I got into an argument with a friend. We were playing a 5v5 premade and our Malphite top went complete tank (Warmogs, Frozen Heart, you name it), without ANY damage items.
Now obviously, the problem with this build is that while you'll be pretty tough to take down, there's no point in being that tanky if people are just going to ignore you. After Malphite uses his ultimate, what the hell is he gonna do? He can slow a bit, sure, but he'll do such negligible damage that you can just kill the others first and not worry about him.
Then, the aforementioned friend states that you should go all tank and TRINITY FORCE. And only TF for damage, tank items otherwise. Well, I said "Really dude?", maybe in a slightly condescending way (not on purpose), because I know that Trinity Force on someone like Malphite simply isn't good, because he does not spam spells that much, he isn't AD and he doesn't need all those different stats.
Before I could explain this though, he's like "Yeah, okay, I guess I don't know what I'm talking about! It's not like I've played him before and gone 15/x/x and stuff before", and some other stuff before he hangs up on Skype.
I really, really HATE it when people can't take criticism. I can't handle those people. I just don't mesh with them well. I mean, I can be a pretty bad loser myself, but if someone proves that I'm wrong, I'll shut up. But when other people talk like they're an expert on something and I prove them wrong (or try to), and they just get really mad and storm off, I'm extremely irritated.
Not to mention when people say "I've played <champion> as <thing>/with <item> before and went <score>, it's the best!". Okay, why is that not a more popular thing? Why does no one do that normally? Can you prove it? Usually they can't, but I guess I'll just have to trust their word!
But I am right about Trinity Force being wrong on Malphite top, right? Because it would suck hard if I was wrong now.