|
On November 14 2013 01:43 obesechicken13 wrote:
Playing one champ all the time is overrated. You improve by playing everything too. Try to win just by playing one champion in every role, perhaps duplicating your top, mid, and jungle (eg renekton top mid and jungle) and see how much your improve in rank.
1300 to top 50 EUW in about a year with udyr
you mad?
|
On November 14 2013 01:32 Clinic wrote:
huge post because people are wrong on the internet
who's the better player: ryan choi or a given plat with 1000+ ranked games played between some 50-odd champions and no real main?
i think some severely underestimate how much the rest of your game necessarily improves simply by playing games with other very strong players
now if the argument is that high elo one trick ponies aren't as good as versatile players of the same rating, that's defensible. but i'd put a lot of money on gbm's ability (back when he only played orianna) to crush any plat 5 player in any role with any champion
'the ability to adapt and diversify' makes it sound like there's some secret mojo to each champion that magically inhibits one's ability to play the game when playing outside one's comfort zone, which simply isn't the case (it's also a poor attempt to defend a poor position through closing the door to discussion by defining this ability as a criterion being ignored by those who disagree, because it isn't). one of the most reliable ways to become a better player is to play with other good players, and you don't learn how to be the best syndra na without learning things that translate to a better overall game. i guarantee you that every d1+ one trick pony (except maybe singed mains harhar) is as good or better a player within a single-digit number of games on any champion than anybody in gold and most plats, simply because of how champion specific skill is outweighed by vast disparity in general skill, which is the most adaptable and diversifiable skill there is.
to illustrate, look at the example of clg's current mid laner. as i recall, when link picked up the game (as link115), he mained sona because of how easy the champion was. he made it to high elo despite being completely ignorant of some of the basic mechanics of even his main champiion (not knowing how power chord passives work until something around plat). his previous wizard football experience gave him the ability to beat players who were better at their champs with superior skill in more broadly applicable mechanics and knowledge. he started adding to his champion pool once in high elo and improved his champion specific skill much more rapidly than he would have against weaker players. the link story is from a while back and i could be misattributing it, but there are similar stories of other players, such as the aforementioned ganked by mom
champion pool diversity is a valuable indicator of skill at competitive levels of play, but is hugely overrated at low rating because everybody is bad at everything there and nobody is playing their champion to potential. given that the best way to improve is to play against tougher competition, specializing in a few champions (which is much more relevant at lower ratings because of lower overall skill, meaning that champion specific skill is relatively more important), getting to 'good' elo (this is subjective and the particular bar set isn't important to the argument), and branching out from there is a more efficient way to improve ALL aspects of one's game than playing a ton of champions and not knowing how to ward a lane because nobody is doing it
but you arent comparing equal terms here. even the 1 trick ponies at the top of NA ladder or whatever are playing hours and hours a day. i play on average about an hour or 2 a day, and im prone to take long breaks from the game and im plat 4 and still climbing.
so the comparable thing is more someone at 70-90 lp in diamond 1 playing 1 champ, vs someone either at the top of diamond 2 or bottom diamond 1. but thats the kind of ladder differential that is realistically there imo.
On November 14 2013 01:44 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2013 01:43 obesechicken13 wrote:
Playing one champ all the time is overrated. You improve by playing everything too. Try to win just by playing one champion in every role, perhaps duplicating your top, mid, and jungle (eg renekton top mid and jungle) and see how much your improve in rank. 1300 to top 50 EUW in about a year with udyr you mad?
is your next post going to be "come 1v1 me faggot"?
|
United States47024 Posts
On November 13 2013 22:22 Scip wrote:
I thought it is pretty much universally agreed that the best way to improve is 1/few champions at a time, so someone who plays a lot of different heroes all the time will be rightfully thought of as someone who doesn't care about improving that much.
This is kind of semantics but mainly I disagree with the idea that improvement not being someone's first priority means they don't care that much. In my mind there's quite a few degrees of separation between "most important thing" and "doesn't care that much".
|
On November 14 2013 01:44 turdburgler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2013 01:32 Clinic wrote:
huge post because people are wrong on the internet
who's the better player: ryan choi or a given plat with 1000+ ranked games played between some 50-odd champions and no real main?
i think some severely underestimate how much the rest of your game necessarily improves simply by playing games with other very strong players
now if the argument is that high elo one trick ponies aren't as good as versatile players of the same rating, that's defensible. but i'd put a lot of money on gbm's ability (back when he only played orianna) to crush any plat 5 player in any role with any champion
'the ability to adapt and diversify' makes it sound like there's some secret mojo to each champion that magically inhibits one's ability to play the game when playing outside one's comfort zone, which simply isn't the case (it's also a poor attempt to defend a poor position through closing the door to discussion by defining this ability as a criterion being ignored by those who disagree, because it isn't). one of the most reliable ways to become a better player is to play with other good players, and you don't learn how to be the best syndra na without learning things that translate to a better overall game. i guarantee you that every d1+ one trick pony (except maybe singed mains harhar) is as good or better a player within a single-digit number of games on any champion than anybody in gold and most plats, simply because of how champion specific skill is outweighed by vast disparity in general skill, which is the most adaptable and diversifiable skill there is.
to illustrate, look at the example of clg's current mid laner. as i recall, when link picked up the game (as link115), he mained sona because of how easy the champion was. he made it to high elo despite being completely ignorant of some of the basic mechanics of even his main champiion (not knowing how power chord passives work until something around plat). his previous wizard football experience gave him the ability to beat players who were better at their champs with superior skill in more broadly applicable mechanics and knowledge. he started adding to his champion pool once in high elo and improved his champion specific skill much more rapidly than he would have against weaker players. the link story is from a while back and i could be misattributing it, but there are similar stories of other players, such as the aforementioned ganked by mom
champion pool diversity is a valuable indicator of skill at competitive levels of play, but is hugely overrated at low rating because everybody is bad at everything there and nobody is playing their champion to potential. given that the best way to improve is to play against tougher competition, specializing in a few champions (which is much more relevant at lower ratings because of lower overall skill, meaning that champion specific skill is relatively more important), getting to 'good' elo (this is subjective and the particular bar set isn't important to the argument), and branching out from there is a more efficient way to improve ALL aspects of one's game than playing a ton of champions and not knowing how to ward a lane because nobody is doing it but you arent comparing equal terms here. even the 1 trick ponies at the top of NA ladder or whatever are playing hours and hours a day. i play on average about an hour or 2 a day, and im prone to take long breaks from the game and im plat 4 and still climbing. so the comparable thing is more someone at 70-90 lp in diamond 1 playing 1 champ, vs someone either at the top of diamond 2 or bottom diamond 1. but thats the kind of ladder differential that is realistically there imo. Show nested quote +On November 14 2013 01:44 Slayer91 wrote:On November 14 2013 01:43 obesechicken13 wrote:
Playing one champ all the time is overrated. You improve by playing everything too. Try to win just by playing one champion in every role, perhaps duplicating your top, mid, and jungle (eg renekton top mid and jungle) and see how much your improve in rank. 1300 to top 50 EUW in about a year with udyr you mad? is your next post going to be "come 1v1 me faggot"?
he posted a challenge
one that I already completed in the past and disproves his argument completely
why are you acting like its not relevant
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On November 14 2013 01:43 obesechicken13 wrote:
Playing one champ all the time is overrated. You improve by playing everything too. Try to win just by playing one champion in every role, perhaps duplicating your top, mid, and jungle (eg renekton top mid and jungle) and see how much your improve in rank.
1300 to 2300 in 3 weeks with Skarner
you mad?
As for the semantics Yango, I meant that in the meaning of "as much as other thing(s)", hoped that wording I used would be clear enough :3
|
|
|
even better since scip was an example of someone who had been playing for a while but dicked around on random champs at first but then he randomly elo
|
i think its all silliness. i think the 2 important parts of improvement, are time and attention. there are a variety of skill sets that make up your overall skill level as a player and in my opinion playing 1 champ a lot, or spreading it out works on different skills that will both improve your average level.
as long as you invest enough time and actually pay attention and actively try to improve rather than just derp around/coast you will see an improvement in your game/ladder/whatever. people are too quick to say this is the way you get better at the game, without defining what being better at the game even really means. even when people use terms like mechanics or decision making they are, imo, being far too broad for any meaningful result.
to put it shortly, to improve do whatever the fuck you want, but make sure you actually pay attention to what you do and the results that gives you. be analytical rather than emotional about your results and actually invest the time in playing rather than discussing the thought of playing on a forum.
On November 14 2013 01:46 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2013 01:44 turdburgler wrote:On November 14 2013 01:32 Clinic wrote:
huge post because people are wrong on the internet
who's the better player: ryan choi or a given plat with 1000+ ranked games played between some 50-odd champions and no real main?
i think some severely underestimate how much the rest of your game necessarily improves simply by playing games with other very strong players
now if the argument is that high elo one trick ponies aren't as good as versatile players of the same rating, that's defensible. but i'd put a lot of money on gbm's ability (back when he only played orianna) to crush any plat 5 player in any role with any champion
'the ability to adapt and diversify' makes it sound like there's some secret mojo to each champion that magically inhibits one's ability to play the game when playing outside one's comfort zone, which simply isn't the case (it's also a poor attempt to defend a poor position through closing the door to discussion by defining this ability as a criterion being ignored by those who disagree, because it isn't). one of the most reliable ways to become a better player is to play with other good players, and you don't learn how to be the best syndra na without learning things that translate to a better overall game. i guarantee you that every d1+ one trick pony (except maybe singed mains harhar) is as good or better a player within a single-digit number of games on any champion than anybody in gold and most plats, simply because of how champion specific skill is outweighed by vast disparity in general skill, which is the most adaptable and diversifiable skill there is.
to illustrate, look at the example of clg's current mid laner. as i recall, when link picked up the game (as link115), he mained sona because of how easy the champion was. he made it to high elo despite being completely ignorant of some of the basic mechanics of even his main champiion (not knowing how power chord passives work until something around plat). his previous wizard football experience gave him the ability to beat players who were better at their champs with superior skill in more broadly applicable mechanics and knowledge. he started adding to his champion pool once in high elo and improved his champion specific skill much more rapidly than he would have against weaker players. the link story is from a while back and i could be misattributing it, but there are similar stories of other players, such as the aforementioned ganked by mom
champion pool diversity is a valuable indicator of skill at competitive levels of play, but is hugely overrated at low rating because everybody is bad at everything there and nobody is playing their champion to potential. given that the best way to improve is to play against tougher competition, specializing in a few champions (which is much more relevant at lower ratings because of lower overall skill, meaning that champion specific skill is relatively more important), getting to 'good' elo (this is subjective and the particular bar set isn't important to the argument), and branching out from there is a more efficient way to improve ALL aspects of one's game than playing a ton of champions and not knowing how to ward a lane because nobody is doing it but you arent comparing equal terms here. even the 1 trick ponies at the top of NA ladder or whatever are playing hours and hours a day. i play on average about an hour or 2 a day, and im prone to take long breaks from the game and im plat 4 and still climbing. so the comparable thing is more someone at 70-90 lp in diamond 1 playing 1 champ, vs someone either at the top of diamond 2 or bottom diamond 1. but thats the kind of ladder differential that is realistically there imo. On November 14 2013 01:44 Slayer91 wrote:On November 14 2013 01:43 obesechicken13 wrote:
Playing one champ all the time is overrated. You improve by playing everything too. Try to win just by playing one champion in every role, perhaps duplicating your top, mid, and jungle (eg renekton top mid and jungle) and see how much your improve in rank. 1300 to top 50 EUW in about a year with udyr you mad? is your next post going to be "come 1v1 me faggot"? he posted a challenge one that I already completed in the past and disproves his argument completely why are you acting like its not relevant
im not, im just pointing out that the emotion conveyed in your last 3-4 posts is very angry.
|
this is true but it doesn't mean that its a lot easier to focus your attention if you aren't playing completely different champions/roles all the time so you can focus on the relevant skillsets since they are relatively stable (still depends on 9 other dudes though) as opposed to constantly changing.
|
On November 14 2013 01:41 Slayer91 wrote:
It's not so much about playing against better players, but that helps, because if you play against bad players you lose the ability to recognize effectiveness since everything works as long as you play well.
It's more that the more you play 1 champion, the less distracting factors there are, so you learn a lot more about the game in general than playing lots of champs because playing lots of champs might give you a different perspective but 90% of your attention is on how your champ plays and not how to the game plays. Once you get a high level you keep all that knowledge you learned playing less champs and can simply focus on learning new champs. If it's a different role you need a bit more but basically you might not get any better at the game but you diversify your champ pool slightly, you use everything you learned and then apply the new strengths of your champ and avoid the new weaknesses and adapt that way.
. (most pros have pretty small champ pool it just changes a lot according to "meta/fotm")
the focused learning aspect is definitely true and it's my fault for neglecting it, although i would claim that there is more knowledge gained in games with better players so the two go hand in hand
|
On November 14 2013 01:49 turdburgler wrote:i think its all silliness. i think the 2 important parts of improvement, are time and attention. there are a variety of skill sets that make up your overall skill level as a player and in my opinion playing 1 champ a lot, or spreading it out works on different skills that will both improve your average level. as long as you invest enough time and actually pay attention and actively try to improve rather than just derp around/coast you will see an improvement in your game/ladder/whatever. people are too quick to say this is the way you get better at the game, without defining what being better at the game even really means. even when people use terms like mechanics or decision making they are, imo, being far too broad for any meaningful result. to put it shortly, to improve do whatever the fuck you want, but make sure you actually pay attention to what you do and the results that gives you. be analytical rather than emotional about your results and actually invest the time in playing rather than discussing the thought of playing on a forum. Show nested quote +On November 14 2013 01:46 Slayer91 wrote:On November 14 2013 01:44 turdburgler wrote:On November 14 2013 01:32 Clinic wrote:
huge post because people are wrong on the internet
who's the better player: ryan choi or a given plat with 1000+ ranked games played between some 50-odd champions and no real main?
i think some severely underestimate how much the rest of your game necessarily improves simply by playing games with other very strong players
now if the argument is that high elo one trick ponies aren't as good as versatile players of the same rating, that's defensible. but i'd put a lot of money on gbm's ability (back when he only played orianna) to crush any plat 5 player in any role with any champion
'the ability to adapt and diversify' makes it sound like there's some secret mojo to each champion that magically inhibits one's ability to play the game when playing outside one's comfort zone, which simply isn't the case (it's also a poor attempt to defend a poor position through closing the door to discussion by defining this ability as a criterion being ignored by those who disagree, because it isn't). one of the most reliable ways to become a better player is to play with other good players, and you don't learn how to be the best syndra na without learning things that translate to a better overall game. i guarantee you that every d1+ one trick pony (except maybe singed mains harhar) is as good or better a player within a single-digit number of games on any champion than anybody in gold and most plats, simply because of how champion specific skill is outweighed by vast disparity in general skill, which is the most adaptable and diversifiable skill there is.
to illustrate, look at the example of clg's current mid laner. as i recall, when link picked up the game (as link115), he mained sona because of how easy the champion was. he made it to high elo despite being completely ignorant of some of the basic mechanics of even his main champiion (not knowing how power chord passives work until something around plat). his previous wizard football experience gave him the ability to beat players who were better at their champs with superior skill in more broadly applicable mechanics and knowledge. he started adding to his champion pool once in high elo and improved his champion specific skill much more rapidly than he would have against weaker players. the link story is from a while back and i could be misattributing it, but there are similar stories of other players, such as the aforementioned ganked by mom
champion pool diversity is a valuable indicator of skill at competitive levels of play, but is hugely overrated at low rating because everybody is bad at everything there and nobody is playing their champion to potential. given that the best way to improve is to play against tougher competition, specializing in a few champions (which is much more relevant at lower ratings because of lower overall skill, meaning that champion specific skill is relatively more important), getting to 'good' elo (this is subjective and the particular bar set isn't important to the argument), and branching out from there is a more efficient way to improve ALL aspects of one's game than playing a ton of champions and not knowing how to ward a lane because nobody is doing it but you arent comparing equal terms here. even the 1 trick ponies at the top of NA ladder or whatever are playing hours and hours a day. i play on average about an hour or 2 a day, and im prone to take long breaks from the game and im plat 4 and still climbing. so the comparable thing is more someone at 70-90 lp in diamond 1 playing 1 champ, vs someone either at the top of diamond 2 or bottom diamond 1. but thats the kind of ladder differential that is realistically there imo. On November 14 2013 01:44 Slayer91 wrote:On November 14 2013 01:43 obesechicken13 wrote:
Playing one champ all the time is overrated. You improve by playing everything too. Try to win just by playing one champion in every role, perhaps duplicating your top, mid, and jungle (eg renekton top mid and jungle) and see how much your improve in rank. 1300 to top 50 EUW in about a year with udyr you mad? is your next post going to be "come 1v1 me faggot"? he posted a challenge one that I already completed in the past and disproves his argument completely why are you acting like its not relevant im not, im just pointing out that the emotion conveyed in your last 3-4 posts is very angry.
I'm only angry because the universe was created
also I'd like to point out that asking someone if they are mad doesn't indicate the anger levels of either parties, though it does indicate that one party suspects a relatively high anger level of the second party (also easier to tell for sure at a party)
|
Teut is about as angry as I'm serious when I post one-liners.
|
which is never
this has to be like the first one to date
so the results of that statement is indeterminate
|
Teut is the horrifying clone of a friend I have IRL. Whenever he posts I laugh because I hear it in my friend's voice.
|
On November 14 2013 01:44 Slayer91 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2013 01:43 obesechicken13 wrote:
Playing one champ all the time is overrated. You improve by playing everything too. Try to win just by playing one champion in every role, perhaps duplicating your top, mid, and jungle (eg renekton top mid and jungle) and see how much your improve in rank. 1300 to top 50 EUW in about a year with udyr you mad?
So you can't play anyone else at a near top 50 level? You'd be 1300 Shyvana?
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
How could the manner in which you mass games not matter? Obviously paying attention is important, but as Teut mentions, it is a massive advantage when you can eliminate as many variables as you can by playing the same champion over and over and learning the specifics of the certain champion. The deeper you go, the more is stuff connected together. Just from playing jungle Elise I have a pretty good understanding of how I should position myself in the lane in relation to jungle activity when playing middle laners or top laners in the lane and how and when to push and when to base. And stuff. It just seems silly not to go that deep with 1 or few champions when you absolutely can.
|
Korea (South)11232 Posts
On November 14 2013 01:07 Gaslo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2013 00:37 Chexx wrote:On November 14 2013 00:32 TigerKarl wrote:Well, hurts TL a lot in terms of numbers but hey, who cares. There will be some new things for us soon(tm). Stuff like more tournaments in the event sidebar, the recent forum structure change and some more things  We still need volunteers in particular for EU and China. If you guys have interested contact me, Neo, JBright, Moonbear, Asmo or OWB. Volunteers for what? I have some free time, and would like to help in any way that i can.
Writing about the EU/NA LCS or LPL similar to our previous coverage.
|
Some people aren't interested in having a high spot on a ladder. You can enjoy playing the game and want to be good at it without being in D1 only playing one role with 2 champs. I don't have time to mass game any more, I don't care about being DA BEST. and when I do play it's for fun first. Improvement is a nice secondary bonus.
Having a couple go-to champs for every role makes it easier to deal with whiners in champ select too, since there's invariably some kid who will play one champ one spot and only that, ignoring the rest of the team.
|
28100 Posts
On November 13 2013 19:44 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On November 13 2013 19:41 Slayer91 wrote:
and having a big champ pool is just spreading shit all over the wall imo That's only if your only motivating factor is raising rank and getting better at the game. I think it's totally reasonable to want to have more champs to play just because you can't stand playing the same thing over and over again in a short time span. Especially given that Emulator is coming from DotA where it's pretty normal to random every game, or to go 300+ games without ever playing any one hero more than 10 times.
I think people just misunderstood what I meant by learning a bunch of champs. The reason for not buying the XP boost in my grind to level 30 is so I have more time understand what each hero does, and what each item does, etc. And the more champs I buy the more that helps because you learn these things faster by playing them than playing against them. So I didn't really mean I wanted a big champ pool, but just the chance to learn the majority of them/what they do during my grind to 30. My plan is to focus on some ADC champs and maybe mid laners once I get to ranked. Like Yango said I come from Dota 2, I also play at the highest possible level in MM in Dota 2, so in learning LoL I think the most important thing for me to get used to is the heroes and items, because things like farming/laning/map awareness/etc I am already pretty decent at because that somewhat transfers over or is easy to pick up 1000x quicker htan someone truly new to the genres.
At the same time I want to have fun and play cool heroes, so I'm also using the grind to 30 to just mess around and try different things. LIke Yango mentioned Dota 2 players tend to play every hero at some point, but I'm pretty competitive and my mindset will definitely change once I'm in ranked. Although I kind of disagree with playing 1-2 champs in order to progress. I think if you have to do taht to hit diamond you're just bad.
|
You are playing normal anyway, so you'll always have free rotation champions. There're 10 champions free each weeks and assume that you can play 7 games/day, so you can only play 50 games/week, which around 5 games per unknown champs, that is not too bad.
You should just keep them IP to buy runes and core champions that you need for later rank.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
