Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

GO TO BOARDS


Why is any elo under 1700 elo considered "low elo"?

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Talisid

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Quote:
SoWrules:
The problem with this, is that is not something that is covered by a tutorial. This is a result of player judgement. This is when you use the basic principles and skills that you have learned, and make a decision based on the situation. Tutorials will never, in any game, cover specific situations such as this, because they can't. Its too subjective.
But look, in your hypothetical situation, not only did you know about wards, and ultimates, not to mention you also knew about buff timers, you understood mana and health levels, your actual champion levels, and buying items. All this is supposed to be covered in a tutorial.(and some of it is).
A player learns throughout his playing period. He learns by actually playing the game, the tutorial is merely an introduction to the player, to cover the basic aspects so that they are able to enter the game knowing enough to actually progress. Currently the tutorial does not cover that enough. and that is what needs to be fixed. In clarification, a tutorial cannot baby a player. it can only guide them towards their own self-advancement.

Let it be known, that i am in no way meaning to pick an argument. I am merely stating my view on this suggestion and its following responses to give a clear answer to others who may ask the same thing.


That's a fair statement and I agree.

However, this thread is about low Elo and how it is perceived.

Despite the fact that an 1100 Elo player will frequently make bad decisions because he doesn't have a good grip on all the factors involved, they are still very very far beyond the help of a simple tutorial.

The current tutorial in the game could certainly use improvement, but no automated tutorial can properly prepare a player for Ranked play. That was the point I was trying to make.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

DaisiesAndDukes

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Elo is not a zero-sum game. Elo decay, for example, lets people lose elo without a corresponding gain in someone else's elo.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Talisid

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Quote:
Genspirit:
someone could be a terrible individual player and have a really high elo simply because he is smart about plays and good at getting his team together


Good decision making, knowing when to make plays and coordinating with your team are core skills in this game and are just as legitimate as mechanical skills.

Being a "terrible individual player" is an irrelevant statement in a team game.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Barioth

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Quote:
Genspirit:
its not really a measure of skill its a measure of your ability to carry a game individual skill != abilitiy to carry

someone could be a terrible individual player and have a really high elo simply because he is smart about plays and good at getting his team together meanwhile another players is comparitvely low in elo but always wins his lane however has poor judgement or just doesnt guide the team at all


you are so dumb you really didn't understood what i posted.
By skill i mean everything combined togheter, teamplay, intelligence,
Not necessarily whatever you thought.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sojs

Senior Member

11-14-2012

season 1 1700 is like season 2 2k


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

chuckdeez59

Senior Member

11-14-2012

they're comparing elo to pro status and yes under 1700 would be considered low elo. to the normal league player 1700 is def not low and neither is 1200. I would say 1200 is an average casual ok player.

Most of your pros are anywhere from 1900 (rarely) to 2500. above 2k ish it's kinda all very similar skill level. There isn't much to climb out of it's just which team gets the most players playing their main roles they got to that elo with.

aaaaanyways pros and anyone above 1900 considers anything below 1700 low b/c they can carry a smurf/themselves out of it so easily. to the average person and statistically speaking 1400 is very good. Be proud of your elo.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Haelstrom

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Quote:
Barioth:
you are so dumb you really didn't understood what i posted.
By skill i mean everything combined togheter, teamplay, intelligence,
Not necessarily whatever you thought.


You could try writing coherently. Maybe then he'd known.

Not that you said anything anyway. "anyone below this arbitrary number is bad because they're bad because i say so" is League logic at its finest. lmao


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

FAQdat

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Even though i tend to agree with the "elo hell" thread thats not proving his point:
"This isn't even counting players below level 30 and the ones that have never played ranked." Cause u dont know if these players are better than u or not. Another to strengthen this argument could be the multiple acc. high elo players have. Doublelift or Aphroo for example have like 3-4 above 2.4k raiting.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Slifar

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Back in season 1, Bronze was like top 25% of players.

Now Silver is top 50%.

It's probably because of the ELO deflation there.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

AbiwonKenabi

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Quote:
DepressiveMan:
1700 Elo is not even top 10 000 in NA... and people at 1200 Elo sucks, that's a fact.

Is this the type of behavior you were referring to?