|
On June 26 2014 05:45 Ryuu314 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 04:49 xes wrote:
Sounds like people are surprised here that a startup (eSports isn't really different from poorly managed startups, except that these startups usually go bust before securing series A whereas the power of ESPORTS can carry idiots for quite some time) is seeking extremely well qualified candidates for positions that they can underpay.
But maybe you'll also get paid in CLG equity, in which case your premium is 50-100k of forgone salary for the opportunity to get millions. $35~45k is decent pay, but not if you're gonna require 2 years of professional work experience. That's like...straight out of undergrad pay scale. People with that level of experience will be willing to join startups for low pay if they believe that said startup will lead to bigger and better things. As much as Esports is growing, the risk is still extremely high and most likely not worth it. On top of that, CLG isn't exactly a new startup anymore. They've been around for at least 4 years and if this is all they can offer after four years, it doesn't speak well to their growth/past management.
not to mention that if you have the familiarity with CLG that the position suggests you have, you'd know its maybe not the best team to be jumping on board with right now.
|
|
|
On June 26 2014 06:02 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 05:45 Ryuu314 wrote:On June 26 2014 04:49 xes wrote:
Sounds like people are surprised here that a startup (eSports isn't really different from poorly managed startups, except that these startups usually go bust before securing series A whereas the power of ESPORTS can carry idiots for quite some time) is seeking extremely well qualified candidates for positions that they can underpay.
But maybe you'll also get paid in CLG equity, in which case your premium is 50-100k of forgone salary for the opportunity to get millions. $35~45k is decent pay, but not if you're gonna require 2 years of professional work experience. That's like...straight out of undergrad pay scale. People with that level of experience will be willing to join startups for low pay if they believe that said startup will lead to bigger and better things. As much as Esports is growing, the risk is still extremely high and most likely not worth it. On top of that, CLG isn't exactly a new startup anymore. They've been around for at least 4 years and if this is all they can offer after four years, it doesn't speak well to their growth/past management. not to mention that if you have the familiarity with CLG that the position suggests you have, you'd know its maybe not the best team to be jumping on board with right now.
Arguably the strongest team in NA LCS.
Strongest they've ever been since S1.
Just signed fat contracts with twitch.
Streamers constantly getting 10k+ viewers now.
uh... yeah..................................................................
|
United States47024 Posts
On June 26 2014 06:07 JimmiC wrote:
Most of the complaining about duos is the same as the complaining about everything. People seam to forget that the same thing happens on the other team too, and they also forget all the duos that do well.
Duo blaming is just another unfounded excuse to why a persons elo is lower then they think it should be without having to consider their own play and decisions as the reason.
There was a similar discussion with regard to wide MMR variance in stacks in DotA, and honestly, the biggest argument against stacks with a wide rating difference isn't how they affect winrate--but how they affect game quality.
Regardless of whether or not they make you win or lose, having one player that's far above everyone else's level and one that's far below has a higher likelihood of creating stompy games--either because the player who is way better does exceptionally well, or because the player who is way worse does exceptionally poorly. It doesn't matter if it happens to both sides--having games be really stompy because one player carries really hard or because one player feeds sucks regardless of the outcome.
Having the duo on the enemy team is just as bad as having it on your team because a bad, stompy game is a bad, stompy game regardless of which team won. It's just not fun to be in a game like that, even if you're the winner.
|
On June 26 2014 06:16 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 06:07 JimmiC wrote:
Most of the complaining about duos is the same as the complaining about everything. People seam to forget that the same thing happens on the other team too, and they also forget all the duos that do well.
Duo blaming is just another unfounded excuse to why a persons elo is lower then they think it should be without having to consider their own play and decisions as the reason. There was a similar discussion with regard to wide MMR variance in stacks in DotA, and honestly, the biggest argument against stacks with a wide rating difference isn't how they affect winrate--but how they affect game quality. Regardless of whether or not they make you win or lose, having one player that's far above everyone else's level and one that's far below has a higher likelihood of creating stompy games--either because the player who is way better does exceptionally well, or because the player who is way worse does exceptionally poorly. It doesn't matter if it happens to both sides--having games be really stompy because one player carries really hard or because one player feeds sucks regardless of the outcome. Having the duo on the enemy team is just as bad as having it on your team because a bad, stompy game is a bad, stompy game regardless of which team won. It's just not fun to be in a game like that, even if you're the winner.
Everyone forgets about the game where the higher of the duo puts on his fucking backpack. While the lower of the duo turns into an anchor.
and you're along for the ride for the battle of the century. Those games are the funnest imo.
|
On June 26 2014 06:20 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 06:16 TheYango wrote:On June 26 2014 06:07 JimmiC wrote:
Most of the complaining about duos is the same as the complaining about everything. People seam to forget that the same thing happens on the other team too, and they also forget all the duos that do well.
Duo blaming is just another unfounded excuse to why a persons elo is lower then they think it should be without having to consider their own play and decisions as the reason. There was a similar discussion with regard to wide MMR variance in stacks in DotA, and honestly, the biggest argument against stacks with a wide rating difference isn't how they affect winrate--but how they affect game quality. Regardless of whether or not they make you win or lose, having one player that's far above everyone else's level and one that's far below has a higher likelihood of creating stompy games--either because the player who is way better does exceptionally well, or because the player who is way worse does exceptionally poorly. It doesn't matter if it happens to both sides--having games be really stompy because one player carries really hard or because one player feeds sucks regardless of the outcome. Having the duo on the enemy team is just as bad as having it on your team because a bad, stompy game is a bad, stompy game regardless of which team won. It's just not fun to be in a game like that, even if you're the winner. Everyone forgets about the game where the higher of the duo puts on his fucking backpack. While the lower of the duo turns into an anchor. and you're along for the ride for the battle of the century. Those games are the funnest imo.
I remember a game like that. Jayce was more than double legendary, jungle duo is like 2/11/3 or something like that, and everybody else is trying to either kill the Jayce, or save the Jayce. Ended up losing because the Jayce facechecked and died once, but what can you do.
|
On June 26 2014 06:16 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 06:07 JimmiC wrote:
Most of the complaining about duos is the same as the complaining about everything. People seam to forget that the same thing happens on the other team too, and they also forget all the duos that do well.
Duo blaming is just another unfounded excuse to why a persons elo is lower then they think it should be without having to consider their own play and decisions as the reason. There was a similar discussion with regard to wide MMR variance in stacks in DotA, and honestly, the biggest argument against stacks with a wide rating difference isn't how they affect winrate--but how they affect game quality. Regardless of whether or not they make you win or lose, having one player that's far above everyone else's level and one that's far below has a higher likelihood of creating stompy games--either because the player who is way better does exceptionally well, or because the player who is way worse does exceptionally poorly. It doesn't matter if it happens to both sides--having games be really stompy because one player carries really hard or because one player feeds sucks regardless of the outcome. Having the duo on the enemy team is just as bad as having it on your team because a bad, stompy game is a bad, stompy game regardless of which team won. It's just not fun to be in a game like that, even if you're the winner.
Exactly.
It's not about winning or losing because of Duos. The games are just toxic shitfests.
|
Which is why they're taking action against duos where one partner is significantly better than the other. I think in general though that a blanket statement of "duoqueue" is really poor phrasing because there are tons of games where Duo queues do fine, but you don't notice that they're duos because theyre not outspoken about it. This is pretty common, actually. And they are too much of a lightning rod for complainers, more so than they should be. The outlying problem of poorly balanced duos is being corrected, and taking all duos out of the game is completely ridiculous.
|
This was an interesting reddit comment I found browsing post history of Rioters:
IMO [the Athene's nerf was] not big enough. The most frustrating thing in designing a mage champ is designing appropriate mana gates because 15 minutes into the game, champions just buy this dumb item that allows them to opt out of mana as a thing that gates them and also does everything else they want. I love this direction, but think we should have pushed harder still.
http://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/28ekxh/410_patch_notes/cia8qhy?context=3
|
On June 26 2014 06:50 xes wrote:This was an interesting reddit comment I found browsing post history of Rioters: Show nested quote +IMO [the Athene's nerf was] not big enough. The most frustrating thing in designing a mage champ is designing appropriate mana gates because 15 minutes into the game, champions just buy this dumb item that allows them to opt out of mana as a thing that gates them and also does everything else they want. I love this direction, but think we should have pushed harder still. http://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/28ekxh/410_patch_notes/cia8qhy?context=3
You mean after buffing the mana costs on almost every single champ in the game, including reducing a ton of ults from 200+ down to 100 flat(or free!), athenes+blue means you never run out of mana? Shocking. However did we get into this mess?
|
|
|
On June 26 2014 06:54 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 06:47 Nemireck wrote:On June 26 2014 06:16 TheYango wrote:On June 26 2014 06:07 JimmiC wrote:
Most of the complaining about duos is the same as the complaining about everything. People seam to forget that the same thing happens on the other team too, and they also forget all the duos that do well.
Duo blaming is just another unfounded excuse to why a persons elo is lower then they think it should be without having to consider their own play and decisions as the reason. There was a similar discussion with regard to wide MMR variance in stacks in DotA, and honestly, the biggest argument against stacks with a wide rating difference isn't how they affect winrate--but how they affect game quality. Regardless of whether or not they make you win or lose, having one player that's far above everyone else's level and one that's far below has a higher likelihood of creating stompy games--either because the player who is way better does exceptionally well, or because the player who is way worse does exceptionally poorly. It doesn't matter if it happens to both sides--having games be really stompy because one player carries really hard or because one player feeds sucks regardless of the outcome. Having the duo on the enemy team is just as bad as having it on your team because a bad, stompy game is a bad, stompy game regardless of which team won. It's just not fun to be in a game like that, even if you're the winner. Exactly. It's not about winning or losing because of Duos. The games are just toxic shitfests. I think the toxicity has nothing to do with the duo. It's more to do with he attitudes of the people in the game. I do think that when people lolnexus or whatever and see a duo they often let these preconceived notions effect the way they play and there attitudes. I'm played lots of games where the duos are fine, medium and normal. In fact way more then the other way. And I'm sure if you did some real statistical analysis you would find the same.
Real problem with duo is it exists.It really shouldn't.Also you should have the option to not have duos in your games.It is pretty retarded that the only way for me to not have duos on my team is to duo myself.
|
On June 26 2014 06:52 Amui wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 06:50 xes wrote:This was an interesting reddit comment I found browsing post history of Rioters: IMO [the Athene's nerf was] not big enough. The most frustrating thing in designing a mage champ is designing appropriate mana gates because 15 minutes into the game, champions just buy this dumb item that allows them to opt out of mana as a thing that gates them and also does everything else they want. I love this direction, but think we should have pushed harder still. http://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/28ekxh/410_patch_notes/cia8qhy?context=3 You mean after buffing the mana costs on almost every single champ in the game, including reducing a ton of ults from 200+ down to 100 flat(or free!), athenes+blue means you never run out of mana? Shocking. However did we get into this mess?
I found it more interesting that there seems to be a tension at Riot between the Anti-Fun Police (mana is anti-fun, energy short term gating shouldn't gate your ultimate, etc etc) and people who want to make good design choices.
|
On June 26 2014 06:13 wei2coolman wrote:
Strongest they've ever been since S1.
Just signed fat contracts with twitch.
Streamers constantly getting 10k+ viewers now.
uh... yeah..................................................................
CLGs been pretty poorly managed from the start. thats far more important to a prospective employee than their performance.
On June 26 2014 06:59 xes wrote:
I found it more interesting that there seems to be a tension at Riot between the Anti-Fun Police (mana is anti-fun, energy short term gating shouldn't gate your ultimate, etc etc) and people who want to make good design choices.
I think the business end gets a bit too much control over the creative end, of course if you make a game accessible and limit experiences that are negative to a minimum at the cost of good design you'll make more money. but the game is a worse game for almost every concession in that matter.
|
|
|
United States47024 Posts
On June 26 2014 06:59 xes wrote:
I found it more interesting that there seems to be a tension at Riot between the Anti-Fun Police (mana is anti-fun, energy short term gating shouldn't gate your ultimate, etc etc) and people who want to make good design choices.
That seems more or less in line with past information about how Riot's design team operates.
On June 26 2014 07:15 JimmiC wrote:
Not to mention it's a game, for fun, enjoy it. And you are in control of your own enjoyment, so don't blame others if you're not having a good time.
The argument has never been about duos in general, but about the decision to limit how wide of a disparity the duo can have in rating.
|
I still think that the "1 full tier" limitation doesn't go far enough. That means that a Silver 5 (who is basically still Bronze) can duo with a Gold 1. What generally happens is they get placed into a Gold 4/5 game, where the Silver 5 is still completely outclassed, and the Gold 1 isn't actually good enough to carry against the 5 other Gold players in the game. I'm tired of playing games where 2 players beg for bot lane, and either they fail because DuoQ bot lololol, or other lanes fail because they main bot lane but let the Duo take it to avoid argument. Or worse, when the Gold 1 takes mid to carry, and I'm in the bot lane with a fucking scarecrow for a lane partner. Whether I win or lose it's ridiculous and it's NOT a good experience. Silver 5's are silver 5 for a reason, the same way I'm Gold 5 for a reason. I don't find it fun to ask my plat and diamond friends to Duo with me so I can feed or get carried, and I don't understand why others attempt it either.
The complete removal of Ranked Duo would be preferable (let them play normals if friends want to play together), but barring that, there should be a 2 DIVISION limit. Anything more completely undermines the goal of the matchmaking system to try and create equal teams.
|
On June 26 2014 06:20 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 06:16 TheYango wrote:On June 26 2014 06:07 JimmiC wrote:
Most of the complaining about duos is the same as the complaining about everything. People seam to forget that the same thing happens on the other team too, and they also forget all the duos that do well.
Duo blaming is just another unfounded excuse to why a persons elo is lower then they think it should be without having to consider their own play and decisions as the reason. There was a similar discussion with regard to wide MMR variance in stacks in DotA, and honestly, the biggest argument against stacks with a wide rating difference isn't how they affect winrate--but how they affect game quality. Regardless of whether or not they make you win or lose, having one player that's far above everyone else's level and one that's far below has a higher likelihood of creating stompy games--either because the player who is way better does exceptionally well, or because the player who is way worse does exceptionally poorly. It doesn't matter if it happens to both sides--having games be really stompy because one player carries really hard or because one player feeds sucks regardless of the outcome. Having the duo on the enemy team is just as bad as having it on your team because a bad, stompy game is a bad, stompy game regardless of which team won. It's just not fun to be in a game like that, even if you're the winner. Everyone forgets about the game where the higher of the duo puts on his fucking backpack. While the lower of the duo turns into an anchor. and you're along for the ride for the battle of the century. Those games are the funnest imo.
They're really not. More realistically the silver is probably like diamond 3 and is just on his smurf.
|
On June 26 2014 07:43 zer0das wrote:
They're really not. More realistically the silver is probably like diamond 3 and is just on his smurf.
Then there is the scummy, dodging your placements to stay at a rating. if you are a diamond 1 player who has an account locked at silver 5 you can carry a bronze 5 friend from b5 to G5.
|
On June 26 2014 03:56 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On June 26 2014 03:51 Goumindong wrote:2 Years work experience and a Bachelors for 40-50k(lets be less than generous and suggest that the value of the rent is only 500 dollars/month)? Not too bad. 40k annually for doing the entirety of CLGs actual functional backend. all of the finances all of communication with legal teams and store personel. and then being expected to help with promo stuff and managing the team in addition to that. is a lot of work. that's not much. people with that much responsibility are executives in other companies.
It is going to be hard to find someone willing to take the job unless they really, really love eSports. Sounds approximately as much as my work load at my internship (pays about the same amount too).
As a learning experience it's great, but as work you're being severely underpaid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
