Losing lane gracefully and waiting to scale is no longer an option.

[{quoted}](name=420 grams,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=6QUJ9n11,comment-id=000000000000000000010000,timestamp=2017-11-23T03:56:59.564+0000)

That's just not true. Sure you won't be able to kill them, but you should be able to keep up in cs. However if you don't respect their lead and you continue to try to trade with them, of course they'll continue to press their lead to create bigger ones and beat you bad.

If they're even halfway decent at the game they'll understand how to zone you off CS or they'll contest every minion you step up to take.

Keystones essentially give you free flat damage on trades. (PTA, Electro, Comet and Aery) has changed the game so that whoever is winning trades, wins them much more.

The removal of bonus resistances from runes and buffs to flat hp regen (not %hp regen) that were available in the old resolve mastery tree also makes health potions less efficient. Which makes farming under harass much much harsher.

hey laner is roaming " mid laner what? gets killed by the roamer. omg how come no one signals missing

U people all act like people in this game know wtf to do when someone is fed. All they do is go feed them some more then flame

[{quoted}](name=Basura Nephilim,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=6QUJ9n11,comment-id=000000000000000000020001,timestamp=2017-11-23T10:47:11.796+0000)

You instantly dropped the fact that this game is Asymetrical.

Not at all, I specified in the premises that, in this thought experiment, both sides are exactly evenly matched, and that the simplest way to imagine it would be to imagine both sides playing the same champion. "All else held equal" also means that you precisely control for these outside occurrences, and simply assume that nothing happens here to influence the conditions. You are right that, in a real game, there is always the possibility of one side getting ganked or the like, but in a real game, nobody is exactly evenly matched, which is why the very contrived framework I am setting is only valid in a thought experiment. My point, however, is that even in these hypothetically perfectly equal conditions, snowballing in the game via gold and experience leads means that the first kill (and we're looking at kills here, nothing else) decides the outcome of every subsequent fight. Introducing outside factors and asymmetry has literally no purpose in a thought experiment whose core assumption is that the particular situation it deals with is perfectly isolated and symmetrical.

yeah this bullshit doesnt work bot lane, when ur facing 2 different people with a random support who u have no idea is competent or not.

u can make the best play the best trade and then have ur support let u downa nd boom double kill gg bot lane

But your reasoning relies on an assumption that violates the basic premise set in the post you are replying to. By a coinflip, I really just mean that whoever got the first kill won from factors outside of either player's skill. In the case of a Tryndamere mirror match, for example, two perfectly equal players can still have an unequal matchup simply because of random crits, and similar, though more subtle outcomes can happen with minions and the way their AI interacts with champions. Even in the case you mentioned, a game where one single mess-up costs you the entire match is not the most fun version of that game you can have, precisely because it should not boil down to a single fight or mistake.

You also miss the point of my post: I'm not at all saying players shouldn't be rewarded for doing well, quite the contrary. What I am saying, however, is that the way the game primarily rewards success is in fact not optimal: in a MOBA, the primary means of progressing through a game should be permanent gains in objectives, namely the destruction of structures all the way up to the enemy base. If this does not happen, the game does not progress. When a fight is won in League, however, the most direct result is that the player who won gets more powerful: the intent is that this then indirectly leads to progress by allowing players to destroy structures, but again, this progress is indirect, and depends on the player's ability to push, which is heavily dependent on their class. In the meantime, though, the winning side generates this stat buffer that means they can make more and more mistakes and still continue to win: past a certain point, the winning side can make even more overall mistakes than the losing side, and still win because they just happened to get a lead at the most critical part of the game, or at least that is the perception. In the meantime, the progress that team makes in the game does not perfectly correlate with their lead, because they can get many more kills and jungle objectives (which also mainly just give more personal power) before they decide to push. Effectively, the end result is a game that rewards leads tremendously inefficiently, damaging the quality and integrity of player-versus-player combat, while only indirectly speeding up the end of a match.

The point being that champions that are designed to powerfarm typically do not have a strong means of avoiding trades, or being interactive, if they did they would be overpowered. I think this thread is made to point out that scaling in general is strictly worse than playing champs are designed to have a strong laning phase, via harassment, or assasins that will try to rack up kills early game. the champions picked for highest tiers of play have strong elements of both, combined with champion picks that cover other indivdual champions weaknesses, but first and foremost must have strong laning mechanics.