[Patch 1.0.0.134: Nautilus] General Discussion - Page 34

On February 16 2012 05:05 dooraven wrote:
"Next time we just book one scrim. They're not capable of playing more" - Wickd

Seriously, TSM.

On February 16 2012 05:05 dooraven wrote:
"Next time we just book one scrim. They're not capable of playing more" - Wickd

Seriously, TSM.

On February 16 2012 05:12 Redox wrote:
I honestly think TSMs behaviour is quite disrespectful towards the people they play against. TSM may have time to play all day, but CLG only has this window of 4-5 hours to play as several have to do university etc.

TSM should like take a vacation or something. Way too much drama for a group of guys who play video games for a living. Just a day or two to go somewhere and do something together could do wonders for them. Or hell, a day or two where they're all apart might help too.

On February 16 2012 05:29 LaNague wrote:
well, the tribunal banned snoopeh this week, one of the nicest players in LoL. One more indication that the tribunal doesnt work.

On February 16 2012 05:12 Chiharu Harukaze wrote:
Just a quick word from me. Riot is aware of the problem with false positives. Currently there is a filter that tries to tell when a report is 'valid' or not before being sent to the Tribunal. This should filter out all the reports where people are falsely accused of feeding or bad playing, but just had a bad day. Obviously, it's not perfect atm but they're working on it. They're also currently hiring PhD level Statisticians and Data Analytics so if you know anyone who fits that and is looking for a job, do tell them about it! Also, remember that there's always the final fail-safe of an actual Rioter to audit the Tribunal. Think of the Tribunal as a crowd sourced engine that filter that examines reports to be sent to a Rioter's Inbox. Kind of. On a separate note, I've heard there have been several fringe cases that have come up in internal discussions regarding improving the system, but the consensus was that these cases were still temp ban worthy, although marginally so.

Re giving reasons for bans: It's not efficient to do so. The people hours required to personalise each punishment is incredibly disproportionate compared to the effect it would have. That is to say, people generally don't care, or are insistent on contesting the reason given. I've handled enough complaints on the Help & Support Boards to get a general idea. Pendragon has a few amusing stories too, including the time when he had to explain to someone by phone that graphical death threats were not an appropriate method of constructive criticism... Also, explicitly stating what is and is not ban-worthy leads to people being pedantic about their bans and playing with semantics, dancing around the bigger issue.

On February 16 2012 05:15 ManyCookies wrote:
The problem with the Tribunal System isn't just that it doesn't provide the exact incriminating details. The more generalized problem is that there's a large disassociation between the incriminating action and the associated punishment.

The verbal equivalent of a ban is "Oi, stop being a dick to people!". Now, if I said that to someone immediately after when they make a sexist joke AND when they beat a hobo on the street, then I've set a definitive boundary that the sexist jokes and hobo beating is wrong. However, if I wait a day and said "God, you were a dick yesterday", then the boundary is rather unclear. Am I only mad about the hobo beating? Was I mad about the sexist joke? Was I mad about either of those things? The ambiguity provides a rationalization to continue with the lesser, but still unacceptable behavior. As a Starcraft example, it's the difference between saying "Stop sucking at Macro so much" and "Constantly build workers" or "Don't queue up units". Without explicit boundaries on proper behavior, it's rather difficult for a person to adjust and improve his behavior/macro.

On February 16 2012 05:50 NeoIllusions wrote:
Waking up to 8 pages about the Tribunal. What a boring topic. :<
Shame on you guys.

On February 16 2012 05:43 Alaric wrote:
So, Nautilus is quite fun, but he's that kind of champ where you can't do much if your team doesn't follow. Tried him top and jungle.
Top I was against an Akali and spec'd MR, so no MS quints, and 9-21-0. He felt really, really slow. I was camped by Udyr for the first 3 levels and died stupidly (I don't think Akali would have had a shot at killing me otherwise, at least not that one). We were kinda behind early on, then I got carried, but RoA + FH after philo gave me some nice survivability.

Jungling I was doing quite well but we had a Heimerdinger feeding botlane (I suspect it was intentional, how could Heimer be caught by Blitzcrank with minions + his turrets?), leading to an inevitable loss to super-fed Vayne.
He can jungle without a pull (started regrowth+pot, Orianna didn't feel the need to help in any way) but he falls really, really low (had to back after wolves). No idea how it would be with a proper leash. His first few levels are kinda slow since his spells don't damage enough so he relies on AAs a lot, and they're slow. Once he hits 4-5 tho, it's nice and a lot faster, thanks to the AoE on-hit effect of the shield.

His passive is really good for ganks, and I believe his Q is better than Blitz's for initiation as it doesn't pull your target as far from your laner(s). Your slowliness and the range on Riptides are so that if the ganked espaces, you won't catch him if you can't Q him immediatly, tho. Still a burnt flash in most cases.
You're a bit under Maokai in the CC-damage department, but you've got both in a satisfying amount.

His AoE clearing is good, both in lane and in the jungle. W should be leveled first as you need to mitigate damage since you're so slow (and you'll often have to survive for a few seconds for your Q to come off cd and allow you to escape), and it also reduces the cd of the spell.
CDR seems like a key stat on him, obviously because you want to spam cc and not rise your damage, but also because his cooldowns are damn long. Before glacial shroud, I often felt "skill-starved", esp. during fights and ganks where he'd be rare that I cast each spell more than once.

On February 16 2012 05:54 NeoIllusions wrote:
TSM drama aside, I read that TSM picked Shen? How is he looking in a scrim?

Edit: n/m, looks like mr_tolkien says TRM failed.