Alright, I'm going to ask a question and I want you all to answer it seriously. If any of you believe this about any champion in the game, whether it be Vayne or Yasuo, why aren't you playing them yourselves? If they're so powerful wouldn't it make sense to abuse them in ranked?
Toastey3 votesbecause some of us dont care so much about free wins as about actually having a good time in game. we also dont want to ruin other people's days by playing a boring, powerful champion. we want the potential for the enemy to outplay us, and by consequence, for us to outplay them.
we're playing a video game to have fun and improve our skills, not to simply win.
Trump4Prison20202 votes[{quoted}](name=Toasted Pigeon,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=yvaAWUWm,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2015-08-22T06:22:50.764+0000)
because some of us dont care so much about free wins as about actually having a good time in game. we also dont want to ruin other people's days by playing a boring, powerful champion. we want the potential for the enemy to outplay us, and by consequence, for us to outplay them.
we're playing a video game to have fun and improve our skills, not to simply win.
But I'm talking about ranked where it is competitive. If you're aiming to win then it would make sense to pick the champion you think is the strongest.
Predatore1 votesI play ranked in hopes to win but i generally only play champions i ENJOY playing.
Toastey1 votesit's always possible that the champion in question falls outside of a player's most comfortable roles, and they want to improve in those roles. for example, i'm a mid main and would like to keep playing mid and improving my mid play. say aatrox randomly gets overbuffed and stays overbuffed. i won't be playing him much simply because i'm not interested in getting better with aatrox, especially since these types of things tend to come and go. once aatrox gets nerfed, i won't be able to do anything with all that time i put into him. i'll just have to pick up the next OP champion and abuse that for a while.
to me, that's not a fun way to go about the game. it might be for you.
SEKAI1 votesBut I'm talking about ranked where it is competitive. If you're aiming to win then it would make sense to pick the champion you think is the strongest.
Good luck abusing steroids in sports bud, oh that's not allowed.
But hey you're saying in video games it's definitely a cool thing to do.
Explain this. I don't think the concept of simple fairness is that hard to understand.
disregardable1 votesClaiming that winning wouldn't be a good time in game.
Toastey2 votesSometimes it is, but winning over and over and over again simply because you're knowingly playing a champion that's just statistically superior to all others in the game is...boring.
disregardable1 voteshttp://matchhistory.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-history
I'm having a pretty good time.
Lost In Time2 votes[{quoted}](name=Toasted Pigeon,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=yvaAWUWm,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2015-08-22T06:22:50.764+0000)
because some of us dont care so much about free wins as about actually having a good time in game. we also dont want to ruin other people's days by playing a boring, powerful champion. we want the potential for the enemy to outplay us, and by consequence, for us to outplay them.
we're playing a video game to have fun and improve our skills, not to simply win.
That's a roundabout way of saying "I don't know how to play/abuse X"
Toastey2 votesI don't want to have to play the same broken champ every game. I may very well be able to play a power pick every single game, and even play it well. But it gets boring when you realise that you're not learning anything. It gets dull just grinding out LP for no good reason. That's why you get people like one-trick ponies who abused a champ when it was strong, liked it, and kept playing that champ all the way to high elo. That's why you get people who are bad at the game if they don't get a power pick and can't play as aggressively as they're so used to doing.
Then again, I should be used to the "winning is absolutely everything" attitude from the League community at this point. Nobody seems particularly interested in the more intricate, cerebral, strategic nuances of the game; they just want to be really strong, kill a lot of people, and win.
Lost In Time1 votes[{quoted}](name=Toasted Pigeon,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=yvaAWUWm,comment-id=000000020000,timestamp=2015-08-22T07:41:46.956+0000)
Then again, I should be used to the "winning is absolutely everything" attitude from the League community at this point. Nobody seems particularly interested in the more intricate, cerebral, strategic nuances of the game; they just want to be really strong, kill a lot of people, and win.
What is there to learn after playing the game for several years?
Beyond some microscopic mechanics that you can practice on customs, the point IS to win in a ranked setting. It's pretty rude to belittle people for being competitive.
SEKAI1 votes[{quoted}](name=Lost In Time,realm=OCE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=yvaAWUWm,comment-id=0000000200000000,timestamp=2015-08-22T08:33:56.328+0000)
What is there to learn after playing the game for several years?
Beyond some microscopic mechanics that you can practice on customs, the point IS to win in a ranked setting. It's pretty rude to belittle people for being competitive.
People do still have the stigma to devaluate video games while the same can not be said about physical games such as chess, poker or even sports. While both types may have different emphasis, they are exactly the same if you rip everything into their core minimal.
Why do we make chess and sports fair but at the same time, we say video games being unfair is okay. Don't you think that's a tad too double standard?
Lost In Time1 votesPeople have still have the stigma to devaluate video games while the same can not be said about physical games such as chess, poker or even sports, while both types may have different emphasis, are exactly the same if you rip everything into their core minimal.
Why do we make chess and sports fair but at the same time, we say video games being unfair is okay. Don't you think that's a tad too double standard?
I think you quoted the wrong guy because I have no clue what the fuck you're on about.
SEKAI1 votes[{quoted}](name=Lost In Time,realm=OCE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=yvaAWUWm,comment-id=000000020000000000000000,timestamp=2015-08-22T09:24:08.675+0000)
I think you quoted the wrong guy because I have no clue what the fuck you're on about.
I guess I have issues with the presentation of my ideas, the thing is,
Games should always be fair and balanced (or at least very close to). Abuse what you can in a fair environment is cool, when it's not then it's also not cool. Simple as that.
It's not being competitive to abuse something that is poorly balanced, it might as well be the same as using steroids in sports.
Lost In Time1 votesI guess I have issues with the presentation of my ideas, the thing is,
Games should always be fair and balanced (or at least very close to). Abuse what you can in a fair environment is cool, when it's not then it's also not cool. Simple as that.
It's not being competitive to abuse something that is poorly balanced, it might as well be the same as using steroids in sports.
Got it, however, I'd say elo boosting is more in term with "steriods" as in you're using external factors to maximize results. I don't agree with that analogy.
For example (I don't know much about pro chess, forgive me) but there are certain opening strats to the game. If you don't use "meta" openings, you gimp yourself or even as far as auto-lose the chess match. Could that not be the same for not picking meta (OP) champs?
Nothing will ever be perfectly balanced, hence why Riot keeps switching up the meta - to at least see fresh things, even if they tend to tread over the line of balance.
OJ1911 votes[{quoted}](name=Lost In Time,realm=OCE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=yvaAWUWm,comment-id=00000002000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2015-08-22T09:58:24.934+0000)
Got it, however, I'd say elo boosting is more in term with "steriods" as in you're using external factors to maximize results. I don't agree with that analogy.
For example (I don't know much about pro chess, forgive me) but there are certain opening strats to the game. If you don't use "meta" openings, you gimp yourself or even as far as auto-lose the chess match. Could that not be the same for not picking meta (OP) champs?
Nothing will ever be perfectly balanced, hence why Riot keeps switching up the meta - to at least see fresh things, even if they tend to tread over the line of balance.
imo as analogies go elo boosting isn't steroids, it's match-fixing
Lost In Time1 votesimo as analogies go elo boosting isn't steroids, it's match-fixing
Well, no, match fixing would be DDoSing equivalent. Where you can affect the entire outcome of the match at your will.
Elo boosting is using something else to get to where you're at, but it still doesn't mean you auto win - you just generated an unfair advantage through another person (i.e. Diamond in Silver MMR)
SEKAI1 votes[{quoted}](name=Lost In Time,realm=OCE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=yvaAWUWm,comment-id=00000002000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2015-08-22T09:58:24.934+0000)
Got it, however, I'd say elo boosting is more in term with "steriods" as in you're using external factors to maximize results. I don't agree with that analogy.
I just find steroids a better fit to use as an analogy for abusing broken champs.
Assuming all pro sport players are roughly the same with everything considered, each with their pros and cons and so every match would be 50-50 for either team.
Then there is 1 guy who introduces this imbalance by using steroids, and gain an underhanded fundamental advantage over everyone, much like how abusing a broken champs is in LoL.
The only difference is that the act of abusing unbalance in LoL is a team effort between some players who deliberately uses it to his/her advantage while having full knowledge of the effect, and the company who tweaks the game poorly. And in the sports' case it's only the players' fault for drugging.
But I say the analogy is close enough, if I may.
Toastey2 votesAh, but my friend! There's so much more to be had. This game is miniature war. Troop movements, resource allocations, intelligence and surveillance. There's so much more to learn than just mastering the mechanics of certain champions. To intricately understand what the team needs to do when, who needs to be where, and to manage these things with a perfect understanding of the rhythms of the game and why everything needs to happen. That's where I'm headed--strategic mastery of the game. For me, it's not about the micro aspect. I play this game for the macro.
When certain champions are flat-out statistical outliers on the upper end, they create an unnecessary imbalance that kind of ruins most meaningful macro decisions. More often than not, they ruin meaningful micro decisions too (ie "no counterplay"). Laning against these champions is a chore, too, and I love the laning phase. There's a lot more brain and slow play involved in laning phase, as opposed to the snap-second twitch reactions of teamfights (which have their own intricacies and nuances, of course; I just like laning better).
I'm not belittling people who are competitive per se; I just dislike people who would rather win a crappy game than play a good game and take a chance on losing. There's a clear difference between, "I am competitive" and "I won't fight fair, and anyone who doesn't use the same tricks is stupid."
Take fencing, for example. I love the sport. I fence foil. Now imagine someone walked into my fencing club with a very, very long rapier and declared that they could score points not only with thrusts, but also with slashes. They then say that anyone who doesn't subscribe to their style of rapier doesn't deserve to win. But I've been a foil fencer all my career; I want to get better at fencing foil. I don't want some OP rapier to come and completely disrupt the game. The rapier fencer isn't learning anything; the foil fencers he's beating certainly aren't learning much except that longer reach + alternate scoring paths is hard to beat. Do you see what I mean now?
SEKAI2 votesIt's not the players' duty to abuse anything that is overpowered but the company's responsibility to balance the game properly, as long as it's not already labelled as Pay to Win by default.
That's why the "if you can't beat it, join it" logic is flawed in most part of the video game scene (excluding ofc, P2W), since no one here is interested in bringing the artificial "reality" into a place where fun is king and imagination is what drives it.
It just isn't supposed to work that way, and it is right, it shouldn't.
BluePolarizer1 votesI don't play ADC.
I don't find playing ADC fun at all. You're last hitting or laning for most of the game. It is too rigid. other lanes and junglers can roam to get kills. You don't roam for kills as ADC very often. You just farm and trade with the other ADC. Then in a teamfight you spend most of the fight walking back and forth in the back doing nothing. I'd rather be a playmaker doing the initiating or assassinating.
I do indeed play the best assassins, bruisers and tanks available though. Too bad as a class, melees suck now unless they're full tank supports.
Stiv12341 votesMaybe because they dont feel comfortable with that role or even that champion? I mean, if I played Vayne, I would probably go mid because I suck so hard at ADC'ing. Same for Ahri, shes still OP as fuck and even though I do decently with basically all midlaners, Ahri just feels really awkward to me.
TheDevice1 votesMy D*** is OP.
<.<;
;>.>
OJ1911 votesAlright, I'm going to ask a question and I want you all to answer it seriously. If any of you believe this about any champion in the game, whether it be Vayne or Yasuo, why aren't you playing them yourselves? If they're so powerful wouldn't it make sense to abuse them in ranked?
Because I'd rather have fun in the attempt to get to diamond on a champion I like even if it means I'm stuck in Plat (OK I'm gold 5 this season because fuck ranked anymore I'm so sick of the LP system go back to MMR riot) than grind out boring games on a champion I hate just because they're stronger and let me get to diamond faster?
When ranks don't actually mean jack shit anyway?
Yeah no thanks
Now if you legitimately enjoy those champions... well I still think you're a little bit of a dirt bag for abusing OPs in ranked but I won't hold it against you like those who play them solely to grind their rank.
ABlueQuaker1 votesBecause usually 1 of 3 scenarios occur.
Scenario 1 I'll call ADC with the intention of playing Vayne. Ally Locks in Random AD Carry. Enemy shits on them with Vayne.
Scenario 2 I'll call ADC with the intention of playing Vayne. Ally Locks in Vayne ADC. Ally feeds due to limited experience with Vayne.
Scenario 3 I'll call ADC with the intention of playing Vayne. I'll lock in Vayne ADC. Ally feeds something equally BS that can shut me down.
Xonra1 votesNot everyone plays every role and every champion.
Just because Vayne may be strong doesn't mean the guy that mains mid is going to suddenly start maining Vayne adc. What logic is that?
I think Riven is annoying as balls, but I main support, so why would I be playing Riven?
You see how your logic makes less sense than you think, OP?
Raptamei1 votesLet's take this one step further. Ranked is supposed to be "play to win". You KNOW Vayne is broken. You INTENTIONALLY don't pick a broken champion because it is more fun for you to pick one that gives you a lower chance to win, at the expense of your team. This may be reportable.