|
Interested in helping start an on-topic, serious League discussion thread? PM Neo to talk about how to get started. |
On June 21 2013 15:06 NeoIllusions wrote:
Still prefer cakegirl.
User was banned for this post.
|
On June 22 2013 06:54 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 06:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On June 22 2013 06:43 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:41 WhiteDog wrote:On June 22 2013 06:38 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On June 22 2013 06:29 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:24 Numy wrote:On June 22 2013 06:22 zer0das wrote:On June 22 2013 06:20 nafta wrote:
[quote]
More likely is you'll get banned really lol.I did.I used to do this but now I just troll people and sometimes flame. Why would you get banned? If you're giving intelligent reasons, no one on tribunal is going to hold that against you as long as you're not toxic. You are assuming people on the tribunal actually read through and do stuff properly. I guess these days with no real reward it might be a safe assumption but it wasn't always so. all th epeople who complain about tribunal giving false positives probably do deserve a ban, even if not for that particular game lol if you really dont troll and dont flame you're not gonna get banned. I think false positives are a thing to some degree. I know people who would just choose punish on every report because it would still guarantee that they'd get like 80% agreement. except it has been repeatedly stated and shown that riot manually reviews before any bans. so if a manual review says you should be banned, chances are you should, and if not, it's attributable to the one-off human error of a riot employee, not of the tribunal system so you getting "banned unjustly" for "nicely telling your team what to do" is not a real occurrence, but rather a delusion that people have when 99.9% of the time they deserve the ban, and no, it's not cause of tribunal punish spam. You sure ? I'm pretty sure they only manually review before any life time bans, not after small 2 weeks bans. "The Tribunal automatically assigns some low-level penalties to players, such as e-mail warnings. More severe cases, however, are reviewed and assigned punishments manually by Player Support." AFAIK, all bans fall under "severe" punishments. iunno, i got a 6 month ban for playing like fiddle, j4 and some other unconventional supports. i didn't even do that badly in any of the reported games. ur not allowed to play unconventional champs if your team doesnt want you to whether or not that's a reasonable rule is a separate topic, but under the current guidelines, you definitely deserved the ban.
I'm fairly sure its not a rule, especially considering all the stuff Riot says about "not enforcing the meta". I'd argue Fiddle support is better than, say, Soraka in a number of cases, and J4 is a very fun bully. He's very similar to Leona, except that many people get a little confused on how to play against him.
|
Baa?21244 Posts
On June 22 2013 07:00 ticklishmusic wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 06:54 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On June 22 2013 06:43 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:41 WhiteDog wrote:On June 22 2013 06:38 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On June 22 2013 06:29 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:24 Numy wrote:On June 22 2013 06:22 zer0das wrote:
[quote]
Why would you get banned? If you're giving intelligent reasons, no one on tribunal is going to hold that against you as long as you're not toxic. You are assuming people on the tribunal actually read through and do stuff properly. I guess these days with no real reward it might be a safe assumption but it wasn't always so. all th epeople who complain about tribunal giving false positives probably do deserve a ban, even if not for that particular game lol if you really dont troll and dont flame you're not gonna get banned. I think false positives are a thing to some degree. I know people who would just choose punish on every report because it would still guarantee that they'd get like 80% agreement. except it has been repeatedly stated and shown that riot manually reviews before any bans. so if a manual review says you should be banned, chances are you should, and if not, it's attributable to the one-off human error of a riot employee, not of the tribunal system so you getting "banned unjustly" for "nicely telling your team what to do" is not a real occurrence, but rather a delusion that people have when 99.9% of the time they deserve the ban, and no, it's not cause of tribunal punish spam. You sure ? I'm pretty sure they only manually review before any life time bans, not after small 2 weeks bans. "The Tribunal automatically assigns some low-level penalties to players, such as e-mail warnings. More severe cases, however, are reviewed and assigned punishments manually by Player Support." AFAIK, all bans fall under "severe" punishments. iunno, i got a 6 month ban for playing like fiddle, j4 and some other unconventional supports. i didn't even do that badly in any of the reported games. ur not allowed to play unconventional champs if your team doesnt want you to whether or not that's a reasonable rule is a separate topic, but under the current guidelines, you definitely deserved the ban. I'm fairly sure its not a rule, especially considering all the stuff Riot says about "not enforcing the meta". I'd argue Fiddle support is better than, say, Soraka in a number of cases, and J4 is a very fun bully. He's very similar to Leona, except that many people get a little confused on how to play against him.
there were multiple riot posts explicitly saying that falls under "refusing to communicate with team" or something of the sort. it's not limited to meta picks - if i wanted to play, say, ahri mid - perfectly standard, and 4 peopel vocally disagree for whatever reason and then report me, i will get banned (if this is a common problem)
it has nothing to do with viability/fit within the team, and it's certainly more likely to happen with picks outside of the meta.
point is, this is definitely a rule that's being enforced.
On June 22 2013 06:59 LaNague wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 06:43 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:41 WhiteDog wrote:On June 22 2013 06:38 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On June 22 2013 06:29 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:24 Numy wrote:On June 22 2013 06:22 zer0das wrote:On June 22 2013 06:20 nafta wrote:On June 22 2013 06:15 zer0das wrote:
Sometimes you just have to say "what you're advocating is stupid and here's why." If you give a good reason, the rest of your team will probably ignore the person who is advocating it, especially if you refuse to go along with it. More likely is you'll get banned really lol.I did.I used to do this but now I just troll people and sometimes flame. Why would you get banned? If you're giving intelligent reasons, no one on tribunal is going to hold that against you as long as you're not toxic. You are assuming people on the tribunal actually read through and do stuff properly. I guess these days with no real reward it might be a safe assumption but it wasn't always so. all th epeople who complain about tribunal giving false positives probably do deserve a ban, even if not for that particular game lol if you really dont troll and dont flame you're not gonna get banned. I think false positives are a thing to some degree. I know people who would just choose punish on every report because it would still guarantee that they'd get like 80% agreement. except it has been repeatedly stated and shown that riot manually reviews before any bans. so if a manual review says you should be banned, chances are you should, and if not, it's attributable to the one-off human error of a riot employee, not of the tribunal system so you getting "banned unjustly" for "nicely telling your team what to do" is not a real occurrence, but rather a delusion that people have when 99.9% of the time they deserve the ban, and no, it's not cause of tribunal punish spam. You sure ? I'm pretty sure they only manually review before any life time bans, not after small 2 weeks bans. "The Tribunal automatically assigns some low-level penalties to players, such as e-mail warnings. More severe cases, however, are reviewed and assigned punishments manually by Player Support." AFAIK, all bans fall under "severe" punishments. i dont want to do digging now, but there was a riot post on the forums that riot from now on does not observe the tribunal anymore. But i hink we arent supposed to talk about the tribunal here, just want to clear this misconception up. if you really want a source, you will have to search the official league forum (good luck).
what do you mean by "not observe tribunal?" as in they don't base decisions on it, or they're not monitoring it for quality, or what?
|
Guys quick! I need a crash course on how to play rengar top. Gogo!
|
I like playing rengar as an assasin, so just build damage items. I like getting Brutalizer, BT, LW and the likes. Basically harass the other guy by jumping into a bush and then out at them and pressing Q to reset the attack. You can also mash the other two buttons while you are at it for extra damage, and maybe you will get another Q off wtih ferocity. (or course you could plan it but whats the fun in that...) Then run into the bush again. If you are a scaredy-lion, harass with Bola strike from afar.
Remember, the key is to always last hit with your passive so that you jump out and make a giant roar sound. Its really intimidating and makes them scared to trade with you and that way they will waste money warding the side bushes because the roar is scary. Little do they know that even though the side bush is warded, it still makes the roar sound anyways.
Also get that bonetooth necklace thing if you are good at KSing.
The most satisfying combo to do with rengar is jumping out of the bush, attacking, back into the bush and out again, since it basically gives you 2 gap closers. Really fun to do.
|
Abuse bushes, spam E to harass from range (or even max it if it's a lane where you can easily bully like that), abuse bush->aa->Q->back to bush. Build CDR via your items (bruta, kindlegem, etc.).
|
On June 22 2013 07:05 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Guys quick! I need a crash course on how to play rengar top. Gogo!
Max R>E>Q>W, best trading skill after they make empowered abilities scale with champ instead of abilty level. All in with W->Auto-Q-PassiveQ every time you possibly can assuming it a killable lane
If it something stupid like Kayle just use empowered W for the heals, waveclear, and imba trading.
If you really far ahead, push lane with W, wander mid and use R for imba ganks unless they bought pinks, in which case your laner should win anyway.
|
Don't listen to them and max E like a pussy. Max Q all the way. Assasin rengar is both fun + legit. You will actually feel useful in mid/late game teamfights if you do so.
|
On June 22 2013 06:29 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:if you're actually at your skill level your super awesome calls that would guarantee victory if not for the fact that people don't follow them probably aren't as genius as you'd like to think.
basically admit you suck first.
I fully admit I suck, but maybe 1/3 of my loses are games that would be slam dunk wins if people would just close the game out properly. If you have a >10k gold lead, unless the enemy team comp has really good wave clear, there shouldn't really be any reason at all you can't just knock down an inhib, then go around the horn and end the game. So many games are lost on people not knowing how to group up and press an advantage, diving towers when the enemy team is full of people who are worth 100 gold, when all they have to do is knock down the tower and the inhib. Or we all back after baron one at a time in a conga line until its 90% gone and none of our lanes are pushing.
I feel stuff like this should be exceedingly obvious after you get past a certain point, and for a lot of players, it is. But not nearly enough.
|
But towers are way less satisfying.
|
On June 22 2013 07:17 ReketSomething wrote:
Don't listen to them and max E like a pussy. Max Q all the way. Assasin rengar is both fun + legit. You will actually feel useful in mid/late game teamfights if you do so.
Except maxing E straight up gives you more damage until you have AD, in which case both abilities maxxed anyway.
Look at the numbers. 60/105/150/195/240+(0.7 Bonus AD) on E vs 30/55/80//105/130 +(1.0 full AD) on Q.
Most of your Q damage just straight from your auto attack damages.
|
United States47024 Posts
On June 22 2013 07:17 zer0das wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 06:29 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:if you're actually at your skill level your super awesome calls that would guarantee victory if not for the fact that people don't follow them probably aren't as genius as you'd like to think.
basically admit you suck first.
I fully admit I suck, but maybe 1/3 of my loses are games that would be slam dunk wins if people would just close the game out properly. If you have a >10k gold lead, unless the enemy team comp has really good wave clear, there shouldn't really be any reason at all you can't just knock down an inhib, then go around the horn and end the game. So many games are lost on people not knowing how to group up and press an advantage, diving towers when the enemy team is full of people who are worth 100 gold, when all they have to do is knock down the tower and the inhib. Or we all back after baron one at a time in a conga line until its 90% gone and none of our lanes are pushing. I feel stuff like this should be exceedingly obvious after you get past a certain point, and for a lot of players, it is. But not nearly enough.
Just think of it this way. Games getting to that point makes it a coin-toss anyway, so you should be trying your hardest to not let games get to the point where it's out of your control.
You shouldn't be blaming your teammates for doing stupid things 50 minutes into the game. You should be blaming yourself for the game being close enough to go to 50 minutes in the first place.
|
Vulcun just got outplayed so hard.
oops... wrong thread
|
On June 22 2013 07:21 iCanada wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 07:17 ReketSomething wrote:
Don't listen to them and max E like a pussy. Max Q all the way. Assasin rengar is both fun + legit. You will actually feel useful in mid/late game teamfights if you do so. Except maxing E straight up gives you more damage until you have AD, in which case both abilities maxxed anyway. Look at the numbers. 60/105/150/195/240+(0.7 Bonus AD) on E vs 30/55/80//105/130 +(1.0 full AD) on Q. Most of your Q damage just straight from your auto attack damages.
Runes + Masteries will tilt it a bit. Also you want to use empowered Q to trade not empowered E to trade. Your base AD is not to be underestimated. The problem is that using empowered Q after maxing E makes you actually not have that much burst.
|
On June 22 2013 07:31 ReketSomething wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 07:21 iCanada wrote:On June 22 2013 07:17 ReketSomething wrote:
Don't listen to them and max E like a pussy. Max Q all the way. Assasin rengar is both fun + legit. You will actually feel useful in mid/late game teamfights if you do so. Except maxing E straight up gives you more damage until you have AD, in which case both abilities maxxed anyway. Look at the numbers. 60/105/150/195/240+(0.7 Bonus AD) on E vs 30/55/80//105/130 +(1.0 full AD) on Q. Most of your Q damage just straight from your auto attack damages. Runes + Masteries will tilt it a bit. Also you want to use empowered Q to trade not empowered E to trade. Your base AD is not to be underestimated.
You get your base AD in Q anyway...
say you max Q, I max E.
at Level 8 When I have 1q1w1r5e I get 3 E's, 1 W, auto QQ for 240x3+50+(30+baseAD)+(30+2(baseAD)) for 830+3(baseAD)
at level 8 when I have 5q1w1e1r I get 3 Es, 1 W, auto QQ for 3x60+50+(130+baseAD)+(130+2(BaseAD)) for 460+3(baseAD)
E max is just better in every scenario brohan. You get slightly bigger burst for much much less kill potential overall, as well as less gank assist.
|
On June 22 2013 07:04 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 07:00 ticklishmusic wrote:On June 22 2013 06:54 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:49 ticklishmusic wrote:On June 22 2013 06:43 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:41 WhiteDog wrote:On June 22 2013 06:38 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On June 22 2013 06:29 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:24 Numy wrote:
[quote]
You are assuming people on the tribunal actually read through and do stuff properly. I guess these days with no real reward it might be a safe assumption but it wasn't always so. all th epeople who complain about tribunal giving false positives probably do deserve a ban, even if not for that particular game lol if you really dont troll and dont flame you're not gonna get banned. I think false positives are a thing to some degree. I know people who would just choose punish on every report because it would still guarantee that they'd get like 80% agreement. except it has been repeatedly stated and shown that riot manually reviews before any bans. so if a manual review says you should be banned, chances are you should, and if not, it's attributable to the one-off human error of a riot employee, not of the tribunal system so you getting "banned unjustly" for "nicely telling your team what to do" is not a real occurrence, but rather a delusion that people have when 99.9% of the time they deserve the ban, and no, it's not cause of tribunal punish spam. You sure ? I'm pretty sure they only manually review before any life time bans, not after small 2 weeks bans. "The Tribunal automatically assigns some low-level penalties to players, such as e-mail warnings. More severe cases, however, are reviewed and assigned punishments manually by Player Support." AFAIK, all bans fall under "severe" punishments. iunno, i got a 6 month ban for playing like fiddle, j4 and some other unconventional supports. i didn't even do that badly in any of the reported games. ur not allowed to play unconventional champs if your team doesnt want you to whether or not that's a reasonable rule is a separate topic, but under the current guidelines, you definitely deserved the ban. I'm fairly sure its not a rule, especially considering all the stuff Riot says about "not enforcing the meta". I'd argue Fiddle support is better than, say, Soraka in a number of cases, and J4 is a very fun bully. He's very similar to Leona, except that many people get a little confused on how to play against him. there were multiple riot posts explicitly saying that falls under "refusing to communicate with team" or something of the sort. it's not limited to meta picks - if i wanted to play, say, ahri mid - perfectly standard, and 4 peopel vocally disagree for whatever reason and then report me, i will get banned (if this is a common problem) it has nothing to do with viability/fit within the team, and it's certainly more likely to happen with picks outside of the meta. point is, this is definitely a rule that's being enforced. Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 06:59 LaNague wrote:On June 22 2013 06:43 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:41 WhiteDog wrote:On June 22 2013 06:38 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:37 ticklishmusic wrote:On June 22 2013 06:29 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:On June 22 2013 06:24 Numy wrote:On June 22 2013 06:22 zer0das wrote:On June 22 2013 06:20 nafta wrote:
[quote]
More likely is you'll get banned really lol.I did.I used to do this but now I just troll people and sometimes flame. Why would you get banned? If you're giving intelligent reasons, no one on tribunal is going to hold that against you as long as you're not toxic. You are assuming people on the tribunal actually read through and do stuff properly. I guess these days with no real reward it might be a safe assumption but it wasn't always so. all th epeople who complain about tribunal giving false positives probably do deserve a ban, even if not for that particular game lol if you really dont troll and dont flame you're not gonna get banned. I think false positives are a thing to some degree. I know people who would just choose punish on every report because it would still guarantee that they'd get like 80% agreement. except it has been repeatedly stated and shown that riot manually reviews before any bans. so if a manual review says you should be banned, chances are you should, and if not, it's attributable to the one-off human error of a riot employee, not of the tribunal system so you getting "banned unjustly" for "nicely telling your team what to do" is not a real occurrence, but rather a delusion that people have when 99.9% of the time they deserve the ban, and no, it's not cause of tribunal punish spam. You sure ? I'm pretty sure they only manually review before any life time bans, not after small 2 weeks bans. "The Tribunal automatically assigns some low-level penalties to players, such as e-mail warnings. More severe cases, however, are reviewed and assigned punishments manually by Player Support." AFAIK, all bans fall under "severe" punishments. i dont want to do digging now, but there was a riot post on the forums that riot from now on does not observe the tribunal anymore. But i hink we arent supposed to talk about the tribunal here, just want to clear this misconception up. if you really want a source, you will have to search the official league forum (good luck). what do you mean by "not observe tribunal?" as in they don't base decisions on it, or they're not monitoring it for quality, or what?
Riot doesn't review non-permaban cases anymore, and they haven't done so for quite a while. AFAIK they still manually review all cases that go up for permaban.
Also, "refusing to communicate with team" reports do not get sent to Tribunal, like Unskilled Player or Leaving the game/afk. Riot uses these signals to tell when a region has too many people not speaking the native language, their matchmaking is screwed up, or their leaverbuster needs work, respectively.
|
On June 22 2013 07:36 iCanada wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2013 07:31 ReketSomething wrote:On June 22 2013 07:21 iCanada wrote:On June 22 2013 07:17 ReketSomething wrote:
Don't listen to them and max E like a pussy. Max Q all the way. Assasin rengar is both fun + legit. You will actually feel useful in mid/late game teamfights if you do so. Except maxing E straight up gives you more damage until you have AD, in which case both abilities maxxed anyway. Look at the numbers. 60/105/150/195/240+(0.7 Bonus AD) on E vs 30/55/80//105/130 +(1.0 full AD) on Q. Most of your Q damage just straight from your auto attack damages. Runes + Masteries will tilt it a bit. Also you want to use empowered Q to trade not empowered E to trade. Your base AD is not to be underestimated. You get your base AD in Q anyway... say you max Q, I max E. at Level 8 When I have 1q1w1r5e I get 3 E's, 1 W, auto QQ for 240x3+50+(30+baseAD)+(30+2(baseAD)) for 830+3(baseAD)at level 8 when I have 5q1w1e1r I get 3 Es, 1 W, auto QQ for 3x60+50+(130+baseAD)+(130+2(BaseAD)) for 460+3(baseAD)E max is just better in every scenario brohan. You get slightly bigger burst for much much less kill potential overall, as well as less gank assist.
Why do you calculate 3 E's, 1 W, 1 auto QQ...why not calculate 1 E, which is the actual combo...?
For comparisons sake, you should calculate the following:
E QQ or E Q E for both cases, in which the math is
240 + 30 + 30 = 300 + 3(base AD)
60 + 130 + 130 = 420 + 3(base AD)
240 + 240 + 30 = 510 + 1(base AD)
In which case maxing Q is clearly better.
|
Because you can harass and punish last hits and stuff with E, without needing to commit. Now why 3, I dunno.
|
Now you are making an assumpion that you use E more in lane which is NOT true. Your Q cooldown is shorter, your free gapcloser has more range than a bola strike anyways. You should use both to harass since you are rengar. Everytime ferocity bonus is near you harass with the full combo.
|
On June 22 2013 07:21 TheYango wrote:You shouldn't be blaming your teammates for doing stupid things 50 minutes into the game. You should be blaming yourself for the game being close enough to go to 50 minutes in the first place.
I'm referring to games that are 25-30 minutes when we have the 10k gold lead. Of course they should never go to 50 minutes, that's my point.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
