We should start at 0 ELO rather than 1200.

12345612 ... 14
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Selcopa

Senior Member

05-02-2012

Anyone who thinks the starting point of ELO should be the absolute bottom clearly has not thought the idea through and what the unintended consequences of such a system would be.

You think the 1200's with ELO Hell are bad now? Imagine what that will be when you include 600-1100 with the 1200s? Remember at the start of season 2? When 800-1700 were compressed to a range like 1200-1350? Games were so much more random because it honestly came down to what team had more season 1 golds and who could feed off the bad players quicker.

Trolls, when you hit the absolute bottom, there's so much more incentive to troll, people troll now yes, but they make the decision that the ELO loss is worth the lulz of trolling that game because they hate a player or whatever reason. But when you introduce the fact that they wont lose ELO, even more people will troll, on top of that, they can create a smurf just to troll with as well. And anyone trying to work their way up the ranks has to deal with them. Because they cant be dropped down to oblivion.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Eggroll9000

Senior Member

05-03-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Selcopa View Post
Anyone who thinks the starting point of ELO should be the absolute bottom clearly has not thought the idea through and what the unintended consequences of such a system would be.

You think the 1200's with ELO Hell are bad now? Imagine what that will be when you include 600-1100 with the 1200s? Remember at the start of season 2? When 800-1700 were compressed to a range like 1200-1350? Games were so much more random because it honestly came down to what team had more season 1 golds and who could feed off the bad players quicker.

Trolls, when you hit the absolute bottom, there's so much more incentive to troll, people troll now yes, but they make the decision that the ELO loss is worth the lulz of trolling that game because they hate a player or whatever reason. But when you introduce the fact that they wont lose ELO, even more people will troll, on top of that, they can create a smurf just to troll with as well. And anyone trying to work their way up the ranks has to deal with them. Because they cant be dropped down to oblivion.
But you wouldn't be playing with them!!! If you are 500 and they are 0, they can't troll you to 0 cuz you aren't playing together!!. If you're 0 and they're 0, they can't hurt you cuz you're 0. If you want an arbitrary ELO starting point, we can set it at 2500 and let people lose their way all the way down as well. But the huge wall of people on their way down in every single game would be rediculous. You can have 5 v 5 @ 2000 with all 10 people playing at 300 elo level just because they are still on their way down. There's no reason to create this wall. Let people start at 0. No one can hurt you at 0. When you climb out, trolls at 0 aren't there. There's no wierd wall of noobs on their way down jumping in your team. Start from 0 solves a lot of issues frequently talked about.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sunli Min

Senior Member

05-04-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by corallein View Post
And everyone will be stuck at 0 instead. And those people who used to be at 0 will still be at 0, and you'll be playing with them all the time.

Unless you let them go negative. And then everyone's ratings will just be what they are right now minus 1200.

Stupid ideas are stupid.
You my friend, obviously havnt played ANY other game have you?

League is the only game I can think of that starts you at a medium rank. Every other game has started you at 0, and has had alot less QQ'ing by the community about getting "stuck in ell" and such.
A prime example of this is Starcraft 2. You start at the lowest possible ranking. No one complains, wheather your new or bad, you start at 0.

In real life, when you join the military, you dont start at Base Commander and fall down if your bad. You start at the bottom and work your way up. League is the only one not doing this system, and honestly has more pro's then con's compared to the elo system


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Get into my van

Senior Member

05-06-2012

Bump.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunli Min View Post
You my friend, obviously havnt played ANY other game have you?

League is the only game I can think of that starts you at a medium rank. Every other game has started you at 0, and has had alot less QQ'ing by the community about getting "stuck in ell" and such.
A prime example of this is Starcraft 2. You start at the lowest possible ranking. No one complains, wheather your new or bad, you start at 0.

In real life, when you join the military, you dont start at Base Commander and fall down if your bad. You start at the bottom and work your way up. League is the only one not doing this system, and honestly has more pro's then con's compared to the elo system
Chess starts you at 1200 elo. In SC2 you can start anywhere from Bronze to Plat, you do not start at the bottom. I placed into Gold when I first started playing sc2.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Seven Sorrows

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

05-06-2012

Add that if you lose games with a lot of zeroes you go in a lesser match making skill pool.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Eggroll9000

Senior Member

05-06-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Get into my van View Post
Bump.



Chess starts you at 1200 elo. In SC2 you can start anywhere from Bronze to Plat, you do not start at the bottom. I placed into Gold when I first started playing sc2.

In chess, you don't get matched up with 4 other players that can be severely overrated as they might be playing their first game ever and rated at 1200 when you worked your way all the way up after losing at first. It's not an equivalent idea.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Selcopa

Senior Member

05-07-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eggroll9000 View Post
But you wouldn't be playing with them!!! If you are 500 and they are 0, they can't troll you to 0 cuz you aren't playing together!!. If you're 0 and they're 0, they can't hurt you cuz you're 0. If you want an arbitrary ELO starting point, we can set it at 2500 and let people lose their way all the way down as well. But the huge wall of people on their way down in every single game would be rediculous. You can have 5 v 5 @ 2000 with all 10 people playing at 300 elo level just because they are still on their way down. There's no reason to create this wall. Let people start at 0. No one can hurt you at 0. When you climb out, trolls at 0 aren't there. There's no wierd wall of noobs on their way down jumping in your team. Start from 0 solves a lot of issues frequently talked about.
If you are 0 and they are 0 they can still 'troll you' just cuz it doesnt hurt your elo, it basically means that the very bottom ranking would be a troll fest, and you would have to be lucky to get out of the troll tier

By having the ability to go lower than where you start, riot is able to control how many trolls are affecting new players who do want to take the game seriously, they are able to avoid a game with numerous sub 1200 trolls.

Your most recent post Eggroll does not prove why the fact that the fact that chess is an individual game makes the comparison irrelevant, the point is that LoL is not the only game with a ladder that the base point isnt 0


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Get into my van

Senior Member

05-07-2012

He also ignored my point about sc2. Sc2 also has a flawed, easily manipulated system where some people drop their ranking to "troll" and cause other players to lose for fun.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Eggroll9000

Senior Member

05-12-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Selcopa View Post
If you are 0 and they are 0 they can still 'troll you' just cuz it doesnt hurt your elo, it basically means that the very bottom ranking would be a troll fest, and you would have to be lucky to get out of the troll tier

By having the ability to go lower than where you start, riot is able to control how many trolls are affecting new players who do want to take the game seriously, they are able to avoid a game with numerous sub 1200 trolls.

Your most recent post Eggroll does not prove why the fact that the fact that chess is an individual game makes the comparison irrelevant, the point is that LoL is not the only game with a ladder that the base point isnt 0

1. The troll fest now is around the 900-1300 point which is commonly deemed "ELO hell" instead of 0 which makes far less sense than 0 if you're taking the game seriously. For those that really want to troll hard, they can make accounts and troll people at 1200 rather than be pooled with people they can't hurt much at 0. This makes trolls even more dangerous. But seriously, I don't think the mass majority of players are trolls that wake up and say "I wanna troll". I think mostly people, like myself, are just new to the game when first playing ranked, don't understand the meta, don't understand the roles, hardly played more than 1 character. This is fine but 1200 is actually pretty high relative to the general population and it doesn't make sense to put someone with 500 wins that is at 1200 with someone that's on their first ranked match ever and just got to lvl 30. The guy with 500 wins is gonna think he's getting trolled but in fact many at 1200 are just new.

2. Again, I don't think there's that many trolls. Mostly noobs that get frustrated then maybe troll to vent. But noobs are the underlying issue, not trolls. Like a ranged ad player that gets 5 phantom dancers for "critical damage" thinking they can outshoot everyone... I don't think that's malicious, just under informed. Or choosing 3 supports in a team... Played many games that the ad didn't build damage or someone that chooses Sona cuz they saw she was good on a Tier list but never played her before. This is the kind of stuff that belongs in 0. I'm ok with noobs, I'm a noob. But once they figure it out, they can climb without running into a wave of noobs on their way down.

3. ELO in chess is pretty close to perfect. If I'm 250 ELO in chess, I'm 250. No argument, no elo hell, no trolls, no bugs, no one to blame but me. In a team sport like basketball with 5 players on a team, it gets wierd. It's easy enough to understand that not everyone in a NBA basketball team have the same skill even tho they have the exact same win loss vs the same opponents. When Micheal Jordan was with the bulls, his ELO would be higher than when he played with the Wizards. But he's the same but with a different team. LeBron couldn't win but he's clearly higher skilled than his teammates. But we get random teammates every game in solo queue which is fine, but if you fought your way from 100 to 1200 then get teamed up with a first time level 30, it doesn't make sense. It's like a random sub that's an elementary school kid in the middle of the playoffs. You didn't fight your way to the playoffs to get teamed up like that. You want to be teamed up with others that also fought their way there. 1200 right now is clearly not that case. People right now drop elo in the beginning, fight their way up just to find themselves teamed up with noobs.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Swooshter

Senior Member

05-12-2012

I actually think this is a great idea. As someone who has been in elo hell for a bit now, I get to the point after some games, where I do not even want to face another match with someone who is just bad at the game.

I also think that this would allow both the trolls and newer players to not affect the players that are struggling to get out of the hole. Right now, I could win a dozen matches in a row, and does that put me with other veteran players? Nope, that puts me with more fresh new players on their first ranked game (and new trolls). Honestly, I think it would be alot easier to get out of 0 elo than it would the current elo hell that we are in.

The whole point of the elo system is to match you up with like skilled players. If I have 100 games under my belt, how is a player with no matches (and no idea how to play) considered the same skill level? They might be as good or better than me, but they need to prove it at a lower ranked elo, not a higher ranked elo.


12345612 ... 14