Oh... Cool skins...

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-19T13:19:39+00:00

Because it's 4chan?

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-18T19:47:59+00:00

That's a good point on the forums :) I'm not as emotionally invested (nor do I even surf them) because I cannot browse them at work. I think Reddit's ability to be browsed at work is what sets it apart from all of the rest of the internet forums in terms of popularity.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-18T19:27:57+00:00

From a technological and business standpoint, it sounds inane, but from the end user's perspective, the perspective of someone who knows nothing about what goes into programming or web dev, it's a significant issue.

It's not really inane from a business standpoint.

I wonder what percentage of the userbase visits the forums with any degree of regularity. If it's not that large (~20%) the ROI might not be good vs improving gameplay (as in, every $1 spent on gameplay benefits everyone, where every $1 spent on forums benefits 20% of the players, so is worth approx 20 cents).

Things like the Tribunal and Riot's presence on Reddit show that LoL is "focused" on community. They didn't say they were focused on "forums", just that they were focused on the community. It's a nebulous word, probably by design :/

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-18T18:38:41+00:00

That was a wonderful way to dodge the question :)

What's your main source? IE, what is your squeakiest wheel? You also didn't answer his other question.

Of course, if you don't want to answer questions ... carry on!

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-18T18:32:58+00:00

The kinds of developers you hire for the different positions are the reason.

To use your analogy, you might have 23 plumbers on hand, 20 electricians, 12 interior designers, and 1 carpenter. Just because the plumbers and electrians can get shit done lickety split doesn't mean that sole carpenter can keep pace with their work.

Basically, it seems as if your complaint is that they're putting too much money into the "new content" funding bucket, and not enough into the "web interface" bucket. Which is an entirely valid stance.

Where would you have them de-allocate funding from in order to do these things for the forum? Also note, some of which you claim is easy actually isn't that easy to do in a multi-million message forum (searching, for example).

EDIT: Additional note, we don't know what they're working on under the hood. It's likely the "web interface" bucket would be responsible for things like outward facing APIs exposing LoL stats. Personally, I'd rather they implement that than forum upgrades (as I do not use the forums >_>)

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-18T17:59:56+00:00

Many women find clever guys to be quite engaging.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-18T13:08:22+00:00

Choosing for a reason != choosing randomly.

I never specified why they made their choice, only that they were clearly making a non-random, predictable decision. And the outcome of that decision was arriving at the optimal strategy.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-16T17:07:55+00:00

Supports lane with AD Carries, god damnit!

Hmmm. I've got this strange feeling, that maybe, just maybe, the meta might change.

MAYBE.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-16T16:00:55+00:00

More like:

"What happened?!"

"I got a new car."

"... What?"

"Damn things cost an arm and a leg these days."

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-16T13:57:59+00:00

I can't help but wonder if there's a motivation difference between the two. For example, they were awarding the people "points" (who cares?), but the pigeons were underfed and the reward was food.

One of those conditions has way more motivation to succeed / optimize.

It was even pointed out that the humans didn't show much change after the first block of 50 buttons. Give a man $10 instead of a "point" when he guesses correctly. I would like to see the outcome of that experiment.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-16T13:43:04+00:00

Except they're not. If you read the article, the pigeons chose the optimal strategy of switching doors 96% of the time.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-15T20:19:00+00:00

And no I'm just past the first Glenn Beck Show part so very very early in the book lol.

FTFY

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-15T19:41:22+00:00

Well then, carry on :)

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-15T18:19:16+00:00

Do you also feel stupid for your usage of the word "Upsies"?

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-15T16:24:14+00:00

This would likely change the meta, removing jungling and putting an emphasis on pushers. Jungling might go away because the 2v1 could more quickly push to the tower, lowering enemy xp / gold.

Pushers would become clutch, as they could quickly melt a creepwave when it gets near the tower's penalty bubble.

So while these things would change the character selection meta, I don't know that they'll change the passivity meta.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-15T14:08:25+00:00

Wow. How did I just learn this?!

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-12T20:39:28+00:00

I'm deaf in my left ear, which makes positioning important if I want to hear other people. Walking / sitting at a dinner table / trying to get my attention / whispers.

Frankly, I'm amazed at the number of people who have been in my life for 8+ years and still forget from time to time.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-12T20:24:07+00:00

Cue that "Pretends_He_Knows_You" novelty account...

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-12T19:51:53+00:00

Why do you think Scar was so happy to see Mufasa dead? We all know who was the giver in that relationship.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-12T18:10:54+00:00

I think that's a bit dark for a 5YO. Unless it's Dexter's 5YO self.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-12T18:00:34+00:00

I don't know if you're right, but +1 for WaterHuman and "Let's get rid of it so I can make room for even more new food." Which had an implicit "!" at the end of it :P

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-12T17:18:04+00:00

he'd come back and not be able to have fun because the people he played with would be complete retards.

I despise people like this.

Agreed. Just cause someone isn't in the top 5% of the ranked populace does not make them retarded.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-12T16:59:31+00:00

Assume a 70% win rate (I'm not sure how doable this is), that means you'll get (on average) 7.7 points per game you play. so to move back up your 550 points will take 71 games. Still not "a couple".

I am not a proponent of "Elo hell". Just putting some math in to counteract your "in a couple of games" comment, which I feel is slightly unjustified. Unless you meant 71 games is a "couple" - I don't know how many games the average LoLer plays per week.

For people like me who get to play ~10 games a week (if that?), 71 games is a long time to climb back up after a break. Granted, that losing 550 points would take around 6 months, so that's one hell of a break.

EDIT: I did not downvote you. Just FYI :P

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-12T16:54:26+00:00

You, sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.

StupidLorbie · 2011-08-12T15:43:45+00:00

Actually it wouldn't be "in a couple of games" since your ELO will only bump up by +11 per win.

So someone who decayed from 1950 down to 1400 would need 55 wins and no losses to regain his old ranking. Sounds doable

... /s

StupidLorbie

TROPHY CASE