ment it as a general example of a typical flamer on these boards, using "you" as a general term. A very common defense for trying to justify flaming is that the person "deserved it". That is _exactly_ the same argument _you_ use as to why _you_ are being sarcastic, condesending and outright mean towards flamers on these boards. "They deserved their bans, therefore I will not be nice to them" The reason I responded to you with "Ah, I see how it is" was because I wrongfully assumed that you were only trying to avoid the argument at all costs and had no interest in constructive discussion. I appologize for this missunderstanding on my behalf :).
Sea Beggar (EUNE)
: Is phrase "inting or?" flaming?
If you have to ask, they're not inting. And even if they were and not even you who are in the same game on the same team as them can tell, how on earth is Riot supposed to detect it? Conclusion: the question has no value other than stating to a persons face that you consider their game play to be equivalent to inting, therefore there's no constructive use for it. Simply don't ask the question and you will never have to worry about whether it'll be considered flame or not.
Voldymort (EUNE)
: >Let's say you when you find an argument that doesn't rely on assumptions about what people may or may not do in response to a flamer, feel free to come back and make a ***valid point*** {{sticker:zombie-brand-facepalm}}
Voldymort (EUNE)
: There's no point confronting your point of view since it's quite apparent that your mind is made up on the topic. And the fact that your catchphrases include "thanks for proving my point", "guess you fit my description" and probably an "i was right all along" at some point, it doesn't encourage confrontation either. There's no point having a debate with someone closed minded, i'm sorry! >Not carring about a punished player doesn't mean you can laugh, post memes, belittle him, etc etc. You are no better than he was when he got punished if you do any of that. we are, actually. you know why? because we aren't toxic neither in the game, nor here. the only thing we do here is have a bit of fun. Constructive criticism is the point of this board, sure! And i've done that at first. But when you get to the 20th+ person who posts a chatlog where he was clearly toxic, claiming that his punishment was unfair, keeping the replies clean of memes and sarcasm is not something that you should expect. We aren't bots, we aren't employed by riot to work in their support section. We're just civilians! :) >The sooner you realise that, the sooner you stop making yourself look like a fool and a hypocrite. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMsrE-9CLFg
"Having a bit of fun" doesn't really justify insulting others though, does it? Some people consider flaming, trolling and inting to be hillarious, still doesn't make it OK. Yes, we're only human and yes, it might be oh so tempting to tell that insanely stubborn and toxic flamer complaining about his permaban to shove it where the sun doesn't shine, but the moment we do we are in fact no better than the flamer yelling abuse at his team mate.
Voldymort (EUNE)
: >You are just as toxic as the players you despise so much. Please understand this and change your attitude, thank you. no we are not. we just don't care about you and your account as long as the chatlogs say you deserved it nor your feelings
> [{quoted}](name=Voldymort,realm=EUNE,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=w6ZfhmXZ,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-09-03T17:00:49.940+0000) > > no we are not. we just don't care about you and your account as long as the chatlogs say you deserved it > > nor your feelings Let's say you play a game of League and your midlaner is feeding his arse off while also being rude and abusive towards your entire team. You react defensively to this by responding to his flame in chat and get reported and punished for this. But wait! Why are you punished? Didn't the toxic player DESERVE to be flamed in return? Does this sound familiar to you? Deserving of a ban =/= deserving of public humiliation or disrespectful treatment. Try to treat your fellow humans with respect, regardless of if it's an encounter IRL, on the Fields of Justice or on the LoL boards.
: Please correct me if I'm wrong. I've gotten a perma-ban because: 1. I've called someone with childish behaviours a "kid". 2. I've called out people for trolling. 3. I didn't realise an employee didn't word their response correctly and I thought "report calling" is not actually an offensive behaviour. If that's the case, then the rules are stricter than what I expected them to be. But in the end, rules are rules.
Nah, you have gotten a permanent ban for repeated and consistent negative behaviour. You know that the logs above doesn't showcase the worst things you have written in chat but what they DO show is that you have continued your negative behaviour even after your final warning (the 14-day ban). Again you are responding to me with "But what I did wasn't THAT bad" and again I am telling you that the problem here isn't the magnitude of "bad" but that the fact that what you did was, undisputedly, bad. If the above logs where all you did and you did that for only one game on an otherwise spotless account I doubt you would even receive a chat restriction. It was the fact that you have consistently displayed this behaviour (and worse) over many games that finally resulted in a permanent ban. I hope this is clear now and that you can acknowledge that your behaviour was destructive and the ban was deserved? I think it's important that you take this lesson with you should you decide to start on a new account, or else history will just repeat itself.
: "Calling people 'Kids'" next time someone sends to all chat "report teemo he flamm my family" I'll call them an adult. "Threaten with mutes" I don't threaten them. I say I've muted them so they don't start talking tactics to me in chat and use pings instead. "accuse people of trolling" my definition of trolling is griefing on purpose. When someone stands in the bush and dances instead of helping me, they are griefing me on purpose which means they are trolling. I don't think I am wrong. "report calling" is not against the rules according to one of your employees who has **encouraged me to report call** (proof: https://gyazo.com/3a2df2b9db24fe23b20321ffda21e61e ) Before my 14 day ban I always thought asking for reports is pathetic and I only did it when the situation was escalating in order to remind the other person of the punishment they can get but after one of your employees actually told me to ask enemies to report the trolls that are ruining the game, I decided to do so. The employee that I'm not naming but I screenshotted the response he had to me was by far the politest and most considerate employee I've ever talked to so please don't go searching for him in order to punish him for making a single mistake and probably not wording out his response properly. I appreciate you replying to my post
Nah, don't call them kids, don't call them adults and don't call them trolls. Don't call them anything, unless it's something encouraging/nice. Also, you clearly haven't muted the players you state that you will mute since you are responding to them later in chat. And I agree with you that a player that is dancing in bush instead of helping is trolling/griefing, but you should respond to that by reporting them, not by harrassing them in chat.
: Don't get me wrong though, I appreciate you reading and responding to my post. It's just, I don't understand how to avoid the problem here
Upvoting this response :). Like I said, a good way to avoid the problem would be to not be abusive/negative at all. That way you don't have to worry about crossing the line. If you have to ask yourself "Was this really bad enough to warrant a ban or just bad but not ban-worthy?", you're on the wrong track.
: Be the judge
You are clearly being negative and outright abusive. You are calling people "kids" (to belittle them) threaten with mutes (instead of just muting) accuse people of trolling and then keep harrassing them with the troll accusations and last but not least you're "report calling" (asking for players to report other players) a whole bunch (don't do that, just report them yourself).. Negative behaviour is a perfect way to describe your chat logs and I can certainly see why this got you banned. I am sorry it had to be that way and wish you good luck in improving your behaviour should you decide to try out a fresh start :). A good "rule of thumb" would be that if you have nothing constructive to say, don't say anything at all.
: intentional feeding 14 days ban!?
Oh please :). You mat not be the worst "Inter" alive but be honest with yourself: You occasionally feed on purpose. Apart from this 25 deaths in 36 minutes Kennen game there's also the 18 death mobi boot Ezreal game and the 25 deaths mobi boot, dead mans plate + double wisp Ahri game? Consider this a slap on the wrist and try to make sure that the occasional inting ends, because the next time Riot finds you guilty of inting they will issue a permanent ban. You can hardly call it a "senseless punishment" when the consequence will be either that you stop inting or your account is permanently banned. Both scenarios will effectively reduce inting and improve the gaming experience for... well everyone :)?
Not xPeke (EUW)
: Yeah this system is a joke. It's SO inconsistent. Some players can flame and say extreme stuff like '%%%' for games and games, and go unpunished. (witnessed it myself, I have a friend that does it and nothing happened to him) Then others get punished for petty "negative attidude". (I have another friend who got punished for barely anything. Can argue that he actually did deserve his punishment, sure, but how does my other friend keep going unpunished? Yeah, inconsistency) Just no consistency. That's also completely disregarding how ineffective and ESPECIALLY inconsistent the system is in regards to trolls and intentional feeders, ohhhhhh boy. PS. proof that the system is not consistent is that Rioters themselves have stated that hate speech and phrases like '%%%' and that sort of stuff is VERY SEVERE and will usually be an instant punishment and will most likely skip punishment tiers. Yet I've witnessed friends doing it for 5 games in a row and they ain't banned, and keep doing! Oh yeah, better ban the guy saying "gg ez" or calling someone a "noob". Lol.
Thing is though, I've had a pretty good experience with the system since it was introduced and have pretty much always seen extreme cases of flame get some kind of a reprimand. I am seriously concerned that it might have been (is?) turned off or bugged.
archerno1 (EUNE)
: Did he say anything that warants instant 14 days ban and not just a chat restriction? Death wishes and death threats arent same. Wishes are just negative attitude. Threats are something serious. Did he say anything that should warrant instant ban disregarding his history?
The most serious I can recall was that he frequently refered to me as having Down's syndrome (not the medical term though) both in English and Italian, used the old "get cancer and die" (but spelled it can cer), told me to uninstall and go kill myself, etc. He did this from 5 minutes into the game until game endes and of course spiced the chat with the more common "noob", "troll", "idiot", "%%%%%%", etc. In post game chat he out of the blue lashed out towards enemy midlaner with "I hope you have kids that die in a car accident" and something in Italian that I didn't recognize. I dunno, I personally feel that warrants a 14 day, and not sure how Riot reasons if they think differently.
: > [{quoted}](name=Lauralf,realm=EUW,application-id=NzaqEm3e,discussion-id=YiyHUvZX,comment-id=,timestamp=2017-09-02T22:51:50.590+0000) > > So, what's happened to the automated ban system, It's still around. > and why isn't it insta-penalizing lunatic flamers like the one described above? Because unless if it's the absolute worst of the worst (such as racism, death threats, homophobia, etc), one game with flaming is not enough for a punisment by itself. If it's any reassurance, it _is_ something that can be used as part of that player's history when they inevitably _do_ get a punishment, and that's assuming that such behaviour is consistent for them. You've said in this thread that you've reported them, and fair enough, but the fact that you're this fixated on them getting punished tells me that you haven't exactly moved on as you claim you have. Just relax - if they _do_ regularly act like this, they're going to get punished.
The worst of the worst results in an instant and permanent ban. Don't tell me that what this guy did wasn't worthy of an instant 14 day. And no I haven' moved on, since I am suddenly far from sure that strongly toxic players suffer consequences for their flame.
: How do you know it failed to recognize it? What, because it didn't punish the player the exact femtosecond you reported them? Alluding back to what I said in my comment, but unless if it _was_ the worst kind of toxicity, it's not punishable by itself, accounting for how people can sometimes merely be having a bad day. Again, if they _aren't_ and this _is_ regular behaviour, then they're going to be eventually.
I've been playing this game since season 1 and can tell you that this player was something out of the ordinary. From minute 5 of the game he frequently refered to me as having Down's syndrome (not the medical term though) both in English and Italian, used the old "get cancer and die" (but spelled it can cer), told me to uninstall and go kill myself, etc. In post game chat he out of the blue lashed out towards enemy midlaner with "I hope you have kids that die in a car accident" and something in Italian that I didn't recognize. The player is still playing ranked as we speak, quite a few femtoseconds after I made the report.
Perilum (EUW)
: The system is smarter than you. It's objective. You're not objective. So let the system do what it can do best. To be objective. It will ban when it will ban. Your job is done with reporting.
This has an almost eeri tone of fundamentalism to it mate :). "The System is smarter than you. It will ban when It will ban. Dare not question the infalliability of The System (blessed be its name)". Objectively speaking: That player crossed more than one line by a LOT, on numerous occasions. If the system fails to recognize that, it's severly lacking and needs to be fixed.
Rioter Comments
Farce (EUNE)
: >The KKK and Apartheid did not happen 500 years ago, in fact they're still going strong. Definitely would argue about "strong" part. They are "underdogs", so to speak. For a justifiable reason. > At least Luke 19:27 and Luke 16:17. Luke 19:27 is where Jesus states that all who doesn't consider him their king should be brought before him and killed. And Luke 16:17 is where Jesus makes it quite clear that the Old Testament stays, which means a WHOLE lot of insanely crazy, violent shit. May be that I'm reading Polish version, but entire 16th chapter mentions nothing about Old Testament. 19:27, yeah, a fable of mines. It doesn't claim it's the word of god, it mentions "one strict emperor". But ok, let's say it calls for violence too. What does it change? I just stated religion is bad overall, no matter which. You just don't have "christian states" on the world anymore. >But you know what? A pretty large part of the Christians in this world seem to realize that the Bible contains quite a lot of contradictions and bullshit, so they simply disregard most of it and lives their lives not according to the Bible, but according to what they think makes most sense. >And here's the funny part: same thing goes for most Muslims. I have Muslim friends who eat pork, or drink alcohol, or doesn't think that killing half the world with a sword is such a good idea. They don't seem to get as much media coverage as the crazy ones though. I wonder why? Yup, I know why. Because in case of christianity the christian heads realize it's crazy shit themselves and dismiss it. On the islamic side governments enforce this crazy shit as law instead. And this creates society of extremists living in an extremist state. They don't criticize it because they are scared to. I met few friends on League from Egypt who admit they are muslim because they are SCARED NOT TO BE. That's why people are not the problem. As I said, religion is a tool. Christian one just isn't used anymore, islamic is. About media coverage - oh I'd argue about that. You'd be surprised how desperate they are to hide fact that any attack was on a religious background.
You're sort of saying it yourself: It's not the religion that is the problem, it's the governements/religious leaders trying to use/enforce it as a means to an end. What if let's say Saudi Arabia had been a Christian country with a Christian dictator forcing people to live by his interpretation of the Bible? Would that not have been just as bad? Why are you so adamant about Islam being the problem, when in reality you could use Christianity in the same deranged way (and it has/is being used in the same way)? And here is a link to Luke 16:16 (sorry, I remembered wrong when I wrote 16:17) [https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+16%3A16-17&version=NIV&interface=amp](https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Luke+16%3A16-17&version=NIV&interface=amp) Here Jesus states that the Law was proclaimed by God and the prophets until John (the Baptist) and that it's easier for heaven and earth to disappear then for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law. Luke 16:16 is commonly used by conservative Christians as a justification for following some obscure verse from the Old Testament.
Farce (EUNE)
: >Christians have killed millions of people in their history as well, yet no one thinks all Christians are murderers. Because, as you said, it's HISTORY. Yeah shit happened 500 years ago. Now it doesn't. Well ok, extremist happen in every single religion at all times. But how many christian terrorist attacks can you name in the last decade? One? None? That's due to the different approach to religion. Nowadays christianity is ADAPTING to modern times and morality. They change their teachings according to popular demand. Hell, the Pope made few rock songs himself. Meanwhile, since Shariah is considered irreplaceable and "the law written by Allah himself", thus not being challenged at all and in fact becoming a core of law in most islamic countries. Thus the primitive beliefs from houndreds of years ago become prevalent in these countries and it's quite easy to figure out that because of that large part of the population will have their own sense of ethics and morality affected. I'm not saying christianity isn't a problem. I'm saying that Islam is a far more dangerous and current one. If we lived at the time of inquisition, we would have tried to counteract christianity just as much. But it's Jihad that's a greater issue as of now. >If there was to be a civil war in your country because of the most popular religion in your country, you'd probably try to flee as well. What would you think if then no one would want to accept you exactly because of the people you are trying to flee from? Or if you were just sent back to the place you wanted to flee from? It would be quite ironic, but sad nonetheless. And that is exactly what these people, who discriminate others because of their religion, want to do. I agree with that point wholeheartedly. It's very hard for people who are struggling in these countries. But this is only a proof for why it's dangerous to create a free borders towards these countries. Not only the "good ones" will get in. And that's the problem we are facing right now. We don't want to leave the victims to die, but also don't want to let the terrorists in. If there are poisonous and edible berries but you don't know how to differentiate between them, you don't eat either. We just need to figure out how to capture potential terrorist. But so far, unfortunately, limiting emigration is the most ethical choice in this scenario until we find another way. Not moral, but ethical. >Of course, germany can't accept all refugees and other countries need to help as well. But accepting these refugees is just what normal humans should do. They should help those in need of help and in turn, they'll get help when they are in need as well. Well they tried to. And now government desperately tries not to lose next election due to open borders policy. It's not that easy, sadly.
The KKK and Apartheid did not happen 500 years ago, in fact they're still going strong. And you should probably read the Bible? At least Luke 19:27 and Luke 16:17. Luke 19:27 is where Jesus states that all who doesn't consider him their king should be brought before him and killed. And Luke 16:17 is where Jesus makes it quite clear that the Old Testament stays, which means a WHOLE lot of insanely crazy, violent shit. But you know what? A pretty large part of the Christians in this world seem to realise that the Bible contains quite a lot of contradictions and bullshit, so they simply disregard most of it and lives their lives not according to the Bible, but according to what they think makes most sense. And here's the funny part: same thing goes for most Muslims. I have Muslim friends who eat pork, or drink alcohol, or doesn't think that killing half the world with a sword is such a good idea. They don't seem to get as much media coverage as the crazy ones though. I wonder why?
: Let's see: 1) Jungling and while i'm at my second buff someone in my team is first blooded already. Then one minute later he is second blooded, and then...you got the idea. Bonus point if the guy immediatly start flaming after that, because of course it's nowhere possible that this is his fault. This is actually worse than enemy invades that manage to get kills, because well, you may not expect them. But being cheesed at level 1 and then start feeding over and over...it's another level or expertise. 2) Junglers that makes suicide dives at level 2-3, die miserably, and then they of course blame the laner because he wisely decide to not follow. Expecially hateful when the junglers goes in even if should be clear that you are backing. 3) Junglers (or laners for what matters) that overstay in the enemy jungle during a chase and get killed by whoever enemy comes to get them. Of course, as in point 2, whoever decide to NOT stay there and go back is to be blamed. 4) Players who are 30+ into a game...without boots. Very common and very infuriating, because most of the time those geniuses will never realize why they are getting killed over and over, and will of course flame the team instead. Man i hate them. 5) When objectives like dragons, barons and sometimes even towers are just there for the taking...and none seems to care in spite of your pings. 6) Games that last 45+ because both teams are so bad that they just can't close it, regardless of who is winning. While sometimes you may enjoy a comeback and a win in these situations, most of the time you are just waiting 25 minutes more and then lose/win anyway. 7) Have a fight, win it...and then instead of recall anyone in your team stick around in spite of having 10 or so life. Cue the enemy team respawing, coming back, and clean them all. 8) Enemy is taking Baron, is simply impossible to stop them...still anyone in your team goes there, one by one of course, to get killed and adding some icing to the enemy's cake. 9) Top or Bot Laners who does not leash the jungler for whatever reason. Luckly, it's rare. When it happens and i'm mid, i always help the jungler myself. Expecially hateful when (almost always) this comes in tandem with point 10. 10) Laners who goes to their turrers and stick there immobile before minion spawing. There really seems to beyond any help when they do that. Luckly, it's almost always without consequences. Bonus points when they hover near enemy tower emoting or doing something else stupid. I don't know why none in the other team ever think to gank, invade or counterjungle when someone does that, really. 11) Laners who will tax your jungle in early game for no apparent reason. Or junglers who will "gank" you just to tax your lane. Expecially bad when you are trying to freeze, and of course they are a thousand miles away from being able to get it. 12) Junglers who, in early game, pass through the mid lane in full view of the enemy. Usually without consequences...but still stupid and perfectly avoidable if you just think a second about that. 13) Laners who flame you as jungler because, while they are dead, you take CS that will be killed by your tower anyway, or because you push the lane to allow your creeps to be killed by the other tower. Very rarely, they may have a point about that (not allow the enemy to easily freeze near his tower, or avoid the need to overextend), most of the time, they simply don't have a clue and just flame you for the f@@k of it.
No.6 is a little unfair. A game might very well last 45+ minutes because the teams are equal in strength, or the losing team is defending well. Or would you say that the 60+ LCS games are that long because both teams are "so bad"?
: What annoys you most?
> [{quoted}](name=Chika Hakozaki 0,realm=EUW,application-id=2BfrHbKG,discussion-id=TJTZAlAz,comment-id=,timestamp=2017-08-01T09:30:43.170+0000) > Yet the jungler for whatever reason, blows flash or goes through a wall to go swipe and steal the kill for no good reason. Seriously, why? What's the point of doing that when the kill was guaranteed? The point of doing that is that a kill + assist = 450 gold for your team compared to just 300 gold for the unassisted kill. Not worth using the flash for it imo and I personally always try to give the kill to laner. But, IF you are close enough to get a free kill or assist (without using flash), why wouldn't you? What can REALLY annoy me is the all too common attitude that the jungler is responsible for winning every lane. "I lost my lane, junglers fault for not ganking enough" is something I hear on an almost daily basis. Never mind that I DID gank the lane and gifted a first blood double kill to the ADC, apparently I didn't gank it enough. Sigh.
ExpStealer (EUNE)
: You know, I read some of their answers to you (the OP). What they say is that your individual skill doesn't matter much in a team game, but when it comes to wins and losses YOU are ALWAYS at fault, YOU always lack the skill to win or SOLO carried if you won; it NEVER is your teammate (or your whole team)'s fault. Which makes no sense. The kind of ranking system LoL uses can work in a SINGLEplayer game, because there you rely solely on yourself and truly you and you only would be at fault if you lose; that's when winrate by itself would be accurate. But as they said - LoL is NOT a singleplayer game. Moreover they say the statistics are just a meaningless bunch of numbers, which is ironic. To win you must perform well - if you perform well you can't have a bad KDA, it's just impossible. You won the game by splitpushing? Damage to turrets/objectives reflects it. You were the support and carried your team? Crowd Control Dealt, Damage Healed and Taken, Vision Score, etc. reflect that. Those statistics would not be there if they were truly meaningless. If you performed very well those statistics would be up in the sky even in the event of a loss and down in the mud if your team carried you. It's true a program cannot tell if you made the game turning Pentakill, but it measures your performance in the entire match, so really, does a single flash count in a sea of darkness?
Sounds like we're on the same page :).
: no, I already said it. If I'm winning my lane but I am quite sure we will lose, like we are 13/5 in general score and 3 towers down, I'd just stay in lane winning while the rest of the enemy team murders my team and gets my nexus. Oh and if you stay afk, or intentionally feed on a daily basis you get banned
Yes, you do get banned which is a good thing. But if you only do it occasionally you don't get banned, and you get the same LP gained/lost as the people on your team that tried their hardest. So you are saying that a split-pushing champion that did well in his/her lane would continue to do well in that same lane (i.e. pushing towards enemy base), and this would not help us winning the game? While running into team fights in mid lane and dying while not getting any kills and/or assists would help the team? Help me out here: When is a bad KDA a GOOD thing? Dying without getting anything in exchange is hardly the way to win the game? If you on the other hand DO get something in exchange, that will increase your kill participation, your objectives taken, amount of damage taken, etc. As a jungler I sometimes give up my life for an important objective like Baron, Elder dragon and the occasional Fire drake. That wont increase my KDA, but it will sure increase my chances of winning the game (especially if I take the objective, which should increase my individual performance score regardless of the death). Winning the game will still be the deciding factor for if you lose or gain LP/MMR. Performing well will only influence the amount gained/lost by a varying degree. Come to think of it, game time should probably be a factor to take into consideration. Losing a game quickly should be more punishing than losing after a long, hard fight to the bitter end. And winning quickly should be more rewarding.
Teejoon (EUW)
: Wow... you show us 2 stats and think you're WAY better than anyone else in your team? You forgot to share the Damage to turrets and objectives. 2.7K damage to objectives and 176 damage to turrets. 2.7K damage to objectives is not much, the Dragon has 3.5K base HP. You might have gotten kills but you definitely couldn't turn those kills to anything more important. Step up your game before complaining. Also, determine if you gain/lose LP based on wins/losses is good enough. If your performance is constantly good, you will win most of your game and climb. Want to do it fast? Get a duo partner that is also performing well constantly and you will climb even faster. I added a random person back in season 3 when I was climbing for Gold cause he played well that one game. And he continues to do quite OK the games after. By duoing with that player, I knew that one less player could be really bad on my team.
Even on that losing team I managed to take two drakes (compared to enemy team one drake). One of those dragons was a smite steal. I also managed to intimidate the enemy team enough to scare them away from two baron encounters. Is it strange that the damage to turrets is low on a full tank jungler :)? I don't think so. What IS strange is that damage dealt to champions is higher than almost all players in the game, including both teams ADC and the rather fed enemy Kassadin. Not only that, but I also RECEIVED the most damage of any player in the game (by a lot) while dying the least. All this while playing on a losing team. So yeah, my performance in that last game was far from bad. And why is "good enough" to be preferred over "better"? And why should "get a duo partner" be the solution to your solo Q climb? You are basically responding to me with a rather aggressive "oh yeah? you think you're so clever? well guess what, I like to have things the way they are and have no interest in improving anything". If you don't want the game to improve, well good for you. I wouldn't mind it a bit though.
Treycos (EUW)
: Well... you guessed it, it might not I only wanted to point out that KDA is still helping a ton, but sometimes (quite often in high) lane managment and roaming can give you a way better lead
I agree mate, good KDA =/= winning games. But neither does a bad KDA. Maybe we shouldn't reward it the same :)?
: of course, but if people is already asking for surrender when the games looks bad, don't you think that once they see it might be lost anyway they will focus on getting S (instead of playing to win) in order to reduce the mmr loss?
But, how do you get an S? And how do you win? By playing well? Currently if you are losing a game you can AFK, troll or intentionally feed and you will lose the same amount of LP as the team player that is trying his or her best. If you get a (somewhat) individual score based on your performance, wont that improve the incentive to play well?
Doomley (EUW)
: Do not speak about the MMR system when you clearly lack knowledge about it. Also the in-game statistics ARE pointless because they are very narrow and do not represent the flow of the game. Who cares if you got an amazing KDA and everything if you didn't manage to win the game with those statistics? In fact, you should be punished for having good stats and still losing because that means you do not have the skill to actually win games. You are just running around the map aimlessly, getting kills that you do nothing with. Then let the game go on long enough for the enemy to kill you once and then end the game with your long death timers. And what about pressuring on the map? Or making the game changing play? The game does not recognize those things.
Uh? How can you claim that I lack knowledge of a system if you don't have any knowledge of the system yourself? Riot is intentionally keeping the exact formula used for calculating MMR a secret, but why on earth should that stop us from discussing it? And no, KDA in itself should not be a deciding factor when calculating skill, but it should be a factor. As should farm, objective control, kill participation, damage dealt, damage taken, damage healed, etc. You do realize I can run around the map aimlessly, GIVE kills and still win? In which case I will earn as much LP as the poor team that had to work hard to carry me.
: In fact, I find it funny cos as far as I'm aware it could be the way you want it to be, you don't really know how mmr changes after a loss (let's remember that mmr are not lp or division/league). Oh and in soccer, even if not official, there are better and worse players in the same team and there will always be some players who will be "carrying" the worst ones, and there are awards and rankings (rankings might not be official) to individual performance.
So you are telling me that even in SOCCER, a very distinct team game with ONLY fixed teams there are better players in the teams who gets recognized and awarded for their individual performance? But that in LoL solo Q that would be uncool? Also, DarkDinomax, I do know that MMR is not LP, but do you know what that means to me at the end of the season? Squat. I am NOT rewarded for my MMR, and I am not rated by my MMR. It is LP that Riot has decided should be the official measurement of skill, and I can be as high or low MMR as I like as long as have the right amount of LP for a tier reward.
: It's still a team game, also the system which gives S and so doesn't really tell how you did it. People would play for kda, I'm 3/0/0 with nice farm and my team is heavy losing? I won't even try, I'll tell the enemy they can go mid, and I won't def as long as I can keep farming (good farm is the best way to higher score)
But if you lose the game you will still lose MMR regardless of a good KDA or not. You will just lose less MMR than the player that went 0/10/0. I don't aspire to get a good KDA or a good farm, I aspire to win the game. A good KDA is a side-effect.
: There is no better ranking system, you win if you win not if your scores are better like in most "real" sports, in soccer you win through scoring, not through ball possession (not sure if thats the translation).
Soccer has no individual rating ladder and you are not assigned random teams. The team is rated and every player awarded the same. LoL has an individual rating system and assigns you a random team, then let the outcome of a game that is largely affected by that random assignment be the only deciding factor in your individual rating. I am not saying that it shouldn't, but I AM saying that your individual performance in a game should play some small role in factoring in how much LP you gain/lose from a win/loss.
Treycos (EUW)
: First things first, they is no way to tell if someone "performed well" or not KDA won't help in that situation, maybe you were shotcalling, splitpushing, maybe you scrified yourself to win a teamfight, there's no way for a program to tell And no, being dragged down by your team DOESN'T mean that you will lose, as being carried doesn't mean that you will win YOU are the one making the difference 90% of the lost match you had were winnable, it's up to you to figure how Putting me in silver game would result with a funny winrate, you could do it too, you just have to admit that you have much to learn (we all do)
Mate, I agree with you that I have a lot to learn and in no way claim to belong in a high elo. And what you are saying is simply a purist but untrue way of looking at things. Matter of fact is that players with a good KDA, a good kill participation, a good farm and a good objective control generally speaking play a larger part in winning a game than players with a bad KDA, a low kill participation, a bad farm and poor objective control does. Some champions will have worse KDA, lower farm or lower kill participation than others simply due to their role and style of play, but Riot already takes that into account when awarding a skill rating. You are telling me that if I put you in silver you would have a funny winrate. Would that winrate be accompanied by bad stats :)?
: Not on a team game, there are many single player games out there
I don't queue as a team though, and I am not rated as a team. It is my solo performance in a solo Q that is rated on a ranking ladder, but the score on said ladder is decided by the outcome of games that are largely decided by team performance. What would be the harm in letting your individual performance affect the rating in some way?
: Look at it this way, you win by teammates 45% of the games, and lose by them 45% of games. The 10% left is the one your performance really decides and those are the ones which make you climb, get stuck or descend Edit: Still you don't address how smurfs could possibly climb again and again to their elo if the system was broken or your performance didn't matter. Oh and btw you don't really now how much mmr you win/lose, you just know the lp win/lose
I am saying that my performance does matter and I am saying that it should matter more. You are telling me yourself that 90% of the games I play my performance does NOT matter. Only in 10% of the games am I a deciding factor. Why shouldn't my individual performance play a greater role when deciding my skill ranking in a solo Q system? Also I agree with you, I feel like roughly about 10% of the games are decided by skill and the remaining 90% is more or less decided beforehand by matchmaking. That is another issue that needs addressing, but while this is the case I think a better ranking system could be an improvement.
Viavarian (EUW)
: No, the goal of the game is to kill the nexus, not to rack up pointless statistics. A system that rewards players for random numbers instead of winning is inherently flawed. Look at Overwatch, a small part of your skill rating is based on your personal performance and it's enough to screw up the ranked system. You can climb ranks while having a negative winrate, it's ridiculous.
I disagree with your statement, and I actually think you do that as well if you give it some second thought. The "pointless statistics" are far from pointless. You say that the goal of the game is to kill the Nexus, but hey guess what? In order to do that you must first defeat the enemy team, most likely by being stronger and/or smarter than them. In order to do that you need to gain gold and XP and take objectives. Your "pointless statistics" shows how well you managed to achieve those objectives that are needed in order to kill the Nexus, and therefore how much you personally contributed (or didn't) to the Nexus kill. Basing skill rating on personal performance is the ONLY way to rate a player in a solo Q and also what Riot is currently doing. Problem is that Riot is using a very blunt method (wins/losses) to measure said performance and the rating therefore will be heavily influenced by the performance of your randomly assigned team rather than your personal performance. Losing less MMR when you perform well and winning less MMR when you perform poorly would hardly screw up the rating system now would it? And if it did that would be an indication that it needs tweaking, not that it should not be discarded.
Treycos (EUW)
: > Should your individual performance in a game have a greater impact on MMR gained/lost? It already is You lost a game while getting an S, great for one, everyone did You may remember 50% of your game when your team was nothing more than a weight for you, but you forgot that the other 50% of the time, they were ahead Handling tilt / bad teamates is a personnale skill as well, master it, and you'll climb EDIT : Why do you think that smurfing players always get back to their ELO or even higher, it has nothing to do with the matchmaking's randomness
Eh no :)? You are just missing the point completely. If I as you say get carried 50% of the time, and get dragged down 50% of the time that means that the outcome of the game will be decided by my teams performance 100% of the time. My individual performance would not matter at all in that scenario. What I say is that I should earn less MMR in those games where my team does well and win for me, and more MMR in the games where my team does poorly but I still manage to carry them. And that all players should lose less MMR in games where they perform well but still lose, and more MMR in games where they perform poorly and lose. This way smurfing players will still climb to their high elo, just faster and less affected by the random performance of their teams.
Fathands (EUW)
: Why the %%%% do people use photobucket? The site does everything imgur does behind a paywall, worse and slower.
Yeah, my bad. Had a very old account that I thought I could still use. Will change the hosting site asap.
Rioter Comments
: How can you state that the Matchmaking-System needs to be fixed, if we don't know how it is working exactly? >... at the end of the day the element of chance will even out and skill will be the only determining factor setting you apart from other players, but when the element of chance is too high it all but eradicates the skill factor. "The end of the day" could be a very, very long time off depending on how many games you would have to play to remove the RNG factor. You need to prove that it would be a "very, very long time" till the "element of chance will even out". You can't make a Statement out of one game, do 100 more and then you might have a sufficient sample-size to make a valid Statement about the current Matchmaking-System. In my opinion there is no need to fix it, i rarely played with players far below my skilllevel in more than 100 games.
Hi DoomXY, Notice that in my post it says that it _could_ be a long time, you were the one who reworded it into "would". Also, I have played far beyond 1000 ranked games, roughly 300 this season alone so to say that I am making a "statement out of one game" is simply wrong. And we know how Riot matchmaking works. It is entirely based on MMR which is in turn decided by how many wins/loses you have on your account, somewhat influenced by the MMR of yours + enemy team in each respective loss. And lastly, you accuse me of using anecdotal evidence and then go ahead and claim that since you yourself has "rarely" played with players below your skill level that means matchmaking doesn't have to be fixed. Well mate, what I am talking about goes beyond blaming a loss on having bad team mates. I am saying that a bunch of my wins are also Influenced by matchmaking and that the outcome of ranked games (be they wins or loses) is too heavily influenced by the luck of the draw that we call matchmaking.
Rioter Comments
taki1212 (EUW)
: New to the game? Np. But stupid also? Sry mate, here's your perma ban.
Normal game mode is normal game mode mate, it is there for the sole purpose of honing your skills and/or having a good time. I can understand if you feel this way about ranked games (that have the expressed purpose of performing well and winning) but for normal games you need to change your mindset.
Rioter Comments
: I have to report someone for intentional feeding every ranked game its getting out of hand.
You are either abusing the report option and reporting people that you think were feeding (regardless of if it's intentional), or you cause people to feed intentionally (likely by creating a negative environment for your team). That, or you are exaggerating.
Ramyskie (EUW)
: When you are doing well with a champion and MMR(On OPGG) rockets, why horrible ppl follows
Wait what? Why are you all saying that Riot is intentionally giving you a bad team/better opponents when you have a positive MMR, like it's the most natural thing in the world? IF Riot does this it's friggin' outrageous and basically boils down to matchmaking being rigged. I can't imagine that this is true and even if it were there's no way any gaming company would admit to it. ...right?
: Well, standing outside the baron pit while the team does baron and **not** helping is report worthy (griefing or so). After that intentionally feeding as well. I'm only afraid that report leads to nothing; if only it gives you a better feeling it has done its purpose. As for ganking -- hmmmm, there is no birthright for a gank. You could argue that because Lee dind't gank you didn't get any farm / gold / levels etcpp. and in consequence were useless. (I imagine you get flamed for noob instead of getting help from the team...)
Not at all, I was barely flamed for the entire game, if at all. My team was very understanding about Teemo denying me farm and bot lane actually asked Lee to please gank top as well. If you look at match history you will see that apart from the bad farm I did really well (I finished laning phase with a score of 5/0). Only problem was that I could only kill Teemo with ult, and as soon as it was down he had the upper hand and could zone me. I agree that it is up to the jungler to decide what lane he wants to gank, just extremely frustrating when the jungler for reasons unknown decides to ignore your very gankable lane.
Show more

Lauralf

Level 30 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion