New ELO point system

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

09-24-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by EndofDeepsleep View Post
So you say my system is bad, BUT then you bring up the fact that players who are not in their correct Elo (smurf account) and are dominating games. With my system they will be moved up into the appropriate bracket faster. Besides i bet you have lost a game you went 12-1-5 in and got mad. And while i do take away from killing the nexus i do not make it obsolete by letting both teams gain Elo in a game. My system is to better filter the players into their brackets even if they are getting the bad teams 9/10 times. Sorry that you don't like it but please do not tell me it sucks and telling me that now we can just farm their team and don't have to kill the nexus. Because that just isn't true, if you don't kill it fast as you can you can still lose the game. I have seen it happen too many times.
You're opting for a system in which you perceive that smurf accounts will get to their proper bracket marginally faster, but rewards things that don't necessarily directly contribute to winning the game?

I mean, as I said, it will encourage farming the enemy team for kills. Even if you and I both know that this risks losing the game and that will result in a marginal amount of lost Elo, people will still want to do it in order to maximize their Elo.

Moreover, it will discourage people from doing the thing that is the absolute best strategy.

For example, if I'm perceiving the game as a sure loss for my team, I'm going to stop doing things to even attempt helping my team win (if I think we truly have no chance) because I'd risk dying (and losing MORE Elo than I would anyway).

For example, let's say there's an enemy on our top inhibitor turret, and an enemy on our bottom inhibitor turret. Yet, I'm at the enemy wolves camp in their jungle, and there's 3 enemies at half health. I'm going to chase them down and get the triple kill instead of returning to base to defend my inhibitors because more kills and less deaths will result in me gaining more (or at the very least, losing less) Elo.

If there are 5 champions on our middle inhibitor turret, I'm not going to try defending it because the risk of me dying in exchange for 0 kills and the turret dying is too great, and I'll be punished in Elo for it--EVEN THOUGH it's the BEST chance we have at defending our turret and defending.

If I, as a player, have decided the game is already decided, one way or the other, I'm going to stop doing things in the best interest of the team and start doing things that are in my personal best interest in order to maximize Elo gain or minimize Elo loss.

And in reality, the person with the best KDA is not always the reason your team won the match. Additionally, just because you had the best KDA on your team, does not mean that your team would have won if you just had better teammates.

In fact, your KDA is often times nothing more than a reflection of whether or not you were better than the player in your lane.

In fact, there's another problem right there. A player who is struggling in his lane is now even less likely to get ganks because the jungler will perceive this as a less-likely kill, so why should he go gank a lane with a less likely kill when he can gank another lane and get a kill or assist (and therefore better Elo) even if the better strategic decision would be to help turn around a lane?


Trust me, when you start letting Elo effect every single decision players make in games, you're going to have some major issues.


Mad because you went 21-5-10 but your team lost anyway? Maybe your 4 teammates where all worse than your 5 enemies. Queue up again though, next time your 4 teammates will be better than your 5 enemies.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

09-24-2012

And while I'm looking at this thread... Endofdeepsleep, can you tell me when you're having these matches that you light up the scoreboard but end up losing Elo?

I'm looking at your match history on Lolking.

9/6/17 win with Graves.
3/5/5 loss with Master Yi
1/7/8 loss with Nautilus
7/7/6 loss with Graves
3/9/9 loss with Graves
3/7/1 loss with Vayne
6/7/1 loss with Kog'maw
6/10/4 loss with Vayne
8/1/9 win with Graves

You had more kills than deaths twice. You won twice. You broke even or had more deaths than kills 7 times. You lost 7 times. These seems pretty fair to me. Particularly since of these 9 matches, you were playing as an AD Carry 7 of the matches and you're SUPPOSED to have the best KDA in the match.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Aureline

Senior Member

09-24-2012

Someone touched on this earlier, but I'll re-state it I guess.

The trouble with this system is that you're using the term "ELO/Elo" wrong. Elo is a rating system that measures skills of players. It's not a currency, like IP or RP. Bits of it can't be rewarded for small things. Elo is a tool for measuring placement of a player. Breaking it up like this for per-action rewards is not what Elo is, at its very definition, from its origins in chess.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

slimjimo10

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

Senior Member

09-24-2012

No.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Jacob26535

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

Junior Member

09-24-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by RuntimeMess View Post
Assists should be worth the same as Kills. This promotes teamwork rather than LOL IMMA USE MY ULTI TO STEAL A KILL LOLOLOL
a.k.a darius lol...


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

jerrwad

Junior Member

10-06-2012

The only problem I see is that supports REALLY get screwed on this one, especially tank supports. They're the ones who're most like to die bot lane (either to ensure a double kill for their carry or to sacrifice himself to save his carry) and they get the least amount of kills simply because of the role they're playing.

With your suggestions you're losing 0.8 ELO per death and only gaining 0.35 for assists. That means for every death you're having to average 2-3 assists (or land a kill) just to break even every time you die. And supports have a slightly higher than average death rate simply because of their lack of items. This will encourage supports KSing people whenever they can as well as making even less people want to play support because even if you win you're going to get less ELO than if you were the AD carry, etc.

I do agree with you on your second post though. There really do need to be more limits on who can play ranked games. I have an real life buddy who absolutely sucks at the game. He hit level 30 through almost only bot games. Literally he only had 15 regular games played and he only won 6 of those (the ones I carried him through when he was like level 14 or something). There is no way he should be allowed to join the ranked queue when he hits 30. He's simply not ready and any team he gets put on will lose or have to play through a SEVERE handicap to even hope to win.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Blorgorize

Senior Member

10-07-2012

Although I see the logic behind punishment for dying, it would make me annoyed as a support to stab myself in the foot for keeping my AD carry or AP carry alive when crud hits the fan.

Losing Elo on death would mean alot more tanks and supports would second guess themselves about saving their core teammates since there would be a fear of losing Elo. Although that 0.8 loss should be competely negated by the amount of assists and objectives taken, the subconsciousness thought will always be there.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Toddles

Senior Member

10-07-2012

Your idea is terrible. It's aimed at carries. It discourages teamplay, and promotes a more important goal than winning.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Laramis

Junior Member

10-08-2012

No, it's a bad idea straight out, because as you can see from countless high ELO matches and even in season 2 championship games, kills mean **** all in this game, so it shouldn't be measured in kills.

Also every solo/duo que game you will have people going ADC OR AFK and no-one supporting, so it wouldn't work and won't be taken as the ELO method in the future.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ramachese

Senior Member

10-08-2012

I have to agree with the majority here - this system is flawed as it focuses on a part of the game that is, ultimately, secondary. Pushing lanes, downing towers and killing the nexus is the key to winning. I have been in games in which we have pushed two towers without actually getting a kill either because the opposition is playing too conservatively or we took advantage and dropped the towers when the opposition ported back to base at a bad time (didn't see a new creep wave or thought we were somewhere we were not). That is just good play but your system does not reward that as far as I can tell.

People already scream about kill stealing (which I say does not really exist - it is a team game and every kill benefits the team as a whole) but in a game where kills are key then it will become rampant. Getting killed is also not always a bad thing. I've had a team member stall the opposing team getting killed in the process but letting us get a baron. His death was worth the trade of the four of us getting Baron and he should not be penalized.

Finally, this is a team game. No matter what you say you are taking the individual and elevating him above the team. I'm sorry but if your team loses they lose and you have to take the loss. If you win you get the boost. That is part of being a team.