A different approach to the "uncooperative teammate who just wants to have fun"

[Jessicka]

Intentionally playing to lose is actually bannable in competitive play, highlighting the difference between the two modes.

For the record, trolling in this forum is bannable as well, just so's you know.

Throwing matches because you don't like someone's pick is playing to lose, you understand this?

[jackofwind]

Throwing matches because you don't like someone's pick is playing to lose, you understand this?

I never once defended the play of the people who didn't like your Widow pick. Throwing matches in competitive is never the right decision.

That doesn't mean that off-meta/bad team picks are really the right decision either, in competitive play, because they tend to hinder your team's ability to win.

TL;DR - If you play non-meta: bring your A game and carry hard or expect criticism.

[Novakhoro]

I will say its typically better to play something that you're better at than to play something like Zarya when you're just bubbling random people on CD. But I strongly disagree with the notion that it's okay to just play around and have fun in comp regardless of their not being a concrete rule. FFS i didn't think people needed to be told that the objective of a competition is to win.

Off-meta is fine in cases. Random troll picks, refusing to communicate (don't come at me with any I had a bad experience, i dont wanna talk to people shit; go play a COD campaign or vs. AI) and general feeding is a problem. The reason these people play comp without the real desire to is it is the only way to get comp points for golden guns.

[Jessicka]

I never once defended the play of the people who didn't like your Widow pick. Throwing matches in competitive is never the right decision.

That doesn't mean that off-meta picks are the right decision either, in competitive play.

And how far would you go to try to press me to switch? Remember, getting abusive is bannable too. Again, SR is purely personal, 5 matches down the line, win or lose, my decision no longer has any impact on where your SR is. It being a purely personal decision, which hero I pick doesn't change whether I want to win; just who I want to be seen to be winning with. I want to win; just as others have picked Widow and been very successful ultimately on their own back. They're allowed once they're there, but they're not allowed to start the journey? I don't get that.

Even though I have over 100 hours with her, and my more recent stats show I'm a little ahead of average with her. She's a functional counter to a lot of heroes, particularly when teams have a lot of tanks because they're very easy to headshot - people actually recommend her because of this, as I already noted. People still lose their shit.

But, I actually mostly play DVa in comp, no one bats and eyelid, she's no longer considered a meta pick, but she hasn't yet developed this ridiculous stigma that's going to land me with people throwing matches or abusing me for that pick.

[Novakhoro]

The reason Widow gets the shit is the feast/famine nature. Shes very impactful and actually Hanzo typically does better against tanks than Widow. He has higher raw output. And someone who is obsessed with following the meta like me is suggesting hanzo. Thats pretty good evidence that sometimes off-meta is actually what is needed. The reason "starting the journey" is frowned upon in comp is because you should deliver a more polished product. That journey should take place in QP or even practice like headshot training if you really want to get better.

I can't be a brilliant striker in football/soccer then decide that i wanna play keep in the next match. If thats where i want to end up I practice until i can perform at that level outside of a game.

[jackofwind]

And how far would you go to try to press me to switch? Remember, getting abusive is bannable too. Again, SR is purely personal, 5 matches down the line, win or lose, my decision no longer has any impact on where your SR is. It being a purely personal decision, which hero I pick doesn't change whether I want to win; just who I want to be seen to be winning with. I want to win; just as others have picked Widow and been very successful ultimately on their own back. They're allowed once they're there, but they're not allowed to start the journey? I don't get that.

Even though I have over 100 hours with her, and my more recent stats show I'm a little ahead of average with her. She's a functional counter to a lot of heroes, particularly when teams have a lot of tanks because they're very easy to headshot - people actually recommend her because of this, as I already noted. People still lose their shit.

But, I actually mostly play DVa in comp, no one bats and eyelid, she's no longer considered a meta pick, but she hasn't yet developed this ridiculous stigma that's going to land me with people throwing matches or abusing me for that pick.

I personally wouldn't attack you for your Widow pick, I'd just say "hey we really need a tank instead", or something like that. The premise of the game is one that doesn't really cater to "mains" - that's a major thing that lots of people don't really get. In competitive play, I understand that you want to improve your Widow stats, but that's really not important to me and shouldn't be as important to you as fielding a well balanced team.

Refusing to drop a Widow pick in favour of something the team needs is extremely selfish and belongs in QM. If you make that choice it's fair to expect you to play accordingly and be good enough to compensate for the imbalance on the team. That also means in a 99-99 OT tie that you're not going to sit back and keep sniping, because that's just poor play in general. You'd be better as a tank in that instance, but you still have to go all-in as a sniper in OT.

Widow is hard because she's essentially a one-trick pony. She offers little to no team utility, and she doesn't actually pressure control points very well except on certain maps. Hanzo offers more control, aoe coverage via his ulti, and vision than her, with little to no drawbacks. Again though, if its 99-99 OT I expect Hanzo to man up and get into that control point, because sitting outside of it isn't doing anything when the enemy team can just sit in LoS.

DVa is actually quite a strong pick now after her buff, I wouldn't say she's not meta. She might not be tier 1, but she's definitely tier 2.

[Aliven]

I don't know if you've ever played a MOBA or if you're new to the idea of metas, but they're just something that people have to adapt to and accept if they want to go anywhere in a competitive game. It's just a fact of life, because hero/champion balance is an ever-shifting thing. There's no rule that states 2/2/2 is mandatory, it's just acknowledged as the current highest win percentile team composition, and therefore it's what people in non-premade groups expect.

Eh. Honestly, as somebody who played LoL since closed beta i can tell you that, in solo ranked, meta dont mean anything really. Even in challenger.
It cant work in solo q. Too many moving parts. Meta is indeed a objective BIS. But ONLY if played in meta enviroment. What good give you champion A (which is meta) when team need to be build around him to archieve his potential. KhaZix may be best junler in lol currently, but if you team need tanky jungler or something then you dont pick assassin jungler. Simple as that. Meta cant work in soloq.

It works great when entire team know about it, use it effectivly, know its limitations and weaknesses. Even in lol there is no "best" team composition. Even in LCS and worlds there are targeted bans to shutdown players who are best in off meta champions. Because, despite being off meta, and therefore inferior, if said player would get that champ he would wreck the game.

So, meta cant work in soloq. Having strong team composition doesnt give free wins.

[xChurch]

Thing is, being good at what you pick will go a long way. If you usually pick WM but are very good at it and push objectives, take out healers, suppress enemy snipers etc etc, I doubt you'll find many people complaining. If you're trying to pracice your WM in comp though, don't be surprised if people pick you for an easy target if your team does poorly. Some characters just have an inheirent handicap in some situations/maps so it requires you to be that much better in order to be as effective as other heroes. In the end, the Meta is more of a guideline than a hard and fast rule, individual skill and adaptablility are the kings of this game.

[jackofwind]

Eh. Honestly, as somebody who played LoL since closed beta i can tell you that, in solo ranked, meta dont mean anything really. Even in challenger.
It cant work in solo q. Too many moving parts. Meta is indeed a objective BIS. But ONLY if played in meta enviroment. What good give you champion A (which is meta) when team need to be build around him to archieve his potential. KhaZix may be best junler in lol currently, but if you team need tanky jungler or something then you dont pick assassin jungler. Simple as that. Meta cant work in soloq.

It works great when entire team know about it, use it effectivly, know its limitations and weaknesses. Even in lol there is no "best" team composition. Even in LCS and worlds there are targeted bans to shutdown players who are best in off meta champions. Because, despite being off meta, and therefore inferior, if said player would get that champ he would wreck the game.

So, meta cant work in soloq. Having strong team composition doesnt give free wins.

Meta involves team composition and is much more than just champion picks in LoL. Duo bot is meta, mandatory ADC is meta, Min. 1 tank is meta. Go into Solo Q and try to change any of these things and you'll be flamed out of existence. Teams without tanks lose, teams without ADCs lose, teams without duo bot lose. None of these things used to be as set in stone though, if you remember - the meta has changed quite a lot even if we completely ignore champion balancing.

Remember when melee kill lanes were viable bot? I member. Member when ADCs got hit so hard by item changes that Ziggs bot became by far the tier 1 pick? I member. Member ADC mid? I member.

I disagree with your view that the meta doesn't matter in solo Q, because the meta encompasses far more than just champion selection. League is much more complex than OW though, with hard counters, pick order and bans, and lanes and items etc etc, all of which have their own mini-metas which go together to form the overall meta. Even item countering in-lane has its own meta, and they're all important.

[Jessicka]

I personally wouldn't attack you for your Widow pick, I'd just say "hey we really need a tank instead", or something like that. The premise of the game is one that doesn't really cater to "mains" - that's a major thing that lots of people don't really get. In competitive play, I understand that you want to improve your Widow stats, but that's really not important to me and shouldn't be as important to you as fielding a well balanced team.

Refusing to drop a Widow pick in favour of something the team needs is extremely selfish and belongs in QM. If you make that choice it's fair to expect you to play accordingly and be good enough to compensate for the imbalance on the team. That also means in a 99-99 OT tie that you're not going to sit back and keep sniping, because that's just poor play in general. You'd be better as a tank in that instance, but you still have to go all-in as a sniper in OT.

Widow is hard because she's essentially a one-trick pony. She offers little to no team utility, and she doesn't actually pressure control points very well except on certain maps. Hanzo offers more control, aoe coverage via his ulti, and vision than her, with little to no drawbacks. Again though, if its 99-99 OT I expect Hanzo to man up and get into that control point, because sitting outside of it isn't doing anything when the enemy team can just sit in LoS.

DVa is actually quite a strong pick now after her buff, I wouldn't say she's not meta. She might not be tier 1, but she's definitely tier 2.

Her recent Armour nerf really hurt her in the meta-picks.

Thing is, being good at what you pick will go a long way. If you usually pick WM but are very good at it and push objectives, take out healers, suppress enemy snipers etc etc, I doubt you'll find many people complaining. If you're trying to pracice your WM in comp though, don't be surprised if people pick you for an easy target if your team does poorly. Some characters just have an inheirent handicap in some situations/maps so it requires you to be that much better in order to be as effective as other heroes. In the end, the Meta is more of a guideline than a hard and fast rule, individual skill and adaptablility are the kings of this game.

I've 105 hours on her (130 DVa) a bit past 'practice' and more about keeping a hand in and learning a new environment; Comp games play differently to QP.

[xChurch]

I've 105 hours on her (130 DVa) a bit past 'practice' and more about keeping a hand in and learning a new environment; Comp games play differently to QP.

I think that's fine, since by that time I'm sure you're well versed in the basics I mentioned before. Being well practised and experienced on a char I find gives you a lot of leeway since people can see you moving around, pushing the points etc etc. I think it's when people die, and pan to the WM just standing near the spawn (or just way back in general) while the payload sits there with no one on it, is what irks people (among other things). Problem is it's extremely hard to judge a persons playing based on the 5-10 seconds you see of them between deaths, though that doesn't stop people from doing it anyway.

[Fluffyfluff]

Intentionally playing to lose is actually bannable in competitive play, highlighting the difference between the two modes.

For the record, trolling in this forum is bannable as well, just so's you know.

Playing to lose If I play torb in attack am I playing to lose?

Who is trolling? is that the go to word when u have a flawed argument?

[jackofwind]

Playing to lose If I play torb in attack am I playing to lose?

Who is trolling? is that the go to word when u have a flawed argument?

0/10 question, you never specified what map or game mode so there's no way to give you an accurate answer. Furthermore, you never specified competitive or QM.

You've already gotten one infraction in this thread. I'd stop at this point, but whatever floats your boat.

[Fluffyfluff]

0/10 question, you never specified what map or game mode so there's no way to give you an accurate answer. Furthermore, you never specified competitive or QM.

You've already gotten one infraction in this thread. I'd stop at this point, but whatever floats your boat.

Well we were talking about competitive wernt we? I promise to be more clear next time.

Yes I got an infraction for what ? Having a different opinion to you amazing!. Oh so if you label someone as trolling because you have a flawed argument and take it personally you must try silence them with an infraction oh silly me I get it now I wont ask any more intelligible questions. Its pointless lesson learned.

Much love x

[jackofwind]

Well we were talking about competitive wernt we? I promise to be more clear next time.

Yes I got an infraction for what ? Having a different opinion to you amazing!. Oh so if you label someone as trolling because you have a flawed argument and take it personally you must try silence them with an infraction oh silly me I get it now I wont ask any more intelligible questions. Its pointless lesson learned.

Much love x

You know your post history is public, right? I don't care enough to look at it, but I'm guessing, based on your post count and what you've demonstrated in this thread, that it will trend very closely to the exact same reason you got an infraction here.

Not to mention the fact that I don't have the power to infract you, so any action taken was by the mods. You may want to familiarise yourself with the forum rules before you complain about receiving infractions. For the record, those rules include not complaining about infractions you receive after the fact. The more you know.

[Fluffyfluff]

You know your post history is public, right? I don't care enough to look at it, but I'm guessing, based on your post count and what you've demonstrated in this thread, that it will trend very closely to the exact same reason you got an infraction here.

Not to mention the fact that I don't have the power to infract you, so any action taken was by the mods. You may want to familiarise yourself with the forum rules before you complain about receiving infractions. For the record, those rules include not complaining about infractions you receive after the fact. The more you know.

What does my post history and the fact that it is public got to do with my question which you failed to answer. Truly bizarre reasoning. You have made 3506 posts so what? How does this relate to the question?

[jackofwind]

I think that's fine, since by that time I'm sure you're well versed in the basics I mentioned before. Being well practised and experienced on a char I find gives you a lot of leeway since people can see you moving around, pushing the points etc etc. I think it's when people die, and pan to the WM just standing near the spawn (or just way back in general) while the payload sits there with no one on it, is what irks people (among other things). Problem is it's extremely hard to judge a persons playing based on the 5-10 seconds you see of them between deaths, though that doesn't stop people from doing it anyway.

I think that's a very good point - when a team wipe at an objective or something similar happens and everyone sees the Widow playing far back, living but not pushing, it gives the impression that they weren't helping. Whether they actually were or not is harder to say.

[Mormolyce]

Stylosa recommends complimenting them to get them in the mood to cooperate willingly. I can't bring myself to do it. Best I've managed is to ignore them completely. They're dead weight and nothing you do or say can change that so it's best to just ignore it and avoid a potential troll fight.

[Wondercrab]

Do people actually play comp just for fun? Any other mode is for fun, comp is to win, there should be no one who doesn't understand this.

The problem Blizzard have with this is that they often incentivise competitive modes by rewarding exclusive in-game items from them. It's a double edged sword, because while it does draw more people into the competitive ladder, it also attracts a lot of people who have no interest in being competitive and are just doing it for the rewards. This segment of the playerbase really doesn't mesh well with the competitive core, often creating friction and animosity when casual players who just want the rewards end up in games with people who want to be genuinely competitive and take every match seriously.

Personally I think that if a game has the potential for a genuinely good competitive scene, then it'll grow and thrive without the need for gimmicks like this to draw people in. I don't like that Blizzard feel the need to dangle shiny treats in front of casual players to try and make them play a mode that might not be at all suited to them. It's possible that in the grand scheme of things it's a good way of nurturing and growing the competitive scene, but my inkling is that it causes more frustration overall.

[Fluffyfluff]

"Do people actually play comp just for fun? Any other mode is for fun, comp is to win, there should be no one who doesn't understand this"

Where does it say comp is too win? Where is the rule book?

Wow playing games for fun who would of thunk it?