devtrackers.gg
This is so cool, wonder if we will be able to see rune stats
This is so cool, wonder if we will be able to see rune stats
feels like an obvious development, but i wonder if more teams are gonna do that now that both Faker and Bierg have stakes in their team (and C9 had that whole thing). the ones that I can think of are Rekkles with Fnatic, Perkz with G2 and probably Doublelift with TL.
no way DL has any ownership with TL lol
I had no idea I needed this in my life until now...
Yusui is so freaking good
Agreed! It's a shame he's not always consistent, but the level he's shown when he's on is IMO very good.
I think we'll learn a lot about him after this Spring/Summer split, but I've been a big fan of his for awhile and I think he'll likely look better as he adjusts to his new teammates.
Why is it hard to blame them? I dont understand the level of apologetic for what is lazy, ignorant, and unprofessional behavior.
Building is simple. Yeah, figuring out particular build sets and the most optimal numbers isn't something you can do in a split second. But given a particular build path, there are like a dozen items you are choosing from, if even. Adjusting build order or swapping out 1 or two items situationally is not a challenge. They deserve all the flame. Its frankly embarrassing.
"Feel" and intuition" is bull shit. It's not a baseball swing where there's complex physics and biodynamics, as well as actual physical habituation and development. Its buying an item in a shop, its clicking 3 buttons. Its buying stats that have clear, simple, algebraic results. its not beyond anyone with a middle school education to evaluate item efficiency.
I can tell you from personal experience as someone who's had the same exact job for seven years and am reasonably good at it: It's impossible to be perfect at everything. Any time I reflect on something I hadn't realized, it's just so easy to imagine a generic Reddit/Twitter comment of, "Well yeah you idiot, of course it should be that way."
Virtually any decision can be called easy in retrospect. But that invariably misses the crucial context in the moment.
Unfortunately, this chaos in communication between teams is visible from the outside. Many things are published and left because they work but not necessarily correctly.Things like this with the League website can be reported somewhere or as a normal player, not have a lot of influence to fix it?
I would like something to be done about it, because probably nobody will fix it for the next 10 years.
While I take your feedback on-board, respectfully, I do not think this is a great example of 'chaos in communication between teams': The specific example you mention is a really minor thing that should probably be fixed but isn't as impactful as a lot of other things the teams that own those products could work on.
You're also making a lot of assumptions that we're using cron to publish posts. Perhaps it's just a really slow jenkins job? Or the cache invalidation period is 5 minutes? You get the idea.
So that's why new League website is still bad designed from backend site. Why new articles are visible for public 5 minutes after publication? On your other pages (garena) news appear earlier than on the real page, because they are using real API. I don't understand who came up with the idea of using cron to create static files instead of updating it at the time of publication. I hope someone fix it.
I don't really know much about that specific thing, but I like to call all-in-one replacements Big Bang replacements. Because that's what tends to happen if you try to release a lot of new things at once.
Very cool! Could be nice for aspiring high-level support players. I know that I get tripped up comparing cooldowns of abilities botlane (Tahm W, Leona E, Morg E, etc)
so, what, 2 months before shes nerfed again or...?
We'll see if she breaks any of our current balance constraints. So far so good on that front though. You can read more about some of our philosophy here:
/DEV: Champion Balance Framework
I'm sorry if this has nothing to do with what you do or if it's a dumb question but has Riot considered changing Kalista's W? It's mostly useless as an active ability and pro players frequently don't bother putting a point in it even after the passive-buff
Sure we've had some thoughts about mechanics changes to Kalista to improve her QoL, nothing to talk about yet though.
next time you nerf her. Can you make slows not mess with her AS to find a better balance? and try to nerf her E dmg on large monsters.. she is a fun champ that with all the gapclosing creep isn't as op as she used to be in terms of kiting. Also, does atk move still slow her DPS down? i remember it did once.
Yeah I agree that's a pretty frustrating quirk of Kalista. I'd love to see some mechanics changes done to her but nothing to talk about yet.
I’m claiming Michelangelo for NA
He has a thousand ideas, and every now and then, one of them will be brilliant.
Buffed a few times in a row. Mostly in the durability/consistency stats which contribute heavily to winrate (SoloQ games are commonly lost due to being squishy/inconsistent in early-game).
Wouldn't a gradual re-factorization of most of the codebase be effectively the same as a rewrite?
Maybe we have different definitions of what a rewrite is. To me, a rewrite can be in the exact same stack. It seems like, from your responses, that you are taking rewrite to be a fundamental change of how the code works (aka using a different web stack). That's probably the correct definition anyways.
Gradual re-factorization in the same web stack doesn't seem fundamentally different than a rewrite in the same web stack.
My definition of a rewrite is 'We start over from scratch and build the same thing. It might be the same tech stack, but we don't re-use any of the old code.'
A good example of an (IMO, successful, rewrite, despite Reddit memes) would be the League client. The old League client was written in a proprietary stack and in such a way that made it a serious undertaking in order to add new functionality, like replays, which is one of the reasons the client was rewritten.
It wasn't that coding with the old League client was just 'hard'; it was difficult to hire for (proprietary stacks tend to be), difficult to write code in and it made a lot of assumptions about the rest of your tech stack outside of the League client that we in some ways still pay for today.
Security flaws rarely require foundational changes :)
You haven't worked on enough shitty web stacks where people abuse global variables and local storage, I take it?
I'm talking security through obscurity. IDK MAN. I think we have just had vastly different experiences.
I've been working as a software engineer for 7 years. I have worked in mom-and-pop companies, Riot, fintech companies. The entire time I've been using JavaScript as my primary language.
I am also a very active member on codereview.stackexchange.com, /r/webdev, /r/reactjs and stackoverflow.com.
Part of my job involves reviewing any code submitted for security review.
I have seen it all.
There've only been a few times in my life where I thought a full rewrite was mandatory. In nearly every case you can refactor gradually.
Which region gets Donatello?
EU because our plays are big brain
Wouldn't this mean a rewrite would only occur when the fundamental requirements have changed or a security flaw was found?
I think that's somewhat impractical, but I guess the burden is in the fact that you cannot prove a rewrite would be better until it's already done- which was your point, or at least some of it, I believe.
I think I'm just irritated because I am currently working on a web site (one of many at my company, we bounce around projects) that was done very, very poorly (sizable code base) and makes doing even some of the easiest tasks very difficult and usually quadruples the time it would normally take. This kind of technical debt is where I feel a rewrite is almost mandatory.
Wouldn't this mean a rewrite would only occur when the fundamental requirements
Yes.
There's no need to rewrite everything unless something very fundamental has changed. It's almost always better to refactor instead
security flaw was found?
Security flaws rarely require foundational changes :)
For what it's worth, I agree with everything said here.
Just want to throw it out there that a lot of companies refuse to rewrite old code even though the cost of rewriting the code is far less than the cost of the technical debt it creates over several years.
This is just another example of companies only being able to think in quarters, to their own detriment. To be quite honest, there is never a really good reason to leave shitty code shitty.
The biggest argument is time, but again every single new developer that works on that code base will end up spending more time than necessary trying to even become acclimated into the code base if it is bad enough. Let alone modifying it.
IDK. This is a big pet peeve to me. The entire mindset regarding legacy systems is understandable, but at the same time while being understandable I also think the current approach of most companies is incorrect.
Most of the companies you're referring to are successful, though, and therein lies the rub. Can you make the argument that these companies would be more successful by either rewriting or modifying a system that, from a business perspective, still works? How do you prove that?
The problem with rewriting is that you're proposing that you take a system that works (if imperfect) and suggesting a business invest a lot of time in coming up with a new system that is functionally identical to the old one but is somehow 'better' from a code quality perspective (which may or may not translate to increased value to customers ergo more $$$ for the business).
So, the problem for any engineer proposing a rewrite is how exactly does the rewrite equate to more value for the business and is that worth the time investment? not only would it cost money to pay developers to do this, QA, etc, but it also takes time away from those engineers from doing something that has a more ...
Read moreTMNT = TournaMeNT. TMNT1 is tournament realm 1 for example.
You're correct, but I'm now starting a petition to rename the tournament realms to teenage mutant ninja turtle realms because that's way cooler
