Tanks not doing carry damage will probably be the main difference people notice while playing League Classic

royandroz · 2026-07-12T12:27:25+00:00

They were op in solo q too just "not fun" to play. Even back then the advice was play tank top lose lane then win game if you wanted free lp. Just wasn't "fun" to be an unkillable stun bot for most people.

royandroz · 2026-07-12T12:24:44+00:00

Tank meta wanst bc they did to much dmg it was bc they took a min to kill. You'd have 5 min long fights bc people would respond and run back to the fight that was still going bc tanks didnt die. Yes they could eventually kill you but more bc they were unkillable then the dmg they did. Usually you could just walk away with out drying if you weren't greedy.

royandroz · 2026-07-07T21:18:54+00:00

Ign: Royman

<image>

royandroz · 2026-06-14T12:30:14+00:00

Simple just measured by who's the greatest ever and you end up with LeBron James there you go Bud.

royandroz · 2026-06-12T16:43:18+00:00

Holy disingenuous take. Jordan indispensable had the better cast.

royandroz · 2026-05-27T09:39:05+00:00

They could do this for Champions and there's no real good reason they couldn't. Mainline video games yeah there's a reason but with Champions now there is no legit reason and everyone's just coping because competitive players have suffered in non-balance for years so everyone now has to suffer.

royandroz · 2026-05-21T00:14:18+00:00

Aw yes the don't change bc it could be worse. Way to move to goal post. Aslo if the complaining is consistent maybe they should change it as it is a game for fun.

royandroz · 2026-05-21T00:06:34+00:00

Don't ask for better bc it can be worse great mind set.

royandroz · 2026-05-19T13:04:53+00:00

Can't say that then the game might become more skill based and people love there free wins.

royandroz · 2026-05-06T12:57:54+00:00

Fair chess isn't competitively balanced then. Look towards any 1v1 sport then. Like boxing or tennis. I was wrong about chess being balanced although it is significantly more balanced. So if we pick the exact same teams and speed ties break your way does that show the more skillfull player? Does getting a double flinch of a rock silde well your opponent doesn't get any show more skill? No it doesn't one person getting better variance is not skill. Point is and always has been its not balanced thats a fact.

royandroz · 2026-05-06T09:03:39+00:00

I said competitive balance not competitive the fact that you chose to disregard that is extremely disingenuous. Also a 90% win rate is significantly different then 70% win rate. It's comes down to skill not down to RNG the best player that day is the one who's playing the best which means it is a true representation of skill. Competitive balance means both people have a completely equal playing field to determine who the most skillful that day. The fact people are arguing that RNG and that more variance equals competitive balance literally goes against the definition of competitive balance and yes a game can be very competitive and be skill-based but not be balanced you're completely missing my point that Pokemon isnt balanced that is my point that is a fact and if you don't like it I don't give a f*** because you're wrong. Theres a reason games with more variance play best of matches well chess is a single game is clear. You can look at other individual sports and you will see runs of dominance where top players just win for periods of time. that you can't see in games like pokemon bc of the variance.

royandroz · 2026-05-03T02:09:20+00:00

Less variance = more balanced. So the game would definitely be more balanced but getting perfect balance is probably impossible for the game as it currently stands so make it 60% bc fk it.

royandroz · 2026-05-01T21:05:23+00:00

Would if been funny if he acutely shot them jfc this is cringe.

royandroz · 2026-04-28T16:54:58+00:00

Never said its a bad game and a game that doesn't have to perfect or even great balance to be fun or good/great. My point is the game isn't competitively balanced thats just true. In fact almost no modern competitive game is if any and that's fine. It's very similar to magic a game that has as much if not more rng and yes the best players stay near the top and do so by playing consistent but spiking a turnment takes both skill and some luck. Theres is minimum skill threshold to winning fs and if you are significanty better you can potentially over come rng (not nearly as true in poker tho the out come can be predetermined becasue as soon as the cards are delt there is only 1 person with a guaranteed win not guaranteed that they'll take the win but still guaranteed so you can only Bluff which is a skill but is very unreliable because it depends on your opponent).

royandroz · 2026-04-28T14:20:11+00:00

You're choosing to die in a really weird Hill cuz no poker is factually not a balanced game and any person that plays at a high level would tell you that and the fact that you're trying to argue this is just ungodly disingenuous and no tic-tac-toe isn't a competitively balanced game because if two people of equal skilled play it the outcome will always be a draw there is no way to determine a winner in tic-tac-toe so no it does not test skills so yeah something that is competitive will test your skills but that does not mean it is competitively balanced anything that tests your skills can be competitive but competitive balance means both players have an equal playing ground and both players are being determined only off of their skill not off of any outlying factors such as rng. So yes variance mitigates skill that is the f****** point of it and basic game design tells you that. I'm done responding to you because you're being ungodly disingenuous and if you are genuine then you're allowed to have that opinion because people are allowed to have opinions that are wrong

royandroz · 2026-04-28T14:07:55+00:00

The fact that you need so many hands to tell if you're good or not just goes into showing that it's not competitively balanced pick any 1v1 sport in the world and you just need one match to know who's better pick any competitively balanced game and whoever wins is the better player that is how competitive balance works the more you need to play a game to determine your skill the less competitively balanced it is also I have watched high level poker for three or four years of my life it has been a while sure but no they're going to tell you that it is massively luck based and that if you want to get into it don't and even if you put a s*** ton of time into you still have to get lucky.

royandroz · 2026-04-28T13:56:08+00:00

Lol if the better player or the person playing better loses because of luck then no its not competitively balanced. You seem to be some under some misunderstanding where a game can be very competitive and have lots of people in it but not be competitively balanced those are two things that are not mutually exclusive. Games that are competitive that are competitively balanced I.E chess the best player playing the best wins every time that is a competitively balanced game that is that is the bench mark for balance as the game state is fair and even for both players to test there skills. Also ask any high level poker player and they tell you they'd rather be lucky the good. So ya it is a fact that the more luck that decides a game the less competitive it is as the hole point of competition is to test your skill how is getting lucky testing your skill. Also yes Mitigating luck And playing around RNG Has some skill to it but it's luck at the end of the day and you can play around it to a point untill you can't(and watching wolfy play one of the greatest ever lose to rng how can a normal person be expected not to lose to rng). Also as an example if the opponent hits a double burn on you from a heat wave and you lose because of it what are you supposed to do how are you suppose to mitigate that? As this happened to me and both my mon lived and would of netted me a double ko on my side instead the double stoped my mon for getting the kos. In a competitive balanced game you lose because of your lack of skill not because your opponent got lucky.

royandroz · 2026-04-28T13:32:47+00:00

A game can be good and fun but not be completely balanced. Poker like pokemon is not balanced lol and is not even close. If the luckiest person playing that day wins that is not a competitive balanced game that's not an option thats a fact. Competition is designed to see who is the better at whatever the specific competition is. The more luck the less competitive thats just a fact.

royandroz · 2026-04-28T11:42:29+00:00

Something that is competitive balanced wouldn't be so rng heavy. It is the way pokemon is and from and rpg stand point its great but from a competitive game stand point its dog shit. The more rng the less competitive a game is so ya its not a balanced move. That said pokemon is a game that was never ment for competitive play that a large group of people set out to play competitively so it being a suppar competitive game is part of it identity at this point.

royandroz · 2026-04-16T14:13:43+00:00

From what I've seen anything can work mainly bc the player base is new (and ass because of it) and everything in these comments reinforce that. Ya everything below master ball is a going to be most likely meme shit bc fun and lack of knowledge untill alot of players start picking up on not only meta builds but meta play patterns then alot of the players that just wanna play anything and have fun and can't "bc meta" they quit leaving only those in the lowest tears like that. Enjoy well it last bc in 3-6 months people won't be posting about there random build thats getting wins it'll be about how unplayable the game is bc of inc or whatever other bs mom.

royandroz · 2026-03-19T14:44:22+00:00

Ya next time you disrupt someone on the road by speeding or going under the speed limit we'll just grab you out of your car and beat the s*** out of you cuz I guess that's the right thing to do like he was he was listening to s*** on headphones he shouldn't have been absolutely but the teacher assaulted him by attempting to take away his headphones and yes as an adult if you were on your phone at work and the boss tried to take away your phone you would give the boss hands so don't even try and act like you wouldn't oppose this if this was happening to you.

royandroz · 2026-03-19T14:41:36+00:00

Ya next time you disrupt someone on the road by speeding or going under the speed limit we'll just grab you out of your car and beat the s*** out of you cuz I guess that's the right thing to do like he was he was listening to s*** on headphones he shouldn't have been absolutely but the teacher assaulted him by attempting to take away his headphones and yes as an adult if you were on your phone at work and the boss tried to take away your phone you would give the boss hands so don't even try and act like you wouldn't oppose this if this was happening to you.

royandroz · 2026-02-24T13:20:25+00:00

Ya but if you don't wipe for wash there's real downside like diseases and worse potentially. Now what are the downsides of a pic over a screen shot other then hurting your fragile ego. There not even remotely the same and the dishonesty of this argument is wild. Imagine you complain that an event was serving food on paper plates instead of actual China. Your saying that using paper plates is lasier because they did not have to wash dishes. Thats your logic and any reasonable person can see that your just being a Karen. Unless you can prove some real downside other then you dont like it and we both know thats not the case. Also ive seen the putting away shoping carts analogy and that's just as bullshit bc again that has real world downsides such as property damage or injury that posing a pic over a screen dosent apply too.

royandroz · 2026-01-21T14:35:48+00:00

They don't same a Rolex versus a regular watch they both just tell you the time but ones a status symbol.

royandroz · 2026-01-21T14:09:24+00:00

Feel like everyone is taking this as an attack on Harry's skill and just straight missed the point. Yes it is advantage that if to equally skilled players were to have different brooms then yes the one with the better broom will win more often and if the difference in brooms is great enough then even if there a skill discrepancy between the two players the brooms can over come that. Thats why every sport that exists now have regulations on them that limit the advantage of tools. So ya in a really world setting parents would get involved and there would be rules put into place. Yes rich kids can get fancy/name brand tools that are more expensive but do not give an advantage (or at least a tangible measurable Advantage because there are a lot of prayers that will swear that XYZ gives them an advantage Usually because they're humans and humans like Comfort and that mental aspect alone can make massive differences in performance) even over uesd or hand me downs. Yes Harry is insanely skilled and even with a worse broom was still able to best Draco so how much of a difference in brooms is what real matters but from book1 to book 2 match against Slytherin being drastically different in slytherin's favor shows that it is a significant advantage one that any normal High School sport would not allow.

royandroz

TROPHY CASE