EPT[Patch 4.21] Rek'Sai General Discussion - Page 56
| Forum Index > LoL General |
Starting Page 94 spamming will in GD will be warned, please don't post for the sake of post count. Keep it civil. Please take website feedback to http://www.liquidlegends.net/forum/website-feedback/ | ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
| ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On December 28 2014 04:49 wei2coolman wrote: jeez, i can't imagine someone being THAT bad. I mean watching streamers is cool, and it does gives you some insights on stuff, but to be honest the progression of ranked has a lot to do with being able to be self critical. http://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/2m96uo/100_most_active_ranked_players_on_na_early/ | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
On December 28 2014 05:06 TheYango wrote: On the original topic that started this discussion: holy fuck that book seems like a huge waste of money. Have you read the book? | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
| ||
|
Simberto
Germany11960 Posts
The main problem is quality control here. There is just no way to actually get a good coach and know he both knows what he is talking about and is capable of teaching, and for literature there is just so much free content that it becomes really hard to justify buying a book. (Also it is a lot harder to convince parents to pay for someone to teach their children play video games better) But generally speaking, i don't think there should be such a stigmata onto buying or selling knowledge of video games. If you want people to treat Esports as an actual thing, you should not tell anyone who actually pays for coaching that he is an idiot being scammed (preferably, they also shouldn't actually be scammed here) In any other field, teaching by someone knowledgable of the subject is considered to be very helpful, yet in esports people always argue for the trial & error methodology, which is probably the slowest possible way to learn about a subject. Obviously it is useful in science where noone else knows how things work, but if someone else knows how stuff works, getting them to tell you is almost always a much faster way of learning. And that is obviously worth some money. | ||
|
Scip
Czech Republic11293 Posts
On December 28 2014 04:56 TheYango wrote: But what if someone just wants a quick fix way to get higher MMR and not spend the time to think about their own games, Scip? Idk, youd have to ask Neo | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
I read the sample excerpt posted on the sale page. FWIW I also considered Pat Chapin's MTG book to be a huge waste of money. Though that had a lot more general concepts and "how to think about the game" kind of stuff than concrete things like the excerpts shown present. On December 28 2014 06:53 Simberto wrote: Yeah, i don't get why there is such a big stigmata on spending money onto learning a competetive Video game. It is absolutely acceptable to spend 40-50 bucks or more a month onto teaching in any other sport, learning an instrument is even more expensive, etc... I mean, the scale is kind of different because most of the time when people get coaching for sports or learning an instrument and are paying that much money, it's from someone who's been playing the sport/instrument for many years and teaches it professionally--and they themselves are planning a much more serious commitment to the sport/instrument itself. So what they're buying has more intrinsic value than what most League coaching right now offers. Music and most sports also generally have a larger pool of relevant accumulated collective knowledge than League does due to having existed for as long as they have, so there's a lot more to be gained from teaching. | ||
|
red_
United States8474 Posts
On December 28 2014 06:53 Simberto wrote: Yeah, i don't get why there is such a big stigmata on spending money onto learning a competetive Video game. It is absolutely acceptable to spend 40-50 bucks or more a month onto teaching in any other sport, learning an instrument is even more expensive, etc... The main problem is quality control here. There is just no way to actually get a good coach and know he both knows what he is talking about and is capable of teaching, and for literature there is just so much free content that it becomes really hard to justify buying a book. (Also it is a lot harder to convince parents to pay for someone to teach their children play video games better) But generally speaking, i don't think there should be such a stigmata onto buying or selling knowledge of video games. If you want people to treat Esports as an actual thing, you should not tell anyone who actually pays for coaching that he is an idiot being scammed (preferably, they also shouldn't actually be scammed here) In any other field, teaching by someone knowledgable of the subject is considered to be very helpful, yet in esports people always argue for the trial & error methodology, which is probably the slowest possible way to learn about a subject. Obviously it is useful in science where noone else knows how things work, but if someone else knows how stuff works, getting them to tell you is almost always a much faster way of learning. And that is obviously worth some money. First, the word is stigma. Second, it's because gaming in general is still growing in acceptance socially, especially pursuing gaming as a competitive thing to do. Not even professionally or anything, but as an activity that you really care about winning and being better than your peers at. Even people within gaming itself look at a lot of their 'peers' and wonder why they care so much about it, let alone those looking in from the outside, so it's no wonder that paying money to improve(especially from being AWFUL and showing absolutely no natural talent at the game) is considered pretty odd or an outright waste. I'd think some uncoordinated, lazy, out of shape dude in his 20 asking for some football lessons so he can crush his Saturday league or dominate intramurals at his college is a little odd too, and that's pretty much the 'real sports' equivalent of a Bronze 5 paying Last Shadow to make him Silver or Gold or whatever. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On December 28 2014 07:38 red_ wrote: I'd think some uncoordinated, lazy, out of shape dude in his 20 asking for some football lessons so he can crush his Saturday league or dominate intramurals at his college is a little odd too, and that's pretty much the 'real sports' equivalent of a Bronze 5 paying Last Shadow to make him Silver or Gold or whatever. Most of his peers would probably tell him to work out and get in shape before considering lessons, too. | ||
|
ZERG_RUSSIAN
10417 Posts
On December 28 2014 00:53 Volband wrote: Gold is a tier more than half of league's players could not reach. Read dozens of stories starting or mentioning "I watched [insert streamer here". Almost everyone I know and improved is like that. I was like that. Whenever I helped out bronze or silver players they - well ,those who cared - managed to improve very fast, despite having hundreds of games played already without any progress. If you just kept spamming league and magically found yourself in high diamond then you are a black sheep, and you should be thankful for your gift of abilities. I did not meet or heard anyone who just played himself into being good. That doesn't exist. What the fuck are you talking about? This game came out four years ago, how do you think the first good players got good at this game? Most of the best players have been up there since before ranked was even around. Who taught the people who had to get there first? Nobody was around to teach or coach them. They just fucking spammed games and adapted. Your argument is incredibly flawed to me because I would say MOST of the current pros just spammed their way there. People who have to get coaching to become good are a different class of players than those who can get there by themselves. Both exist, but just because SOME people can't get there without coaching doesn't mean ALL people can't get there without coaching. There is one thing that makes a difference: Attitude. The willingness and desire to do whatever it takes to get somewhere. The self-reflexivity to examine your own biases and question your beliefs. A general sense of nothing is too hard for me to do. This may not always be true. Some people don't make it, for one reason or another, and some people are born with talent and don't need the attitude portion. Still, I don't find it any surprise that the top players, regardless of their innate talent, pretty much all have the attitude portion of it down too. And that attitude, for us, translated into spamming games and constantly learning, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW YOU PUT IN THE WORK. | ||
|
Slusher
United States19143 Posts
Give reasoning if possible | ||
|
Nos-
Canada12016 Posts
| ||
|
JazzVortical
Australia1825 Posts
On December 28 2014 08:55 Slusher wrote: Want some opinions on worst hero in the game on this patch. To avoid the all heros have strengths reply i will pose it like this. If you played a game of solo q with 100$ on the line and as a handicap you could pick one hero the opposing team had to pick (but not role) Give reasoning if possible That is actually hard to answer. In Solo Queue I'd say Ashe. Too hard to coordinate with your team to make best use of your ult, and you can't really hard carry the game like other ADCs until late, when your natural scaling kicks in. In a age of mid game focused ADCs, Ashe doesn't fare too well. Also no mobility ;P Outside of that, maybe Taric or Zac. | ||
|
kongoline
6318 Posts
On December 28 2014 09:00 Nos- wrote: Man the client is just.. bugging out hella hard these days, I accept a game, and then it bounces me back into the main page, won't let me queue up again because I'm apparently assigned to an existing game, and then right as I try to restart the client it puts me back into the champion select room saying how I dodged? imo darius, u have to completely crush lane to be relevant in team fights, if u lose or go even you are useless | ||
|
AsnSensation
Germany24009 Posts
| ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + By carry I mean feed  | ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
Fusilero
United Kingdom50293 Posts
On December 28 2014 09:25 AsnSensation wrote: Have the KOR/CN teams played any official matches yet? I saw on esportscalender that EDG is playing Team King tomorrow and I don't know anything about Team King but EDG should still be favourites right? There's been quite a few off-season tournaments in China with varying levels of competence of execution to say the least. Anyways regarding team king they've played against EDG in two tournament finals post-worlds first was the XCS where EDG beat king 3-1 then there was the the NEST where king beat EDG 2-1. Regarding the current finals afaik they're going to play this one with deft instead of namei which you can make of it what you will. Namei hasn't had the best post-worlds run, he had some amazingly embarrassing moments against styz in a recent final against world elite. But they've played zero official matches with deft while team king have retained the same all Chinese roster for the past few months. So I suppose EDG ought to be the favourites and they have a better track record against king but I'd say a king victory is far from unreasonable. | ||
|
AsnSensation
Germany24009 Posts
On December 28 2014 09:34 Fusilero wrote: There's been quite a few off-season tournaments in China with varying levels of competence of execution to say the least. Anyways regarding team king they've played against EDG in two tournament finals post-worlds first was the XCS where EDG beat king 3-1 then there was the the NEST where king beat EDG 2-1. Regarding the current finals afaik they're going to play this one with deft instead of namei which you can make of it what you will. Namei hasn't had the best post-worlds run, he had some amazingly embarrassing moments against styz in a recent final against world elite. But they've played zero official matches with deft while team king have retained the same all Chinese roster for the past few months. So I suppose EDG ought to be the favourites and they have a better track record against king but I'd say a king victory is far from unreasonable. cool thx. Is tomorrow bo3 or bo5? | ||
| ||
