|
On August 18 2012 04:47 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 04:44 Seuss wrote:On August 18 2012 04:41 arb wrote:On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? should we be playing to lose then? It's about priorities. If you play to win but don't learn anything you'll eventually get stuck. If you play to learn winning is a natural consequence of self-improvement. That's a chicken/egg argument. If you're playing to win, you're going to be playing at your best, which leads to improvement. So is it better to focus on winning (which leads to harder-to-win games and therefore improvement), or focus on improving (which increases the chance of victory)?
It's not. There's nothing about playing your best which inherently leads to improvement. You can improve when playing your best, but that has nothing to do with how well you played and everything to do with ability to analyze the game objectively. Playing to win can, in fact, stymie growth by causing a chilling effect on your play.
For example, many junglers aren't confident in their ability to directly counter-jungle. As a result the best way to win in the short term is to avoid that risk altogether. Long term the player is stuck until they can put winning aside and learn the skill that they've been avoiding because of the risk.
Again, it's not a chicken and egg problem. It's about priorities.
|
On August 18 2012 04:54 Requizen wrote:
I really never flame in game unless it's really bad, I just meant here on the forums.
Yes, I'm going to say that some of my losses were due to my team throwing the game. You seem to be saying (and I'm sorry if I'm just misunderstanding) that I should never say that about my teammates because I should just carry harder. I'm not saying I'm just in ELO hell because my teammates suck, but I can list it as a large contributing factor, and I don't feel bad about that.
yes that's exactly how youre supposed to play ranked, never call anyone out and carry harder. You can feel ok about raging at teammates all the time and blaming them but you'll also never gain elo.
|
On August 18 2012 04:54 JackDino wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? Please teach me how to play 6v x. I'm guessing about 80% of the playerbase plays to win. In lower elos atleast they only care about winning.
Oh man I miss 6v6 on twisted treeline. That shit was bonkers.
|
On August 18 2012 05:05 Seuss wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 04:47 Requizen wrote:On August 18 2012 04:44 Seuss wrote:On August 18 2012 04:41 arb wrote:On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? should we be playing to lose then? It's about priorities. If you play to win but don't learn anything you'll eventually get stuck. If you play to learn winning is a natural consequence of self-improvement. That's a chicken/egg argument. If you're playing to win, you're going to be playing at your best, which leads to improvement. So is it better to focus on winning (which leads to harder-to-win games and therefore improvement), or focus on improving (which increases the chance of victory)? It's not. There's nothing about playing your best which inherently leads to improvement. You can improve when playing your best, but that has nothing to do with how well you played and everything to do with ability to analyze the game objectively. Playing to win can, in fact, stymie growth by causing a chilling effect on your play. For example, many junglers aren't confident in their ability to directly counter-jungle. As a result the best way to win in the short term is to avoid that risk altogether. Long term the player is stuck until they can put winning aside and learn the skill that they've been avoiding because of the risk. Again, it's not a chicken and egg problem. It's about priorities.
That's not entirely true. If I'm playing to win, I'm focusing as hard as I can on things that matter. I'm forcing myself to look at the minimap, to last hit correctly, to position myself in the right place - not because I'm actively attempting to improve myself in those aspects, but because doing them well actively leads to my victory. Eventually, they become habits that I don't have to focus on as much. I don't go into each game thinking "I have to get better at last hitting", I go in with the idea of "last hit as best as possible to win my lane", which eventually leads to becoming better at it in the long run naturally.
But in that train of thought, improving and winning are naturally tied hand in hand, hence the chicken/egg argument.
|
Canada13389 Posts
On August 18 2012 05:13 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 05:05 Seuss wrote:On August 18 2012 04:47 Requizen wrote:On August 18 2012 04:44 Seuss wrote:On August 18 2012 04:41 arb wrote:On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? should we be playing to lose then? It's about priorities. If you play to win but don't learn anything you'll eventually get stuck. If you play to learn winning is a natural consequence of self-improvement. That's a chicken/egg argument. If you're playing to win, you're going to be playing at your best, which leads to improvement. So is it better to focus on winning (which leads to harder-to-win games and therefore improvement), or focus on improving (which increases the chance of victory)? It's not. There's nothing about playing your best which inherently leads to improvement. You can improve when playing your best, but that has nothing to do with how well you played and everything to do with ability to analyze the game objectively. Playing to win can, in fact, stymie growth by causing a chilling effect on your play. For example, many junglers aren't confident in their ability to directly counter-jungle. As a result the best way to win in the short term is to avoid that risk altogether. Long term the player is stuck until they can put winning aside and learn the skill that they've been avoiding because of the risk. Again, it's not a chicken and egg problem. It's about priorities. That's not entirely true. If I'm playing to win, I'm focusing as hard as I can on things that matter. I'm forcing myself to look at the minimap, to last hit correctly, to position myself in the right place - not because I'm actively attempting to improve myself in those aspects, but because doing them well actively leads to my victory. Eventually, they become habits that I don't have to focus on as much. I don't go into each game thinking "I have to get better at last hitting", I go in with the idea of "last hit as best as possible to win my lane", which eventually leads to becoming better at it in the long run naturally. But in that train of thought, improving and winning are naturally tied hand in hand, hence the chicken/egg argument.
Not really. you can focus on last hitting and if its good then good you win the lane. But missing something on the minimap isnt the end of the game, its the next on the get better list. But you cant get better by doing everything at once.
|
If you're playing to win all the time you'd never try out anything new.
|
playing to win in ranked can be detrimental to the learning process
a really obvious example is risk-aversion/ unwillingness to take risks. you might not be willing to test our the aggressive/offensive limits of a certain champion just because you don't want to lose, when you could have tried and failed and learned more than never trying and never knowing
|
On August 18 2012 05:16 ZeromuS wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 05:13 Requizen wrote:On August 18 2012 05:05 Seuss wrote:On August 18 2012 04:47 Requizen wrote:On August 18 2012 04:44 Seuss wrote:On August 18 2012 04:41 arb wrote:On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? should we be playing to lose then? It's about priorities. If you play to win but don't learn anything you'll eventually get stuck. If you play to learn winning is a natural consequence of self-improvement. That's a chicken/egg argument. If you're playing to win, you're going to be playing at your best, which leads to improvement. So is it better to focus on winning (which leads to harder-to-win games and therefore improvement), or focus on improving (which increases the chance of victory)? It's not. There's nothing about playing your best which inherently leads to improvement. You can improve when playing your best, but that has nothing to do with how well you played and everything to do with ability to analyze the game objectively. Playing to win can, in fact, stymie growth by causing a chilling effect on your play. For example, many junglers aren't confident in their ability to directly counter-jungle. As a result the best way to win in the short term is to avoid that risk altogether. Long term the player is stuck until they can put winning aside and learn the skill that they've been avoiding because of the risk. Again, it's not a chicken and egg problem. It's about priorities. That's not entirely true. If I'm playing to win, I'm focusing as hard as I can on things that matter. I'm forcing myself to look at the minimap, to last hit correctly, to position myself in the right place - not because I'm actively attempting to improve myself in those aspects, but because doing them well actively leads to my victory. Eventually, they become habits that I don't have to focus on as much. I don't go into each game thinking "I have to get better at last hitting", I go in with the idea of "last hit as best as possible to win my lane", which eventually leads to becoming better at it in the long run naturally. But in that train of thought, improving and winning are naturally tied hand in hand, hence the chicken/egg argument. Not really. you can focus on last hitting and if its good then good you win the lane. But missing something on the minimap isnt the end of the game, its the next on the get better list. But you cant get better by doing everything at once.
Right, and then I win that game, which raises my ELO, putting me against harder opponents. Then against those opponents, missing something on the minimap is the difference between Dragon and the enemy team getting it, so I force myself to focus on it, getting better because victory requires it. The next higher level, missing a tiny thing on the minimap is the difference between Baron and a loss, so I have to force myself to focus, etc.
We're really saying the same thing, except I'm saying "I'm improving with the intention of getting better to win more", while you're saying "I'm improving with the intention of getting better just to be better". Same difference.
Edit: onus isn't the right word.
|
On August 18 2012 04:54 JackDino wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? Please teach me how to play 6v x. I'm guessing about 80% of the playerbase plays to win. In lower elos atleast they only care about winning.
You shouldn't be immature and call it 6v4 or w/e when you're teammates doing badly. If he's doing badly as long as he gets levels and into and gets into teamfights (make sure you ping and call objectives instead of just assuming he's going to be somewhere) he's going to be much more effective than fighting 4v5. The important thing is to be ahead enough that you don't lose map control and the dude doesn't get ganked all day.
Like the solo queue games I played the past week I was "that guy" who was like 0/3 early game because I'm not playing that much solo q and I have a bad sense for gank timings top and I get dived a couple times and I'm 0/3, the games where the team just played as normal I ended up doing well because being 0/3 doesn't matter if you have levels and farm but the games where the mid and jungler were just complaining and pretty much doing nothing all game were the ones where we ended up losing.
|
On August 18 2012 04:24 greggy wrote:
and someone give me a vod or something of a top player playing support in low elo and carrying the game.
http://www.twitch.tv/aphromoo/b/328849440
@1:43:40
i complain about my teammates all the time in skype with friends or post-game on messageboards, but never in game and never at someone.
but complaining is just idle banter. when i actually look back and reflect over the game or watch the replay i try to find out where i misplayed to get myself better. i never watch another lane or think about what someone else could've done.
you can do both. =)
speaking of playing to get better, i wish this game had like a training mode where you can customize everything. say you want to simulate a 5v5 teamfight with certain items in a certain position on the map with certain objectives, i wish you could just set it up and play it out.
|
On August 18 2012 05:27 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 04:54 JackDino wrote:On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? Please teach me how to play 6v x. I'm guessing about 80% of the playerbase plays to win. In lower elos atleast they only care about winning. You shouldn't be immature and call it 6v4 or w/e when you're teammates doing badly. If he's doing badly as long as he gets levels and into and gets into teamfights (make sure you ping and call objectives instead of just assuming he's going to be somewhere) he's going to be much more effective than fighting 4v5. The important thing is to be ahead enough that you don't lose map control and the dude doesn't get ganked all day.
Lol, he said 6vx because you said "play normals with 5 other guys". 6 ppl queueing 
|
On August 18 2012 05:13 sylverfyre wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 04:54 JackDino wrote:On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? Please teach me how to play 6v x. I'm guessing about 80% of the playerbase plays to win. In lower elos atleast they only care about winning. Oh man I miss 6v6 on twisted treeline. That shit was bonkers.
Wait, when was this? Sounds hilarious.
|
On August 18 2012 05:13 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 05:05 Seuss wrote:On August 18 2012 04:47 Requizen wrote:On August 18 2012 04:44 Seuss wrote:On August 18 2012 04:41 arb wrote:On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? should we be playing to lose then? It's about priorities. If you play to win but don't learn anything you'll eventually get stuck. If you play to learn winning is a natural consequence of self-improvement. That's a chicken/egg argument. If you're playing to win, you're going to be playing at your best, which leads to improvement. So is it better to focus on winning (which leads to harder-to-win games and therefore improvement), or focus on improving (which increases the chance of victory)? It's not. There's nothing about playing your best which inherently leads to improvement. You can improve when playing your best, but that has nothing to do with how well you played and everything to do with ability to analyze the game objectively. Playing to win can, in fact, stymie growth by causing a chilling effect on your play. For example, many junglers aren't confident in their ability to directly counter-jungle. As a result the best way to win in the short term is to avoid that risk altogether. Long term the player is stuck until they can put winning aside and learn the skill that they've been avoiding because of the risk. Again, it's not a chicken and egg problem. It's about priorities. That's not entirely true. If I'm playing to win, I'm focusing as hard as I can on things that matter. I'm forcing myself to look at the minimap, to last hit correctly, to position myself in the right place - not because I'm actively attempting to improve myself in those aspects, but because doing them well actively leads to my victory. Eventually, they become habits that I don't have to focus on as much. I don't go into each game thinking "I have to get better at last hitting", I go in with the idea of "last hit as best as possible to win my lane", which eventually leads to becoming better at it in the long run naturally. But in that train of thought, improving and winning are naturally tied hand in hand, hence the chicken/egg argument.
It's entirely true. Your skills improve when you focus on them, but when you play to win you focus on winning. Any improvement you experience with that mindset has nothing to do with you playing your best and everything to do with the fact that you focused on last-hitting/awareness/whatever for a few seconds or thought about what went right/wrong after the game was over. Whether you're playing your best or relaxing you get better at what you focus on.
On August 18 2012 05:22 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 05:16 ZeromuS wrote:
Not really. you can focus on last hitting and if its good then good you win the lane. But missing something on the minimap isnt the end of the game, its the next on the get better list. But you cant get better by doing everything at once. Right, and then I win that game, which raises my ELO, putting me against harder opponents. Then against those opponents, missing something on the minimap is the difference between Dragon and the enemy team getting it, so I force myself to focus on it, getting better because victory requires it. The next higher level, missing a tiny thing on the minimap is the difference between Baron and a loss, so I have to force myself to focus, etc. We're really saying the same thing, except I'm saying "I'm improving with the intention of getting better to win more", while you're saying "I'm improving with the intention of getting better just to be better". Same difference. Edit: onus isn't the right word.
You're not saying the same thing. You're saying, "I focus on winning in order to win and by winning improve." We're saying, "We focus on improving in order to improve and by improving win." Our argument is that the latter mindset is, in the long run, more effectual.
|
On August 18 2012 05:27 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 04:54 JackDino wrote:On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? Please teach me how to play 6v x. I'm guessing about 80% of the playerbase plays to win. In lower elos atleast they only care about winning. You shouldn't be immature and call it 6v4 or w/e when you're teammates doing badly. If he's doing badly as long as he gets levels and into and gets into teamfights (make sure you ping and call objectives instead of just assuming he's going to be somewhere) he's going to be much more effective than fighting 4v5. The important thing is to be ahead enough that you don't lose map control and the dude doesn't get ganked all day. Like the solo queue games I played the past week I was "that guy" who was like 0/3 early game because I'm not playing that much solo q and I have a bad sense for gank timings top and I get dived a couple times and I'm 0/3, the games where the team just played as normal I ended up doing well because being 0/3 doesn't matter if you have levels and farm but the games where the mid and jungler were just complaining and pretty much doing nothing all game were the ones where we ended up losing.
It was a joke because you told to queue up with 5 others, which makes 6. I usually never flame even when they're doing badly, if someone is playing bad than that's it, flaming doesn't help. I do tell people to shut up if they're being really annoying though.
|
On August 18 2012 04:45 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 04:41 arb wrote:On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? should we be playing to lose then? What? The greatest glory to be had in a game is to carry an entire feeding team. You can give up and lose if you want to when your team feeds but I'm just going to continue playing my best. What does playing to win got to do with your team? Nothing. If your team is doing badly and they are fed you have to adjust your play accordingly but it doesn't mean you're going to lose. "
Once lost to a team with a bunch of 0-10 people but a 36-6 graves. He must have felt like a million bucks afterwards
|
I know that this was probably talked about a little bit earlier, but there should really be a limit on how far you can duo with someone with. What I mean is that there should be a 200-300 point max limit put on difference of ratings. Had a 2k with an unranked player today. It's just not right.
|
On August 18 2012 05:13 sylverfyre wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 04:54 JackDino wrote:On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? Please teach me how to play 6v x. I'm guessing about 80% of the playerbase plays to win. In lower elos atleast they only care about winning. Oh man I miss 6v6 on twisted treeline. That shit was bonkers.
I remember hearing about this. How did it work, why doesn't it work anymore, and is there any way to get this back?  Sounds like a lot of fun.
|
On August 18 2012 05:48 wussleeQ wrote:
I know that this was probably talked about a little bit earlier, but there should really be a limit on how far you can duo with someone with. What I mean is that there should be a 200-300 point max limit put on difference of ratings. Had a 2k with an unranked player today. It's just not right.
Shake brought this up a few days ago and made a reddit post about it.
|
Most of the times, I will ask in champion select if we want to win or we want to have fun. (most of the times, nobody reply me : who say anything in champion select? Tryhard much!)
Assuming they say "win", I will usually go with my safest champion. And I will agree with people here. When you really want to win, you don't focus on trying new stuff (you sometimes will, but your main focus is winning)
However, when team troll picks or say play for fun, I will pick champions I am unfamiliar with, or champions I want to improve on.
When playing for fun, I rarely rage
When playing to win, I unfortunately rage when people don't listen (basic stuff like : Play safe, ward, lets do dragon, don't push, back etc.) Some of my friends say that my voice is unfriendly on skype when I call out their mistakes (ie : you should buy ward, you could have done this or that). So I guess I can be negative when people keep dying to the same mistakes.
|
On August 18 2012 05:42 Seuss wrote:Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 05:13 Requizen wrote:On August 18 2012 05:05 Seuss wrote:On August 18 2012 04:47 Requizen wrote:On August 18 2012 04:44 Seuss wrote:On August 18 2012 04:41 arb wrote:On August 18 2012 04:37 Slayer91 wrote:
So you play to win games rather than prove and improve your skill? Why not just play normals with 5 high elo guys and stomp? should we be playing to lose then? It's about priorities. If you play to win but don't learn anything you'll eventually get stuck. If you play to learn winning is a natural consequence of self-improvement. That's a chicken/egg argument. If you're playing to win, you're going to be playing at your best, which leads to improvement. So is it better to focus on winning (which leads to harder-to-win games and therefore improvement), or focus on improving (which increases the chance of victory)? It's not. There's nothing about playing your best which inherently leads to improvement. You can improve when playing your best, but that has nothing to do with how well you played and everything to do with ability to analyze the game objectively. Playing to win can, in fact, stymie growth by causing a chilling effect on your play. For example, many junglers aren't confident in their ability to directly counter-jungle. As a result the best way to win in the short term is to avoid that risk altogether. Long term the player is stuck until they can put winning aside and learn the skill that they've been avoiding because of the risk. Again, it's not a chicken and egg problem. It's about priorities. That's not entirely true. If I'm playing to win, I'm focusing as hard as I can on things that matter. I'm forcing myself to look at the minimap, to last hit correctly, to position myself in the right place - not because I'm actively attempting to improve myself in those aspects, but because doing them well actively leads to my victory. Eventually, they become habits that I don't have to focus on as much. I don't go into each game thinking "I have to get better at last hitting", I go in with the idea of "last hit as best as possible to win my lane", which eventually leads to becoming better at it in the long run naturally. But in that train of thought, improving and winning are naturally tied hand in hand, hence the chicken/egg argument. It's entirely true. Your skills improve when you focus on them, but when you play to win you focus on winning. Any improvement you experience with that mindset has nothing to do with you playing your best and everything to do with the fact that you focused on last-hitting/awareness/whatever for a few seconds or thought about what went right/wrong after the game was over. Whether you're playing your best or relaxing you get better at what you focus on. Show nested quote +On August 18 2012 05:22 Requizen wrote:On August 18 2012 05:16 ZeromuS wrote:
Not really. you can focus on last hitting and if its good then good you win the lane. But missing something on the minimap isnt the end of the game, its the next on the get better list. But you cant get better by doing everything at once. Right, and then I win that game, which raises my ELO, putting me against harder opponents. Then against those opponents, missing something on the minimap is the difference between Dragon and the enemy team getting it, so I force myself to focus on it, getting better because victory requires it. The next higher level, missing a tiny thing on the minimap is the difference between Baron and a loss, so I have to force myself to focus, etc. We're really saying the same thing, except I'm saying "I'm improving with the intention of getting better to win more", while you're saying "I'm improving with the intention of getting better just to be better". Same difference. Edit: onus isn't the right word. You're not saying the same thing. You're saying, "I focus on winning in order to win and by winning improve." We're saying, "We focus on improving in order to improve and by improving win." Our argument is that the latter mindset is, in the long run, more effectual.
Perhaps, but I'd argue that the former mindset is more rewarding.
If, in the long run, both mindsets lead to both winning and improving (which you postulated), then the road to that point is either filled with more wins but less effective learning, or more effective learning but possibly less wins. At that point it stops being objective which is better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
