[Patch 4.15] Master Tier General Discussion - Page 62

On September 07 2014 04:02 Disengaged wrote:


Good yes.

Good enough to win worlds over Koreans?

No.

On September 07 2014 04:26 RouaF wrote:

If Wickd wins worlds i'll eat my hat. I'm quite sure his weaknesses will be revealed there.

On September 07 2014 03:57 TheYango wrote:
You already quoted it! XD

On September 07 2014 04:29 Alaric wrote:

I think it's the first time I've seen you use a smiley.

On September 07 2014 04:34 ketchup wrote:
Also this is pretty funny(more so that there is a stream of this, and someone is doing it like they did it with Faker):

http://www.twitch.tv/lcs_pros_in_koreansoloq

On September 07 2014 05:24 onlywonderboy wrote:
I'm just salty because we aren't gonna get the Shy, Madlife , Ryu team. Overall I have mixed feelings on the soft region lock but I realize it's probably better overall for the average LCS fan. I want to see better teams but they want to see teams they can root for. I think LMQ had done a good job of building a decent fan base bit if more full foriegn teams came into the scene I could see a lot of fans getting tired of it and revert back to the "faceless Korean" complaint. In the end I still don't think this is gonna do enough to "fix" NA and make them more competitive in the world scene.

On September 07 2014 05:25 Sufficiency wrote:



You still can get Madlife and Shy on NA. They just can't bring an entire squad of Koreans.

For example, I can see EG acquiring Madlife and Shy.

On September 07 2014 05:23 wei2coolman wrote:
blue build ez mid, proof that kr soloqueue meta is godly

On September 07 2014 05:33 Fusilero wrote:

Machi and ahq fighter was on that shit months ago, SEA master race strikes again.

On September 07 2014 05:32 TheYango wrote:
What exactly are the LCS rules on subs again? The new policy seems to apply only to players on the starting lineup.

Would it be possible to field a team of 3 NA starters, 2 Korean players, and 3 Korean subs?

On September 07 2014 05:12 Sufficiency wrote:
Ranked disabled. Fuck this shit.

NA the new EUW now. Seriously. Very wow much QQ.

On September 07 2014 03:52 Goumindong wrote:


protectionism actually does work in some instances. Tariffs are not necessarily net negative



You're looking at the wrong time period for the creation of the American state. The protectionism he is talking about occurred in the 1800's, not the 1950's (by which time US policy had switched for the most part and the U.S. wanted to pressure other nations to reduce their tariffs and allow our goods in. E.G. GATT which we started in 1947). The nations that you claim "just totally beat us because of tariffs", like Japan* employed high tariffs in order to protect those industries until such a time as they could compete.

US Auto companies were not successful because of tariffs they were successful because the rest of the world's production infrastructure was a bombed out heap after world war II and neither did they get lazy because of tariffs. If they failed because of tariffs it was German and Japanese tariffs which caused the failure. Indeed. In the 70's US auto companies lobbied the US government for tariffs. Which they did not get! (though Japan did voluntarily reduce imports)

While the Development Economists are not unanimous on the subject of tariffs it is not nearly so clean cut as you suggest and there is robust evidence to suggest that tariffs are part of smart development strategy.

*IIRC Japan still has effective tariffs on imports by requiring non-standard modifications to vehicles imported. This can add thousands of dollars of extra cost onto foreign vehicles which are not produced specifically for the relatively small Japanese market.