suggestion : ranked solo queue peer evaluation

12
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sparth

Junior Member

08-21-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by Luderik View Post
Yeah in fact, I had the idea too but you proposed it first. Lots of advantages in that system. I can't see any fails (like I said, not for one game only but for many games).

For premades... lets say they all get the same, the average of the 2 for solo queue. And they can't vote each others in solo.
Can you link to the thread? maybe if a thread becomes large enough we can catch riot's attention.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Luderik

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

Senior Member

08-22-2010

Let's use this thread


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

BlitzKrag

Senior Member

08-22-2010

cool sounds like a worse revision of an idea I posted a couple days ago.

congrats.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sparth

Junior Member

08-25-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlitzKrag View Post
cool sounds like a worse revision of an idea I posted a couple days ago.

congrats.
Could you elaborate?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Donnie Danko

Member

08-30-2010

We already use this idea on the forums somewhat. You can down rate a post until it can't even be seen unless you choose to see it. (Look at BlitzKrag's troll post, already has some down votes.)

I like your idea. However i don't think a crazy rating cut is needed. So say a good player with positive feedback gets +12 and the crappy kid gets +2 for a win. 10 Rating points for one bad game is a lot. However in smaller increments it will still add up. If the **** player keeps not gaining much rating do to his poor play, or bad attitude. It will force him to re-think how he plays, without completely taking him out of the game to a really low ELO. If he keeps being ignorant, or just really bad over time he will pay for it. Have to think in a big picture format. A lot of bad players have the potential to be good players, so long as they are mature enough to take a look at themselves and answer the question of why their doing so poorly.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sparth

Junior Member

08-31-2010

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marked4Death View Post
We already use this idea on the forums somewhat. You can down rate a post until it can't even be seen unless you choose to see it. (Look at BlitzKrag's troll post, already has some down votes.)

I like your idea. However i don't think a crazy rating cut is needed. So say a good player with positive feedback gets +12 and the crappy kid gets +2 for a win. 10 Rating points for one bad game is a lot. However in smaller increments it will still add up. If the **** player keeps not gaining much rating do to his poor play, or bad attitude. It will force him to re-think how he plays, without completely taking him out of the game to a really low ELO. If he keeps being ignorant, or just really bad over time he will pay for it. Have to think in a big picture format. A lot of bad players have the potential to be good players, so long as they are mature enough to take a look at themselves and answer the question of why their doing so poorly.
The numbers I gave were just an example. Ratings also change based on how many games you play I have started to notice.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Krackor

Senior Member

08-31-2010

Like the first response said, this just sounds like it's far too easily abused. Once a team starts losing, all they have to do is find the person most "to blame" and dump the negative rating change on them. In my experience, a player's estimation of who's "to blame" is incredibly subjective and driven by emotions rather than actual player skill.

A jungler gets no support from his teammates, gets ganked once or twice, loses control of neutral buffs, and can't gank lanes since his teammates don't harass properly? Well he's automatically blamed despite the fact his teammates are at fault since they should have been supporting him.

A tank initiates well, cc's the right enemies, but his teammates don't follow his lead? The tank gets called a feeder and everyone downvotes him.

Furthermore, I hear the most complaints from players who are stuck in the 1100-1300 range. It seems like your system is targeted at improving matchmaking for these players, yet that's also where the most ignorance and blame-calling exists. In the example above with the Ashe, Tristana, Twitch, Ezreal team asking for the 5th pick to play a tank, it's entirely possible that all the carries will end up blaming the tank for the loss even though it's their fault for picking an imbalanced team.

TL;DR - The current matchmaking system is objective with regard to the total performance of a team. Adding a peer-evaluation system introduces so many subjective and potentially fallacious influences from players that it would ruin the objectivity of an ELO rating.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

smunk

Senior Member

08-31-2010

The problem is some are getting matched with people who don't know how to play well / what the game is actually about.

There is no way that the solution is to let those people judge how well others play. They don't have the ability to know.


12