ENT Gaming

Hello everyone

Once again I've lost another game because an ally used the so-called suicide-strategy (pushing 7/15 with a value of +/- 500 value). As a matter of fact, the title of the strategy really deserves its name - it's a pure losing strategy. I state a few points to underpin my argument:

1. A properly played standard yolo can even reach a higher income than the suicide strat.

2. In most of the cases, the income does not compensate the amount of gold loss due to leaks.

3. Especially when played in 3s and when it comes to race sends - the heavy undervalue of the suicide strat player leads to a substancial disadvantage since the other 2 players are - in most of the cases - not able to hold their lanes + hold the suicide strat players' lane (since his leaks give 0 bounty).

4. If this strategy turn into an advantage, then only in a long game (20+), since the relatively high income compensates the value exponentially.

5. It's an empirical fact the team of the suicide strat player loses in more than 90% of the cases.

Concluding I request that this strategy should - for the future - be put under ban/warning. I perceive this strat as a real impertinence.

Kindest regards,

~Psy

Have you tried asking people why they did that? Because being new to a league and asking for such a thing is kinda odd.

I never play that stuff, but from what I can tell this strategy is chosen, when something went either wrong with the normal yolo and recovery is out of question anyway, or when the towers were just crap. Of course you can try to "yolo" with 7/4 till arena with 1300-1400 value of crappy towers and just delay the inevitable or have a shot by sending hard on one level.

Also your last point seems just false/ignorant to say. You have 37 games on your account, and observed up to 22 games on top of that (minus some draws), as I checked there are 59 games on your list. You cannot make such a statement as a new player and having only such little amount of games on your list.

I can understand your frustration if someone with e.g. aquas would go 500 value until arena, pushing 7/9 or so, because I wouldn't see the point either of doing that. But having only 7/4 at arena with crappy towers for the value of 1300-1400 is not helpful either. If somoeone is e.g. forced to play something like novice, mass ghouls or stuff like that. 1300-1400 value of those crap towers are useless for the levels 10+. They might reach the value-requirement, but in the end they would have just piled up shit higher than needed. I call those towers "Dead value" once you go past the arena.

For more detailed answers, ask the yolo-experts.

I still think it's too early to take actions (if we should take any at all), but sure we can discuss this further and see what other people think.

Personally I think this strategy is silly, but still interesting and I see it as a legit strategy with both advantages and disadvantages. It can work out but it can also fail easily. Though what's annoying imo is that many people try to do this without understanding it and then they just hurt their team which often leads to a loss which wasn't necessary.

@Hutzu

Thanks for calling me ignorant an unexperienced. If you had a clue about me, you wouldn't talk such a crap bullshit, SIR. I've stated a list of arguments which you totally ignored in your "argumentation".

@Diablo_

Yes that's the problem. People try this strat on cost of the team fellows. Totally inacceptable if you ask me. Thanks for your feedback.

"5. It's an empirical fact the team of the suicide strat player loses in more than 90% of the cases." really? I got the feeling that you are just making up numbers here.
I know that if you look over some of the top ELO people that basically will do anything to win (read BEEP), you can see that they often use beyond recovery yolo as a mean to win pre 20 - few times this does not work and the game goes to 20+

Suicide often serves a higher purpose than just getting the income for later or leak gold for the team - the time spent with the leaks makes the game shorter which often benefits the team

With that being said I totally agree that suicide is retarded and when I do heavy incoming I always have in mind that I want to recover - I think I have dropped recovering ONCE in my entire LIHL carreer cause of shitty rolls and lack of kingleaks on both sides and if you check my elo you can clearly see I am nowhere near the top because of this fact.

So a suggestion could be something like have 900 value at start of lvl 9 or 1000 value at start of 11 or simply add a rule that states you must do 200 value per every other level or have some special levels in which you must reach a certain value or add a rule against leaking too many units level after level without sends - there is enough of possibilities but the sad truth is that all these ideas should not be neccesary - people should care more for the game than for winning, but they don't.

@Psyclone You are welcome. Stating something to be empiric with low quantity of examples is ignorant and inexperienced. I don't need to have a clue about you nor do I claim to have it. I said nothing about your person, just about a certain statement. You should read my post more carefully.

I actually agreed with your points, just stated why some people might still choose to play it.

@Hutzu

Just fuck off if you're here to bear a grudge against me.

@Krumme

Thanks for your feedback. I totally agree with you: If suicide strat is being played, it should be based on a team consensus. Just going suicide is selfish and unprofessional since the whole team suffers from its consequences. Cheers

My opinon is (if I am not too new to the league and allowed to have one ) is that this suicide yolo more often doesnt work for a few reasons... In 3v3 it rly rarly works because the other 2 players have to be imba to cover. Its still more likely to fail than to work but it sometimes can be successful BUT only if every team member agrees that the certain player is *allowed* to do this suicide.

That could be a rule if you ask me because (especially some players) play it too often without asking that everybody agrees rly. They just go like: fuck it my units suck i go suicide. Thats not okay imo.

Greetings
v1rus

@Psyclone Huh? What are you getting this from now? I reply logically to your posts. I wish I could say the same about your posts.

@V1rus Thanks for the feedback. Totally agree and I think this suggestion should be discussed / implemented. Cheers

Hutzu and Psyclone can I just say that both of you are slightly missunderstanding each other and the thread and the purpose of the thread are gaining nothing from the two of you arguing.

V1rus - good point with the rule, but I think every game should be like that. Yes 4v4 is easier to suicide in as you often have a holder or the entire team gains from having a leaker where as in 3v3 and 2v2 you often end up in failure with a total suicide strat. Another idea could to be simply banning suicide in 2v2, making it a team decision in 3v3 and make it legal in 4v4 but I am not a fan of banning a strat - I prefer countering it somehow.

@krumme
yeah that would be reasonable. the majority of the team has to agree to the strat (so in 2v2 if one disagrees= no suicide) in 3v3 2 players have to agree and in 4v4 3 players (and in 1v1 you have to agree to it)

@Krumme 100% agreeing. This sounds like a fair compromise.

Banning a strat that you beat every time seems stupid. If it loses 90%, why not just beat that team every time? Or unvouch someone who loses 90% of their games?

@eldryan What are u even talking about?