|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
If you are from the NA servers, you may very well ask: who am I to badmouth your favourite thread? I go by the name of Scipaeus121212 on EUW in the client, you may know me from the Amumu thread or the GD threads where I post quite often.
Let's get straight to topic that is broader than the T.R.O.L.L.S. thread, but encompasses it. And that is the topic of low level experimentation: how players of lower skill levels try out new things and make new strategies. Firstly, I'd like to say I have no quarrel and no contempt for those who would experiment for the sake of fun and the natural exploration of the game. Secondly, I will be talking about experimenting for the purpose of finding new good strategies, as opposed to experimenting for the purpose of getting better as a player, the latter of which is completely fine.
In League of Legends, there are massive amounts of options, way too many to experiment with all of them or even think of all of them in a reasonable amount of time. Of course good players don't brute force finding new good strategies, but it does involve significant amount of testing. Because of that it is very well possible that a low level player might make a strategy that has not been yet tried by a pro-player, but is quite awesome.
Although more complete understanding of the game helps pro-players to find good strategies way more efficiently, this is not where the problem lies. When a low level player does indeed find a brand new amazing strategy, how is he going to be able to tell?
It's certainly not going to be experience, that same player has probably done very well with jungle Fiora, new AP Rengar and PD Hecarim just a few games back. It's definitely not going to be theory, not from a player who is unable to justify the actions of pro-players, let alone predict them. The main component of a low level player's ability to distinguish between bad and good things is inevitably luck.
Therefore, the low level player is unable to distinguish good and bad strategies due to the lack of understanding and no experience to test his theories against. And this is why I would advise you to not consider the T.R.O.L.L.S. thread as any authority whatsoever and nothing close to a source of knowledge of the game.
What would I, then, consider to be a good way to discover new strategies and things never tried before? As discussed above, aquire the two quintessential components: knowledge and understanding of the theory of the game, and extensive experience.
Aquiring these will involve experimentation, but as noted above, that experimentation will be fundamentally different than the one that will try to discover new strategies, as the goal will be different, and focused towards something more productive, even though the results will not come as immediately.
I am adding notes not necessary to state my opinion, but if you wish to criticize, please read them first.
+ Show Spoiler +Low level player can have understanding of basic math, and can therefore compare items/masteries and potentially create efficient builds. This very specific case is different from others.
Yes, experimentation for the purpose of finding new strategies and experimentation for the purpose of getting better are different. Hopefully I don't have to go too deep on this, but for the most obvious difference, the former of the two actively tries to avoid something that has already been done.
Yes, I understand that T.R.O.L.L.S. thread is largely for fun. It still is an extremely bad source of knowledge, which is what this thread adresses.
|
Congratulations, you managed to say nothing of any value.
User was warned for this post
|
There are valid levels of perception that low level players have about low level games. "Noobcrusher" builds that allow a lower level player to eek out a quirky advantage. Perhaps this through some parlor trick that their equals have never dealt with before. Perhaps it is gained through abuse of a particular strength or weakness that catches low level players off guard. In this way, conclusions drawn from T.R.O.L.L.S. can be valid. However, they will likely only be applicable to lower skill levels.
I think the real value of T.R.O.L.L.S. is finding unique builds that are "good enough" to compete at lower skill levels. The same reason people build less-than-optimal characters in other games. Style and fun.
|
I see T.R.O.L.L.S. as a medium to try ideas and experiment with new theories without the rage of 15 year olds for breaking the meta. The TL community has discussed many FotM things before they were common knowledge by being used in a high level tournament. They have also missed the mark on a lot of ideas that were good in the middle of discussion but fell short in practice in the fields of justice.
|
Thanks for telling us this before we made a HUGE mistake!!!!
|
The criticisms laid out in this topic, and in a handful of posts elsewhere, can be summarized as follows:
- Experimentation should be focused on personal improvement and not discovery.
- Inexperienced, less-than-pro players have no way of discerning when they find a useful discovery.
- The T.R.O.L.L.S. discussion thread is rife with extremely bad "knowledge".
- T.R.O.L.L.S. has failed to produce any meaningful results.
I believe this is an accurate summary. Under that assumption, I will now respond.
The purpose of T.R.O.L.L.S. is not merely the generation of information. That is one of its goals, but not its sole purpose by any means. T.R.O.L.L.S. is bigger than that. Though created on a whim, I had a clear vision of what I wanted to accomplish.
- Foster an analytical, experimental mindset in a community plagued by fads and monthly flavors.
- Provide a place where ideas are dissected and their merits and flaws explained rather than tersely shut down.
- Create an environment where players feel comfortable putting their ideas to the test.
- Report any meaningful findings to the sub-forum, should any be found.
- Have fun.
These are not easy objectives, and at times I fret that one or another is falling considerably short. However, these are worthy objectives not because they will provide the greater LoL community with a think tank of reliable, competitive ideas, but because they give players the opportunity to become the thoughtful, insightful players of tomorrow.
The sharing, development, and refinement of ideas is a skill like any other, it must be practiced in order to see improvement. If one refuses to acknowledge the efforts of novices, misguided as they often may be, you deny them the opportunity to learn and advance beyond their misunderstandings. The goal of T.R.O.L.L.S. is not the development of strategies, that is the means, but the development of strategists.
This is a long-term goal and the fruits may not be seen for months, maybe years. I may disagree with Ketarah's assessment of GSG's push strategy, but regardless of who is right or wrong (or even if there is a right or wrong in this case) what's important is that everyone involved had an opportunity to think, to bounce their thoughts off the foils of their peers, and then think some more. It's a chance to improve the mind, and God knows we need every opportunity to do that we can find.
Have we discovered the new meta? No. Are we qualified to dissect LCS matches? Probably not. Are many of the ideas we discuss inane? Certainly. Have we come to any conclusions that are meaningful and useful? Not yet (indeed, we have not finished significant testing of any one idea). But none of these are the point.
My goals may be far too lofty, too difficult, or too abstract, but if even one person uses this opportunity as a step towards greater things, even outside of LoL, I will have considered it a success.
|
You replied in a far more mature fashion than I would've Monte, given that Scip's entire post can be summarized by saying 'TROLLS is a bunch of bad players who will never say anything worth hearing.' Even if that were actually true(there are certainly some decent enough players involved), it still wouldn't discredit anything found. Coaches of sport come up with revolutionary ideas all the time without being expert 'doers'(players) because a mind for the game is not dependent on skill/affinity for playing the game, even if it would indeed aid a player. There is literally 0 reason that an idea born from the braintrust on this forum(which again, actually includes some solid players) couldn't be worthy of high level play, even if the final product might require fine tuning in the hands of said high level players.
About the only worthwhile thing he pointed out is that the level of play makes the process more ambiguous, but then he goes to shit all over it instead of stopping himself at what would've been an understandable(but pointless; something that he clearly wasn't concerned with in the end) comment.
TLDR: Condescending faggots will be condescending faggots. Scip must be really proud of his League standing(god I hope he's at least Diamond or something).
User was temp banned for this post.
|
The only real problem is things can't be tested over 100's of games without doing so for weeks (when "trolls" actually only meets once/week for a few hours), which is one thing needed to really find out if a strategy can be competently used in certain situations. But skill level also plays a factor in this of course. If you're somewhat analytical of things though you tend to actually become a good player over time, moreso than just the people who simply follow fotm's and never really learn anything other than "this shit op."
|
On February 15 2013 12:26 red_ wrote:
You replied in a far more mature fashion than I would've Monte, given that Scip's entire post can be summarized by saying 'TROLLS is a bunch of bad players who will never say anything worth hearing.' Even if that were actually true(there are certainly some decent enough players involved), it still wouldn't discredit anything found. Coaches of sport come up with revolutionary ideas all the time without being expert 'doers'(players) because a mind for the game is not dependent on skill/affinity for playing the game, even if it would indeed aid a player. There is literally 0 reason that an idea born from the braintrust on this forum(which again, actually includes some solid players) couldn't be worthy of high level play, even if the final product might require fine tuning in the hands of said high level players.
About the only worthwhile thing he pointed out is that the level of play makes the process more ambiguous, but then he goes to shit all over it instead of stopping himself at what would've been an understandable(but pointless; something that he clearly wasn't concerned with in the end) comment.
TLDR: Condescending faggots will be condescending faggots. Scip must be really proud of his League standing(god I hope he's at least Diamond or something).
Yeah this sounds remarkably similar to the 'casters don't know shit' discussion.
It's been done.
|
On February 15 2013 12:41 WaveofShadow wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 12:26 red_ wrote:
You replied in a far more mature fashion than I would've Monte, given that Scip's entire post can be summarized by saying 'TROLLS is a bunch of bad players who will never say anything worth hearing.' Even if that were actually true(there are certainly some decent enough players involved), it still wouldn't discredit anything found. Coaches of sport come up with revolutionary ideas all the time without being expert 'doers'(players) because a mind for the game is not dependent on skill/affinity for playing the game, even if it would indeed aid a player. There is literally 0 reason that an idea born from the braintrust on this forum(which again, actually includes some solid players) couldn't be worthy of high level play, even if the final product might require fine tuning in the hands of said high level players.
About the only worthwhile thing he pointed out is that the level of play makes the process more ambiguous, but then he goes to shit all over it instead of stopping himself at what would've been an understandable(but pointless; something that he clearly wasn't concerned with in the end) comment.
TLDR: Condescending faggots will be condescending faggots. Scip must be really proud of his League standing(god I hope he's at least Diamond or something). Yeah this sounds remarkably similar to the 'casters don't know shit' discussion. It's been done.
I'm not really mad or anything(my post could come off that way). I'm more surprised and annoyed. This seems totally out of nowhere. Were there people roaming League doing crazy things citing TROLLS as their reasoning that made Scip want to belittle anyone who has involved themselves in the group at any point? It just feels like a completely random and unwarranted, and unnecessary, criticism. And yes, as you pointed out, as far as criticisms go this is a tired one.
|
For reference, Scip is Diamond I. I responded without vitriol because I know he's not a bad guy and means well. I'd have far fewer friends if I jumped on them every time they stuck their foot on their mouth (and vice versa).
|
This thread has nothing to do with strategy and shouldn't be in the strategy section, imo.
|
United States37500 Posts
A lot of people have made complaints about this thread but it's fair criticism of T.R.O.L.L.S. imo. But I think there's a gap of understanding between what Scip thinks T.R.O.L.L.S. sets out to accomplish and what T.R.O.L.L.S. members actually do. I won't say I've actually step foot into the T.R.O.L.L.S. thread that often but it's activity and enthusiasm warrants a place here in our strategy subforum. Just take their experimentation with a grain of salt. Its popularity is largely credited to Monte, who makes this fun and interesting for a number of our users.
It's ok to have a separate dissenting thread here. I would imagine you guys want to discuss the criticism of T.R.O.L.L.S. outside of the actual thread.
In short, have fun. It's only a game.
|
Baa?21242 Posts
This is a game of individual skill up until the very top of professional level. Trying out strategies at a level below that and using that as proof of the superiority/viability of a strategy is very silly, since more often than not, whether or not a strategy works depends more on the individual skill level of the players involved than the inherent merits of said strategy.
|
If someone is testing PD Hecarim and it is working at their skill level why does it matter? If they make a guide about it, all the players who realize the faults of PD Hecarim will ignore it and for the players who don't have that understanding of the game it will probably work for them anyways.
I think TROLLS is great because it gets players to think critically and mess around and have fun. If it comes at the illusion of skill or understanding of the game, why should that bother someone who actually has understanding of the game? If this allows them to enjoy the game then so be it. Its not going to affect any way that you [the higher skilled player] will play if you ostensibly know better, and presumably their revelation about PD Hecarim isn't going to cause your 2100 elo jungler next game to rush PD (although One Trick Pony plays Homeguard/TP Hecarim to extremely good effect).
Don't be the guy that goes around and tells every kid that Santa doesn't exist. Who cares if they believe in Santa as long as they have fun?
|
On February 15 2013 14:50 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
This is a game of individual skill up until the very top of professional level. Trying out strategies at a level below that and using that as proof of the superiority/viability of a strategy is very silly, since more often than not, whether or not a strategy works depends more on the individual skill level of the players involved than the inherent merits of said strategy.
That's not to say there isn't some verification of some merit on strategy, it still does a good job of showing whether or not certain ideas have some promise.
|
Trust a giant troll to come and troll the T.R.O.L.L.S 
For reference: Everytime i open my mouth in LiquidParty eu, he badmouths me. In a trolly way i might add
I dont see anything wrong with T.R.O.L.L.S imo, let people experiment and discuss ideas, what the hells wrong with that
|
What I learned from this thread: Scip is the fun police!
|
Baa?21242 Posts
On February 15 2013 16:20 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On February 15 2013 14:50 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
This is a game of individual skill up until the very top of professional level. Trying out strategies at a level below that and using that as proof of the superiority/viability of a strategy is very silly, since more often than not, whether or not a strategy works depends more on the individual skill level of the players involved than the inherent merits of said strategy. That's not to say there isn't some verification of some merit on strategy, it still does a good job of showing whether or not certain ideas have some promise.
Actually that's exactly what it says lol. When a bunch of wildly inconsistent players with variable skill levels, none of it near the top, "test" something, it's completely meaningless.
It'd be akin to a high school physics student, in some laboratory, getting an experimental result of g = 12m/s^2 and proclaiming that this means the scientific community should look into revising its definition of Earth's gravity because this experiment, though not precise, shows that "there might be some promise."
There's nothing wrong with TROLLS, just don't pretend it's something that it's not - namely, something that can ever produce anything actually useful.
|
Depends on what you're testing for. Maybe for team comps, yeah it's hard to tell with inconsistent players, but some itemization, or maybe lane based decisions are usually pretty easy to test for, and over enough datapoints could point to some discovery. AP Yi for example, use to be just like a troll thing, then after enough play in solo queue, ended up being a "thing" in pro play. There's plenty of things that come out of solo queue (which is pretty much the definition of inconsistent). I'm not saying TROLLS discovery will always be right, or even come close to anything that will revolutionize the meta, but what they can do is fuck around with stupid ideas, while having fun, and maybe come up with small nuggets of info.
"the difference between messing around and science is writing it down"-adam savage.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
