League Of Legends

Favorite ADC.

Mid would be Kha Zix because he's stupidly OP, or Fizz because he's fun and people suck at playing against him.

Top would be Zac or Cho Gath because they're both good sustain, strong top laners. And they can both 1v2.

Favorite jungle is definitely Cho Gath or Mundo, Mundo is insanely fun to play and Cho is fun and strong.

Lastly, I only play support Sona because I hate the support role and almost never get forced to play it.

ADCraven, I don't play ADC ever, and I only really own him.

Support:Thresh, I prefer Blitz but I don't feel like buying him. Soraka is good but she's so useless lategame in high level play.

Mid:Kass/Karma, Kass is so sexy once he gets level 6 and Karma is noice since the rework.

Jungle:Mao is my usual jungle, but if my team is bad I become even more useless. I bring no damage really, but all the CC, and I fall off late game hard so it's up to me to feed the kills and up to them to utilize.

Top:Garen is a safe top for me, Vi used to be my bay, don't play her much. Try to pick people who don't get completely Teemo'd.

My actual game history won't tell you this, but my favorite ADC is Graves. He's so bad *** and so cool to play, but I'm still attached to Caitlyn, who was the first character I ever learned, so...yeah.

Mid lane? Lux for ranked stuff. Still working on TF and Syndra. Entertaining making Nidalee a thing, too.

Top lane is Jayce for me. I have Vi and many other toplaners, but if I have to care about the match, I'm doing Jayce.

Support wise, I like Sona. I also like Leona if we need some UMPH on the team.

Jungle (which I hate, but am learning), I go either Vi or Xin. But f*ck jungling.

As a learning jungler, I wouldn't pick those two. These two are junglers that are also good as at top lanes, even better.

I'd suggest playing with easy sauce junglers. WW is 450 and once he hits level 6 you're throwing ults so often. I'd also say Fiddlestick has great sustain and his ganks are nice when you get in range. Just gotta land his ult.

Are you saying Vi and Xin aren't easy junglers?

I'm saying that there are indefinitely easier junglers and, as you said for Elise, they can be used better top lane. They do better with more CS and more kills.

The only game with more unwarranted arrogance than MNC: LoL. :lol:

Every player swears they should be platinum level but for the teammates they're saddled with, sitting there glorifying a rating that was assigned to them with 0 performance stats, only win/loss, in a game with randomly assigned teams! :lol:

Yet in game this amazing skill level they claim seems to only consist of rage.

Yes - everyone seems to be a rager or flamer.... but is MNC really that bad? I've never had any trouble - only a bit of banter.

Every player except me... I'm bad and know it.

But lately the EUW servers have been sooooooooooooo bad I can only play customs :'(

I recently reached level 30 and started playing my promotional matches. (EUNE)
This is the result of one game:

We lost of course but people are so nooby xD

I love Kassadin, in the game after this one, I played a normal(blind picks) and ended up against a Kassadin and I totally raped him and one of their players called me Xpeke on a secret account, it felt nice :mrgreen:

I also play Blitz, Shen, Udyr, Twitch and other random champs, I'm trying to play as many different combinations as possible since I just started playing about 2 months ago, still make many mistakes cause the opposing champ has abilities I never seen and similar.

League of Legends matchmaking is so bizarre at times...

I personally will never do ranked again until I have a 5-man team. It's absolutely AWFUL.

No, awful is the rating system, no matter how hard you try, how well you play, how diligent your CSing, how opportune your ganking, you are 1 person, and there are 4 others on your team whose collective influence on the outcome of the game is far greater than yours can ever be as a single player, it's simple math.

Yet for some reason Riot games thinks pure win/loss with no other stats accurately reflects a player's SKILL at the game.

It'd be funny if the public didn't agree with their illogical conclusion.

Rating system.
Wut.

I personally think points gained in ranked games should be determined by individual performance, not whether you win or lose. The only issue with this is, though, is that you could be someone that doesn't communicate with teams well at all and move into higher ranked games where communication and teamwork is more important and screw everyone else over.

The only reasonably quantifiable measurement is win/loss, the only sensical one too.

If you don't like that you can stop playing with randies and get a real team.

Sounds like you haven't played ranked...ever.

The LP system is silly and stupid. Drastic drops and minimal climbs. For 1v1 games, that's great, but for something wholly dependent on others, it's silly.

I do agree about finding a 5-man, though. But...timing. blegh.

I'm just talking about ELO and derivatives in general. There is no useful mathmatical approximation of skill based on how well you supported, carried or whatever.

How are you gonna quantify a successful suicide dive, I mean clearly he gave his life which is not a usual sign of skill.

A win is a clearly defined and quantifiable point of data.

I'm sure their system could use some improvement (regular ELO doesn't quite cut it anywhere outside of Chess and Quake) but I don't have any real specifics on the subject, if you can enlighten me about anything out of the ordinary they're doing I'd be grateful.

I'll also probably end up saying that they should use TrueSkill, which they should.

They stopped ELO a LONG time ago.

It's now this LP system, which I'm told is similar to StarCraft's ranking system, which I know nothing about. There are tiers (Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum, Diamond, Challenger) and 5 levels for each tier. Once you get into a tier, you can't go any lower than that tier, but level wise, you can plummet to the bottom.

The problem I have with this is the dramatic difference in point gain and loss. A win can net you 10 LP or so, depending on your MMR, while a loss can have you lose twice as much. Once you amass 100 LP, you are then put into a promotion series where you have to win 2 out of 3 matches to move up to the next level and start at 0 again. I think it's 3 out of 5 if you are going from one tier to another, but I could be wrong.

While a win is statistically the best way to determine "skill," the mentality that has formed is that you would need to be a person that can carry your entire team while they piggyback off your efforts. While I agree that a player should be somewhat able to do this, a lot of people go into ranked matches doing whateverthefuck they please, under the assumption that one person will carry them to victory. That's not okay. Ever.

Oogie's suggestion was great, but you have to put "KSing" and other things that would make it a 1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1v1 instead of 5v5. People would wait around to "steal kills" or take cs from people would need it more, among many other things. I guess what they have now is the best they can do, but I think it's silly.

You can't blame the system for retarded people though, however I'm not familiar with the system you describe (though I'm fairly familiar with SC2's rating system, which is pretty good for 1v1 encounters)

I just explained it a little better. I think it started this season, as I only got to do ranked when they literally JUST rolled it out.