Good to keep this thread going. I'm still in Asia right now so I'm only on occasionally.
The reason I put out my initial post as just a simple outline/guideline is because my belief as a serious competitive gamer comes from a very solid understanding of basic mechanics of a game. The cool part about that is that I apply this to many things in life, not just in games.
---After just proof reading this, I realize this is a kind of corny way of trying to explain ELO. But I had fun writing it, so feel free to just stop reading here if you don't like "wasting your time" ---
Let me take a physics course as an example. Lets just assume there is an ELO in a university physics course, just for fun. Your ranked matches would then come from your homework assignments which would most likely be worth about a plus or minus 15 points per assignment, and test scores which might be able to affect your score by about 50 points per exam.
50% on homework = 0 rating change.
0% on homework = -15 rating change.
100% on homework = +15 rating change.
50% on exam = 0 rating change.
0% on exam = -50 rating change
100% on exam = +50 rating change
To get the highest score in your class, you need to work hard in order to learn the material - all the material, how it correlates, and how to apply it to build on your knowledge of mechanics. To learn all of these things, you must master the basics. How will you learn the more advanced levels of play and dive into more material without the complete knowledge of basics?
Players in the intermediate range (around 1475 - 1825) are like those people in physics class ( and I'm talking as an estimate, my disclaimer is that there are always exceptions) who get away with 70%'s on all their exams, the occasional 100% on homework and maybe they just forgot to turn in a few assignments (and therefore a 0%). If they work hard to get 100% consistently and prove their know the material, there are better chances that they will get 100%'s on future exams because the knowledge builds on top of the past exams, and therefore their personal rating will go up.
However, I know this is a team effort. You need to rely on your teamates to also get high scores in order for the team to do well. But this post strictly toward how to help understand why the basics are important and how it may correlate into a better rating. If you yourself as a player start improving with these ideas, there is a better chance that your team will win, because YOU have improved.
I know this was really corny, and probably a boring read. But knowledge in this game, whether it is helping yourself or somebody else, raises the bar in a competitive game over time. If you look at it from a personal point of view, it is simple to see - you play a carry, you get lucky, you catch the other team in a bad spot, you team wins and get a better rating. If you are able to look at it from the big picture, You win - players ask you how you did this and that, you tell them. They then tell their friends. Their friends might be nice enough to share with others as well. And from that, you have singlehandedly raised the bar in competitive play - adding a not so well known factor into the pool. This is how ideas are shared, knowledge is absorbed AND BUILT UPON, and great/talented players are formed.
Keep this in mind for all your future gaming endeavors - you will be surprised what you can come up with using an approach like this. Suddenly it won't be as much "looking up what the pro's do and doing it", more like "watching what the pro's do and figure out possible ways to creatively express it yourself when you are able to improve upon it".
I would like everyone to continue this thread, no matter what their viewpoint. The collective of all of our opinions are what make this thread more and more useful to our gaming community.
It is oversimplified, because i never believed that someone needed to know the full meaning of ELO in order to improve their gameplay in that way. We do not need to dump a ton of statistics on top of the community to give them reason to believe that they have no hope - it is all player percieved. If anyone would really like to know how ELO works, feel free to look it up on Wikipedia! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system
I really like this thread, onisake and DarkPsx make some really good points. But aren't you guys over extending the ELO part of the game? it is after all a game first with competitve portion for those who want to take it further. Although you guys both make really good points, you should'nt argue about a game that's played for fun.
I just read this entire argument between matchmaking and this is what I have concluded: Darkpsx has actually contributed something decent for the community to follow as a guideline for all players, while Onisake is seemlessly trolling Darkpsx and trying to overcomplicated the entire system. In all honesty, I have thought of this as a decent argument until Onisake has tried to argue against ELO. Yes Onisake, this is a modified ELO system. Not many institutions still implement ELO straight up, because there is a K factor for certain rankings as well as a type of soloment rank fluctuation, as well as the fact that logical distribution was implemented in place as a more reliable source of ranking. If you really understood the true meaning behind ELO, you would know it is more of a formality in respect to Arpad Elo, the person who formed the caluclations for such a rating. Most multiplayer games today use a modified version of the ELO system, which we commonly just refer to as the ELO system itself because it follows the basics of ELO.
For everyone in the community that is still hazed because of the argument that is going on in this thread, you only need to know a few things to clarify this big maze of information:
1. In the first post, Darkpsx gives the community a general guideline for players to follow in order to improve their knowledge of the game and therefore extend on a player's level of skill in a game. He is making a claim that good sportsmanship, a very wide knowledge of game mechanics, and the urgency to seek help from other peers is a key to improving your competitive gaming experience. This is completely logical, and the reason is because most players are content in the level they play and have little room for growth, mentally, without that extra kick that something needs to be changed.
As a counterargument, Onisake goes ahead and adds the fact that it's not just this little information that cuts it for competitive play - which is completely true - but goes on and tries to prove that certain carries are so groundbreaking that no matter what you have done to learn and improve your gameplay, it has little to no effect on the outcome of the game. To an extent, this can always be argued - in fact, there are many things in competitive play that can be argued, because to scale with player skill, a random variable can always be pushed to its max potential (figuratively) and the game is thrown off as "carried".
2. Darkpsx then tries to explain that the guide is not meant to account for sharp changes in random variables, and that his belief of improving your rating is simply to improve and foster a more efficient and meaningful playstyle. This is a logical approach to the post - the players who are highly rated are generally BETTER PLAYERS in general. Whether they are creative in their use of game mechanics or simply have a better team effort due to a better understanding of the game, they are higher rated than just a player who didn't know any better and never knew that a double cs lead means that they could be in trouble.
The counterargument by Onisake was that this was incomplete (which Darkpsx understood), and that the random variable pushed to its max potential is too much of a reliant factor in how rating fluctuates. This, on top of a random 4 members who either do their best to support the carry or be clueless and go on their own, are not so big of a factor as long as there are a few reckoning forces on the team that truly understand their game. This argument is also correct - but is less of a consistent argument. This is simply because the random variable (carry) on one team will not always be the dominant force in a game, whereas this random variable was pushed to its max potential, the other team may have a BAD carry but 4 EXCELLENT supports who are able to push the carry down. Therefore, we rely on 1 random carry and 4 players who can't seemingly figure out how to stop this carry in order to counter its effects.
In this case, we must keep our eye on consistency.
3. The last manner was Dark's attempt to simplify ELO and how it is roughly calculated and its purpose behind the way it acts, from the beginning of when you are first rated, to the end (rating change is then minimal plus your matchmaking can further reduce or increase your loss and gain per match). Honestly, the way it was analogized, this was a great example. It was put in terms that many players in the community can understand. This is where I feel Onisake has lost it completely, and its either trying way too hard to find an argument or is just trying to prove his knowledge in order to discredit this explanation of ELO. Fortunately for most of the community, you are hearing from me, a statitistic graduate that this is indeed a modified ELO system, and that it was explained rather well. Don't try to think about the system more than it is - the original intent of the post was simply to inform players that perfecting the basics can increase your chances of winning based on the bigger picture - the fact that a player is then increasing his skill potential, he has just promoted his potential to win in the bracket that he is in, where players may share similar skill.
© 2013 Riot Games, Inc. All rights reserved. Riot Games, League of Legends and PvP.net are trademarks, services marks, or registered trademarks of Riot Games, Inc.