I voice from a silver 5 player

LegitBacon66·Jan 15, 2017·104 votes·10,290 views

I have to say. Ranked is horrible. I may not be great at the game. Maybe everything I say might be irrelevant because of my rank, but hear me out. Last season, I was silver 3. That is the highest rank I have achieved since the start of season 5. I went through the shit show of dynamic queue. For 4 months straight, I sat at silver 3. Never went up, never went down. Every game I would get boosted golds, or no one competent at all. Now, all those boosted golds and semi-high elo players are flooding low silver tier, and it is the same shit all over again. I make no progress. I win one day, the next day I'm back where I started. Then Riot, you bring back solo queue, which was GREAT, but why autofill? I saw no difference in queue times, just a decrease in my game quality. Dynamic queue times were stupid lets be real, but sacrificing queue times for game quality is WRONG. Also you cannot say that queue times decreased. Did you factor in all the dodges? 3-4-5 dodges per champion select that someone gets autofilled? That increases time. Also don't give me that sad excuse "just learn every role and get good". I, in fact, can play every fucking role in this game, well. I remember I queued bottom/mid and I got autofilled top, and the person who queued top as their primary role got support? What the hell is that shit? The whole system is screwed up. Don't tell me for one god damn second that the queue health is satisfactory.\

EDIT: Might have been some miscommunication. I am not stating that I am the better player, nor am I trying to imply that I am really good at this game. I have to improve still. What I am trying to say is, if I improve or get a million mastery points on "X" champion, I can't carry myself because of the way the game is working out to be. Even if I get ahead in the game, my team still brings me down and it is hard to carry. Yes, I need to get better at this game, but at no point am I trying to prove that I am better and shouldn't be in this elo. I am saying that, even if I was improving and did really well in "x" game, I still can't win because of someone not knowing how to play "x" role due to autofill and the imbalance of elo where a bronze bot lane versus a gold bot lane. It is a team game at best.

183 Comments

JbelsJan 15, 201779 votes

Your rank will never make your opinion invalid. I've seen Diamonds bitch about the most irrelevant things, and I've watched Bronze players compose beautiful arguments with solid points that net Rioter comments. Rank determines nothing but how much experience climbing a person has

LegitBacon66Jan 15, 20175 votes

Thank you

2 Weezy BabyJan 15, 201714 votes

[{quoted}](name=A Koichi Pose,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=gdA8gsxv,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-01-15T15:42:28.830+0000)

Your rank will never make your opinion invalid. I've seen Diamonds bitch about the most irrelevant things, and I've watched Bronze players compose beautiful arguments with solid points that net Rioter comments. Rank determines nothing but how much experience climbing a person has

Bronze players have skewed perspective on certain topics. Such as elo hell actually existing, the game and climbing is purely luck based, bad teammates are the reason they are in low elo, and champions who they lose to are instantly op and need to be nerfed. Their inability to play the game effectively causes them to have skewed perspectives and they start blaming the wrong reasons.

And don't forget how the almighty autofill is now keeping low elo from climbing.

SmileInABoxJan 15, 201731 votes

Elo hell definitely exists, I think it's more a matter of higher elo players who are satisfied with their rank choosing to say it doesn't exist because it makes them feel even MORE satisfied with their rank.

LasslowJan 15, 201712 votes

I've been bronze through gold, all the low elos, there's no way elo hell actually exists, atleast in my opinion. People just have to learn to stop blaming their teammates.

Edit: If a guy can reach CHALLENGER with his feet, then you guys can get out of bronze and silver, and I don't mean to elo shame as I'm only gold, but it's not like it's impossible.

SmileInABoxJan 15, 201717 votes

It's definitely important to look inward, but there are some teammates that you just can't carry. I had a game yesterday where my toplaner was 0/2 and my midlane was 0/3 at 6 minutes, the game actually went a while cuz I put my carry pants on and I was playing Sivir so I could stall forever. But seriously, how the fuck are you supposed to carry that shit? Between all the leavers, trolls, and fuckin idiots I'm sick of people telling me that Bronze isn't an elo hell.

Oakleaf RangerJan 15, 20172 votes

Bronze isn't Elo hell but more of a clown fiesta. A lot of new and bad players in one spot. The thing is that Elo is easy to get out with just basic mechanics and bare bone game knowledge. If you want to get of bronze the fastest, play mid, top, or jg. Since you can really take control of the game if you get lead in those positions (assuming you know how to play those roles). Playing adc in bronze is just asking for trouble unless your playing Cait or some hard carry laner for adc.

SmileInABoxJan 15, 20172 votes

Yeah, I definitely chose the wrong role to main this season.

476 CEJan 16, 20171 votes

You can literally carry from any position and with any champion in Bronze. Bronze isn't affected by Meta NEARLY as much as high elo. Bronze ADCs are more likely to miss-position, push lanes past ward coverage and farm terribly. It doesn't matter if they pick Urgot or Caitlyn. Their inherent flaws will be apparent on any champ they pick until they change their poor habits.

Oakleaf RangerJan 16, 20171 votes

Look if you want to climb out of bronze with braum adc I'm not gonna say its not impossible because it is bronze. But if you want to skip the part where you give your headache doing so, I recommend a role that has more agency over the game early on instead of the role might have more later on. By all means climb out of bronze with bronze supports and junglers on your team. Have fun with Urgot and a bronze support against a bronze zyra and cait who might somewhat play the champions well.

476 CEJan 16, 20172 votes

I'm not saying you should play something that off the wall. I'm merely saying that people make so many excuses of why they are stuck in Bronze, that they fail to realize it's their own gameplay, and refuse to own up to it, rofl. I'm stating that if you deserve (let's say, Silver), you WILL climb out.

DarkSunSovereignJan 15, 201712 votes

Once again, next game, that will happen to the enemy team.

But variance is a bitch, so have fun grinding.

AMYS GRAVEJan 16, 20171 votes

variance is a bitch, but do you know how many games you have to play to ensure that you get more afk on the enemy team than yours? Its on the order of thousands.

PB4UAMEJan 16, 20172 votes

That's to ensure the variance is there much at all, but if you are a better player than those you are matched against, after only dozens of games you will climb and keep a positive win rate, and it will, in fact, help your climb.

Here's one way to look at it that you might not have thought of. If you are a good player, or at least decent for your Elo, and you yourself do not AFK, then for every game that you play, at least 1 of your team is a non-AFK. This isn't true for your opponents. They have 5 slots for AFKers to potentially fill, meanwhile, your team has only 4 slots.

While yes, truly even distribution of AFKer per player slot takes thousands of games, in your case, you'll still receive noticeably less AFKers on your team than on the enemy's.

Pr0MeisterJan 16, 20171 votes

{quoted}

That's to ensure the variance is there much at all, but if you are a better player than those you are matched against, after only dozens of games you will climb and keep a positive win rate, and it will, in fact, help your climb.

Here's one way to look at it that you might not have thought of. If you are a good player, or at least decent for your Elo, and you yourself do not AFK, then for every game that you play, at least 1 of your team is a non-AFK. This isn't true for your opponents. They have 5 slots for AFKers to potentially fill, meanwhile, your team has only 4 slots.

While yes, truly even distribution of AFKer per player slot takes thousands of games, in your case, you'll still receive noticeably less AFKers on your team than on the enemy's.

To be fair, you somewhat point it out in your last paragraph, but as I have pointed out many times before: Statistics don't work that way. The enemy team having 1/5 chance more to get an AFK/feeder is just that- a chance. It's really quite possible to play a thousand games and have more afks and feeders in your team.

And there is also the fact we always keep forgetting: we are the enemy team. And the ally team. For every guy we collectively tell, just get better you have 4/5 slots for bad players, they have 5, we fail to realize this isn't a single player game. OP doesn't play in a vacuum with some nebulous entity called "other players". I know this is kinda confusing to read and, frankly, eloquence escapes me right now, but what I am trying to say is:

Each of us sees themselves as the main character in the game, and we advise each other here as if that's true, in every single thread sincce forever. And that screws perspective and how things really are a whole damn lot.

ChlululuJan 16, 20171 votes

yo this is crazy

PB4UAMEJan 17, 20171 votes

There is a reason that is done, and it has everything to do with agency. I mean, what you're discussing is the dichotomy of the subject-object orientation, and you are indeed correct that it creates issues with our conceptual schemes and thereby causes inaccuracies or biases in our world views,** however, consider the case of you as a player in a game of LoL. Whose actions are you in control over? The answer is only yourself, that is the limit of your agency in the game. Sure, you can communicate, or attempt to, with your team, and possibly impact them, but they still decide what it is they do.

There will always be leavers, but you do not have control over if any one leaves but yourself. Now, consider that, due to your dislike of having AFKs on your own team, you resolve to never AFK (at least in ranked). This is, ultimately, the most control you as a player can exert on if you have an AFK in your current match. Yes, you can report people who AFK, and ostensibly get fewer AFKs as a result, but you cannot alter the fact that someone else AFKed in your game while you play it.

Assuming as little as "your rate of leaving ranked games is lower than the median of players in your division" you will have fewer AFKs on your own team than the enemies, minus potential early variance in the first few dozen games. Once you get to 100 games, the variance is already minuscule, even though it would take literally infinite games to be absolutely certain anyway. If you also stipulate that you are good compared to the people around your level, as many people who complain about Elo hell also like to believe, then you should be able to fairly easily hit 53% or higher of a winrate, which is enough to climb through promos, especially with promo helper.

If you can't, and you still blame AFKs, then either you also AFK a bunch and/or are on leaver's island, or you simply aren't better than the people you play against, and the AFK issue is irrelevant to you. The statistics aren't wrong even if most people's understanding of what the statistics entails is flawed. Yes, it is less certain, yes there will be variance due to other factors, and human will, but. . . those things will average out, and if you aren't contributing to this negativity, or at least not as much as everyone around you is, you'll be affected less by it than others will, increasingly more so as time (or in this case, games played) goes on.

**Such an orientation also leads to an interesting paradox, since the orientation perceives others as objects, or those which can be calculated, described, quantified, etc, how does one then regard themselves when you think in terms of existence? If they operate under the pretense of observable rationality, they can only regard them self too as a sort of other; yet, at the same time they would also realize they know about themselves through first hand, lived experiences, and we have, or perceive that we have, free choice. Such radically different mental frameworks are functionally mutually exclusive. Now, many philosophers have attempted to address this paradox by re-imagining the conditions such that it is not a subject-object orientation, but an intersubjective one instead, but that also entails retooling and reapplication of the tools of rationality-- much of applied sciences, and as you mentioned, some understandings of statistical frameworks, not of the math itself, but on its real world applications.

Pr0MeisterJan 17, 20171 votes

{quoted}

There is a reason that is done, and it has everything to do with agency. I mean, what you're discussing is the dichotomy of the subject-object orientation, and you are indeed correct that it creates issues with our conceptual schemes and thereby causes inaccuracies or biases in our world views,** however, consider the case of you as a player in a game of LoL. Whose actions are you in control over? The answer is only yourself, that is the limit of your agency in the game. Sure, you can communicate, or attempt to, with your team, and possibly impact them, but they still decide what it is they do.

There will always be leavers, but you do not have control over if any one leaves but yourself. Now, consider that, due to your dislike of having AFKs on your own team, you resolve to never AFK (at least in ranked). This is, ultimately, the most control you as a player can exert on if you have an AFK in your current match. Yes, you can report people who AFK, and ostensibly get fewer AFKs as a result, but you cannot alter the fact that someone else AFKed in your game while you play it.

Assuming as little as "your rate of leaving ranked games is lower than the median of players in your division" you will have fewer AFKs on your own team than the enemies, minus potential early variance in the first few dozen games. Once you get to 100 games, the variance is already minuscule, even though it would take literally infinite games to be absolutely certain anyway. If you also stipulate that you are good compared to the people around your level, as many people who complain about Elo hell also like to believe, then you should be able to fairly easily hit 53% or higher of a winrate, which is enough to climb through promos, especially with promo helper.

If you can't, and you still blame AFKs, then either you also AFK a bunch and/or are on leaver's island, or you simply aren't better than the people you play against, and the AFK issue is irrelevant to you. The statistics aren't wrong even if most people's understanding of what the statistics entails is flawed. Yes, it is less certain, yes there will be variance due to other factors, and human will, but. . . those things will average out, and if you aren't contributing to this negativity, or at least not as much as everyone around you is, you'll be affected less by it than others will, increasingly more so as time (or in this case, games played) goes on.

**Such an orientation also leads to an interesting paradox, since the orientation perceives others as objects, or those which can be calculated, described, quantified, etc, how does one then regard themselves when you think in terms of existence? If they operate under the pretense of observable rationality, they can only regard them self too as a sort of other; yet, at the same time they would also realize they know about themselves through first hand, lived experiences, and we have, or perceive that we have, free choice. Such radically different mental frameworks are functionally mutually exclusive. Now, many philosophers have attempted to address this paradox by re-imagining the conditions such that it is not a subject-object orientation, but an intersubjective one instead, but that also entails retooling and reapplication of the tools of rationality-- much of applied sciences, and as you mentioned, some understandings of statistical frameworks, not of the math itself, but on its real world applications.

A 53% winrate is still somewhat low tho, assuming someone is climbing and not already in their appropriate division. But a climb with a 53% winrate is more of a grind than a real climb. Frankly, I've RL friends who are diamond but even they struggle getting a decent winrate because of various factors like the ones already discussed. That's what turns many players off ranked. That even a positive winrate seems to be like they are going nowhere if they need 5 promo series to get a division ahead.

In other games, like Hearthstone for example, one needs significantly fewer games to get to their proper ranking, precisely because there are no teams to tilt the whole system askew in one direction or the other.

PB4UAMEJan 18, 20171 votes

Indeed, you are right that it's "somewhat low," as it is the lowest reliable winrate-- which is to say, its the lowest integer winrate where you shouldn't have major losing streaks, no, or few demotions, and a relatively steady progression. It's going to take a while, I'd say probably a good 50 games a division, but if you can keep that winrate or better, you will climb eventually. Sure, with a 60-70% winrate you could go B5 -> P5 in 100 games, but most people can't get that high of a winrate, unless they belong a division or two higher.

You make a good point, about other games matching more accurately, and ranking up/down faster, but the only game you mentioned, was a 1 vs 1 game, Hearthstone. Any 1 vs 1 game has a match making that is infinitely easier to make and balance that trying to individually rate 10+ players on the outcome of 1 game that they all contributed, and influenced different amounts of said game. On top of that, something that must be realized about League's ranked system is that it is the most densely populated system for any video game ever. It takes a good amount of time to climb in ranked. League's ranked system is slow to adjust, and you have to prove that it is you impact those games (by winning in streaks, or maintaining high winrates overall) before you really start to see yourself move. But even then, its still going to require dozens and dozens of ranked games to meaningfully climb.

RikariJan 15, 20172 votes

I can literally show you multiple games where one person has thrown it.

LasslowJan 15, 20171 votes

People throw games all the time, but to think that you're not responsible is just false. There's always something you can do.

RikariJan 16, 20172 votes

If you force me to,I will find a game with 50 deaths before 20 minutes https://s23.postimg.org/kcvh8qye3/one.png

aspects1Jan 15, 20172 votes

id say anywhere between bronze 3 and 5 is elo hell, because at those ranks, there are just so many trolls and afks, you really dont have too much control on the games yourself, you just have to keep playing ranked, and eventually, you will climb because you are better than that rank

LasslowJan 16, 20171 votes

Simply not true, those are the easiest elo's. Like, you can 3v5 in that elo, and still win because they have NO CLUE on what they're doing.

aspects1Jan 16, 20171 votes

tell that to someone in that elo

drakuIa421Jan 16, 20171 votes

i was placed b3 last season and got out pretty quickly, i dint remember having much trolls or afks, and most of my teammates played better than i expected from bronze.

aspects1Jan 16, 20171 votes

because at the beginning of a season, there are many people who are much better than that in that elo, so your more likely to get better teamates

2 Weezy BabyJan 15, 20174 votes

{quoted}

Elo hell definitely exists, I think it's more a matter of higher elo players who are satisfied with their rank choosing to say it doesn't exist because it makes them feel even MORE satisfied with their rank.

Why wouldn't high elo players be satisfied with their rank? You play and climb to the point where you are at your peak. If you can't improve any further than your rank becomes stagnant at that point. If I become stagnant at the top 5% why wouldn't I be satisfied? There is no elo hell where teammates are so bad that you consistently can't climb in the course of several seasons. There is an "elo hell" where you don't improve anymore and can't climb because you're not good enough. That's not really a hell though, just a point where you decide to focus and get better or bitch and moan on the boards and have nothing change.

SmileInABoxJan 15, 20174 votes

I said they WERE satisfied with their rank. Every time I hear this shit it just sounds like people humble bragging about their ability to climb.

Gnart Even CloseJan 16, 20173 votes

That concept is really dumb. "Elo hell" just means people can't climb, because their gameplay isn't at a higher level than their current rank.

I have had times where it's been hard to climb, but you just need to play more. I failed my gold promos three times in a row, and finally got it on my fourth attempt. I had only failed one promo before that and I had no problem climbing to Gold 4 afterwards. The thing is, it was just bad RNG and me playing at a lower level than usual. I played my fourth round of promos, and finally got a rank I deserved. It's just how the game works.

You play at a better level than your rank consistently, and you will climb. Anybody who thinks otherwise has no grasp on how the ranked system works.

JbelsJan 15, 20172 votes

[{quoted}](name=2 Weezy Baby,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=gdA8gsxv,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2017-01-15T16:56:27.534+0000)

Bronze players have skewed perspective on certain topics. Such as elo hell actually existing, the game and climbing is purely luck based, bad teammates are the reason they are in low elo, and champions who they lose to are instantly op and need to be nerfed. Their inability to play the game effectively causes them to have skewed perspectives and they start blaming the wrong reasons.

And don't forget how the almighty autofill is now keeping low elo from climbing.

Right, but their rank isn't the indicator of whether or not they are complaining and need to get good or are giving a thought on the current state of the game. It's whether or not they're bitching in the post

2 Weezy BabyJan 15, 20179 votes

[{quoted}](name=A Koichi Pose,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=gdA8gsxv,comment-id=000000010001,timestamp=2017-01-15T18:07:00.793+0000)

Right, but their rank isn't the indicator of whether or not they are complaining and need to get good or are giving a thought on the current state of the game. It's whether or not they're bitching in the post

"I went through the shit show of dynamic queue. For 4 months straight, I sat at silver 3. Never went up, never went down. Every game I would get boosted golds, or no one competent at all. Now, all those boosted golds and semi-high elo players are flooding low silver tier, and it is the same shit all over again. I make no progress. I win one day, the next day I'm back where I started. Then Riot, you bring back solo queue, which was GREAT, but why autofill?"

Quoted from OP. This is literally bitching in a post from a low elo.

Blamed dynamic queue.
"Every game I would get boosted golds, or no one competent at all" Blaming teammates EVERY game???
Everyone but me is boosted and flooding low silver tier. lmao.
Blames autofill for game quality.

All of this is just bitching from a low elo. His mindset is like this because he hasn't improved enough to carry himself out of Silver. He doesn't want to accept that maybe he's not good enough. It's more comfortable to just blame literally anything else for his inability to climb.

theArtifactsJan 15, 20172 votes

[{quoted}](name=2 Weezy Baby,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=gdA8gsxv,comment-id=0000000100010000,timestamp=2017-01-15T18:14:31.223+0000)

All of this is just bitching from a low elo. His mindset is like this because he hasn't improved enough to carry himself out of Silver. He doesn't want to accept that maybe he's not good enough. It's more comfortable to just blame literally anything else for his inability to climb.

Agreed

GayFluffyUnicornJan 15, 20174 votes

except dynamic Q fucked up the ladder so hard plat is the new silver.

Troll for TrumpJan 15, 20176 votes

I'm gold, and I still think elo hell exists, climbing is purely luck based, and bad teammates contribute to almost all losses. The champs the team loses too are yes, often OP. Those OP champs are also meta, so of course they'd be played a lot.

In the last two games, I had an Anivia who hadn't played the game since 2015 and just jumped into ranked, and a jgler who forgot smite because he was tabbed out

Autofill will make you lose games, at any rank. You are playing a nonprimary (nonsecondary too) role, so of course you'd play worse in it.

It's not that you can't play the role, it's that you will play that role worse than your primary and secondary.

2 Weezy BabyJan 15, 20173 votes

{quoted}

I'm gold, and I still think elo hell exists, climbing is purely luck based, and bad teammates contribute to almost all losses. The champs the team loses too are yes, often OP. Those OP champs are also meta, so of course they'd be played a lot.

In the last two games, I had an Anivia who hadn't played the game since 2015 and just jumped into ranked, and a jgler who forgot smite because he was tabbed out

Autofill will make you lose games, at any rank. You are playing a nonprimary (nonsecondary too) role, so of course you'd play worse in it.

It's not that you can't play the role, it's that you will play that role worse than your primary and secondary.

Climbing largely based on skill with a small percentage of luck. If you get an afk or feeder, unlucky. But come on VulDread, you've played almost 200 games this season. You really think elo hell in those 200 games is the reason why you can't climb? You think bad teammates contributes to your losses in everyone of those 200 games and made you unable to climb? You think luck made you unable to climb in those 200 games? And seriously... autofill makes you lose games... but surely not enough out of 200 games to make you unable to climb.

Troll for TrumpJan 15, 20175 votes

Actually, yes.

About 1-2 seasons ago, I got placed in Bronze 2, and got to gold 5 in roughly 80 games.

This season, I got placed in Bronze 2, and got to gold 4 in roughly 200 games, almost twice as much.

I've been playing pretty consistently. The only thing that's changed is the meta.

So yes.

Yosuke ApperuJan 16, 20171 votes

[{quoted}](name=A Koichi Pose,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=gdA8gsxv,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2017-01-15T15:42:28.830+0000)

Your rank will never make your opinion invalid. I've seen Diamonds bitch about the most irrelevant things, and I've watched Bronze players compose beautiful arguments with solid points that net Rioter comments. Rank determines nothing but how much experience climbing a person has

Thank you for this! I can't stand when I(a bronze player mind you) bring up a point to any rank higher than me and they just say "you're bronze so your opinion is invalid". Everyone has a voice <3

xDarkx1ChrisJan 15, 20178 votes

Agreed. All I have to say is Ranked sucks and something needs to change. It's impossible to carry 1v5.

PuttybloJan 15, 20173 votes

{quoted}

Agreed. All I have to say is Ranked sucks and something needs to change. It's impossible to carry 1v5.

http://puu.sh/tnhli/8f615de33f.jpg

DrCyanideJan 15, 201713 votes

You've got 4 other players to show for those games before that screenshot means anything.

PuttybloJan 15, 20172 votes

{quoted}

You've got 4 other players to show for those games before that screenshot means anything.

Not really. That's on my smurf in your ELO and your scores don't even come close except for one game where you fought a bronze 4 player.

http://puu.sh/tnlj9/748af20624.jpg

there's the other time I decided to long on.

You can get back to me when you can consistently pull KDAS like this.

DrCyanideJan 15, 20175 votes

Ah, the classic "I can win 1v5's when everyone in the game is two entire tiers below me" argument. How well do you do at winning those 1v5's when you're at Plat 5 I wonder? I suspect not as well, otherwise you wouldn't be playing more ranked on your smurf than you have on this account.

I've gotten sloppy recently, it's true, but I've still maintained a KDA over 3.0 overall. The more persistent problem has been converting kills into objectives, something I need the assistance of teamates for more often than not.

PuttybloJan 15, 20171 votes

{quoted}

Ah, the classic "I can win 1v5's when everyone in the game is two entire tiers below me" argument. How well do you do at winning those 1v5's when you're at Plat 5 I wonder? I suspect not as well, otherwise you wouldn't be playing more ranked on your smurf than you have on this account.

I've gotten sloppy recently, it's true, but I've still maintained a KDA over 3.0 overall. The more persistent problem has been converting kills into objectives, something I need the assistance of teamates for more often than not.

This is my other smurf. Plat 5 players are also jokes. Again though, the argument from OP is him saying it's impossible to 1v5. I've demonstrated doing that.

http://puu.sh/tnnJl/10757bf20f.png

That enemy team were all plats /high gold last season.

I play on my smurfs when it's 2 am and I have time for like two games, I'm tired, and I don't want to spend 50 minutes jerking off in queue only for one team or another to never accept/ dodge when Rengar/Hecarim/Poppy/Caitlyn get picked to enter go into another set of 4 queues where the mid otp Syndra player finally ends up in autofill only to lock in Singed jungle support only for yet another dodge.

So yet again, another inaccurate pointless statement from a typical player on Gameplay.

You really don't need team work from silver players. They have a tendency to follow high kda players every ping. The only person in any of my games trash talking me was the autofilled support. But even he shuts up after a while and starts blindly following any and all of my pings/calls. Yeah there are games where your team is so garbo that you wish there was an ff5 button but honestly you can usually spot those a mile away and the correct play would have just been to dodge. So even those are in a way your fault.

DrCyanideJan 15, 20176 votes

Your evidence for being able to 1v5 in Plat is a screenshot of a game where everyone on your team stomped? Isn't that a bit of an apples vs oranges comparison?

So yet again, another inaccurate pointless statement from a typical player on Gameplay.

Ironic.

PuttybloJan 15, 20172 votes

{quoted}

Your evidence for being able to 1v5 in Plat is a screenshot of a game where everyone on your team stomped? Isn't that a bit of an apples vs oranges comparison?

Ironic.

They actually didn't stomp. You can look at the assists + damage to see that I rolled bot lane, got ganked by Viktor + Eve both repeatedly, killed them too, took her jungle and proceeded to faceroll my lane into a 3+ level advantage. Then I went mid and proceeded to face roll the rest. It's exactly why I posted the damage chart and not the standard match. And this is how you 1v5. You do this sweet thing called rotating. It's a pretty neat concept that really isn't thought a whole lot about until really high up. It's why in challenger if your bot lane loses it's usually GG because the enemy ADC will just go top/mid and make their life hell too while the other bot lane licks their wounds for 20 mins trying to play catch up even though the odds are less than 1% they ever will without a massive throw.

Now I've shown multiple times 1v5ing is quite possible. I've also just explained how you can do that as an ADC. And so far the only thing you can actually come up with as some form of crappy excuse to entertain me being wrong is "Well, you're higher rank than these guys, so it doesn't really count." [slayer-pantheon-popcorn] Maybe the reason you can't 1v5 is because you're no better than the players you're playing with, and at that point you have 0 reason to actually complain?

Any higher elo player will tell you the only elo actually difficult to climb out of the first few times around is plat and D5-4 and it's because they have a very particular personality that makes games extremely unfun.

So with that said, if you can't 1v5 in silver/gold/low plat then it's because you're bad and it has nothing to do with your team because you're not punishing mistakes, you're not minimizing your own, you're not shot calling, you're not pinging, you're not keeping the morale up, and at that point it leads me to the conclusion that you're entering a game expecting all team mates to win lane and you just kind of sit afk at turret and just win. A lot of support players end up winning like that. But you know, that's a different topic in itself.

P.S: The reason I don't specifically mention the idea of 1v5ing in upper plat-diamond-master-challenger is because a lot of the times you don't need to carry so disgustingly hard that the game collapses on itself. Just about every single one of those players in their main role is good enough to pop off if you give them even a tiny lead. So often times choking a bot lane in front of your turret for your jungler to gank will win you a game because you set him up with 600 gold + first blood turret, so now he can just go 1v9 and do Hecarim things. The play style in upper elo is completely different from that of other MMRS where it's better to be insanely greedy and just kind of abuse weak mentalities vs looking at the team comp and who would be most disgusting to get a lead on/ whose punishable, is the enemy top Hashinshin, is Tobias Fate on Twisted Fate support.

So the only logical conclusion I can come up with out of all this is you're still looking for an excuse other than yourself as to why you're down there. So, I'm going to leave you with two options.

You can think about this, go watch some youtube videos, maybe even go watch some Last Shadow coaching videos ((He's toxic, and he treats people like trash but it's because he's burnt out and sees the same things over and over. His general strategies and all of that are actually very good for the most part. )) And you can climb.
You can just sit here and uhh you know, be like OP and complain about his team and any time someone shows they're wrong just be like "Well, you're higher rank and uh, yeah go fys, it's my noob teams and not my fault, even though I'd be higher rank if it wasn't my fault, so the whole me saying your higher rank argument is completely counter intuitive and stupid now that I spent 10 seconds thinking about it. But I'm going to use it as an excuse anyways because I truly don't know any better."

Tl;dr This is my last response so it's lengthy because I have nothing else to say to the matter.

DrCyanideJan 15, 20172 votes

They actually didn't stomp. You can look at the assists + damage to see ...

I see the enemy team dealt 48.8K to champions, and if you omit you your team dealt 46k damage to champions.

In what world isn't it a stomp when you can remove the biggest damage dealer and still have close to the same damage output between the teams? It implies your team would have had a decent chance of winning a 4v5 without you.

And so far the only thing you can actually come up with as some form of crappy excuse to entertain me being wrong is "Well, you're higher rank than these guys, so it doesn't really count."

Are you even aware you used the same argument earlier? Let me refresh your memory:

your scores don't even come close except for one game where you fought a bronze 4 player.

So when you have high KDA's on smurfs and carry it's all skill, but when I have high KDA's against lower rank players and carry it's not?

This hypocritical thinking of yours is painful.

I'm not claiming to be Plat material, I know where I have short comings and work to improve them.

The pain people express with these types of posts is the pain of someone having to climb near their skill level but without being able to count on allies to do the right things to win the game. You heard high elo players complaining about the same pain all last year, with how "boosted" their teammates were. It was amazingly hypocritical to see the complainants about how they couldn't win games with teammates performing under the level they should have, yet telling Bronze and Silver players that they shouldn't complain about the same thing.

PuttybloJan 15, 20172 votes

{quoted}

I see the enemy team dealt 48.8K to champions, and if you omit you your team dealt 46k damage to champions.

In what world isn't it a stomp when you can remove the biggest damage dealer and still have close to the same damage output between the teams? It implies your team would have had a decent chance of winning a 4v5 without you.

Are you even aware you used the same argument earlier? Let me refresh your memory:

So when you have high KDA's on smurfs and carry it's all skill, but when I have high KDA's against lower rank players and carry it's not?

This hypocritical thinking of yours is painful.

I'm not claiming to be Plat material, I know where I have short comings and work to improve them.

The pain people express with these types of posts is the pain of someone having to climb near their skill level but without being able to count on allies to do the right things to win the game. You heard high elo players complaining about the same pain all last year, with how "boosted" their teammates were. It was amazingly hypocritical to see the complainants about how they couldn't win games with teammates performing under the level they should have, yet telling Bronze and Silver players that they shouldn't complain about the same thing.

"Are you even aware you used the same argument earlier? Let me refresh your memory:

your scores don't even come close except for one game where you fought a bronze 4 player.

So when you have high KDA's on smurfs and carry it's all skill, but when I have high KDA's against lower rank players and carry it's not?"

Um no. I'm implying you belong where you're at. You just called me a hypocrite by showing that I'm actually right and the exact thing I told you to do. lololol.

And no, a lot of high elo players were complaining last year because they were fighting premades in an MMR where making one single mistake will cost you a game and a premade on voice chat greatly greatly amplifies the possibility of that single mistake. VS Silver where the enemy half health EVE decides it's a great idea to gank a Jhin who has two bullets primed to shoot her in the face and just got a double kill without burning a single summoner, and then the Viktor comes rolling down bot lane to feed me yet another. Very big difference buddy. It's exactly why they removed premades from diamond +.

Unless you want to imply that fighting SKT every game is the same as fighting ECKSDEE nobodies in silver who apparently have super dank challenger strats according to Gameplay?

"I see the enemy team dealt 48.8K to champions, and if you omit you your team dealt 46k damage to champions.

In what world isn't it a stomp when you can remove the biggest damage dealer and still have close to the same damage output between the teams? It implies your team would have had a decent chance of winning a 4v5 without you."

See above.

Me being a good adc not only eliminated the enemy bot lane entirely it caused so much pressure that the EVE decided to gank me and not even bother going to her red side. She then died instead of getting a double kill BECAUSE I always expect to be ganked and was already prepared for her shenanigans when I could have very easily given her a double kill with my support. This allowed me to ping my jungler to take her whole red side jungle to get a massive level lead on her, and when Viktor came bot and died to me as well it gave my Azir two waves of cs lead on the enemy mid. Then once I eliminated bot and rotated mid it became a gigantic faceroll. So no, your statement is entirely incorrect. My team actually would have lost to the Evelynn for abusing an ADC that wouldn't know how to deal with an Evelynn player and then she would have snowballed on everyone else.

http://puu.sh/tnvjV/ee80c4979b.jpg <-- this is the same Eve's next games score btw. I guarantee you she just ganked bot and popped off.

" You heard high elo players complaining about the same pain all last year, with how "boosted" their teammates were. It was amazingly hypocritical to see the complainants about how they couldn't win game."

You're welcome right here and now to describe the difference to me between bronze player and a silver player, and then compare them to a diamond 5 player where those players usually get boosted to and what you think the odds are of said player being able to take on Dehkar on his smurf account. Because guess what, diamond- high plat, almost none of the master/challenger players really played on their mains and they all exclusively smurfed around plat 3-d3 and then made new accounts to duo/trio again and again.

Now if you're here to tell me that the difference between Bronze and silver is so vastly large that it's a bigger gap than silver/bronze sitting in diamond 5 facing Dehkar. I'm here to tell you you're absolutely absurd.

Ungrateful ThugJan 17, 20172 votes

{quoted}

"Are you even aware you used the same argument earlier? Let me refresh your memory:

your scores don't even come close except for one game where you fought a bronze 4 player.

So when you have high KDA's on smurfs and carry it's all skill, but when I have high KDA's against lower rank players and carry it's not?"

Um no. I'm implying you belong where you're at. You just called me a hypocrite by showing that I'm actually right and the exact thing I told you to do. lololol.

And no, a lot of high elo players were complaining last year because they were fighting premades in an MMR where making one single mistake will cost you a game and a premade on voice chat greatly greatly amplifies the possibility of that single mistake. VS Silver where the enemy half health EVE decides it's a great idea to gank a Jhin who has two bullets primed to shoot her in the face and just got a double kill without burning a single summoner, and then the Viktor comes rolling down bot lane to feed me yet another. Very big difference buddy. It's exactly why they removed premades from diamond +.

Unless you want to imply that fighting SKT every game is the same as fighting ECKSDEE nobodies in silver who apparently have super dank challenger strats according to Gameplay?

"I see the enemy team dealt 48.8K to champions, and if you omit you your team dealt 46k damage to champions.

In what world isn't it a stomp when you can remove the biggest damage dealer and still have close to the same damage output between the teams? It implies your team would have had a decent chance of winning a 4v5 without you."

See above.

Me being a good adc not only eliminated the enemy bot lane entirely it caused so much pressure that the EVE decided to gank me and not even bother going to her red side. She then died instead of getting a double kill BECAUSE I always expect to be ganked and was already prepared for her shenanigans when I could have very easily given her a double kill with my support. This allowed me to ping my jungler to take her whole red side jungle to get a massive level lead on her, and when Viktor came bot and died to me as well it gave my Azir two waves of cs lead on the enemy mid. Then once I eliminated bot and rotated mid it became a gigantic faceroll. So no, your statement is entirely incorrect. My team actually would have lost to the Evelynn for abusing an ADC that wouldn't know how to deal with an Evelynn player and then she would have snowballed on everyone else.

http://puu.sh/tnvjV/ee80c4979b.jpg <-- this is the same Eve's next games score btw. I guarantee you she just ganked bot and popped off.

" You heard high elo players complaining about the same pain all last year, with how "boosted" their teammates were. It was amazingly hypocritical to see the complainants about how they couldn't win game."

You're welcome right here and now to describe the difference to me between bronze player and a silver player, and then compare them to a diamond 5 player where those players usually get boosted to and what you think the odds are of said player being able to take on Dehkar on his smurf account. Because guess what, diamond- high plat, almost none of the master/challenger players really played on their mains and they all exclusively smurfed around plat 3-d3 and then made new accounts to duo/trio again and again.

Now if you're here to tell me that the difference between Bronze and silver is so vastly large that it's a bigger gap than silver/bronze sitting in diamond 5 facing Dehkar. I'm here to tell you you're absolutely absurd.

Thanks for your long posts regarding gameplay in this thread. It's been insightful to read, as someone who is always looking for ways to improve.

CppLJan 17, 20171 votes

{quoted}

This is my other smurf. Plat 5 players are also jokes. Again though, the argument from OP is him saying it's impossible to 1v5. I've demonstrated doing that.

http://puu.sh/tnnJl/10757bf20f.png

That enemy team were all plats /high gold last season.

I play on my smurfs when it's 2 am and I have time for like two games, I'm tired, and I don't want to spend 50 minutes jerking off in queue only for one team or another to never accept/ dodge when Rengar/Hecarim/Poppy/Caitlyn get picked to enter go into another set of 4 queues where the mid otp Syndra player finally ends up in autofill only to lock in Singed jungle support only for yet another dodge.

So yet again, another inaccurate pointless statement from a typical player on Gameplay.

You really don't need team work from silver players. They have a tendency to follow high kda players every ping. The only person in any of my games trash talking me was the autofilled support. But even he shuts up after a while and starts blindly following any and all of my pings/calls. Yeah there are games where your team is so garbo that you wish there was an ff5 button but honestly you can usually spot those a mile away and the correct play would have just been to dodge. So even those are in a way your fault.

How was that 1v5???? all your lanes won!! wtf are you talking about!?!?