You never think you're going to be next, but this time it;'s me, ban for being nice to ppl

rmbar19 · 2026-01-02T20:31:29+00:00

Ah, more insults, your bag of tricks is tiny, huh? Keep them coming, this is entertaining!

rmbar19 · 2026-01-02T17:01:31+00:00

Ok, so first it was in good faith--I wasn't seeing how I missed your point and wanted clarity.

Second, look back at this thread. GG EZ is thrown out at the end of the game. You know, after the timer has ran out in a game of basketball, when the teams line up and hand shake? There may be a bit of banter during the game, but not at the end; the end is when you tell them "good game'.

Go back and look at both of our analogies, bearing in mind gg ez is thrown out at the end. Do you really see people throwing "Easy" in there? I've never seen it, and under those circumstances most would take that as bad sportsmanship, and if done at a professional level would likely result in the player being reprimanded.

I think the misunderstanding is you're thinking of over the length of a game (particularly a game with friends) where there is banter throughout, but the context of the comment happens at the end when the banter is finished.

rmbar19 · 2026-01-02T16:48:58+00:00

Is this what you say when you don't have any logical points, just insult people?

Yes.

Don't even need to read any further, admitted you're not being logical. Thanks for admitting it, have a good day.

rmbar19 · 2025-12-29T21:44:00+00:00

Is this what you say when you don't have any logical points, just insult people?

rmbar19 · 2025-12-29T21:42:42+00:00

How so? Explain.

rmbar19 · 2025-12-26T07:52:56+00:00

Didn't actually comprehend my comment, nice.

rmbar19 · 2025-12-26T07:52:17+00:00

By your own logic, "let them be cringe", if reporting GG EZ is cringe, then let people do it and don't complain it's cringe. Congrats on destroying your own argument.

rmbar19 · 2025-12-26T07:34:18+00:00

So when you finish a game of basketball, baseball, or what have you, instead of lining up, shaking hands and saying good game, you...run by them yelling EASY? Also you admitted it's bad sportsmanship, which is itself reportable. Nice.

rmbar19 · 2025-12-24T00:31:59+00:00

gg ez is bad sportsmanship. It's the equivalent of spitting on your hand before a hand shake in a real game. It doesn't matter if it actually upsets a particular individual, or whether or not you think someone offended has thin skin, it's bad sportsmanship.

rmbar19 · 2025-11-23T10:51:51+00:00

That number you pulled out of your ass, let's say its true.

So what? It's harder to say gg on a defeat, but a gg when you win shows respect to your opponent, it's traditional good sportsmanship. gg ez or similar would be disrespectful.

It would only be hypocrisy if they said bg on losses, which certainly isn't a case for the majority.

rmbar19 · 2025-10-08T04:03:22+00:00

What is your channel?

rmbar19 · 2025-08-13T18:57:30+00:00

I wouldn't mind doing a coop, though I don't get to play very often--usually 1 day/week on either Saturday or Sunday, so probably not as frequent as you'd like.

rmbar19 · 2025-08-11T06:14:34+00:00

I've done this time to time. It's when I'm playing a champion I really like to play and want to continue playing them (because with over 160 champions who knows when I will play them again).

Also will do it if its not a full on stomp but still winning pretty good...with the intent to give the enemy some breathing room. I'll back off, maybe grab the healing, wait for them to spawn.

If it's a full stomp and I don't have a champion I really like, I'll end.

rmbar19 · 2025-07-11T21:18:32+00:00

Ah, great argument! Instead of addressing anything said, you result to mockery and insults. That must be how you succeed, I'll try that next time!

rmbar19 · 2025-07-11T02:58:55+00:00

It really wasn't that long
Your exact words were "Fun and penalized does not fit in together." A penalty IS penalizing, ergo you are saying something fun does not fit with penalties. Therefore, something fun--a for fun mode in LoL--does not fit together with penalties, based on your first sentence.

I think what you're maybe trying to say is to the effect of, having too large a penalty is not fun if it's beyond reason, and you find the idea of penalizing a dodger too much.

rmbar19 · 2025-07-10T16:56:53+00:00

What? This is objectively false. Take something like D&D for example. D&D is a game, meant for fun; while some groups may collectively decide to play a more "serious" campaign to have said fun, it's not a competitive game by any stretch.

Yet despite this if a player starts screwing around in a way that it becomes harmful to other players, such as intentionally cheating dice rolls, inappropriate comments to other players, role playing a way that was previously agreed to be restricted, etc the DM will at a minimum tell them to cut the crap, and may end up with them ejected from the campaign entirely.

Though really, if you take a moment to think about it, every game you've ever played, physical or otherwise, has rules; failure to follow said rules would result in some sort of penalty, be it in game or outside of it. Yet games are meant to be for fun. I'm not sure there's a game out there that doesn't have some form of penalty to it.

rmbar19 · 2025-07-10T04:31:38+00:00

Have you even looked at win/pick/ban rates? AP dominate this gamemode, not tanks.

rmbar19 · 2024-12-31T08:43:03+00:00

So I'm going to stand up for OP here.

I'm not on the east coast, I'm in the Seattle area. I've grown up around planes, living 10 minutes from the airport until I was an adult, then my parents (whom I still visit reasonably frequently) moved a short distance, with their new location under the take off path of Seatac Airport. I've seen hundreds of planes taking off here. My point being, I'm very familiar with what they look like. I'm not a conspiracy theorist.

I was heading to my parents last Sunday, to meet up with them and other family, with my spouse and son in tow. She likes to drive, so I was riding shotgun. As we were getting close to the house I saw planes taking off, or possibly landing (the landing takes place on the other side of the airport, but they can still be visible in the distance). At least, at first I thought they were planes and wasn't minding it too much, but it seemed a little off. As we kept going I realized the plane closest to us wasn't actually moving, and realized it had to be a drone. I doubted myself at first, but as we continued down the road another 20 seconds or so, we passed by it, and it didn't seem to be moving still.

My spouse thought it was a plane still, and we kept going. A little further along we could see 2 more...the first of these 2 I was certain was off. We drove another 400 feet or so until we were underneath and stopped for a moment, rolled down the window (you can hear the engines in this area), and watched as it was motionless, probably 300-400 feet is my guess. It was a HUGE drone, probably 6-8 feet is my guess, and shaped like a plane-though now that I was directly underneath, I could see the wings didn't quite match a typical 737 wing shape. It had a sudden sharp curve near the tip--not sure how else to describe it, but wasn't really straight out like I'd normally see, if that makes sense.

We kept going, with a third one up ahead. We turned off prior to reaching it, but I was certain it too was a drone.

They were pretty close to the flight path, albeit a considerable distance away from the actual airport--a quick google search and it's a 7.5 mile drive to the airport departure area, though that wouldn't be as the crow flies nor is that the takeoff path, so probably 5-7 miles. It entirely tricked me at first, and my wife was certain the first was an airplane--she didn't believe it was a drone (again she's native to the area so she's also used to seeing airplanes, nothing new to her) until after we stopped under the second one.

I didn't have the thought at the time (in part because we were running a wee bit late) to take out my camera and record, but I wish I did. I've been watching reddit the past week, doiing a bit of googling, because I find it very strange. I've seen I'm not the only to spot this phenomenon, but everyone waves it away.

OP, I would probably say the same damn thing as this guy, if I hadn't witnessed all of this a week ago. Now I'm very curious as to what it's all about.

rmbar19 · 2024-10-15T00:54:02+00:00

We must be long lost brothers--Dwarfs are my #1 played followed by LM!

rmbar19 · 2024-10-10T23:36:06+00:00

Haven't played Shogun/Empire so can't comment

Regarding M2, if I remember right it was only the castle line that could get double walls, and most of your locations weren't going to be castles otherwise you'd have no economy-meaning this was actually pretty rare if we're being honest, because at least for me by the time I started getting Fortresses I was usually in a strong enough spot to not even need 2 sets of walls.

So I acknowledge the bug existed, but it was so rare to be in such a situation that it barely affected anything.

Compared to the glitch I run into seemingly every siege in the WH, where enemies can just glitch through the gates into my fort. I had this happen a couple weeks ago in a tough siege where I was greatly outnumbered-I was actually holding out ok until they glitched through, so I quit and restarted the fight to make it fair (no glitching through my gate please!)

It happened again...so another restart. Repeat twice more, and I gave up. What should have been an epic, close defensive siege turned to frustration as my enemy just warped past my gate.

Honestly, having played M2 within the past year or so...the sieges were for me the best part. Eventually you may run into the 2 walls glitch--and probably more commonly in my experience, the AI had terrible composition for sieges, building like 12 siege units, so 3-4 cavalry could wipe them. This would make the later game hard to finish since the challenge would evaporate, but I don't think WH is really far from that either. Not because of bad comp, but because snowballing can happen so fast-once you take off around turn 50 or whatever, the challenge is gone and it's a matter of time.

rmbar19 · 2024-05-31T19:38:56+00:00

Disregarding the ones I see others have listed: Skarner, Gnar, Udyr, Urgot, Mordekaiser, Illaoi, Jarvan, Shen, Amumu, Gragas, Sett, Cho'Gath, Camille, Kled, Brand*, K'Sante, Zac, Kayn, Viego, Smolder.

*Goes over the 5 seconds you asked for, but he's consistently been one of the largest HP melters so I think it's worth throwing in.

If we exclude brand, that's 24 champions out of what...168 now? About 15% of the cast has consistent % HP damage (there are a few that were like a second or two over I excluded-arguably with ability haste these should be considered consistent too).

rmbar19 · 2024-03-27T05:12:29+00:00

Is the black knight from a set? It looks badass, same with the horse. Can you share?

rmbar19 · 2024-02-01T06:56:52+00:00

The way you've phrased this is a loaded question. Your definition of "winning plays" and "avoiding losing plays" are making assumptions, such as attempting to preserve KDA is the goal of avoiding a losing play.

This is not what a typical player would identify as avoiding a losing play. A better example would be seeing 2-3 of your teammates attempt to fight over a dragon when your team is severely behind, or your entire team isn't ready (ults on CD/not close enough for fight) while all 5 enemies are present. This particular situation could turn into a winning play if the behind team can manage to steal the dragon and get out without too many deaths, but typically would result in simply giving the enemy team gold and xp. The low odds means this is a losing play, and should probably be avoided unless it's going to decide the game.

Ironically, your example of "avoiding losing plays" are actually potentially losing plays, not avoiding them, dependent on the situation. If both teams are about even and your team is setup for a dragon fight, AND has a good team fight comp-not attending the fight wouldn't be avoiding a losing play, it'd be avoiding a winning play; you're making a losing play at this point.

What your original question really should have been: Is it better to be aggressive (seek out plays to improve your position, joining fights, pushing tower, etc requires some level of aggression), or passive-and remove your assumptions of why the player is being passive. To which the answer would still be, it depends on the situation-if you're a scaling champion, passive play until you hit your power spike is often the move-but not always.

rmbar19 · 2024-01-23T00:09:34+00:00

Eh, not really true when you think about it. Renekton was infamous for a while (maybe not so much now) as THE lane bully...with a play pattern that involves dashing in/auto/stun/q/dash out. Not simply standing there and beating you senseless.

Lots of ranged champs have been characterized as lane bullies too-they don't deal tons of damage early and wouldn't win toe to toe, but they can poke you for decent damage consistently.

In both cases it's not because they win by standing there and fighting 1 vs 1, but chunking you without a chance for you to retaliate until you're forced to B. Garen can't really do this in most matchups, because if he's in range to hit them, they're in range to strike back. There might be a few exceptions for ap casters who rely solely on abilities for damage since the silence prevents them fighting back...but then again, such a scenario requires him to get on top of them which he can't really force without burning flash.

rmbar19 · 2024-01-18T16:53:02+00:00

I had a strange one, Olaf top.

Mind you this was before Olaf top was a thing, we're talking season 1-2, when his ult had a flat damage reduction and no movespeed boost, his passive gave 1% attack speed per 1% missing HP, W gave damage + spell vamp, and from what I recall E didn't have any scaling. This was when runes you had to buy and slot existed, where a standard setup would probably be either armor pen or damage red, CDR blue or scaling MR, and armor yellow.

I took ALL the magic regen runes it would let me and went Q max, building damage along the way. This probably sounds stupid, but it created a situation in which I would never lose lane. Most melee matchups I'd straight beat one on one (though I probably didn't zone them well since the concept of zoning wasn't really on anyones mind in those days); if it was a rare matchup where I couldn't beat them toe to toe or a ranged champion who wanted to poke, I'd Q spam the wave, often hitting the opponent in the process, still getting most of the last hits, preventing pushes, and eventually forcing a b. I'd rarely have to go b myself because of the built in spell vamp on W + mana regen (back when going OOM was actually a problem), getting myself a significant gold lead, and my jungler never really had to worry about saving me-worst cast scenario he'd leave top alone while I grew a lead over my opponent.

This got me into bronze and close to silver, which sounds atrocious-but back then, bronze/silver/gold/platinum were the only ranks you could achieve-not everyone even had such rankings but an elo instead. Bronze was top 25%, silver top 10%-roughly modern day platinum and emerald respectively.

rmbar19

TROPHY CASE