|
On July 29 2014 23:55 Slusher wrote:
Holy shit this explanation by RiotLyte why low priority ques don't work is so bad, I haven't thought a rioter was so out of touch with his posting subject since they made that post 2 years ago on their reasoning behind 3 bans.
What is this explanation?
|
I think this training thing has gotten overblown a bit. However, I wrote a law review article when in school about why judges make the same mistakes over and over. The real reason is usually lack of immediate feedback. This may be the actual Korean advantage, competitive sister teams. The coaches can pause the intramural scrims at any time and slap the players right then and there.
|
United States47024 Posts
Montag and Lyte seem hung up on the "toxicity breeds toxicity" argument. I understand the logic of it, but their concern with how it applies to verbal abuse is misplaced. DotA hasn't really used LPQ for verbal abuse issues since chat bans became a thing, and likewise, I agree it's not appropriate for them.
By his own admission, Lyte says that LPQ is effective for handling leavers/AFKers, and not so for other things--but that's all LPQ is really used for in DotA right now to begin with.
EDT: Admittedly, the OP paints a very outdated picture of how LPQ is used in DotA as well, so I can see where the misconceptions arise from.
On July 30 2014 00:24 Sufficiency wrote:Show nested quote +On July 29 2014 23:55 Slusher wrote:
Holy shit this explanation by RiotLyte why low priority ques don't work is so bad, I haven't thought a rioter was so out of touch with his posting subject since they made that post 2 years ago on their reasoning behind 3 bans. What is this explanation?
http://forums.euw.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?p=8608239#8608239
Montag's initial post, plus 2 more after by Lyte.
I don't think their argument is wrong, it's just completely out of touch with how they system is used in DotA.
|
On July 29 2014 23:55 Slusher wrote:
Holy shit this explanation by RiotLyte why low priority ques don't work is so bad, I haven't thought a rioter was so out of touch with his posting subject since they made that post 2 years ago on their reasoning behind 3 bans.
Could you link it ?
|
On July 30 2014 00:31 TheYango wrote:Montag and Lyte seem hung up on the "toxicity breeds toxicity" argument. I understand the logic of it, but their concern with how it applies to verbal abuse is misplaced. DotA hasn't really used LPQ for verbal abuse issues since chat bans became a thing, and likewise, I agree it's not appropriate for them. By his own admission, Lyte says that LPQ is effective for handling leavers/AFKers, and not so for other things--but that's all LPQ is really used for in DotA right now to begin with. EDT: Admittedly, the OP paints a very outdated picture of how LPQ is used in DotA as well, so I can see where the misconceptions arise from. Show nested quote +On July 30 2014 00:24 Sufficiency wrote:On July 29 2014 23:55 Slusher wrote:
Holy shit this explanation by RiotLyte why low priority ques don't work is so bad, I haven't thought a rioter was so out of touch with his posting subject since they made that post 2 years ago on their reasoning behind 3 bans. What is this explanation? http://forums.euw.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?p=8608239#8608239Montag's initial post, plus 2 more after by Lyte. I don't think their argument is wrong, it's just completely out of touch with how they system is used in DotA.
Did you read why Riot doesn't want ingame voice chat? Pretty hilarious.
|
I think Riot probably already tried this kind of Prisoner's island approach, which is why Lyte is making the toxicity breeds toxicity argument.
|
Obligatory omg riot are awful post.
Enjoy your riot-funded LCS and F2P game btw.
|
I just think it would be nice if they would implement low priority, I could end up being wrong but I don't think it would be for the reasons he posted.
I'm not "CANCELLING MY PREORDER" or anything if it doesn't happen
|
Does anyone know how to get rid of the bots that try to add you as a friend, you click on decline, and they proceed to spam you with a bunch of messages? I'm getting like 3 a day and it's getting annoying.
|
On July 30 2014 01:49 Slusher wrote:
I just think it would be nice if they would implement low priority, I could end up being wrong but I don't think it would be for the reasons he posted.
I'm not "CANCELLING MY PREORDER" or anything if it doesn't happen
I still think Riot probably experimented this. But they felt it didn't work too well so they were like meh.
|
On July 30 2014 01:42 Capped wrote:
Obligatory omg riot are awful post.
Enjoy your riot-funded LCS and F2P game btw.
I agree with Riot completely on this subject but arguments like these are terrible. Riot isn't running a charity so it's a bit dumb to paint them as saints. Just because they use a different business model than some other companies doesn't mean they magically become immune to scrutiny.
|
On July 30 2014 00:31 TheYango wrote:
Montag's initial post, plus 2 more after by Lyte.
I don't think their argument is wrong, it's just completely out of touch with how they system is used in DotA.
Their argument about ruining the leveling experience because of angry people smurfing is silly. Banning people has the same problem, except its forced. you HAVE to smurf when banned, when in LPQ you don't HAVE to. levels 1-5 are essentially playing bot games 1v5 with 4 afk or feeder bots. i'd argue that having a rager or whatever smurfing on your team actually improves your gameplay in those situations. any new player starting LoL already has to deal with a mountain of shit that probably turns off any solo player. having someone act like people act on the internet all the time could do nothing to make that worse.
|
United Kingdom50293 Posts
|
On July 30 2014 00:39 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2014 00:31 TheYango wrote:Montag and Lyte seem hung up on the "toxicity breeds toxicity" argument. I understand the logic of it, but their concern with how it applies to verbal abuse is misplaced. DotA hasn't really used LPQ for verbal abuse issues since chat bans became a thing, and likewise, I agree it's not appropriate for them. By his own admission, Lyte says that LPQ is effective for handling leavers/AFKers, and not so for other things--but that's all LPQ is really used for in DotA right now to begin with. EDT: Admittedly, the OP paints a very outdated picture of how LPQ is used in DotA as well, so I can see where the misconceptions arise from. On July 30 2014 00:24 Sufficiency wrote:On July 29 2014 23:55 Slusher wrote:
Holy shit this explanation by RiotLyte why low priority ques don't work is so bad, I haven't thought a rioter was so out of touch with his posting subject since they made that post 2 years ago on their reasoning behind 3 bans. What is this explanation? http://forums.euw.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?p=8608239#8608239Montag's initial post, plus 2 more after by Lyte. I don't think their argument is wrong, it's just completely out of touch with how they system is used in DotA. Did you read why Riot doesn't want ingame voice chat? Pretty hilarious.
I have a friend who never speaks in voice chats because she has had a lot of awful experiences purely because she's female. She just says she doesn't have a mic and goes by "masculine" screen names.
Fucking adorable!
|
United States15536 Posts
This is what I imagine MoonBear is like in real life.
|
more %health scaling dmg just what was needed for top lane
|
Netherlands4118 Posts
If his numbers are high he will be OP in toplane with all the cc he provides. As soon as he gets toned down a bit though I don't think his 1v1 is good enough for top. I kinda want to try him as a support though, that seems like it could be fun.
|
On July 30 2014 03:44 Gahlo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 30 2014 00:39 Numy wrote:On July 30 2014 00:31 TheYango wrote:Montag and Lyte seem hung up on the "toxicity breeds toxicity" argument. I understand the logic of it, but their concern with how it applies to verbal abuse is misplaced. DotA hasn't really used LPQ for verbal abuse issues since chat bans became a thing, and likewise, I agree it's not appropriate for them. By his own admission, Lyte says that LPQ is effective for handling leavers/AFKers, and not so for other things--but that's all LPQ is really used for in DotA right now to begin with. EDT: Admittedly, the OP paints a very outdated picture of how LPQ is used in DotA as well, so I can see where the misconceptions arise from. On July 30 2014 00:24 Sufficiency wrote:On July 29 2014 23:55 Slusher wrote:
Holy shit this explanation by RiotLyte why low priority ques don't work is so bad, I haven't thought a rioter was so out of touch with his posting subject since they made that post 2 years ago on their reasoning behind 3 bans. What is this explanation? http://forums.euw.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?p=8608239#8608239Montag's initial post, plus 2 more after by Lyte. I don't think their argument is wrong, it's just completely out of touch with how they system is used in DotA. Did you read why Riot doesn't want ingame voice chat? Pretty hilarious. I have a friend who never speaks in voice chats because she has had a lot of awful experiences purely because she's female. She just says she doesn't have a mic and goes by "masculine" screen names. Fucking adorable!
+ Show Spoiler +this skin lol
|
Probably going to be a ridiculous lane bully unless his numbers are low. See kennen. I also don't think he needs an escape but that's just wishful thinking.
|
three things i'm curious about with Gnar. do his abilities share cooldowns with their transformed version, when you use an ability with full rage do you use your mini form ability or your rage form ability, and if you hop and bounce off of someone, what happens when you land on another person, do you keep bouncing or does it stop.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IbDPRqevT5c/U9ft6HwzuxI/AAAAAAAAUrY/Z-mrZvj5lPQ/s1600/gnar.jpg)
