EPTEDIT: Some people just don't like copying professional players all day every day.
It's time for change! - Page 3
| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
Sponkz
Denmark4564 Posts
EDIT: Some people just don't like copying professional players all day every day. | ||
|
Slayer91
Ireland23335 Posts
| ||
|
Sponkz
Denmark4564 Posts
| ||
|
Slayer91
Ireland23335 Posts
| ||
|
Sponkz
Denmark4564 Posts
| ||
|
Slayer91
Ireland23335 Posts
| ||
|
Prog
United Kingdom1470 Posts
On February 20 2014 02:28 Sponkz wrote: Because that's how you do it, in this game. You look at pro's and con's, match-ups, item-builds, masteries, runes, scaling etc. and it all comes down to math (and how you play in-game). EDIT: Like a conclusion to Sarah Bryant (sorry for repeating this example, but the issue has been adressed) and her WW build would be: Works in lower tier play Extremely fun to play Good AS scaling while providing supression And after she has said what needs to be said, you can go into a game and try it and give your feedback, maybe she got some of the numbers wrong etc. and from there you slowly work your way up to a point where it's "viable". There are just two different types of discussions: 1) The viability one, in which you bring up strengths and weaknesses with the constitutive goal winning. and 2) The fun one, in which you discuss why something is fun to play. It makes no sense to discuss, for instance, match-up viability, or which item build is best against x, if you play the language game of aiming at fun. (Edit: It makes perfect sense though too discuss which builds are fun because of what) Most of the problems with controversial picks in the general discussion happen because one does not clearly indicate which language game one is playing. | ||
|
Fildun
Netherlands4122 Posts
Don't worry about the inhouses, I don't care that much if you play serious or not, as long as you're there! | ||
|
Sponkz
Denmark4564 Posts
On February 20 2014 02:55 Prog wrote: There are just two different types of discussions: 1) The viability one, in which you bring up strengths and weaknesses with the constitutive goal winning. and 2) The fun one, in which you discuss why something is fun to play. It makes no sense to discuss, for instance, match-up viability, or which item build is best against x, if you play the language game of aiming at fun. (Edit: It makes perfect sense though too discuss which builds are fun because of what) Most of the problems with controversial picks in the general discussion happen because one does not clearly indicate which language game one is playing. No, you are right about that. Maybe TL should implement a feature so your skill-range would be shown and then everyone has to show a little respect for each other and respect their rank compared to others. Like when i played in a danish community on facebook, it was easy for me to get a touch with these guys (random people really, other gamers, there's a big gaming culture in Denmark thanks to Counter Strike), cus usually it was 4 guys with 1 guy who was like "the leader" of 2-3 other guys (maybe a random sometimes) and he just wouldn't respect me when i called. As a support player, you RELY SO SO SO SO MUCH on your team, unless you snowball the living shit out of bot-lane (which is FUCKING hard to do at d1-level omfg), so naturally i tried to do shot-calling. And everyone knows that sometimes, shit goes wrong, it's a game SOMEONE has to WIN and SOMEONE has to LOSE, but then people will soon turn a grudge on you (this was back when i was d3, i remember the guy clearly, cus his friend added me after the game and said in danish "what do you think"). So much fucking shit I've had to take from my team over the years, because they started the blame game, while i was just trying to win. So naturally, i started acting like i was fucking "God", and trying to FORCE people to play certain champions, based on what they would write in team-select. And sometimes, it worked, but it also failed. Over the years i quick realized why i would fail; someone on my team would start getting a grudge on somebody and from there it just snowballs into a loss. So whenever i couldn't convince people to play, i would lose really really hard and really really fast because people would start to play like a "troll". But by acting like you know EVERYTHING fucking EVERYTHING (you just start by dominating the team select with a friendly attitude, like wtf you guys have been seeing LCS players do this on stream for years) and acting like they're fucking "God", because they show confidence in their play. You can be really good mechanically, but if you fail to understand this, you might be stuck in bronze/silvergold/plat (keep in mind that over the years i've played on several accounts, i'm not proud of it, but i did it to try and get a grip of what the play was like in every tier though it was "boosting"). So yeah, that's how i got Diamond 1. When i reached d1 i realized that everybody was exactly like me, in the sense that they showed confidence and didn't give up no matter what (well some do, but they're outcasts and people bash them reguarly in all-chat) and then it became boring to me and i started looking at it differently. EDIT: I forgot to mention, i ping and look at the minimap all the time (minimap is your best friend) | ||
|
Kergy
Peru2011 Posts
I think we average solo Q players can't learn much from pro teams other than a few lane matchups and tricks, LoL becomes a very different game when instant communication is involved. | ||
|
Sponkz
Denmark4564 Posts
And that's pretty much all there is to it. With that said, I'm a fucking terrible player. It took me somewhere between 4000-5000 games to reach the second highest level the game has to offer(d1 30 LP) , and i couldn't even keep consistent, that's how hard it was. And remember i only played Nunu and Sona, those champions are fucking bat-shit easy to play lol. Tip if you shot-call: Be humble and explain why shit went wrong, and just get over it and start focusing on something else you can do. EDIT: And i almost forgot this http://www.lolking.net/summoner/euw/21597596 | ||
|
Omnishroud
1073 Posts
-If someones playing some wacky shit for fun and posts about it, TL LoL will giggle along and have fun with it. -If someones trying an abstract pick and posting constructive theory and better yet evidence and results about it being legit, TL LoL will discuss its merits The problems arise when you start posting about something being legit without the evidence/results/valid points and continue insisting its legit without providing these things. (See: Support WW) You're basically taking a wacky fun pick and just saying its legit. Before support WW which prompted this thread, there was a very legit morgana support conversation going on. | ||
|
Sponkz
Denmark4564 Posts
EDIT: I wanted an open debate about some of the terrible attitudes that has shown their faces on this forum over the years including myself. League of Legends is just as much a casual game to some people as it is competitive. | ||
|
Omnishroud
1073 Posts
| ||
|
BreakfastBurrito
United States893 Posts
and methylone is not 5x as strong as x, sorry bud | ||
NeoIllusions
United States37500 Posts
Sponkz, what you are looking for is essentially the TROLLS thread in the LoL Strategy subforum, like a few people have suggested already. You're free to piggie back off Monte and the NA crew's discussion and test things out for yourself on the EU servers. Most of the posters in that thread are much more "free-thinking" and are more open to eccentric picks. In TL LoL General Discussion, I'd like to think we're open and mature enough to theorycraft (so long as it's backed by some common sense and rationale). Like Omnishroud mentioned, several posters and I were talking about support Morg last week and that is certainly not something that's mainstream yet. I don't want to beat a dead horse about support Warwick but frankly, I don't think it's viable or optimal. I've heard TROLLS talk about support Cass and even that is so many more levels more valid than a melee support with negligible poke, subpar team buff during laning phase, and zero CC until level 6. Lastly, in regards to hostility and bashing ideas or users in General Discussion, feel free to PM me if such situations arise. I understand that several of our TL veterans are inanely abrasive and I will do my best to reel them in (except Cheep, who I can't action against when he oversteps his bounds because he's "staff" status) but for the most part, there's a line between criticism and mockery and I honestly don't think we tread into the latter that often. Please let me know if there's anything else. | ||
| ||
