|
On March 03 2015 10:08 Frudgey wrote:
All of this talk of jungle Darius is making me giddy. Going to try it out later when I get the chance!
But I have to ask: How do you guys manage to get all 6 camps on your first clear as Darius? I've tried and I can only get 4 at very best.
Which route do you guys take? Also what runes do you guys run? I do Attack Marks, Armour Seals, Scaling MR Glyphs, and Movement Speed Quints. Is my jungle rune page off?
Or is there some sort of magic to kiting the jungle monsters that I don't understand?
Couple things: don't take ms quints. Jungle too hard imo, Ms quints a luxury junglers can't afford imo.
I use ad quints, as / ar pen red, flat armor yellows, and cd / as blues. Dunno if that's optimal or not, but definitely stops you from getting your ass kicked as hard. Lots of peopla hev told me I am trash for using the blue spots to help my jungle clear, but I like that too.
The other is Darius is one of the few champions that can still kite jungle camps Oldschool like due to his bleed damage.
|
On March 03 2015 10:13 Alaric wrote:
There was a Graves in the enemy team, with 35% crit.
First time I see him he crits me 3 out of 4 autos.
Second time crit crit auto.
Third time he just ks'd me from someone with a single auto, crit too.
I stopped counting at that point. Riot pls.
It was probably an Irelia bug.
|
Thresh
Blitz
Master+ stats. Blitz higher winrate, Thresh picked in almost double the games. Apparently your 'peers' in Master+ brackets disagree with the idea that Thresh is a terrible pick or they wouldn't be picking him in nearly half of the games. Blitz does seem to be the better pick, but that's not what your statement was.
|
On March 03 2015 10:37 red_ wrote:ThreshBlitzMaster+ stats. Blitz higher winrate, Thresh picked in almost double the games. Apparently your 'peers' in Master+ brackets disagree with the idea that Thresh is a terrible pick or they wouldn't be picking him in nearly half of the games. Blitz does seem to be the better pick, but that's not what your statement was.
what
|
On March 03 2015 10:50 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2015 10:37 red_ wrote:ThreshBlitzMaster+ stats. Blitz higher winrate, Thresh picked in almost double the games. Apparently your 'peers' in Master+ brackets disagree with the idea that Thresh is a terrible pick or they wouldn't be picking him in nearly half of the games. Blitz does seem to be the better pick, but that's not what your statement was. what
It's cool if you don't understand how statistics will operate in a (supposed to be, but not quite) closed rating system, but ya, Thresh is far from a 'terrible' pick in Masters+.
|
On March 03 2015 10:37 red_ wrote:ThreshBlitzMaster+ stats. Blitz higher winrate, Thresh picked in almost double the games. Apparently your 'peers' in Master+ brackets disagree with the idea that Thresh is a terrible pick or they wouldn't be picking him in nearly half of the games. Blitz does seem to be the better pick, but that's not what your statement was.
As both a blitz and thresh main, thresh is far more generalist pick imo. Especially if you have to pick before you've seen your matchups.
|
On March 03 2015 10:52 red_ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2015 10:50 101toss wrote:On March 03 2015 10:37 red_ wrote:ThreshBlitzMaster+ stats. Blitz higher winrate, Thresh picked in almost double the games. Apparently your 'peers' in Master+ brackets disagree with the idea that Thresh is a terrible pick or they wouldn't be picking him in nearly half of the games. Blitz does seem to be the better pick, but that's not what your statement was. what It's cool if you don't understand how statistics will operate in a (supposed to be, but not quite) closed rating system, but ya, Thresh is far from a 'terrible' pick in Masters+.
I don't get your logic
Thresh isn't bad because he is picked a lot even though his winrate is bad? Honestly I'm confused.
What's next, 42% winrate yasuo wasn't bad because people picked him in masters too?
|
United States37500 Posts
What I don't get is if 101toss is really playing in Masters, how he can seriously advocate Blitz being a better Support that Thresh.
Even for a shit region like NA, you're still playing with some pretty decent Support Mains/Thresh Mains in Masters/Challenger solo q. I don't believe this is not trolling.
|
On March 03 2015 10:55 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2015 10:52 red_ wrote:On March 03 2015 10:50 101toss wrote:On March 03 2015 10:37 red_ wrote:ThreshBlitzMaster+ stats. Blitz higher winrate, Thresh picked in almost double the games. Apparently your 'peers' in Master+ brackets disagree with the idea that Thresh is a terrible pick or they wouldn't be picking him in nearly half of the games. Blitz does seem to be the better pick, but that's not what your statement was. what It's cool if you don't understand how statistics will operate in a (supposed to be, but not quite) closed rating system, but ya, Thresh is far from a 'terrible' pick in Masters+. I don't get your logic Thresh isn't bad because he is picked a lot even though his winrate is bad? Honestly I'm confused. What's next, 42% winrate yasuo wasn't bad because people picked him in masters too?
His winrate hovers almost exactly at 50% in Masters, being picked in almost half of the games. League of Legends operates in a closed rating matchmaking system which attempts to make every game as close to a 50/50 as possible.
It also doubles on statements you've made about all of us being idiots that don't understand Master's play because we suck. Well, actual Masters and Challenger players who you objectively cannot say suck, seem to think Thresh is also worth picking, to the tune of twice the pickrate of Blitz.
|
I could see an argument for Blitz being better than Thresh in solo queue. He punishes uncoordinated play and people doing stupid shit harder than Thresh. Thresh is still perfectly fine though.
|
On March 03 2015 10:56 NeoIllusions wrote:
What I don't get is if 101toss is really playing in Masters, how he can seriously advocate Blitz being a better Support that Thresh.
Even for a shit region like NA, you're still playing with some pretty decent Support Mains/Thresh Mains in Masters/Challenger solo q. I don't believe this is not trolling.
there is at least an argument that blitz is a better solo queue support than thresh, if you don't play support. but i think thats the line i would draw.
|
On March 03 2015 10:56 NeoIllusions wrote:
What I don't get is if 101toss is really playing in Masters, how he can seriously advocate Blitz being a better Support that Thresh.
Even for a shit region like NA, you're still playing with some pretty decent Support Mains/Thresh Mains in Masters/Challenger solo q. I don't believe this is not trolling.
Let me put it in terms you'll probably understand Neo. From SF4, imagine Daigo who was Ryu main from the first game. However, since he's a pro and thus his job is to win, when SSF4 comes out, does he pick the champion with the lower winrate (Ryu) or the OP champion (Yun)? You probably remember which one he did. Sure, he can play Ryu and stomp a lot of people since he's Daigo, but when the tournament money is on the line, he picks Yun. Same concept here, you can win with thresh (he's not azir/veigar/kassadin levels of terrible), but for solo queue he's a suboptimal choice when blitz pretty much outclasses him in every manner. I get that in masters, you probably don't give a shit and don't want to tryhard so you pick whatever champion you want, but my general statement was that thresh is bad especially when compared to blitz in solo queue, regardless of elo (which he is).
On March 03 2015 11:00 red_ wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2015 10:55 101toss wrote:On March 03 2015 10:52 red_ wrote:On March 03 2015 10:50 101toss wrote:On March 03 2015 10:37 red_ wrote:ThreshBlitzMaster+ stats. Blitz higher winrate, Thresh picked in almost double the games. Apparently your 'peers' in Master+ brackets disagree with the idea that Thresh is a terrible pick or they wouldn't be picking him in nearly half of the games. Blitz does seem to be the better pick, but that's not what your statement was. what It's cool if you don't understand how statistics will operate in a (supposed to be, but not quite) closed rating system, but ya, Thresh is far from a 'terrible' pick in Masters+. I don't get your logic Thresh isn't bad because he is picked a lot even though his winrate is bad? Honestly I'm confused. What's next, 42% winrate yasuo wasn't bad because people picked him in masters too? His winrate hovers almost exactly at 50% in Masters, being picked in almost half of the games. League of Legends operates in a closed rating matchmaking system which attempts to make every game as close to a 50/50 as possible. It also doubles on statements you've made about all of us being idiots that don't understand Master's play because we suck. Well, actual Masters and Challenger players who you objectively cannot say suck, seem to think Thresh is also worth picking, to the tune of twice the pickrate of Blitz.
I never said masters don't suck or that I was good. In fact I think I'm pretty bad at this game. There's a point when you understand that people aren't good at league, they just get less bad (it sounds dumb/illogical but some master/challenger here can confirm it).
That having been said, if your goal is to win, why would you pick the 48% winrate thresh (based off the chart I'm seeing) when you have a similar champion, blitz, who actually wins more than half the time? The sample size for both seem large enough that we can safely conclude blitz is a better champion. Whether you see 48% winrate as terrible is in the eye of the beholder (yes I can think of worse champs but keep in mind many champions have 50%+ winrates). The difference only grows as the elo decreases.
It would be more clear if I put my solo q champion winrate tiers into perspective-
>55%- getting nerfed next patch
55%- op
53-54%- strong champions
51-52%- good champions
50%- fair champions
48-49%- bad champions
46-47%- terrible champions (many Faker xDDDD and other commonly used pro champions fall in here)
<46%- mundo and friends
|
On March 03 2015 11:16 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2015 10:56 NeoIllusions wrote:
What I don't get is if 101toss is really playing in Masters, how he can seriously advocate Blitz being a better Support that Thresh.
Even for a shit region like NA, you're still playing with some pretty decent Support Mains/Thresh Mains in Masters/Challenger solo q. I don't believe this is not trolling. Let me put it in terms you'll probably understand Neo. From SF4, imagine Daigo who was Ryu main from the first game. However, since he's a pro and thus his job is to win, when SSF4 comes out, does he pick the champion with the lower winrate (Ryu) or the OP champion (Yun)? You probably remember which one he did. Sure, he can play Ryu and stomp a lot of people since he's Daigo, but when the tournament money is on the line, he picks Yun. Same concept here, you can win with thresh (he's not azir/veigar/kassadin levels of terrible), but for solo queue he's a suboptimal choice when blitz pretty much outclasses him in every manner. I get that in masters, you probably don't give a shit and don't want to tryhard so you pick whatever champion you want, but my general statement was that thresh is bad especially when compared to blitz in solo queue, regardless of elo (which he is). Show nested quote +On March 03 2015 11:00 red_ wrote:On March 03 2015 10:55 101toss wrote:On March 03 2015 10:52 red_ wrote:On March 03 2015 10:50 101toss wrote:On March 03 2015 10:37 red_ wrote:ThreshBlitzMaster+ stats. Blitz higher winrate, Thresh picked in almost double the games. Apparently your 'peers' in Master+ brackets disagree with the idea that Thresh is a terrible pick or they wouldn't be picking him in nearly half of the games. Blitz does seem to be the better pick, but that's not what your statement was. what It's cool if you don't understand how statistics will operate in a (supposed to be, but not quite) closed rating system, but ya, Thresh is far from a 'terrible' pick in Masters+. I don't get your logic Thresh isn't bad because he is picked a lot even though his winrate is bad? Honestly I'm confused. What's next, 42% winrate yasuo wasn't bad because people picked him in masters too? His winrate hovers almost exactly at 50% in Masters, being picked in almost half of the games. League of Legends operates in a closed rating matchmaking system which attempts to make every game as close to a 50/50 as possible. It also doubles on statements you've made about all of us being idiots that don't understand Master's play because we suck. Well, actual Masters and Challenger players who you objectively cannot say suck, seem to think Thresh is also worth picking, to the tune of twice the pickrate of Blitz. I never said masters don't suck or that I was good. In fact I think I'm pretty bad at this game. There's a point when you understand that people aren't good at league, they just get less bad (it sounds dumb/illogical but some master/challenger here can confirm it). That having been said, if your goal is to win, why would you pick the 48% winrate thresh (based off the chart I'm seeing) when you have a similar champion, blitz, who actually wins more than half the time? The sample size for both seem large enough that we can safely conclude blitz is a better champion. Whether you see 48% winrate is terrible is in the eye of the beholder (yes I can think of worse champs but keep in mind many champions have 50%+ winrates). The difference only grows as the elo decreases.
Because you pick what you're good at. Also, I would be wary of having to pick Blitz first, before seeing what the enemy team has.
|
I think you should stop treating win rates like they are some factual statement of hero strength that completely explain everything you need to know about what is strong, especially when the number of games played between heroes is so vastly different.
|
On March 03 2015 11:16 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2015 10:56 NeoIllusions wrote:
What I don't get is if 101toss is really playing in Masters, how he can seriously advocate Blitz being a better Support that Thresh.
Even for a shit region like NA, you're still playing with some pretty decent Support Mains/Thresh Mains in Masters/Challenger solo q. I don't believe this is not trolling. Let me put it in terms you'll probably understand Neo. From SF4, imagine Daigo who was Ryu main from the first game. However, since he's a pro and thus his job is to win, when SSF4 comes out, does he pick the champion with the lower winrate (Ryu) or the OP champion (Yun)? You probably remember which one he did. Sure, he can play Ryu and stomp a lot of people since he's Daigo, but when the tournament money is on the line, he picks Yun. Same concept here, you can win with thresh (he's not azir/veigar/kassadin levels of terrible), but for solo queue he's a suboptimal choice when blitz pretty much outclasses him in every manner. I get that in masters, you probably don't give a shit and don't want to tryhard so you pick whatever champion you want, but my general statement was that thresh is bad especially when compared to blitz in solo queue, regardless of elo (which he is). Show nested quote +On March 03 2015 11:00 red_ wrote:On March 03 2015 10:55 101toss wrote:On March 03 2015 10:52 red_ wrote:On March 03 2015 10:50 101toss wrote:On March 03 2015 10:37 red_ wrote:ThreshBlitzMaster+ stats. Blitz higher winrate, Thresh picked in almost double the games. Apparently your 'peers' in Master+ brackets disagree with the idea that Thresh is a terrible pick or they wouldn't be picking him in nearly half of the games. Blitz does seem to be the better pick, but that's not what your statement was. what It's cool if you don't understand how statistics will operate in a (supposed to be, but not quite) closed rating system, but ya, Thresh is far from a 'terrible' pick in Masters+. I don't get your logic Thresh isn't bad because he is picked a lot even though his winrate is bad? Honestly I'm confused. What's next, 42% winrate yasuo wasn't bad because people picked him in masters too? His winrate hovers almost exactly at 50% in Masters, being picked in almost half of the games. League of Legends operates in a closed rating matchmaking system which attempts to make every game as close to a 50/50 as possible. It also doubles on statements you've made about all of us being idiots that don't understand Master's play because we suck. Well, actual Masters and Challenger players who you objectively cannot say suck, seem to think Thresh is also worth picking, to the tune of twice the pickrate of Blitz. I never said masters don't suck or that I was good. In fact I think I'm pretty bad at this game. There's a point when you understand that people aren't good at league, they just get less bad (it sounds dumb/illogical but some master/challenger here can confirm it). That having been said, if your goal is to win, why would you pick the 48% winrate thresh (based off the chart I'm seeing) when you have a similar champion, blitz, who actually wins more than half the time? The sample size for both seem large enough that we can safely conclude blitz is a better champion. Whether you see 48% winrate as terrible is in the eye of the beholder (yes I can think of worse champs but keep in mind many champions have 50%+ winrates). The difference only grows as the elo decreases. It would be more clear if I put my solo q champion winrate tiers into perspective- >55%- getting nerfed next patch 55%- op 53-54%- strong champions 51-52%- good champions 50%- fair champions 48-49%- bad champions 46-47%- terrible champions (many Faker xDDDD and other commonly used pro champions fall in here) <46%- mundo and friends
Heimer confirmed nerf next patch?
You're making my point for me, you have a fundamental difficulty understanding how certain statistics work in the matchmaking environment of LoL.
|
On March 03 2015 11:22 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2015 11:16 101toss wrote:On March 03 2015 10:56 NeoIllusions wrote:
What I don't get is if 101toss is really playing in Masters, how he can seriously advocate Blitz being a better Support that Thresh.
Even for a shit region like NA, you're still playing with some pretty decent Support Mains/Thresh Mains in Masters/Challenger solo q. I don't believe this is not trolling. Let me put it in terms you'll probably understand Neo. From SF4, imagine Daigo who was Ryu main from the first game. However, since he's a pro and thus his job is to win, when SSF4 comes out, does he pick the champion with the lower winrate (Ryu) or the OP champion (Yun)? You probably remember which one he did. Sure, he can play Ryu and stomp a lot of people since he's Daigo, but when the tournament money is on the line, he picks Yun. Same concept here, you can win with thresh (he's not azir/veigar/kassadin levels of terrible), but for solo queue he's a suboptimal choice when blitz pretty much outclasses him in every manner. I get that in masters, you probably don't give a shit and don't want to tryhard so you pick whatever champion you want, but my general statement was that thresh is bad especially when compared to blitz in solo queue, regardless of elo (which he is). On March 03 2015 11:00 red_ wrote:On March 03 2015 10:55 101toss wrote:On March 03 2015 10:52 red_ wrote:On March 03 2015 10:50 101toss wrote:On March 03 2015 10:37 red_ wrote:ThreshBlitzMaster+ stats. Blitz higher winrate, Thresh picked in almost double the games. Apparently your 'peers' in Master+ brackets disagree with the idea that Thresh is a terrible pick or they wouldn't be picking him in nearly half of the games. Blitz does seem to be the better pick, but that's not what your statement was. what It's cool if you don't understand how statistics will operate in a (supposed to be, but not quite) closed rating system, but ya, Thresh is far from a 'terrible' pick in Masters+. I don't get your logic Thresh isn't bad because he is picked a lot even though his winrate is bad? Honestly I'm confused. What's next, 42% winrate yasuo wasn't bad because people picked him in masters too? His winrate hovers almost exactly at 50% in Masters, being picked in almost half of the games. League of Legends operates in a closed rating matchmaking system which attempts to make every game as close to a 50/50 as possible. It also doubles on statements you've made about all of us being idiots that don't understand Master's play because we suck. Well, actual Masters and Challenger players who you objectively cannot say suck, seem to think Thresh is also worth picking, to the tune of twice the pickrate of Blitz. I never said masters don't suck or that I was good. In fact I think I'm pretty bad at this game. There's a point when you understand that people aren't good at league, they just get less bad (it sounds dumb/illogical but some master/challenger here can confirm it). That having been said, if your goal is to win, why would you pick the 48% winrate thresh (based off the chart I'm seeing) when you have a similar champion, blitz, who actually wins more than half the time? The sample size for both seem large enough that we can safely conclude blitz is a better champion. Whether you see 48% winrate is terrible is in the eye of the beholder (yes I can think of worse champs but keep in mind many champions have 50%+ winrates). The difference only grows as the elo decreases. Because you pick what you're good at. Also, I would be wary of having to pick Blitz first, before seeing what the enemy team has.
I hear this a lot and while it does have merit, if you can play thresh it's not much of a step to play blitzcrank. In fact, if you're masters, you should be able to play more than 1 champion. Then again, I know many self-proclaimed support mains are just players who can't play any other role and champions, but most of those people don't make it to masters.
Also, if they counterpick vs blitz, like sivir/morg, why the fuck would you pick thresh who fares even worse?
|
I mean for the record the same chart 101toss used to prove his point has Naut support a higher winrate than thresh or annie(support).
handle that information how you wish
|
On March 03 2015 11:41 Slusher wrote:
I mean for the record the same chart 101toss used to prove his point has Naut support a higher winrate than thresh or annie(support).
handle that information how you wish
Except the sample size is too small for those champions so you just throw those out. Nice strawman though, would have worked vs a bronze player :^)
Also I know that balancing is done usually without taking solo q winrates into account (riot said this explicitly with the ww nerf) and that nerfs usually take place just to get rid of toxic gameplay (see: recent akali/kassadin/veigar nerfs), so champions like heimerdinger/malzahar have been and still go untouched. You can say win rates don't paint the whole picture and picking based off win rates won't make you win more. I feel that's akin to saying that playing the lottery is good even though you're expected to lose more than you win. There's enough samples on the lolking winrates for generally accurate statistics, although it can get sketchy when looking at stuff like zac in masters+ or some shit. To say there's not enough samples for blitz or thresh though is just bad statistics.
|
On March 03 2015 11:51 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On March 03 2015 11:41 Slusher wrote:
I mean for the record the same chart 101toss used to prove his point has Naut support a higher winrate than thresh or annie(support).
handle that information how you wish Except the sample size is too small for those champions so you just throw those out.
Ooh you're getting so close now. Dig a little deeper and you'll get there.
|
What counterplay is there to Annie in lane? When are they adding a 0.75 second delay to a 0.25 cast time on Tibbers?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
