League of Legends General Discussion Thread 6

[RegisNex1232]

Still not proof of anything. But sure, go ahead and use unsupported assumptions for scaling, it's not like it's against the site rules.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

And contrary to your... interpretation, Scathlocke's is actually pretty clear, that anything that survived the November 2017 purging now has much higher canocity status.

Rengar being able to beat Draven therefore is still canon. Also please bring canon proof that the trailer's location is the Summoner's Rift. Unless you find one that What-If battle does not take place there (of course you won't be able to find one).

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

It's on Universe, ************. It will remain there for the rest of your life that you will spend clinging to the 'logic' that "Riot just didn't have time to remove it."

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

ffs in the same paragraph that you spiel Rioters saying "anything information published in Runeterra Map or Universe is canon" yourselves, you say something that's explicitly on Universe on a permanent basis is non-canon.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Again, nothing supporting its use for scaling other than assumptions and given that there's no proof for it, does mean that it shouldn't be used.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Nothing indicates that it's there permanently other than your assumptions.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

"nothing supporting its use for scaling"

>sees trailers from Kat to Darius to Zed permanently featured in Universe, the official repository of canon materials

lmao.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Not like all cinematics are canon and should be used.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

Proof?

 

[Friendlysociopath]

Just curious but if Riot literally said, "We're working on the canon" then why would you make any particular argument for or against it when you can't make any particular assertions about it? Riot themselves- the people who own and created the canon- can't say for sure what's canon right now and what isn't.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

It's so funny how you are so caught up in debating semantics instead of the actual valuable versus contents. I don't know what's so hard about MCU Cap vs Cinematic Garen, Cinematic Darius, etc. which are actually valuable versus (Of course the outcome of hundred tonners vs single toners is pretty clear cut in this example but the purpose is just to show that making a debate is possible because the cinematics provide with immensely valuable info).

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

Just curious but if Riot literally said, "We're working on the canon" then why would you make any particular argument for or against it when you can't make any particular assertions about it? Riot themselves- the people who own and created the canon- can't say for sure what's canon right now and what isn't.

Because I'm already afraid (and for the correct reasons) that 5 years from now you will still abuse that "Riot just didn't have time to remove it" excuse. Just watch and see Regis.

But this is really backward logic. Just listen to your proposition for a moment, please. It should be that until Riot removes it it should be cano, not until Riot NOT removes it it should be non-cano, because how can the latter ever happen? (It should be on Universe until after we are dead?)

 

[RegisNex1232]

Go ahead with that stuff, but using it as representative of the lore-wise characters isn't possible since it isn't connected to the stories. So continuous insistence that the two are connected basically comes off as wank/rating characters without any actual evidence.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Again, assumptions =/= evidence and you haven't shown any yet.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

The Cinematic are still canon even though none of them are connected to the Champions' actual stories, confirmed by Rioters. None of the cinematics so far have ever happened in the story, even The Climb published in January 2018.

LeaoC111 points┬À1 year ago

Correct, but they are still canon. So this is Zed in Runeterra and not "alternate fantasy" or "fan fic".

WAAARGHbobo (NA)

9 months ago in > @Riot - A Bunch of Questions About Xayah & Rakan's Lore/History

1. It is not a part of the timeline. Promotion team just takes inspiration from the lore-- they do not make stuff within the timelines. Because... uh.. Reasons? Well you'd have to ask them.

 

[Friendlysociopath]

Because I'm already afraid (and for the correct reasons) that 5 years from now you will still abuse that "Riot just didn't have time to remove it" excuse. Just watch and see Regis.

But this is really backward logic. Just listen to your proposition for a moment, please. It should be that until Riot removes it it should be cano, not until Riot NOT removes it it should be non-cano, because how can the latter ever happen? (It should be on Universe until after we are dead?)

It does have some current credit to it- Scathlocke's quotes about those changing are all relatively recent and it's literally his job to fix the canon.

And to be clear, saying, "It's not canon unless it's on Universe" does not inherently mean everything on Universe is canon. Semantics eh?

The 5v5 cinematics honestly don't have good reason to be canon because most, if not all, of them feature at least some characters that have had their lore reworked and even entire kits changed since they were in those cinematics; not to mention the massive overhauls to the Riot staff that was in charge of such things.

Like I'm curious and I don't get to talk about League lore all that much, what value for example can you get from the Dominion Cinematic when I think everyone that isn't Teemo has had a lore or gameplay update since? How could you use that for proof of anything when the champions it depicts don't exist anymore?

 

[RegisNex1232]

It's nothing but unjustified ratings due to bias, rather than any objective assessment. Nothing has been given that supports scaling Teemo to Garen, among other examples.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

See? That's literally the argument that you will stick to for the next 5 years. Just like I said.

Dominion isn't on Universe, it's that simple.

In a versus it will only be used for Pre-Retcon or composite canon Jarvan IV when someone makes one (like the various composite canon Zeldas or Godzillas or Pre-Retcon Beyonder who is a different individual from the current canon's Beyonder race).

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

>A New Dawn is on Universe.

> Riot didn't have time to remove it

>5 years later A New Dawn is still on Universe.

> Riot still didn't have time to remove it

How predictable.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Which you haven't really refuted.

There's no point since most champions didn't/don't have any real feats pre/post-retcon. Look at the profiles, and see how they're all based on scaling to Garen's feat in an outdated cinematic and no one has ever given sufficient reasoning for it.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Again, not indicating canonicity until Riot says so.

 

[Friendlysociopath]

Which you haven't really refuted.
There's no point since most champions didn't/don't have any real feats pre/post-retcon. Look at the profiles, and see how they're all based on scaling to Garen's feat in an outdated cinematic and no one has ever given sufficient reasoning for it.

Is that the one where his ult basically broke a stone roof yet supposedly had the firepower to level a small town?

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

5 years later when I point out that it's still on Universe, you will just repeat what you are saying today.

A New Dawn will be canon for the rest of your remaining lifespan. Just get ready to live with it. I just already have.

The only relevant feats from Dominion came from Jarvan and Mordekaiser; their Dominion versions alone were enough to fight popular characters like Cinematic Cap, so of course there was a lot valuable info from them in the past before we got new stories and visual updates for these champions.

However, both sovereigns have received better feats since then from those new contents. So we don't really need to rely on these non-Universe cinematics for those characters.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Yup, click on a League profile and most of them will have 'Small Town level+ (Can fight on-par with Garen, and similarly powerful champions)'.

And Garen's ratings come from this.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Assumptions =/= evidence.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

I don't really care about that. VSB's Overwatch characters like Widowmaker have Mach 90 massively hyperosonic combat speed and destroy skyscrapers with single shots, so as long as Jarvan IV can keep up with that using the same methodology as other video game profiles on this site I'm fine. Bothering to fix all of them is out of my interest so refer them to moderators like Weekly.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

It's been 2 years now, so only 3 years more until Universe celebrates its fifth anniversary. Hmm, what excuse you will bring up then, i wonder?

 

[Friendlysociopath]

Yup, click on a League profile and most of them will have 'Small Town level+ (Can fight on-par with Garen, and similarly powerful champions)'.
And Garen's ratings come from this.

Always thought it was weird to use the supposed speed of the sword to find damage rather than the literal visual. If the visual showed more firepower than the speeds would suggest then it wouldn't even be thought of as a contest- you'd just side with the visual.

I still don't know how they got the height the sword traveled aside from just stating it came from X height. Seeing a light in the sky doesn't tell you anything about the height of the sword at all. I could just as easily say the weapon took X seconds to fall and then guess the height it fell based on that- wouldn't even contradict anything.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Not an argument. Justifying inaccurate stats by pointing at other unrelated verses is dodging the point that there are inaccurate stats. And it's not like said methods of scaling are correct at all.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Yet when this is pointed out, Weekly will immediately jump in and deny everything. Look at my past attempts to try to fix it, which gave him a panic attack.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

Yeah I totally can, because I'm merely explaining the reason why I don't care. As long as Rhaast is a legit multiverse destroyer and Garen doesn't lose to Overwatch characters, like they should be, I don't care about what they do with the rest of the site.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Yeah I totally can, because I'm merely explaining the reason why I don't care. As long as Rhaast is a legit multiverse destroyer and Garen doesn't lose to Overwatch characters, like they should be, I don't care about what they do with the rest of the site.

And your proof for this? Again, avoiding the argument doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Unless breaking the rules is fine with you because your verse is involved.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

Rhaast is a Dark Star. They even showed a universe at an advanced stage of entropic death, and the fact that they come from alternate realities to arrive at new universes through multiversal travel. They are both on the Odyssey story on Universe; haven't you read that?

Garen and Jarvan are easily a good match for non-Maiden RWBY characters even outside VSB, so yeah I'm pretty doubtful Garen should lose to hypersonic skyscraper-oneshotting Overwatch characters.

As long as site-specific rules is held to the same standard across all verses, be it LoL or Overwatch, I'm okay as long as the debates are contained to this site.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Rhaast is fine because he actually has proof unlike Garen or Jarvan.

Again, arguments based off faulty evidence aren't great or usable. This is nothing but bias, and bias isn't used in ratings here.

Still avoiding the question of incorrectly used rules or the lack of valid evidence for said stats.

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

I'm fine with the result that Garen and Jarvan can keep up with Overwatch characters and won't lose as soon as their fight start due to 'faulty' evidence (as long as both evidence were evaluated to the same standard by the site). I don't care about the road taken to get there as long as the result is correct.

As long as they can keep up with that, I'm fine.

 

[RegisNex1232]

So you are fine with lies and wank being used as valid reasoning simply because it fits with your views, even if said views are unsupported? Even if it's against the rules of the site?

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

If they are against the rules of the site the mods would be removing them.

While I'm on this site I follow their rules. On other sites I would follow their own rules to debate the same LoL and Overwatch characters who would use different methods for the same outcome as long as they were held up to the same standard.

 

[RegisNex1232]

Again, the mods using inaccurate stats and assumptions does not mean that they are right. You still haven't answered the question.

So you're fine with using unsupported statements and assumptions for no reasons other than it 'fits', even when it doesn't?

 

[Heinkel_Astrea]

Yeah I'm fine because I don't care.

Now, using the non-VSB approach. I mean when you put a bulletproof character against a character who uses real-life guns to fight, and she can no longer one-shot skyscrapers... and he is now also faster than her. What did you think will happen.

As long as the final result doesn't differ from the expected outcome I don't care to debate further while I'm a visitor to this site.

 

[RegisNex1232]

You do realize that assumptions aren't evidence that we can use here?

Literally irrelevant to my question. Your assumptions aren't facts, and thinking that they are or that the site should use them and not correct them is a bit mind-boggling.

Expectations which can change based on the evidence given.