examples are usually done in the extreme to make a point...

Extremely unrealistic examples don't make a point. They just detract from legitimate discussion and create needless conflict. In fact they usually detract from your point because it makes it appear as if you can't make your point with real numbers, so instead you rely on blatant hyperbole to make up for that.

Example:

Realistic:

Darius q at level 1 can deal 105 base damage with a bonus AD ratio greater than 1, meaning he can hit for over 120 damage and proc his passive for another 15 or so. This damage seems very high for an easy to land AoE ability with a reasonably large range.

Extreme:

Darius q hits for half my hp at level 1 even though I start with 50 armour. I can't even go close to any creeps to cs because his q hits me halfway across the lane.

Which example better makes the point that Darius has very high damage at early levels?

Note how I presented a realistic and plausible example, and you responded with an extremely unrealistic example. Then when I call you on that, you say it was just meant to make a point.

will talk to you more in a bit. gonna make a list of some players, and go over which i would dodge because of and why. Feels like you don't want to work off theoretical situations.

So you pull up a player on lolking they have 211 games played and they are 5.5/5.1/7.0 now this is a suspicious player anything >5 on average deaths is a red flag. So I do actually bother to check their info. Sometimes people play hard engage champs and if so a higher death average is ok.

In this case this player plays MF as a main, her stats are 34W-27L, 6.3/5.2/8.5.... This tells me a lot about this player, since there are a high number of games played we can make the easy assumption that this player is in general playing MF incorrectly. A quick glance at their recently player games shows some awkard build choices across several games.

A quick glance back at their elo loss gain chart shows that this player recently climbed out of the 1100's.

Put it all together and you have a player who is peaking on their bell curve and is likely to cost you the game.

It took me 1 ranked queue to find this player, and there is a second just like them in the same queue, but hey you know what why not give them a chance right? OK...

Go in and sure enough the two players I pegged get out played in their lane (I elected to jungle so i could keep an eye on them). In addition their positioning in team fights is not at the 1300 elo ranked.

If I wasn't doing this just to gather data I would 100% have dodged this game, and honestly what harm would it have done? Not any, i had done all my research before the first pick was even made.


Gathering data quickly from lolking is about looking for red flags that let you know to examine the player closer. In most (cases call it 1 in every 15 players in the 1400's) you wont need to look at their champ info beyond their Win-loss and their average KDA. But if one of their KDA #'s or their Win-loss record looks odd, it lets you know to look deeper. Sometimes awkward kda #'s can be explained by preferred champions or sometimes by a change in playstyle both of which you can spot by looking at their elo trend and their individual stats with various champions.

dis post is da bumb

<3

A good 95% of the rage, trolling, and frustration that goes on in LoL is due to the fact you cannot quit a game in progress without getting banned. LoL and all similar games in this genre are the ONLY games I have ever seen that enforce this. Why should you be forced to play with a team that starts acting like ******s before the game even begins? If I'm playing a random team 2v2 RTS and my teammate is a moronic jackass, I'm just going to quit and move on to a game that isn't a sure loss. Why should I have to play that game out? Same with a FPS, if there's an immature mic spamming idiot I'm going to quit and find a game that does NOT involve said idiot. Games are supposed to be fun, and part of the fun factor of multiplayer games is having a team you enjoy playing with. If my team is down in kills 25-9 with 7 towers to 0, why do I have to play it out? Forcing people to stay in that game is EXACTLY WHAT CAUSES VERBAL ABUSE ****STORMS TO BREAK OUT IN CHAT.

I realize LoL soloq would not function it people could quit losing games. And for that reason, I am in full support of unlimited dodging. If I have a really bad feeling before the game even starts, I should be allowed to walk away rather than suffer for 20-30 minutes. I've never been banned, I don't rage in chat; but I still had to stop playing SR because the only way to keep my sanity there was to /mute all at the start of every game. People are more relaxed in Dominion and co-op where there isn't an elo gun over everyone's head and people just shrug when there's a blowout game. How many SR games end with 'report XYZ' these days?

As for calling lanes, I don't see why Riot refuses to take a stance on this one as it is a growing issue. By declaring it a 'gray area', you're telling people that 5th pick control+v'ing TOP OR MID instantly entitles them to throw a tantrum when they don't get those lanes and forces someone else to eat the dodge. Is it really so hard for Riot to say, "Players must respect pick order. Trolling because you did not get your desired role is reportable and bannable behavior." There, matter settled. Of course, Riot could have fixed the 0 CS support thing so last pick wouldn't be terrified of getting a less fun role, but they pussied out yet again much like with Flash. And yes someone will downvote and claim they like 0 CS support. But the fact of the matter is the majority of players do NOT like having to support in soloq where it is the only role than cannot really carry a bad team at all.

I like this quote.

Bump

word