|
Remember guys, this is the general discussion thread. Keep whine/QQ posts in the appropriate QQ memorial thread! Thanks! |
On April 15 2012 16:41 obesechicken13 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 16:38 jadoth wrote:On April 15 2012 16:28 Bezelheim wrote:On April 15 2012 16:23 jadoth wrote:
there are plenty of times where dying is the optimal play. flash ulting to baron steal as warwick is a very good play and you will most of the time doing that. staying behind to finish an inhib. running straight into 5 of them as say mundo and getting blown up but because they had to turn on you they get flash ken and vlad ulted and get aced. suicide pushing top could be a good play a lot of the time and saying you should have baited it and got away is unreasonable. in order to make them come top you have to be with the creeps so they can see you and so you are actually applying pressure and that is too deep to escape from a lot of the time.
Though it is completely likely that dying will be the result, it`s still not exactly optimal. Flash ulting to baron, stealing, and getting away would be optimal, even if it is rarely possible. if flash ulting, stealing and then getting away is impossible then how is it the optimal play. that makes no sense what so ever. if stealing and dieing is the best you can do then it is the optimal play. if impossible plays are the optimal play then the optimal play in every game is to 1v5 them in their spawn at lvl 1. Pretty much. Bezelheim your argument makes no sense.
i dont think you guys get what hes saying lol
|
No one tends to say "I'ma suicide into that pit and steal baron at the cost of my life"
i have said that to myself many times.
|
On April 15 2012 17:34 jadoth wrote:Show nested quote + No one tends to say "I'ma suicide into that pit and steal baron at the cost of my life" i have said that to myself many times.
I've said that to myself upwards of a dozen times probably. Number of times of success though are probably in the single digits though =(.
On a side note, is anybody else from NA experiencing ridiculous server side lag? 200ms(up from 50-70) with occasional 5-10 seconds of complete and utter unplayability?
EDIT: it's been like this for me all day today pretty much.
|
On April 15 2012 17:42 Amui wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 17:34 jadoth wrote: No one tends to say "I'ma suicide into that pit and steal baron at the cost of my life" i have said that to myself many times. I've said that to myself upwards of a dozen times probably. Number of times of success though are probably in the single digits though =(. On a side note, is anybody else from NA experiencing ridiculous server side lag? 200ms(up from 50-70) with occasional 5-10 seconds of complete and utter unplayability?
yes i got that at the tail end of the game i just played.
|
On April 15 2012 13:09 petered wrote:
Anyone else feel like they play much better if they play more games in a row?
My usual LoLing is just a couple games at a time. I find that when I can play more in one day I am doing much better by the end of the day. Maybe just anecdotal/incidental, but it definitely feels that way.
I'm just the opposite. I usually get a headache after 3 or 4 games, and then my decision making goes out the window...
|
United States47024 Posts
On April 15 2012 17:15 Parnage wrote:
..His argument makes perfect sense he's just going a bit overboard in it's defense. I think what people are trying to say is that a teammate dieing may not be the worst for the team. However obviously that person should try his/her best to actually not die anyway.
Hard to do near suicidal plays such as a baron steal or turning to let the enemy blow everything on you is not ideal play but it can be effective play if done at the right time. No one tends to say "I'ma suicide into that pit and steal baron at the cost of my life" but they do realize it's possibility and understand that the possibility of success even at the cost of death outweighs the cons.
Yeah?
Basically you're saying that for every "good" play that involves someone dying, there's a "better" play that's nearly equivalent in which that person does not die.
Except that's not always true. If the choice is between running away, and turning around and throwing one round of spells that gets you killed, that one round of spells can still be worth more than whether you lived or died.
"Optimal" play is pretty meaningless in teamfight-related scenarios anyway. In a situation involving 10 distinct players, you usually can't nail down the optimality of individual actions because it's so dependent on the play of the other 9 players--and you can't make any sort of optimality assumptions about those players' play.
|
It'd be nice to have someone who isn't a moron go over pro/high level replays and point out more of that stuff about teamwork that so many people miss. I like watching high level games, but I hate listening to guys like Hotshot who are so arrogant and unhelpful or who is emotional in the moment and just trying to make themselves look good.
Something like a LoL version of the Day9 daily would be kick ass. If TL came together and produced a show like this I bet it could really take off ^^
|
On April 15 2012 18:25 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 17:15 Parnage wrote:
..His argument makes perfect sense he's just going a bit overboard in it's defense. I think what people are trying to say is that a teammate dieing may not be the worst for the team. However obviously that person should try his/her best to actually not die anyway.
Hard to do near suicidal plays such as a baron steal or turning to let the enemy blow everything on you is not ideal play but it can be effective play if done at the right time. No one tends to say "I'ma suicide into that pit and steal baron at the cost of my life" but they do realize it's possibility and understand that the possibility of success even at the cost of death outweighs the cons.
Yeah? Basically you're saying that for every "good" play that involves someone dying, there's a "better" play that's nearly equivalent in which that person does not die. Except that's not always true. If the choice is between running away, and turning around and throwing one round of spells that gets you killed, that one round of spells can still be worth more than whether you lived or died. "Optimal" play is pretty meaningless in teamfight-related scenarios anyway. In a situation involving 10 distinct players, you usually can't nail down the optimality of individual actions because it's so dependent on the play of the other 9 players--and you can't make any sort of optimality assumptions about those players' play.
Playing "optimally" is a stupid theoretical concept anyways, if you're playing as good as you can, the rest of your success usually lies within the enemy team.
Meaning you gotta bank on them doing retarded stuff.
If you get triple towerdove, and all of them die for you, in my book that's as good as it can get. Of course it would in theory be possible to survive with it too, but as long as your not Vlad or Fizz, that's next to impossible, and it depends on the enemies being retarded to work.
|
I feel that if you can get away with 25apen runes (31 apen total w/ masteries) as an ad carry against a bot lane which doesn't have killing potential in lane (since you probably won't be last hitting under tower that often), I gotta say that it's fucking awesome how you can start shredding people with just a bf sword. Now I'm thinking about trying this out in all of my 1600 elo games, and maybe adding a brutalizer since solo q's don't depend on the optimal late game carry most of the time.
Oh yeah, ashe with ghost/flash is friggin scary if you can get away with it in lane lawl
|
On April 15 2012 00:55 TwoToneTerran wrote:Show nested quote +On April 15 2012 00:35 spinesheath wrote:On April 15 2012 00:27 TwoToneTerran wrote:
If you go into ranked only being able to play two champs and maybe one support, what do you do when those lanes get taken and your support banned? You really need atleast a modest number of champs you can play in different lanes so you don't get ruined by the other team picking what you want to play or you not getting the lane you want. You just play another champ. Where's the problem? Sure, you're probably not gonna carry and so on, but it's not the end of the world. As long as you don't pick one of the few not-so-easy-to-get-the-hang-of champs you should be fine. At least you got some real practice for that champ. I've won lots of ranked games where I played a champ for the first time (it goes downhill starting with the second game). Playing a champ for the first time in ranked is a pretty quick way to throw away a game and annoy a bunch of people. If you don't care about that then, whatever. I disagree. I only played like 150 normals before I started playing ranked and learned how stupid it was that I only played 3 or 4 champs and decided to learn some others while playing with friends. Your anecdote doesn't really make a reasonable point. The vast majority of instances where someone plays a champ for the first time they will SUCK with them, especially if they're anywhere near their appropriate ranking.
I really disagree, you can totally play firs time champs in ranked. It's not ideal, but certain straightforward champs (cough warwick cough) can be played without prior experience just fine.
|
^not sure if that applies in higher elo, though. Assuming you mean top, top lane is pretty much knowing your matchups. If you meant jungle, well it shouldn't really make much of a difference, just as you said.
|
On April 15 2012 19:52 billy5000 wrote:
^not sure if that applies in higher elo, though. Assuming you mean top, top lane is pretty much knowing your matchups. If you meant jungle, well it shouldn't really make much of a difference, just as you said.
You might as well. Sure, expect to lose at least a couple dozen points, but its not that bad.
|
On April 15 2012 19:52 billy5000 wrote:
^not sure if that applies in higher elo, though. Assuming you mean top, top lane is pretty much knowing your matchups. If you meant jungle, well it shouldn't really make much of a difference, just as you said.
You won't get the experience needed to play a certain champ at a high level from anywhere other than ranked either. At least not with reasonable effort. Whether you're not exactly great on that new champ for 5 or for 7 games doesn't matter.
|
Assuming you play other champs at that role.
Difficulty of learning a new champion at a certain role.
Jungle - easiest, so long as you have a good runepage/mastery/skill setup, you'll do perfectly fine.
Midlane - Decent, so long as you understand how a champion works you'll do okay. Some matchups are still going to be very hard.
Bot- harder, gonna group together because bot works as a team. But if you don't know what you're doing you can still farm and hope the other guy isn't too good at punishing, but it's more difficult than mid because you can get zoned much harder if you fuck up.
Top - hardest. Some lanes you have to build in a certain way, rune/spec a certain way just to not die in lane. Other's you need to abuse certain power lulls to gain advantages. Some lanes are just about impossible. How you handle vlad as olaf is different than how you would handle cho for example. One you pretty much need to win lane early or get fucked, the other you can take to a farmoff and still be fine.
|
I've lost two games against intermediate bots this month. One I was doing AD gragas to learn the guy when our revive tele anivia, jarvan and sion decided to be like "I'm helping" and bum rush the enemy fountain at level 1. (I joined them). Anivia had some amazing walls. Often kept me from getting in danger of enemy champs or to keep them and me from getting to her ^_^
Overall they must have had 15 deaths each and 0 kills among them by the 20 minute mark.
The other one I was playing a smurf as AD graves. Just as I got a double kill on soraka and udyr, ending my game as 19-2 (I know I'm so bad T_T) I find my nexus going down and my three teammates I left to guard it dead... lol. Smurf bot games are so much better than actual bot games. You get to do so much more. I don't smurf vs people though. Tried that once. Ended up 13-0.
On topic. I still play new champions in ranked. I play one bot game first to get a feel for their skills and then go ranked. Just don't tell your allies or they'll be on your ass all game long. And if you do marginally well and your team carries you to a high kdr don't go "first time ashe ^_^" in all chat. It's a dick thing to do.
|
Who is a good counterpick to Mordekaiser?
I usually just play Viktor against him, which is fine, after a few levels you can clear as fast as him and laser him when his shield is down, but I dont feel like I really have an advantage.
fucker just clears waves instantly and cant be harassed 90% of the time
|
On April 15 2012 20:24 sob3k wrote:
Who is a good counterpick to Mordekaiser?
I usually just play Viktor against him, which is fine, after a few levels you can clear as fast as him and laser him when his shield is down, but I dont feel like I really have an advantage.
fucker just clears waves instantly and cant be harassed 90% of the time
I think Cassiopea is good ?
|
Pantheon can destroy him top (maybe mid too despite the short lane).
|
On April 15 2012 20:30 Alaric wrote:
Pantheon can destroy him top (maybe mid too despite the short lane).
really? how do you play it? Just spear him to death?
|
Most of the times I see him I go Galio and dump on him. He can't dodge your Qs when he tries to push and you can push just as hard as him, also you make for instant kills with your ult + jungler on him. Just remember to ward his path to your wraiths as most Mordes like to farm them and it's an easy kill.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
