EPT[Patch 5.9] Ashe Rework General Discussion - Page 42
| Forum Index > LoL General |
gg ez discussion will not be continued in GD following this post | ||
|
Velocirapture
United States983 Posts
| ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
| ||
|
wei2coolman
United States60033 Posts
20% of the time, midlaner is significantly behind in lane 0-2, or huge cs down, I take blue as jungler. 5% of the time, midlaner significantly behind, pings for blue, I take blue as jungler, tells him i'll give him the 3rd buff (lol i don't, but it prevents them from raging). 20% of the time, midlaner is too far away (either in base or roaming in another lane). 10% of the time, midlaner is either even, close to even or ahead, I ping for them to take blue buff and they just tells me (as a jungler) to take blue buff. 25% of the time, midlaner is either even, close to even, or ahead, I ping for them to take blue buff, they take it. 20% of the time, I forget to bother checking for midlane's status, and just bindly take 2nd bluebuff, cuz yolo my jungle. | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
| ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On May 21 2015 07:03 Sufficiency wrote: Can someone provide a TLDR for the blue buff arguments? Look at my picture. | ||
|
Sufficiency
Canada23833 Posts
You have a picture? | ||
|
Slayer91
Ireland23461 Posts
On May 21 2015 07:03 Sufficiency wrote: Can someone provide a TLDR for the blue buff arguments? no useful conclusion was achieved just arguments over nothing really | ||
|
Zess
Adun Toridas!9144 Posts
His picture isn't very useful: On May 21 2015 04:07 cLutZ wrote: I also made a picture about why you guys can't agree. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://s12.postimg.org/t9l660a7h/agdfgfsad.jpg) | ||
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
I was at around 20 LP in Gold I, playing against several Plat (including Plat IV) per game, or people in promos to Plat, so I assume my Elo was close to that. I lose one, down to 0 LP. Two other losses and I'm demoted to Gold II. A stray Plat V here and there, I can get—on his way to Gold I but not quite down to Gold V Elo yet. But considering I've played around 100 ranked games this season, the variance should have went back to "normal" levels (eg. no more "accelereted Elo gains/losses")—I think it's around the first 50 games or something till it settles? Going from low Plat to below Gold II Elo in 3 games has to be some big swing. Or an unprobable set of occurrences where even the Plat IV guys where actually close to Gold II Elo (without being demoted to Plat V somehow) and I was always down there the whole time. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On May 21 2015 07:16 Zess wrote: His picture isn't very useful: My picture is the most useful. The lack of pictures during this argument is why, in general, it went nowhere. Picture. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On May 21 2015 07:21 cLutZ wrote: My picture is the most useful. The lack of pictures during this argument is why, in general, it went nowhere. Picture. This argument doesn't include a picture, therefore you have no stance. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On May 21 2015 07:18 Alaric wrote: Uh... the league system is leaving me puzzled here. I was at around 20 LP in Gold I, playing against several Plat (including Plat IV) per game, or people in promos to Plat, so I assume my Elo was close to that. I lose one, down to 0 LP. Two other losses and I'm demoted to Gold II. A stray Plat V here and there, I can get—on his way to Gold I but not quite down to Gold V Elo yet. But considering I've played around 100 ranked games this season, the variance should have went back to "normal" levels (eg. no more "accelereted Elo gains/losses")—I think it's around the first 50 games or something till it settles? Going from low Plat to below Gold II Elo in 3 games has to be some big swing. Or an unprobable set of occurrences where even the Plat IV guys where actually close to Gold II Elo (without being demoted to Plat V somehow) and I was always down there the whole time. V's are always a coinflip of people that belong there and people that just managed to squeak out of a league. | ||
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
 | ||
|
Fildun
Netherlands4124 Posts
Teut, you're hilarious. Cheep, stop giving me fucking cancer. Your whole heuristics argument sucks absolute balls, because the 70/30 split doesn't say anything about the chance of someone being wrong in a single circumstance. It's basic stochastics. The argument that in KR soloq mid always gets blue has been factually unproven. (is that a word?) | ||
|
Slayer91
Ireland23461 Posts
On May 21 2015 08:01 Fildun wrote: unproven. (is that a word?) discredited perhaps? p.s + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://memestorage.com/_nw/25/83703334.jpg) | ||
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21248 Posts
On May 21 2015 08:01 Fildun wrote: I just read all 10 pages. Holy shit. Teut, you're hilarious. Cheep, stop giving me fucking cancer. Your whole heuristics argument sucks absolute balls, because the 70/30 split doesn't say anything about the chance of someone being wrong in a single circumstance. It's basic stochastics. It's like you haven't read the thread at all. On May 21 2015 08:01 Fildun wrote: The argument that in KR soloq mid always gets blue has been factually unproven. (is that a word?) No it hasn't? | ||
|
Slayer91
Ireland23461 Posts
| ||
|
Alaric
France45622 Posts
It's, uh... for equity I guess. First you adjust the RP prices, then you adjust the lag so we can feel just like our fellow east costies! | ||
|
Kinie
United States3106 Posts
On May 21 2015 07:03 Sufficiency wrote: Can someone provide a TLDR for the blue buff arguments? Lots of people shit posting about blue buff, misunderstandings abound. Overall sense is it should be a case-by-case basis and require communication between the jungler and mid laner on who gets it. | ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
On May 21 2015 08:01 Fildun wrote: because the 70/30 split doesn't say anything about the chance of someone being wrong in a single circumstance. It's basic stochastics. Uhh yes it does. It says that if you choose the 70% choice every time you will be wrong 30% of the time and if you choose the 30% choice you will be wrong 70% of the time. The 70/30 split, in this instance, defines the individual probabilities. (Though technically we say that the split is defined by the probabilities and not the other way around this has no effect on the predicted outcomes, which is to say "the chance of someone being wrong" | ||
| ||
