Real Talk (Breaking down riot's reply to the singed issue)

Okay, Real talk Riot is shadowing Donald Trump right now. They are literally giving paragraphs of opinions, and useless information that has nothing to do with the summoners code. Nothing in this passage gives riot the right to threaten a player for his play style other then "this is my game and I do what I want".

This was the message they posted in reply. Now for the parts that matter.

> If you're about to play stunbot Twisted Fate tank support with Talisman, Righteous Glory, and Protobelt, let your team know the special kind of hell you're aiming to create for your enemies, and how they should adjust their expectations and approach to the game. If, instead of that, you wholly fail to communicate, or completely disrupt game after game, it makes sense that you’d rack up a ton of reports, net manual reviews and even potential penalties from Player Support.

He did.

> It's clear this wacky Smite, Support Singed plays to win.

Then what's the problem?

> It’s also clear the player struggles to effectively communicate intentions and strategy to teammates.

He gave them a paragraph every game, does he need to right a book?

>unwieldy communication and the wacky Smite, Support Singed pick are tightly linked. So let’s pick them apart some.

Great let's settle this big misunderstanding.

>of playe Innovative and unconventional approaches to League keep the game fresh, and finding new ways to win motivates a tonrs. We 100% support the opportunity to innovate with surprising picks and strategies in League.

This is what the singed main did right? I'm glad you support it because so does the summoners code. (By the way you have some typos)

> The only real condition we place on that right to experimentation is that you play to win.

Agreed.

>However

oh?

>sometimes unconventional approaches to the game have costs that outweigh benefits.

That's literally life in a nutshell. What's your point?

>This player might have a respectable(-ish) winrate on Support Singed with Smite and no Sightstone

... Wait are you telling me a 53% winrate with a champion of around 2000 games is good-ish? His win ratio is tied with Annie-Bot on annie... 53% Because last I checked that's almost as good as it's gonna get.

>but the pick and build also nets them a frankly enormous number of reports and probably gives their ADC high blood pressure.

And ? I don't see anything on the summoners code that says I can't pick a strategy that will supposedly "give my ADC high blood pressure."

> Q: If intentions are clearly aimed at victory, is there an outer boundary for too unconventional a pick/build/strategy? > A: No.

At this point you literally just said what he's doing is not against the rules.

> This is where we break from the Support ticket linked in the original reddit discussion. Real talk, this player is far from the only support in Gold V to skip out on a Sightstone. No one should ever get banned for skipping Sightstone.

We know that. And you know we know that. No one cares either.

>asking an ADC to lane alone while their support farms the enemy jungle truly pushes that teammate out of their comfort zone and that should mean something.

Now you're just making fat fucking lies because there are more then one tape out there showing proof that he does help his adc through most of the laning phase. Secondly it's his strategy, YOU LITERALLY JUST SAID IF HIS INTENTIONS ARE TOO WIN, EVEN IF UNUSUAL IT IS ALOUD.

>We can all sympathize with the lonely Miss Fortune facing down Lucian and Alistar at her own turret.

Use I statements when giving examples, don't try to speak for me because I and possibly others can't sympathize the misfortune vs Alistar and Lucian, and clearly neither can the singed main who's only Gold V. Also there's a reason he's Gold V, so quit acting like he's doing what you think is wrong intentionally. You never taught him how to support or gave him any examples on it at all, if you're so good at support teach us what to take otherwise leave him be.

>and it makes sense to us when they report this Singed player.

Then update the summoners code.

> If you're gonna throw a curveball at teammates, you also need to communicate your intentions to teammates. You shouldn’t just expect everyone to "get it", so tell them what's up. To be clear, this player does attempt to communicate intent and strategy, but a good chunk of teammates across hundreds of games just don’t want to sign up for the plan. That lack of agreement on the new plan makes for a pretty chaotic game and leads to a huge share of this player’s reports. If a teammate in champ select says, “pls no, this is game 5 of promos”, maybe stick with something conventional and skip tilting your teammates off the face of the earth. In short, argue for your idea, but stay ready to be flexible. > > In the same vein, teammates should be willing give unconventional picks/strategies a fair shot. They could surprise your opponents more than they surprise you. We need to leave plenty of space for experimentation in League (Hi Support MF), even if it sometimes leaves us in less than perfectly comfy games. > > If you're about to play stunbot Twisted Fate tank support with Talisman, Righteous Glory, and Protobelt, let your team know the special kind of hell you're aiming to create for your enemies, and how they should adjust their expectations and approach to the game. If, instead of that, you wholly fail to communicate, or completely disrupt game after game, it makes sense that you’d rack up a ton of reports, net manual reviews and even potential penalties from Player Support. > > The net result is that players, if playing to win, have a fundamental right to experiment in League. It’s good for the game. At the same time, common sense and good sportsmanship say that experimenting players need to clearly communicate intent and win conditions to their teammates.

This is either completely irrelevant or repeated text

> The net result is that players, if playing to win, have a fundamental right to experiment in League. It’s good for the game. At the same time, common sense and good sportsmanship say that experimenting players need to clearly communicate intent and win conditions to their teammates.

More repeated text.

> we believe the penalty was warranted because in literally hundreds of games the player inflicted a huge amount of disruption on players who didn’t agree to their chemistry experiments.

Where on the summoners code is this relevant ?

>On the other hand, the player’s communication issues fall well short of permaban territory, and in retrospect the threat of a perma in the Player Support response was a bit much.

... He shouldn't be banned at all.

> We also see marked improvement in their efforts communicate with teammates in more recent games.

Uhh duh because you threatened to perma ban him, so he stopped using smite out of FEAR and fear alone.

> Still, with intent to win confirmed, gameplay experimentation and innovation is something we stand behind even if it ruffles feathers. After all, conventional picks lose half their games too.

Write this in the summoners code.

>We think this player could still do a much better job of communicating with teammates, but we also believe players should be more tolerant of different approaches to the game.

You want a book huh? Because he's not a publisher or a writer. You would think a paragraph is more then enough. I have what over 2000 games played? Never have I seen someone explain to me in a paragraph his intentions in champion select.

>The line here is the player repeatedly showing no flexibility in the face of resistance to their strategies, and consistently forcing teammates into a wildly different bot lane experience hundreds of times.

If this is a problem, you write it in the summoners code. You notify your players that it's updated, and then you give him a fair warning. But you did not say giving people different experiences is bad... In fact I can argue it's good for them.