Boards›Gameplay

Bracket stating and the reason for it not being "wrong";

Dominick Destine·7/30/2017, 12:12:43 AM·3 votes·493 views

I have a very straightforward argument to present to those that wildly defend ..... a particular situation.

If I say, for example, you are asian and therefore, you do not know about potatoes. That doesn't make sense. Value A (Asian race) and value B (Potatoes) are completely unlinked, unrelated, irrelevant. This is axiomatic and cannot be debated.... unless someone has some crazy anti-potato japan conspiracy theory.

In this case, invoking %t's race is an ad hominem since it has absolutely no bearing on the arguments presented. This can indeed be considered to be a valueless comment.

Now contrast this to the statements that were made in.... a certain thread, paraphrasing a bit; "People who are below a certain threshold of skill should not be in charge of balance"

I agree with that statement, though the original poster was not me. Is this incorrect? we know that Diamond Pride and (The opposite extreme) are not the same thing. This also cannot be debated as it is objective reality. Now that's not to say that (The opposite extreme) is a "bad" thing, but rather that it simply does not qualify for the target endeavor. That is not an ad hominem, that is a statement of fact.

Now let us extended one step further unto general posts; If someone makes a very terrible argument, that argument can be refuted. If someone continues to make that same terrible argument, that argument can be refuted. If someone yet again continues to make that same terrible argument, it is at that point that we must search for an underlying cause.

The #1 culprit is [Forbidden word]. And even if naysayers deny it, the concept will not be indelibly besmurched.

So to summarize; Asians and potatoes = Unrelated concepts. Bracket status and skill = Related concepts.

It really isn't that complicated..... it is not an insult to say that red wall is red..... and before someone (very predictably) says "Getting to Diamond requires no skill" , if that's the case, why are there so few people in Diamond Pride? or better yet, why are the people that make that argument almost always [Forbidden word]?

The prosecution rests.

18 Comments

Chibi Bronzlife7/30/2017, 1:17:00 AM5 votes

Let me break this down for you. Rank is in no way an identifier for knowledge. Your logic works only if you discount the idea that say a silver 4 player could have as much if not more game knowledge than a Diamond+ player. It's been proven (Monte). Why can't these individuals climb to Diamond? There are many reasons: not enough time to commit to ranking up, maybe older player that has slower reflexes so just can't make the fast paced plays necessary, maybe physically impaired (me for example). You can't just discount individuals based on their rank, which is why this argument that you are defending is inherently flawed. I'm willing to bet the balance teams know more than most higher elo players, hence why they're allowed to be on the balance team. Not to mention the game isn't balanced for the minority (high elo) it's balanced for the majority (silver/gold).

On that note I move for a mistrial on the basis of flawed logic.

Ariel the Cruel7/31/2017, 2:46:33 AM5 votes

"People who are below a certain threshold of skill should not be in charge of balance"

Unfortunately, I can not agree with this statement in the context of that thread. Game balance is a complicated system. And by Riot's own admission, they have a 2-tier system for balance changes.

  • Programmers who monitor and make changes to the game. (What most people think of by "balance team.")
  • Testers who are pulled from the master+ player pool that give feedback/proposals on current game-state and balance changes. (The part the forums conveniently forget.)

With this system, the requirements for each tier are separated. Technical game knowledge and data analysis are the most important abilities for the first tier. Practical game applications and environment comprehension are the most valuable for the second tier. So when that thread complained about balance team members being in silver, they completely disregarded the other half of master+ "members." If someone lacks skill in the game, but has high game knowledge and analytical ability, then it is perfectly acceptable for them to be on the balance team.

As for generic usage of the concept; it's not an unreasonable sorting measure. But, it should not be used to deny input. Though higher skill generally equates to better input, there are still statistical deviants. A "bronze Chaos" can suffer a stroke of brilliancy, just as easily as a "diamond pride" can enjoy a stroke of stupidity. For the sake of example;

  • Malicious Metal has a reputation for being a [baffleingly] dedicated Mord main. His experience using that specific champion could be seen as highly valuable; despite his traditionally low [relative] elo.
  • Conversely: There was that topic Rubick(?) made a while back complaining about how Syndra 1-shot him as Sona. (Was this topic deleted deleted? I can't find it.) Despite being Diamond.

The reason you take so much flak for it, is because you have a tendency to use rank to shut-down arguments you don't want to continue. Or at the very least, your posts are presented in such a way as to give that interpretation. And even you can mistake your own wording sometimes. (Which you just happened to do in that very topic. ;p )

Rand0mH3r0X7/31/2017, 4:16:17 AM1 votes

I guess I'll add some information, in which I have no real source to offer other than I saw a Rioter post it.

Champion balance is done around Platinum rank.

Whenever I discovered that, I tried to reach Platinum rank so that my opinions on champion balance could be considered. Unfortunately, I realized that, in between Gold 2 and Diamond 5, lies to most vile and toxic segment of the League community.

From Riot's previous statements, they do indeed balance for Pro Play. Again, no source to offer for you.

There is the two targets in which Riot has in mind when they do Champion balance.