Sympton (EUW)
: Nah you are only looking at KDA.. It can go by healing done, shielded, towers taken, barons, dragons, damage dealt, damage soaked as tank, KDA, and more...and in the end still make the victory/defeat count the most so IF you win you still go up in the end, so it is worth trying to steal that baron. also smiting a baron succesfully killing it could even count towards it. win/defeat counts most, all the other factors determine howmuch worth testing and finetuning.
Most players are currently using KDA as the measuring stick to judge if a player did well in a game, or to use it to verbally assault someone not doing well in (report XY and Z for inting / feeding / trolling). A grade as S is relatively easy to get for toplaner, midlaner, jungler and ADC, you just have to focus on cs > kills, and try to last hit in team fights to minimize the chance of ruining that "perfect game / score", where as if you play a tank support being the natural frontline soaker / initiater, and go in thinking you've got your carries backing you up, you are more than likely wasting your life as everyone will be looking to bump their grade up before playing for their team. I'm all for a better match making, but it has to be realistic which this suggestion isn't.
Shiwah (EUW)
: ***
I've left a game once because it didn't matter if I was there or not with the clown-squad, but to repeat the fella before me, I don't have a 3000 iq to get it either :)
Shiwah (EUW)
: ***
That would probably be true, if match making wasn't a total scam. Ranks that holds 0 meaning and in no way reflects a persons ability to play the game or have the basic concept down. Team-wide mmr matching which can be further unbalanced by having a premade duo on your side.., yea, I'd probably just take the hit to both mmr + lp loss instead of wasting 20+min.
: Yea, the concept is borrowed from proplay. Idea behind is, the further away you are from the tower, the higher the chance you will get caught offguard and die. Also the ADC has the highest tower-pushing power. Taking first towers, opens up the river, you gain control of the main objectives (crabs/drakes/herald+baron). So common sense would dictate, the highest pushing power goes for the safest, and most effective play possible, in order to secure the key objectives. AKA after bot tower falls, ADC goes top to take tower + herald and rotate mid, opening up the whole jungle. Also, if the jungler is botside, and your jungler goes for a top play, you sacrifice the ADC, which is (or was), up to this patch, the most important, key person on the team. It's like in chess. You don't trade queen for the bishop.
It's not that I don't understand the theory behind it, I just find that it's based on a faulty premise, especially since you don't have the communication that they do on the pro-scene. It's not safer moving top after taking bot tower, than it would be pushing for the tier 2 tower in botlane, assuming you bring the 3 wards + 1 trinket + 2 control wards, since that gives you more than enough vision to play it safe. This way you control the lower section of the map (Which includes the pit) in terms of vision and power (assuming you got the lead in gold and it wasn't a poor recall on enemy bot allowing you to take their tower). Just because you rotate bot to top doesn't mean you by default can take enemy top tower before they take your bot tower.
: Pretty simple. After bot tower falls, and dragon is taken, if the ADC+support would stay, they'd be overextended since they would need to push the 2nd bot tower. They would be easier to gank, or get roamed on. So what they do, they go top, and start banging on the first tower. In order to counter that, the enemy botlane has to respond and go top as well, since the top laner can't hold 2 people alone. It's safe to assume, if the botlane that went top first was able to get the bot tower first, they will be able to outpush the enemy botlane on top as well, getting one more tower, opening the topside enemy jungle, being able to safely place vision, allowing to do herald and prepare for baron. After top tower has fallen as well, you take herald, rotate mid as 3 or 4. Outter towersare the way to get enemy jungle control. So the best way to take them is bot->top->mid . Hope you got my point.
Frankly I find this concept ridiculous, unless you are able to stall the game and take advantage og the farm game, otherwise you would always be overextending in both bot and top sooner or later. Botlane can easily push for the 2nd tower with the use of warding. This would most likely result in enemy jungler being at or near botlane all the time to stop the push, which would open both mid and top for your own jungler / team. I see it more as just another play in the pro-scene being copied for no other reason, than the pro-scene doing it, similar to when players blindly copy certain builds without understanding the reasoning behind it.
T 4 K E (EUW)
: Did the average gameknowledge drop?
Depending on ranking I guess (or mmr for those who are dense). Around Silver 1 > Gold 3 then definitely yes, for someone wanting to main jungle, my games are typically 2 games where I am waiting for the enemy team to forfeit cause it's so %%%%in boring playing against Riot bots, followed by 2 games where I may as well not even bother farming, because the Riot bots are on my side and won't react to anything. Personally I don't care what sort of shit excuse is used to defend this arbitrary match making, but when a laner can sit in their lane and allow enemy laners to roam 24/7, not ward and still lose their lane, it's not because they are having A bad game.., it's because they are %%%%in dogshit and should be placed at the very rock buttom of the ladder, because their gameknowledge or w/e you prefer calling it, isn't worthy for anything above reading the game guide on forum!
Tarolock (EUNE)
: yup, yi totally doesnt have an alpha strike that makes him immune to anything, fizz doesnt have his pole that makes him untargetable zed doesnt have his shadow/ult and yasuo totally cant cast a windwall that stops everything even if the spell almost touched him
I'll agree that Yasuo's windwall has been left broken since release, but that's also it. Yi's alpha isn't anything remotely near Pyke's invis, you can easily see where Yi lands after it, and it doesn't magically remove him from the entire fight. Trickster is either used for engage or disengage, but it doesn't have a built in speed-boost removing him from the fight, unless you are dense enough to fight him against a wall.
Pyke Kidd (EUW)
: ehm ehmm you all become toxic when riot releases a ''OP'' champ pyke is not op if he gets caught he dies soo quick hes squishy ofc he does alot of dmg Hes A freakin assassin !!!! but he dies qucik and you complain about that??, how about this {{champion:420}} {{champion:120}} {{champion:105}} {{champion:84}} {{champion:89}} {{champion:39}} {{champion:11}} {{champion:75}} {{champion:23}} {{champion:48}}
Read prior comment about leaving Irelia out in terms of broken champs. As for the rest I personally only think Akali is leaning towards being as busted as Irelia, but that is purely down to how insane her scaling is on her sustain, having both superior mobility, "invisibility" and high end damage is to much (imo).
Tarolock (EUNE)
: {{champion:11}} {{champion:105}} {{champion:238}} {{champion:157}} yea i dont get it either
Those 4 don't have a magic get-out-of-jail-free button, Pyke does.., 1v3?- np, I'll just invis the %%%% out of here with 0 counterplay, which is just a tiny thing in his overloaded kit.
: He is also very squishy and lacks a real way to come back into a game when behind due to his reliance on being a support who only really brings damage to the table... beat him early and he will struggle a lot. Not to mention messing his ult up is super effective and relatively easy to do
Due to what reliance on being a support?- this guy can be played in any lane (or role), support being the one role where he absolutely has no place (imo anyway), as support he brings very little to the table as he can't use his snare / drag or stun without opening himself up to counter cc and hard dmg. The few times I've seen him as support, the ADC he is suppose to support gets hammered cause Pyke always runs off around 70% in order to heal back a little, on top of that I've not seen a single lane being won where Pyke was the support. I've seen him played midlane and become a nightmare as he wins the lane and outroams the enemy mid by a factor of thousands, I've seen him played jungle which is even worse due to his invisibility ganks, and the "sharks" that swim around you are so tiny and easy to miss if you are fighting someone else, that they may as well not be there (Think of every invisiblity / stealth champ without some icon showing up once they are close).
Smerk (EUW)
: He actually has the lowest winrate out of all champions right now. I'd say part of it due to his kinda unique kit, but it is still a bit too extreme. So, yeah, you can expect to see a buff for him soon
All new champions has a low winrate until people start getting guided and get some experience in on him (Not everyone wants to spend their life on pbe). Out of all the champions currently in the game, he is probably the one least needing a buff (Yes, I ignored Irelia because she doesn't have a vanish-between-5-enemies escape). His entire kit is so overloaded that I question the sanity of Riots staff handling champions! I'm sure part of why champions are now made this way with overloaded kits, is because Riot have dried up in the fresh idea section, so they just look at existing material and start combining multiple champions into 1.
Pyke Kidd (EUW)
: pyke.......
I don't get how you can love a champion with so much damage, self-healing, utility, escape, drag & stun, and his disguisting R ability. There should be no way that this champion isn't getting hammered by several adjustments in the coming patch.
Icepaw (EUNE)
: verification prevents smurfing - which in turn prevents people with high skill to mask as mdeiocre players and use mediocre players in silver/gold as cannonfodder. This isnt hard to grasp m8.
I don't see how since Riot isn't and wont ever support a 1 account per player policy, so it would just be multiple verification codes per phone.
Icepaw (EUNE)
: If you dont understand the reasoning above, there is nothing more that can be done to help you until you graduate preschool.
I'm sure it makes sense in your mind, but in the real world all you achieve with this verification, is that A human player enters a code to log into A account, it doesn't magically alter how match making works.., not even when you make childish attempts at belittling others.
Nondicio (EUW)
: Inting + Toxic and he is still playing? I want justice!
Just another thread showing how well the system works, as long as you don't use PG13 rated language, you can literally ruin games for months on end.
amenoko (EUW)
: Negative win-rate in normals, positive winrate in ranked
Given your disparity between games played in normal vs ranked, wait until you've reached maybe 50 ranked games, and you'll start seeing that fairness wasn't even on the whiteboard when Riot "designed" the matching "algorithm". If I have to be "kind" to Riot, I can without doubt say that a great deal of the unbalance, comes from the amount of socially inept players they have such success in attracting to this game.
Shukr4n (EUW)
: Well. That is the case of after millenials parenting. When i was a child there was less snowflaking about bad behavuoir children
Cause we all know that beating a child makes the person better down the line.
Icepaw (EUNE)
: Banks have imlemented personalia verification ages ago. Banks with online services are not only using phone validation, but instant double authentication process involving encrypted codes each time you make a transaction or login. So I guess it makes sense for Riot to at least verify 1 human individual to each account. Now, since you didnt understand this, it makes sense you dont understand why smurfing destroys ranked integrity, so Im gonna go by it step by step. 1: Riots (and all MOBAS) are built on the principle on equality. Equal sides, equal starting points, equal everything. When you start a match, the optimal starting point is 10 completly equal players on a an equal map with equal possibilites. Why? Cause then its down to the combined skill of the team who determine the winner of that match. 2: To determine a players skill, Riot has developed an algorythm, on a popular term called ELO, which is an integer\number on how good you are. Winning increases this number, and winning against better players will increase it more than if playing versus lesser players. 3: This number is one of the main factors the matchmaking system will look for when determining teams. It will always try to match up people in the same skill level. 4: When you reach an ELO (division) where you are roughly winning\loosing 50% times, you are seen as belonging in that ELO. **_NOW, the complicated part is, that your skill is not constant. It fluctuates based on hundreds of factors, including age, stress, mood, time of day, time of year etc etc. So while you in certain period average Platinum5, you can somehwere in the future, perhaps belong truly in Silver1. _** 5: SMURFS! When a high tier player, which are placed in ELO around Diamond, he will have an ELO of around 2500. A silver/gold player will have an ELO of around 1500. When the high tier player enters a ranked Q with a smurf, the matchmaking system will believe he is as skilled as a silver player, and match him vs silver players. What happens when a pro meets an amateur? He will own the game of course, making it pointless for 9 other players to play. They dont stand a chance. And that is what we mean by "destroying ranked integrity". Fooling the matchmaking system is gaining an unfair advantage, and SHOULD in any SERIOUS MOBA GAME be concidered cheating!
I understand that the verification = 1 human login into X account, but for you to extend this into somehow making matching and thereby ranked better I don't understand. You talk about equal skill and then move into Riots simplistic matching tool which is pairing teams based on team-wide mmr (not elo since that's something entirely different). To be able to match players based on equal skill, you first need to remove the team-wide mmr matching, since that alone can cause a new players (unranked) at 1500 mmr to go up against a seasoned gold player, since it doesn't look at anything beyong the mmr rating. This means the unranked player has 0 statistics in terms of ward count average over a given number of games, has a 0% KP etc etc, which only further increases the possibility of a unequal matching in a given lane, something that isn't negated at all by saying there is 4 other players on the team which has X mmr rating. It has nothing to do with verifying X person entering a SMS code in order to log in.
Valzuuuh (EUW)
: I guess you can find this information from: https://euw.leagueoflegends.com/en/legal/privacy#your-choices Click the "**Expand**" button at bottom right corner to view full text.
Yes, but part of the GDPR is that is suppose to be easily understandable by the user, and explained in short format, both things which is missing entirely from this essay form.
Rioter Comments
: You will never prove this pont. All my games, no exceptions: trolls, afk, flamers. Every single game. Verbal abuse is 100% in every game. It is very clear that the system does not work since there is a 100% chance to meet flamer in the game. 100% is a good indicater that system does not work as intented. It is basically efficient at 1%. Now think about why :) Quit the game, bro. Not worth mental health.
I'd say it's proven through the reports I've handed out because of the passive-aggressive / verbal assaulting going on, what more proof is needed for them?
Icepaw (EUNE)
: Bring SMS verification to soloQ ASAP!
Explain how SMS-verification will make match making better, because it makes as much sense as saying you can trust banks if they implement the very same thing.
Shukr4n (EUW)
: your parent, usually, threat u before kicking your ass. they dare u to do XX or they remove your pc, internet, cellphone... it s bad parenting and imho bad education if they dont give u the chance to choose. u can choose, whatever u think is right: to do or not to do something? they suggest to NOT do certain things. anyway toxicity seems well punished since chat is readable by a simple program to decide. trolling instead...
Your parent assuming they are of average intellect and have some common sense, won't use threats or physically abuse you, but instead tell you calmly what you did wasn't okay and why, and what consequence it may have if it continues in terms of taking away luxeries you have (weekly allowance, Playstation etc). That isn't the case with Riot though, and it can't be compared on any level.
: One day i will understand why some people can't use the /mute function. They would rather read every s@@t directed at them and flame back even tho, at this point, they should know they risk getting the boot for that too. Go figure...
Since there will always be days where it takes much less to trigger a reaction, the damage may already be done, not to mention the ripple effect it can have on everyone. So unless you mean instantly /all mute upon loading in, it would be the same as asking for chat removal, or bare minimum having that option through the client (Which is the prefered choice).
: > Why don't you make your 0 tolerence policy into a actual 0 tolerence policy, and skip the chat restriction punishment and go instantly into a 14 day suspension for passive-aggressive / verbal assulting? This is just plain stupid. I'm guessing your not alone. But! You're wrong. The system works. Riot CAN NOT change people's behaviour. Why can't you understand that? Better yet. Remove chat all together give us voice chat. (team only, no all chat). and stop with the "abuse" shit. Because again. Riot can not change the way people behave. You look for evil, you will find it everywhere.
Chat removal would also be my prefered choice, but I didn't wanna tickle the greenkeepers of these boards. I am also not asking for Riot to act as a behavior modifier, I am asking them to outright remove the weeds instead of giving them limited chat entries for a period.
Rioter Comments
: Its not childish. I always ban yasuo(if im not mid) or fizz(if im mid). I dont care if you are 7million mastery challenger yasuo, i will ban it, not because i want to spite you but because i hate playing with and against the champion. Dont like it? Feel free to ban my prepick, i play more than 1 champion in ranked, if you dont then dont play ranked, its simple.
Well at least you aren't shy in displaying a mentality that is part and parcel of the problems plaguing this game.
: > [{quoted}](name=Montazuma,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=WTPFdbrU,comment-id=0001000100000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-22T13:12:29.798+0000) > > You need to start _actually reading_ what you reply to mate. This guy is obviously a troll. {{sticker:zombie-brand-clap}}
I must be right, considering I read context and coherently and am not blindly naive or over-the-top narcissistic in regard to the debate...
Hydnoras (EUW)
: There are clear reasons why riot allows the banning of prepicked champions and they make perfect sense. Especially in ranked.
Oh yea, I am sure they are crystal clear to Riot, and I am sure it is also a mystery why such a thing creates animosity.., especially in ranked (if that has any point what so ever).
: Ranked is ranked regardless if its soloq or flex. You had no intention of winning because someone banned "your" champion. Banning peoples prepicks is not against the rules. Playing without intention of winning to get back at someone is bannable. Your attitude is shameful and you broke the rules, fair ban imo.
What a load of horseshit to fire off. Banning someone's prepick instantly creates animosity toward the person, not to mention it's about as childish as it gets to ban someone's prepick! There are so many levels of this game that are infuriating and frustrating **because** of Riot's inability to outright ban these mentally handicapped "people" who deliberately either ruin games, or ruin the atmosphere's by the example given (Among other things). Sure you can blame these would-be adult children for their attitudes, and you can blame it on everything else you can conjure in and out of the cosmos, but eventually it works like gravity and circles back to Riot and their utterly disguisting approach to dealing with those players!
íGengar (EUW)
: When exactly do you belong in your rank
Some will say you belong where you are, when you stop climbing. While that is partly true, it's also a increadibly naive statement due to the way this games matching works. Some players can get stuck at a given rank for extended periods of time bobbing up and down a little, before then climbing again. Part of that will be due to inconsistency, another part will be the matching, and again another part may be due to smurfs (I'll leave out the rage-quitters, flamers and inters, but you see where it's going). You don't win a game on your own ever, it doesn't happen in any rank of this game (even though many want to belive that), even if you somehow get the push your lane from tier 1 tower to nexus, you didn't win the game 1v5, because the enemy team would be tied up with your team mates. So when do you belong at a given rank?
Rismosch (EUW)
: A hacker is by definition someone who gains unauthorized access to a computer or system. If someone gets access to your account in an unauthorized way, then he is technically a hacker. It doesn't matter how he got access to your data, if someone who stole your data and logs into your account, then that someone is by definition a hacker. Also I want to note that hacking in real life mostly abuses human nature, not some complicated computerstuff like they show in movies. The weakest link in any security system is the human. The best hackers are the ones who fully understand humans. https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-2ebc5ba77db7fcc83eb042f4da79e4d6
No, a hacker is by definition someone that finds and exploits weaknesses in a computer system or network. Try as you might Rismoch, but this is the one reply you get from me in this thread before you try your usual tactic of derailment.
olimpa (EUW)
: Perma-Banned Due To Hacker.
Due to hackers? Don't you mean due to sharing details or going onto a site you had no clue what was and grabbing a keylogger:)
Montazuma (EUW)
: ***
'' Montazuma (EUW) - 2 days ago But the current system and all it's predecessors on which it is building, sure do reform players.... (Your respons) Surprisingly, yes. '' By implying the current system leads to reformation, you must have reduced level of toxicity, otherwise you agree with me. You cannot have reformation without a decline in toxicity, unless you now want to throw out some more nonessential mumbojumbo about stagnating toxicity due to "new players". My own experience doesn't need to have statistical value, it just need to convey what I experience on a daily basis. It's no different than me buying a car, if that car keeps breaking down on a daily basis its enough for me to say the car is a piece of shit, even if there are 100m other cars just like it driving around with no problems.., why? Because it's the experience I have that matters to me, not what some nod head may come and tell me about his car.
Shiwah (EUW)
: ***
First off, no I don't see why you ask for facts since I am stating based on my experience in games, you are the one using fictional numbers in terms of players on EuW and stating as fact that toxicity isn't on the rise, without backing it up with more than your word. I don't need to physically see people to know they are being toxic in games where I am present, what is it you don't understand specifically about individual player perception? _Rhetorical question_ You should get your head around what you say before making sickening attempts at turning the tables, perhaps you should actually read the postings from start.
Zyzyx (EUW)
: > debate the pro's and cons of the topic? You do realize that you did not do that at all, right? You just threw in 2 suggestions without explaining the pros and cons in the slightest, ignored feedback about your ideas completely and instead decided to attack me personally. How is it possible that you apparently DO know what a good discussion is all about yet you do the exact opposite?
Yes, I threw 2 suggestions out as alternative to the current direction which haven't altered in over 5 seasons, which is within what the thread is about. I didn't just jump in like you and fire down suggestions without adding anything as a alternative.
Shiwah (EUW)
: ***
It had all the facts required since this game is all about the individual perception of the game. Just because you say things are improving doesn't make it so, when I have the totally opposite experience on a daily basis, and your supporting argument that it's because there are 100m players makes your statement all the more invalid, since there isn't 100m players on EuW. Ultimately it doesn't matter if you came in to this thread claming there was 10 trillion players on EuW, if my experience is that toxicity is rising, it will still take a hell of a lot more than your word that it isn't.., specifically that my experience is improving on this particularly area, at which point I would agree with you.
Shiwah (EUW)
: ***
I can see how that changes my previous reply, especially when this game works by having 100m players in the same pool., oh wait, even if that was the case, it has 0 impact on my previous statement.
: > [{quoted}](name=Montazuma,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=WTPFdbrU,comment-id=00010001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-21T14:13:52.918+0000) > > No, I did get your point, I just don't agree with it since it's more of the Riot spin (I belive they themselves came out with the example in yesteryear). > > I didn't say all RnG variables would stop the climb, I just said there are to many to use your "mathmatical" formula to dismiss the RnG match making. > > Your PoV so far have been on par with Drake's equation, you know a couple of factors and believe you can extrapolate and have a result, which you can't. Well then: go ahead! Name me one of those variables that stop you from climbing, in case you are better than the average player at your elo. What exactly makes my argumentation invalid?
You need to start _actually reading_ what you reply to mate.
Zyzyx (EUW)
: Why do you even join a discussion if you obviously do not want to discuss but instead just insult people?
Wait, a discussion for you is reiterating Riot spin rather than debate the pro's and cons of the topic? Rethorical question just so you don't get confused, but I do agree I should have stayed out of this topic since it's always the same outcome. People chime in and fire down suggestions and ideas without actually providing anything to the table to maintain status-quo, despite 8 years into it, the only thing proven is that it doesn't work.
Zyzyx (EUW)
: > Season 3 where I started it was the tribunal, which had it's main flaw of being run by players who are wildly different in perspective That was actually not the problem. First of all the communities perspective was surprisingly consistent even across continents and different cultures and secondly it was a crowdsourcing system and in such a system consistency is not even required. The main problem of the Tribunal was the lack of speed. It took weeks or even months to process a case. There were more problems, but this was the major one. > Since then it's been going on the same 3 principles I outlined previously, just because you have 5k+ CR games in season 4 or 5 and now get 10 / 25 doesn't change the system. That was not the only change. Different ban lengths were tested, additional information was provided to punished players, different forms of punishment and rewards were tested (ranked restrictions, honor, loot etc.), the zero tolerance system was introduced...and that's just the things I can think of spontaneously. > Let players moderate their own chat via the in-game mute function How exactly do you mean that? Mute already exists and the players opinion is already the very basis of the current punishment system. > Design a system that uses the current shortlistings on "toxic" words, which then alters a players text from say: Screw you %%%%% > Thomas the Thuthu train likes to run fast The idea of having a chat filter / blacklist was already discussed to death and there are plenty of downsides, for example the inability to keep up with human creativity, the fact that those filters quickly tend to block the entire human language in their attempt to cover everything that could be toxic, the fact that toxic players see it as a challenge to trick such a system, etc. > that list goes on for miles. Bring it. > Finally, you ask why you can't teach a US institution about reformation?- because they are inherently supporting this type of system in all their functions in order to maximize profit. Again, it's not an institution and it does not consist only of Americans. It's just located there, that's all. And even if it is...so what? Fighting toxicity is in Riots financial interest. Fighting toxicity successfully and maximizing profit go along with each other. So what exactly is the problem about it?
There are so many irregularities in your conclusions that I don't know where to begin, maybe because I also don't care to reply to each of these c/p's. The list goes on for miles, I could fire off a ton of suggestions and each one would get the same reply as you just gave, which is why I cba with more than 2 easy ones. If Riot introduced 50k CR's for players in season 9, people like you would would cheers it as the greatest invention since toiletpaper and claim it was revolutionary and unlike everything prior to it.., I am sure you can draw your own conclusion as what I think you are, from that.
KinefCZE (EUNE)
: You can make this game enjoyable again.
I understand your PoV and respect it, but you sound to much like those who are competitive regardless of rank, have some invalid argument if they have to contend with someone who playes like they could give a %%%%. I definitely don't dispute that this game has its fair share, of people who are downright moronic and spout trashy comments regardless of whats going, but I can also understand the other side of the argument, and don't find your statement more correct than theirs. Using myself, if this game didn't have a ranked mode, I wouldn't be playing this game at all, because in both ranked and normal, I find that it's quite standard that players play to screw their team mates for the sake of KDA, and then abuse them.
Shiwah (EUW)
: ***
I'll take your word for it, the day it doesn't actually seem like toxicity is increasing exponentially.
Zyzyx (EUW)
: Riot is not an institution, it's a company...an international one that just happens to have their HQ in LA. Why exactly would be impossible to teach Riot about reformation, based on the their geographical position? And why do you even think it's necessary to teach Riot this if you consider the fact that Riot is THE company that values reform over all else and are pretty much the first gaming company who ever followed this principle? > their system is the exact same as the previous one And also very different to what they used before. The System was changed and improved multiple times over the years. You really can't blame Riot for sticking to the status quo, because they don't do that all.
The system was changed multiple times over the years? Season 3 where I started it was the tribunal, which had it's main flaw of being run by players who are wildly different in perspective.., what you would consider offensive, some other person would find hilarious and not worthy of punishment. Since then it's been going on the same 3 principles I outlined previously, just because you have 5k+ CR games in season 4 or 5 and now get 10 / 25 doesn't change the system. A system change is something entirely different, which could be; - Let players moderate their own chat via the in-game mute function - Design a system that uses the current shortlistings on "toxic" words, which then alters a players text from say: Screw you %%%%% > Thomas the Thuthu train likes to run fast Two rather easy suggestions that are fundamentally different than the now 4 year old system, that list goes on for miles. Finally, you ask why you can't teach a US institution about reformation?- because they are inherently supporting this type of system in all their functions in order to maximize profit.
Zyzyx (EUW)
: The usual and most obvious example are American prisons (therefore the name of the idea, "prisoner island", a reference to Alcatraz). They mostly follow the concept of just putting the bad guys together as punishment and hope for the best. That's why American prisons tend to make people more criminal instead of creating law-abiding citizens and why they have some of the lowest reform ratios of all the prison systems in the world. Other prison systems, like the Norwegian one, that do have a strong focus on not branding the inmates as criminals and rather train them to live a normal life, are insanely successful in comparison.
You are refering to Halden Prison which is indeed a model example of reformation, but you can't teach reformation to a US institution which Riot also is in a form. That's also why their system is the exact same as the previous one, and is always built upon the same basic principles, silence the players (CR), punish the player (suspension), "exclude" the account (perma-ban which isn't a perma-ban of the actual problem, the player).
Shiwah (EUW)
: ***
But the current system and all it's predecessors on which it is building, sure do reform players.... This isn't about reforming players, but about banking on the added revenue from banned accounts buying up the same stock they lost, if it wasn't there was alternatives to take; - Lets players use the mute function in games or keep listening to the toxicity - Alter the chat message when it detects toxicity into something a child likes The list is fairly long!
: > [{quoted}](name=Montazuma,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=WTPFdbrU,comment-id=000100010000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-21T09:44:07.493+0000) > > Yes, and 2 + 2 = 4 > > Mathmatical certainties does not apply where the RnG factors are so great they can't be calculated, which is what this game has more off than anything else in the universe. > > Case in point is where you have the smurfs, who has a game where they just don't perform because <insert reason here>, or the tantrum child that rage-quits after dying 2 times, or the player who loads in and dances around on the fountain until the game is lost, or the that Yi player who gets hardfed early and starts 1v5 dying until he goes negative KDA and the enemy team is back in the game..., the list goes on and on since they are also applied on the other side. > > Your knockout argument has the punch of a 4 year old child. I think you didn't quite get my point. If your performance is constantly better than that of the average player in your elo, **you are going to climb**. Nothing will change this. All variables in your team that make you lose a game without you having control over it **can also be applied to the enemy team**, they therefore have a higher chance of happening to the enemy team than to you, since you are the constant in this case. ------------------------------ Literally all RNG factors cannot stop you form climbing if you deserve a higher rank. Smurf who doesn't perform, tantrum child, AFKer, overconfident Yi, whatever, all these factors do happen to the enemies more often. Unless of course you are either a smurf who doesn't perform, a tantrum child, an AFKer or an overconfident Master Yi player _**wink**_ ------------- You are wrong. Mathematical certainties **do very much** apply to these numbers, as the do to any numbers that exist. Always when there is RNG involved stochastics theory becomes **even more** important. ----------------------------- Also: Please, there is no need to become offended, just because you're losing a peaceful and unpersonal discussion on the internet.
No, I did get your point, I just don't agree with it since it's more of the Riot spin (I belive they themselves came out with the example in yesteryear). I didn't say all RnG variables would stop the climb, I just said there are to many to use your "mathmatical" formula to dismiss the RnG match making. Your PoV so far have been on par with Drake's equation, you know a couple of factors and believe you can extrapolate and have a result, which you can't.
: > [{quoted}](name=Montazuma,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=WTPFdbrU,comment-id=0001000100010000,timestamp=2018-05-21T09:14:07.921+0000) > > That is indeed what I am saying when it comes to the Silver ranks, mostly because people have no clue on how to close games. > > Players in this rank places KDA > everything else. > > Even games where you have 2 inhibitors down and 1 nexus tower remaining and just got baron, I've seen players try to force a toplane and lost it, since that 1 player dives cause he's "OP" and fed. That makes no sense at all. You are not more likely to lose when you are ahead. Yeah, there may be some throws sometimes, but after all **the enemy team does not know how to end as well.** So it may just be a coinflip, which, when you're ahead is already influenced positively influenced to go your way. Even if you don't agree with me about my last point, this is going to convince you: There are 4 players in your team, that place KDA above everything else, but there is 5 in the enemy team.
You are right that I don't agree with your last point, because it's the mathmatical analogy based on ignorance.
: Honor locked
If you can play you've been given a chat restriction (or you had a suspension at one point), your honor is now locked for the next millenium.
GreyfellD (EUW)
: Don't complain about matchmaking if YOU ARE THE ONE that broke it...
What you state is ONE factor that ruins games, another and equally legit reason is that match making is in to simplistic to result in balanced games. The most easy example is that ward count on average isn't included in matching, but only the crap team-wide mmr rating which only increased the problem.
Show more

Montazuma

Level 73 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion