: Ok quite simply you are pulling up stats that are relevant and do have significance however you are attributing to these stats your own unproven and illogical hypothesis. You claim that a win-rates significance is dependent on the champions play-rate because of a player-base of dedicated players that skew champions win-rate due to being much more experienced than the average player-base of more played champions and because of this Kai'sa is the "strongest" ADC in the game due to her having the highest play-rate in the game. As a side note just to clarify you claimed she had a 50% play-rate when that is untrue. She actually has a 30% play-rate. There's two ways we can disprove this. We can show that the stats of other champions do not agree with your hypothesis and we can also show that the mathematical logic has no basis in reality as well. I'm going to do both just for consistency. Firstly let's look at the stats. Simply put from the examples I gave in my previous post we can see that there are plenty of examples of high pick and high win-rate champions and low pick-rate low win-rate champions. In fact if you actually go and look at all champions it actually points to the opposite of what you claim. High play-rate champions are more likely to have a high win-rate and low play-rate champions are more likely to have a low win-rate. It's almost as if players like playing champions that win them games! *Surprised Pikachu*. From this it's easy to conclude that just because a champion has a high play-rate doesn't mean their win-rate is somehow stunted below what it could be and that the claim that if only Kai'sa had a 20% play-rate instead of 30% she would have a much higher win-rate than Jinx is complete bull. There is one stat I found which I would like to add in which much more simply than all of this disproves your claims. If you look at the full patch of 9.17 for Latin America North stats for both Jinx and Kai'sa. They play both of these champions in equal measure. They both around a 23%-24% play-rate for 9.17. Yet Jinx is almost 5% higher than Kai'sa in win-rate for that patch which is very similar to the world wide average win-rate for both these champions and I'd also like to point on Caitlyn in the past has had a 35%-40% play-rate with a 51% win-rate which is far better than Kai'sa. Now you've already been proven wrong by the real world statistics available to us showing that Kai'sa isn't the best ADC ever. Let's just do that one more time by looking at mathematical and logical problem with your claims just in case you wanna claim those statistics about other champions are incorrect. If what you claimed about champions having a dedicated player-base of one tricks and experienced players then this can take place in 2 forms. The first of which is that when a champion is played more the amount of people who one trick the champion and have a higher skill level on that champion is proportional and because of this their win rate is entirely unaffected by their play-rate because they always have the same percentage of players of that higher skill level playing her. The other scenario (and what most people seem to believe) is that it is not proportional and that the amount of dedicated one tricks is a flat and steady number of players that is relatively unchanged by having a larger overall player-base. If this is true then simple maths teaches us that as a play-rate increase the less that increase in play-rate will change the overall win-rate. This would mean going from a 1% to a 2% play-rate would make a massive difference and 2% to 4% would make half as much of a difference and so on as we scale up. Now since again other ADCs have pick-rates close to Kai'sa with much higher win-rates we can conclude that she is no where near the strongest ADC. There you go. Proven wrong in 2 completely different ways :)
> [{quoted}](name=Sir Prepuzius,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=YnJzerez,comment-id=00010000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-09-12T13:54:26.762+0000) > yeah you did that..imagine how impressed i would be now if you had proven me wrong in 3 different ways :) Probably could have but don't have the time or patience for it.
: ok then since i'm apparently unable to read and understand properly would you please be so kind to explain to me again why statistics about winrate & pickrate are meaningless thank you
Ok quite simply you are pulling up stats that are relevant and do have significance however you are attributing to these stats your own unproven and illogical hypothesis. You claim that a win-rates significance is dependent on the champions play-rate because of a player-base of dedicated players that skew champions win-rate due to being much more experienced than the average player-base of more played champions and because of this Kai'sa is the "strongest" ADC in the game due to her having the highest play-rate in the game. As a side note just to clarify you claimed she had a 50% play-rate when that is untrue. She actually has a 30% play-rate. There's two ways we can disprove this. We can show that the stats of other champions do not agree with your hypothesis and we can also show that the mathematical logic has no basis in reality as well. I'm going to do both just for consistency. Firstly let's look at the stats. Simply put from the examples I gave in my previous post we can see that there are plenty of examples of high pick and high win-rate champions and low pick-rate low win-rate champions. In fact if you actually go and look at all champions it actually points to the opposite of what you claim. High play-rate champions are more likely to have a high win-rate and low play-rate champions are more likely to have a low win-rate. It's almost as if players like playing champions that win them games! *Surprised Pikachu*. From this it's easy to conclude that just because a champion has a high play-rate doesn't mean their win-rate is somehow stunted below what it could be and that the claim that if only Kai'sa had a 20% play-rate instead of 30% she would have a much higher win-rate than Jinx is complete bull. There is one stat I found which I would like to add in which much more simply than all of this disproves your claims. If you look at the full patch of 9.17 for Latin America North stats for both Jinx and Kai'sa. They play both of these champions in equal measure. They both around a 23%-24% play-rate for 9.17. Yet Jinx is almost 5% higher than Kai'sa in win-rate for that patch which is very similar to the world wide average win-rate for both these champions and I'd also like to point on Caitlyn in the past has had a 35%-40% play-rate with a 51% win-rate which is far better than Kai'sa. Now you've already been proven wrong by the real world statistics available to us showing that Kai'sa isn't the best ADC ever. Let's just do that one more time by looking at mathematical and logical problem with your claims just in case you wanna claim those statistics about other champions are incorrect. If what you claimed about champions having a dedicated player-base of one tricks and experienced players then this can take place in 2 forms. The first of which is that when a champion is played more the amount of people who one trick the champion and have a higher skill level on that champion is proportional and because of this their win rate is entirely unaffected by their play-rate because they always have the same percentage of players of that higher skill level playing her. The other scenario (and what most people seem to believe) is that it is not proportional and that the amount of dedicated one tricks is a flat and steady number of players that is relatively unchanged by having a larger overall player-base. If this is true then simple maths teaches us that as a play-rate increase the less that increase in play-rate will change the overall win-rate. This would mean going from a 1% to a 2% play-rate would make a massive difference and 2% to 4% would make half as much of a difference and so on as we scale up. Now since again other ADCs have pick-rates close to Kai'sa with much higher win-rates we can conclude that she is no where near the strongest ADC. There you go. Proven wrong in 2 completely different ways :)
: yeah, %%%% maths, bunch of meaningless numbers, right?
Who said anything about maths? Reading a number isn't maths? Again, go back and actually read what I wrote you might actually gain some insight rather than sticking to what you've argued just to protect your ego.
: actually i don't understand what are you contesting all i'm saying is high pickrate high winrate => meaningful low pickrate high winrate => not so meaningful
Yeah and if you properly read my prior message you'd see they're both equally meaningless.
: >Also I couldn't help myself but look up your account because of your original story. You made this thread after playing what I can see 2 games of Kai'sa. So basically you played a couple games went "errrmahgerrr she op" and made a thread about it. yeah i played only 2 games with her at the time and i wrote my impressions, i wrote it not to complain but just to open a discussion about it, even with opposite points of view compared to mine, i have no problem in being proven wrong actually i do that everytime i play a new champ >low pick rate meaning higher winrates due to the player base being made from dedicated players only there is no real evidence to support this the evidence is the fact that there are few people playing the champ. if only 3 people out of 1000 play champion xyz i call them people "dedicated mains" (not otp as you mention often) because despite the fact that their champion isn't meta they still are playing him. and i never stated that low pick rate means higher winrate, i just formulated an hyphotesis about a low pickrate/high winrate champion trying to explain the concept that while winrate alone might not mean much, winrate AND pickrate AND banrate togheter are the criteria on which a champion is evaluated balance wise
And that hypothesis is proven wrong by all the realistic statistics that are available to us to it's not worth sharing and not relevant to the argument that Kai'sa is the "strongest" adc.
Antenora (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Just Chrissy,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=YnJzerez,comment-id=000100000000,timestamp=2019-09-05T17:19:14.511+0000) > > Jinx has been at a 53% winrate for at least 3 months with a 20%+ pickrate. Just saying she has a high pickrate means nothing. Jinx is overtuned, she can be fixed with some nerfs. Kai'Sa isn't overtuned, she's overloaded. She's the ADC version of Thresh, does too much too well.
So? It's not like her being "overloaded" in your eyes means that she's winning more games or impossible to play against. A champion that you call overloaded but doesn't actually win more games than any other champion on average is far less of a problem than a champion that is "overtuned" and making it hard to justify picking anything else.
: actually, high pick rate with decent winrate means a lot despite half of the adc population is picking her they manage to win half the games, it's huge, with such an high pickrate winrate is supposed to fall off bad for instance let's assume there is a champion with 75% winrate if his pickrate is 0.0001% let's not cry for nerfs yet, it just means only a handful of dedicated mains wins with it, and not that is op now the champions gets reworked, a lot of players play it and his pickrate rises up to 20%. at this point it's only natural that his winrate drops off since a lot more players are playing him depending on how much his winrate drops, we can call it balanced or not 49% winrate and 49% pickrate is not balanced in my book, simply put it means half of the adc population can play her and win half the games, without necessarily having experience with the champion itself
First off she doesn't have a 49% pick rate she has a 30% pickrate which again is only 10% higher than Jinx while Jinx has an enormous winrate of 53% which she has maintained for at least 4 patches but if I remember correctly its a hell of a lot longer than that. As for your hypothesis about low pick rate meaning higher winrates due to the player base being made from dedicated players only there is no real evidence to support this happens in any major volume. In fact when you actually look at the real evidence not just the random thoughts people come up with to explain things you see almost the opposite occur. Anything above a 5% playrate means a champion is seeing hundreds of thousands of games every single patch and if you actually look at the profiles of most of the players you play with people who genuinely one trick champions are play most on their games on a single champion make up a tiny percentage of the playerbase and usually don't have that high winrate on these champions if they do have 100+ games on their main champions and more importantly even if this theory about super experienced players were true (which it isn't) there's no reason to believe that going from a 10% playrate to a 30% playrate would have anywhere near the same effect as going from a 0.1% playrate to a 10% playrate because any level of basic mathematics is gonna tell you that while you scale up the number of players either the one tricks will scale up with it and therefore the playrate means nothing or the one tricks stay a small group that doesn't increase with playrate and therefore the more you scale up the less they matter so after you reach a certain point scaling up further won't make a difference. That's basic mathematics and doesn't need any kind of league knowledge to figure out. I could stop there but lets just take a quick look at real evidence something you don't seem to have done even with your Kai'sa example given the playrate you provided for her was incorrect. Nunu 5% pickrate 54% winrate, Janna 10% pickrate 53.5 winrate, Jinx 20% pickrate 53% winrate, Nami 12% pickrate 52% winrate, Kha Zix 13% pickrate 52% winrate. On the other end the supposed 1 tricks that are destroying the with their champions that no one else playes. Tahm Kench 0.5 pick rate 47% winrate, Viktor 1.6% pickrate 48% winrate, Trundle 0.9 pickrate and 49% winrate. While I've pretty substantially proven this wrong just a quick side note about champions being reworked or released. Yeah of course they're gonna have a high playerate and low winrate. No one knows how to play them yet and people like to try them because they're new. That has nothing to do with the winrates and playrates of established champions. Also I couldn't help myself but look up your account because of your original story. You made this thread after playing what I can see 2 games of Kai'sa. So basically you played a couple games went "errrmahgerrr she op" and made a thread about it.
Zineus (EUNE)
: so you wanna say 49.36% win rate with 43.59% pick rate is fine?.. she has too much to her kit. both ad and ap scaling..
Jinx has been at a 53% winrate for at least 3 months with a 20%+ pickrate. Just saying she has a high pickrate means nothing.
: kai'sa strongest adc ever
Eh not really. Just coz she has a lot in her kit doesn't make her inherently better than other adcs. She wins just about as much as any other adc sitting pretty at a 50% winrate since release.
: Nothing says "balanced" like the 1/11 enemy Vayne oneshotting our team once she hits her powerspike
Care to share that game with us as I don't seem to be able to find it in your match history. You only have 2 vayne games in your match history one of which carried throughout the game and ended 15/4 and the other where the vayne played bad the whole game and finished 2/13.
: Which role/lane feeds more in your games?
Us botlaners because we're just the target of 90% of the games ganks and if a jungler does gank mid or top its so those laners can go bot.
: Why is botlane so horrible now...
"called"? People still play blind? Anyway yes as an adc main I've never found it easier to get my role in ranked...and never hated it more. Planning on making a video and write up about it and possible fixes for both that and other major problems in the game to hopefully get some of these changes I'm proposing considered for the pre season changes.
: Season 9 ruined EUW too
It's always been like that.
xFrosten (EUW)
: On the contrary. Report calling DOES in fact get you punished. I don't know if it can get you banned, but chat restriction 100 %. I got a chat restriction for that exact reason, I wrote a ticket to riot, and they replied that me writing "report Syndra" made it a valid punishment, so it would stay that way. But that was the ONLY thing that I have done in the past 1000 games that was anything near toxic, and it got me chat restricted. So yes, report calling is offensive and might be punished accordingly. As for report calling not making any difference, that is completely untrue. When you ask the enemy team to report one of your teamates, the teamate in question will automatically be affected. He will feel like you are flaming him, and will probably not enjoy the game that much anymore (in general at least). So when you ask for reports, you are potentially ruining one players experience. It also starts filling the chat with negativity, as people might start arguing, or might start to ask why report him and stuff like that. It also CLEARLY stated in the old summoners code (riot games old roolbook) that "report calling" is punishable. So even Riot games has made an official statement on their standpoint, although very few read it...
If you don't say anything punishable then you wont get punished. If you do say something punishable then you will it's as simple as that. You can say anything and it can feel like you are flaming someone just because it might potentially make someone feel upset doesn't mean something should be punishable. There's enough safe spaces out their in the world competitive league doesn't need to be one. There's a mute button for a reason.
xFrosten (EUW)
: Why does so many people "report call" and why does riot games not do ANYTHING about it
There's nothing really wrong with report calling. No one gets banned just because people reported you. You have to actually have done something. Not to mention the whole report calling thing rarely actually makes any difference. Most people have made their minds up whether they will or won't report someone regardless of whether someone asks them to or not.
: ***
The hypocrisy is hilarious.
Pxerkza (EUNE)
: thats definitely not what im claiming logic is beyond you bye
What you're claiming is something that fits your own little hypothesis of the way the game works so that you can feel better about yourself without any real way of proving it whatsoever. There is no threshold you just pulled that out your ass.
: >The idea that champions that are trash normally like Akali and Ryze become good in challenger is completely false. Is that why zoe has a 48% wr average across all ranks (45% in iron) but 63% wr in challenger? Or why akali has a below 47% wr across all ranks (45.9% in iron) but 51.5% wr in challenger? Many hard mechanically demanding champions do get more viable in higher ranks when people know how to use them. However, when it comes to ryze, he was always strong in PRO play because of his ultimate that required communication, which doesn't exist in soloq. Same with galio. >It's really sad that people still believe this bullshit about higher elos favouring other champions. The champions that are good in silver gold plat etc are also good in challenger and vice versa. Yeah, that's why garen has a 54.5% wr in iron but 42.86% wr in master, right? That's why nasus has a 53.8% wr in iron but 44.83% in master, right? Or maybe, there are champions with kits that are highly abusable and people in higher elos tend to have the skill to do so? And maybe there are champions that have a lot of tools in their kits and only players with skill can use all of those tools more effectively, creating a higher win rate in higher elos? It's outright delusional to think every champion is equal in terms of power regardless of skill level. >In 9.15 tristana had a 44% winrate in both top and mid at challenger level play. Now is 9.15. Tristana has 55.93% wr in mid lane in challenger globally and 47.83% wr in the top lane, mid being the most played role for tristana. https://op.lol/tristana/?lane=middle&tier=challenger
Yeah nah mate nice try https://gyazo.com/a399cc54898f6d0d2b75262c2d26aedd
Pxerkza (EUNE)
: look at the challenger players on any ladder the people that have 500+ games are all 60% or below wr even the very best players if someone has an above 60% win rate in 500 games it's because they duo a lot and this is hard proof by simply looking at the ladder
No, go find an example of a player who had a 70% winrate at 499 games who then got a 60% winrate after going to 500 games. That's what you're claiming. Don't make some random statement up about some amorphous blob of players who happen to have a certain winrate. Find a real example of it.
: Give me duo, I become diamond in a three days. I just don't need this shitty elo number to know I'm good at this god-forgotten game.
LOL you're bronze with over 400 games played. Talk about being being the living personification of the bronze steriotype who thinks hes way better than he is and that elo means nothing xD
Pxerkza (EUNE)
: at around 500 games also he is playing duo that threshold doesn't hold when you play duo
You gonna provide any proof? Please by all means provide some examples of players who have above 60% winrates going down to 60% winrates once they reached 500 games? Go ahead by all means I'll wait.
Player 123 (EUNE)
: Yeah, it means very much that they are very different when they are complaining over gold,silver.
Lol get over yourself. Grandmaster and challenger players are no more correct in the crap they're crying about than anyone else. I'd be rich if I have a penny for every time a challenger or pro complained about something that was a non factor.
Player 123 (EUNE)
: Akali and Ryze are the most frustrating, oppressive champions to play in Challenger. In a semi-coordinated play and in good hands, it's really unplayable. People complain about Riven being broken, but Akali is the one to be worried about. And Tristana as well as all other champions don't play around winrate like Akali,Ryze are. Just like i explained. They are played because they are super oppressive on lane. People might troll around later and lose which is why her winrate is like that, but that's because this isn't the ADC playing an ADC top, it's a toplaner or autofilled one. They got some knowledge about the lane, or a champ but it's not the same as Challenger adc main. My issue is that these range harasses ADC that moved to solo lanes are super oppressive. I never said in any of my comment that they are broken, strong or whatever. It's just that Riot accidentally or whatever allows this kind of thing to happen. When bruisers were lit, and with normal winrates, people were complaining about all of them. Nobody complained that they are broken, but that they are oppressive in duo botlanes against these adcs that weakened. Same way i'm saying here that bruisers top already have enough issues with range champs like Kennen,Jayce etc. These is just an add on everything else and it's frustrating to play against. I don't see people complaining much about it now like when bruisers were bot.
If Akali and Ryze are so broken then why don't they win games? Simple. Something being annoying to play against doesn't make they actually broken. Just makes them annoying to play against but that isn't enough for people like you because you want to see them nerfed or changed but you don't have the same clout when you make claims about a champion being annoying as you do a champion being broken. So you claim a champion is actually broken when all real evidence points to the contrary.
WORLDBraker (EUNE)
: You got lucky that's all i just finish a bronz 3 game where the enemy team had a 1.7 million illiaoi in bronz 3 ...
What do you mean "You got lucky"? Firstly that's not me I'm not that player. Secondly no he didn't get lucky he played incredibly well over a very large amount of games.
Pxerkza (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Just Chrissy,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=zlmrgRhT,comment-id=00040000,timestamp=2019-08-08T00:33:04.307+0000) > > Yeah except pants are dragon is neither number 1 in challenger nor has a %74 winrate. that doesn't matter as i said adc+support and support+jg are the best duos the 1st wins bot the 2nd wins bot side but not as consistant https://www.op.gg/summoner/userName=DWG+BeryL this is more accurate to a support player climbing solo 60% win rate is pretty much the maximum after a certain games threshold while playing solo as your own contribution to the games outcome is 20% ie if everyone on your team played their average game and you were consistently playing on your best form you would be winning 60% of your games
After what threshold LOL? There's a guy with 500 games played who plays Janna only in challenger with a 72% winrate and the main player I mentioned at the beginning has over 300 games played? So what after 2k games they're gonna go down to 60%? Do tell me with your extensive research and knowledge what exactly is this threshold? At which point does a player whos played 500 games suddenly see a massive drop in his winrate? You're literally just making stuff up as you go along for how you feel rather than any realistic facts. What do you mean it doesn't matter you pointed out pants are dragon was the same I then clearly explained to you why it's not the same and you have nothing more to say than that doesn't matter LOL. We're talking about peoples ability to win the game here of course winrate matters. If pants are dragon or any other duoq abuser in challenger was the same as this player and the only reason they were doing so well was because of the duoq then why is it the other players can't even come close to this guys winrate.
Player 123 (EUNE)
: Considering supports need synergy with their adcs, do you think this is possible without the DuoQ? Also numerous people are complaining in higher elo, especially Challenger that duoQ ruins the competitiveness of soloQ since it's usually a team that has a duo, wins. Also numerous people said, DuoQ doesn't show your true rank, since you relay a lot on your duoQ, voice coms where those that for example, go EVEN in the lane against you aren't duoQ, aren't in voice coms but because of pure skill, game knowledge. Congrats on this achievement!
First off people complaining about something in league of legends is nothing new. Just because it's challenger players whining doesn't mean they're any different from anyone else when it comes to complaining. Secondly if duoq was so strong why are there only 3 people in challenger with a 70% winrate in euw? You would think out of a sample size of 200 more than 3 people would be duoqing correct? So why so few people with crazy winrates like this? Even the people he duos with don't themselves actually have high winrates with the exception of one player. The only major consistency in all this is him. It's the variable that doesn't change while the people he duos with have much lower winrates they win when they play with him however when they duo with other players they don't win nearly as much. But obviously the only reason this guy has the number 1 spot in challenger with the highest winrate in the region for that rank is because he duos. Congrats on your achievement!
: Next time someone posts something like this, remind them that one single player is not a statistical representation of the overall, especially when said player is literally the most extreme outlier in the dataset. In other words, one player's winrate (and by extension this post) is meaningless.
Not really. It proves that if you're good at support you can climb. This isn't a fresh account with 30 games this is a high challenger account with over 300. That's more of a sample size than most champions get in an entire patch for challenger worldwide. The difference between this guy and other supports is he's just really good at the role and always seems to hard carry.
Player 123 (EUNE)
: Take a look at Akali stats. Negative. But she is still one of the strongest picks in Challenger,Gm across all servers, especially EUNE and EUW. Ryze is another example where bad stats meaning nothing to the champ where is played. They can have a free lane due to their kit when they want to, which is why they are strong there. When bruisers were meta some champions also had bad stats, but that's because people were playing them for the first time on lanes where aren't supposed to be at, where bruisers that were played top by mains were bringing that winrate up. Taking winrate into an example to tel me that ADCs top aren't that good and that players are bad at countering is so troll and ignorant. Lanning phase is unplayable because of them and that is where they shine, it's not my issue they throw the lead later or int to have that winrate. The point is about lanning phase being unbearable for melees. There is a reason why ADC's are played on solo lanes in Challenger. So i'm not sure why you think people in Challenger are bad and can't counter them, but here you are telling me it's fine. Are you rank1 smurfing with that account or am i missing something?
The idea that champions that are trash normally like Akali and Ryze become good in challenger is completely false. Over the last 5 patches in challenger Ryze has floated around a 48% winrate and akali around a 46% winrate and more importantly champions that are still good in lower elo that require not a ton of skill like jinx for example remain incredibly good champions. It's really sad that people still believe this bullshit about higher elos favouring other champions. The champions that are good in silver gold plat etc are also good in challenger and vice versa. Where there is a difference is pro play because of the nature of the game itself being incredibly different to soloq. Flex picks are not a thing in soloq they don't mean shit but in pro play a champion that can be played in more than one role and therefore not be countered easily is incredibly important and on top of that champions like ryze that have point and click CC allowing other players to make plays much more easily off of some simple communication make the champion far more important. Edit: and going back to the guys original point about champions not being good like tristana mid or top to which you claimed it was different in challenger. In 9.15 tristana had a 44% winrate in both top and mid at challenger level play.
Pxerkza (EUNE)
: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uY9GljcHcRU&t=9m37s https://na.op.gg/summoner/userName=Pants+are+Dragon thats definitely not the case yes but the synergy and coms between 2 challengers weighs a lot thats why pants are dragon gets constantly flamed for duo abuse because being in a duo scenario with someone just as good as you makes games so much easier
Yeah except pants are dragon is neither number 1 in challenger nor has a %74 winrate.
Shamose (EUW)
: What I'm saying is that it isn't so easy to climb as you make it. Just because a chally support duos with a chally adc doesn't mean that some rando person can climb easy.
Not saying it's easy to climb just saying it's easier than 3 other roles in the game but you still need skill to do it.
Pxerkza (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=Just Chrissy,realm=EUW,application-id=39gqIYVI,discussion-id=zlmrgRhT,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-08-07T23:54:23.083+0000) > > I was tempted to believe that but then I found the only other player in the top 100 of challenger with an over 70% winratio > > https://euw.op.gg/summoner/userName=Qishilu1 > > That's a over 72% winratio over more than 450 games so no one can call that luck either and the best part is every single game is Janna. duo doesn't really count as being a duo with highly mechanical adc almost always guarantees you having the winning bot lane and we all know how bot lane decides games in these days
You can't duo in Challenger and that guy woulda played 300+ games in challenger to get where he is. Even if he did have a duo while in challenger games he's still gonna be playing against other challenger players.
Zanador (EUNE)
: It's hard to learn to be so good with support that climbing becomes easy.
I mean yeah it's hard to learn to be good with any role to climb as fast as this guy but the point is support isn't as bad as a role as many people believe in fact it's probably the second best role in the game for climbing.
Shamose (EUW)
: You really think he got this wr with a random adc? People just duo with other chally smurfs. He duod with xMatty, a challenger ADC. Here is another one of doss accounts https://eune.op.gg/summoner/userName=Happy%20Doss See the difference?
Yeah I'm sure that's definitely his account. Even if it was you assume what? He spent 300 games with a 70% winratio in platinum or diamond and then suddenly jumped to first place in challenger? The guy would have played most of his games against challenger players. Not to mention the fact that this logic only works if he's the only one who does this. What you think no one else in challenger made a smurf to see what winrates they could get? There are 3 challenger players with a 70%+ winrate and 2 of them are support. If you genuinely think support is a weak role, you're in denial. Yeah you can still argue midlane is better but support is a close second.
Shamose (EUW)
: So a chally smurf in plat has chally smurfs as enemies all the time?
No you said he had a challenger adc. To have a challenger adc he would have had to play in challenger against other challenger players.
Pxerkza (EUNE)
: climbing as support is only hard if your champion can't make decisions soraka/janna/lulu and the like champions like thresh pyke blitz naut karma lux yuumi can all hard carry games due to their play making so playing support is as viable to climb with as any other role but if you coin flip your games by relying on your team only you are bound to stagnate
I was tempted to believe that but then I found the only other player in the top 100 of challenger with an over 70% winratio https://euw.op.gg/summoner/userName=Qishilu1 That's a over 72% winratio over more than 450 games so no one can call that luck either and the best part is every single game is Janna.
Shamose (EUW)
: I mean give me a challenger adc every game and I'll climb fast too.
Well first off he would have had to get through at least platinum and diamond to get there first and secondly that logic only works if the enemy adc isn't challenger. When he has a challenger adc so does his enemy support so the point is null.
: he's lvl 57 btw
Yeah, probably a fresh account made by an already established good player.
Rioter Comments
Mxnas (EUW)
: Just play Zed, worked for me, they FF'd 15
Zed toplane? Hoping the enemy would pick ryze or hoping the already picked ryze would be top and not getting your ass blasted by a bruiser in lane for picking zed top.
Rioter Comments
: Dog Shit Ryze Changes
These changes probably aren't the way to go but Ryze needs to be changed. He is a terrible champion for soloq or normal games which is 95% of the games that are played. The only place where he's good is pro play he doesn't even get a positive winrate in challenger which is absolutely ridiculous.
Dr Lav (EUW)
: Do I deserve to get permanently suspended for this?
Rioter Comments
Rioter Comments
: its not any sexist if i want to surround myself with cute girls and no guys? its what i prefer doneso.
Sexism: prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, on the basis of sex. So yeah it's sexist.
Megidus (EUW)
: Lux's cooldowns
Honestly Lux is barely a viable champion at the moment so I can't see why nerfing a champion that's not even doing that well would be a good idea.
Bodö (EUW)
: Lower rank border being displayed instead of the higher one and a skin issue.
Happened to me as well when my plat border showed instead of my diamond boarder dunno whats going on.
: Looking for criticism of my gameplay
You're bad an you will always be bad.
Rioter Comments
: Heimer grenade bug? Or HARDNERF not listed on patch notes?
good coz heimers absurdly op to the point where he can be played in 3 different roles and have a positive winratio in every single one.
Show more

Just Chrissy

Level 264 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion