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 we hate Elo-Hell believers

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Bradykin

Member

01-15-2013

Quote:
Loligrabber:
I like this a lot, and would highly prefer it. However, it is problematic simply because, say, your top lane goes 0/5. Now you, the mid, are tied in your lane 0/0. Their top lane begins to roam and dives you. Now you're 0/1. Let's just say this process keeps continuing and you end up with a negative score because one lane got out of control. This now would make you look like a feeder and add to the elo loss.
Aside from that though, I still wish this system was implemented. Some people are just unlucky and always end up with the worst possible teammates.


As has been repeated many times in this thread, this game is about WINNING, not about your score. Any criteria for ELO other then winning will encourage some form of activity that will make it abusable and people will abuse it over winning the game. If you go 0/0/1 in a game because you always hid and never went in because you didn't want to ruin your KDA, you've probably lost it for your team. There can be NO criteria for gaining ELO other than did you win or not, otherwise the system is abusable.

The current system is fine. ELO hell does not exist for a very simple reason (that has also been said many times in this thread): If you shouldn't be at that elo, you will be better than the average player. Of the 9 other players, they have 5 potential failures, you have 4. Now, you can hit bad streaks and tank elo, and that sucks, and it's happened to everybody. But people tend to notice the trolls on their team a lot more than the ones on the other, and will see themselves as constantly getting the short stick when that's just not true. Over the course of enough games, you will get to your correct ELO.

The only portion of the current system I disagree with is placement matches. The reason is simple: Since you can have inadvertant ELO shifts based on simple bad luck, or on good luck to go a lot higher than you should be, placement matches make this more inflated of an issue. I understand the purpose behind them (to boost you to your right ELO faster) but I think that it's not worth the trade-off. I also think you should need to own a certain # of champs (in my mind 40) and at least X number of wins (100+) to play ranked, but that's another issue entirely.

There's my 2 cents, lets see what people say.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Distillz

Senior Member

04-20-2013

and we hate non-elo hell believes who think their team makes not a difference to them having a higher elo. Seen too much dumb **** to think it doesn't exist. I am adc bot and all I keep hearing is team mate died over and over.

Seriously, I had a game recently as ashe where my alistar was pushing their solo top in my face every fight. I try to kite, then I see pantheon flying towards me. They literally work towards NOT being carried. There is just way to much BS


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Distillz

Senior Member

04-20-2013

Quote:
Bradykin:
As has been repeated many times in this thread, this game is about WINNING, not about your score. Any criteria for ELO other then winning will encourage some form of activity that will make it abusable and people will abuse it over winning the game. If you go 0/0/1 in a game because you always hid and never went in because you didn't want to ruin your KDA, you've probably lost it for your team. There can be NO criteria for gaining ELO other than did you win or not, otherwise the system is abusable.

The current system is fine. ELO hell does not exist for a very simple reason (that has also been said many times in this thread): If you shouldn't be at that elo, you will be better than the average player. Of the 9 other players, they have 5 potential failures, you have 4. Now, you can hit bad streaks and tank elo, and that sucks, and it's happened to everybody. But people tend to notice the trolls on their team a lot more than the ones on the other, and will see themselves as constantly getting the short stick when that's just not true. Over the course of enough games, you will get to your correct ELO.

The only portion of the current system I disagree with is placement matches. The reason is simple: Since you can have inadvertant ELO shifts based on simple bad luck, or on good luck to go a lot higher than you should be, placement matches make this more inflated of an issue. I understand the purpose behind them (to boost you to your right ELO faster) but I think that it's not worth the trade-off. I also think you should need to own a certain # of champs (in my mind 40) and at least X number of wins (100+) to play ranked, but that's another issue entirely.

There's my 2 cents, lets see what people say.


Even if you are better than the average player, there are a lot of factors. You are very optimistic about the system in my view. Most of the time my teams feed. Should I believe that somehow they are equal to the enemy team then? How does that work? If they don't even demonstrate any sense of what to do when, how do I say they are just as bad as the opp when the opps seem to know what they are doing? Not saying the opponents don't mess up but not nearly as much as the teams I get.

There also seem to be pockets of bs. I climbed from silver 5 to silver 2 and all of a sudden all my teams turned into crazies.

You guys neeed to stop pretending as if you know it all. you cannot even begin to tell someone there is no such thing as elo hell for them because you have not seen their games. I had a player doing that once and I had him go on my account to play. He went 19-4 or some **** with several turrets etc, going full tryhard and lost like he did nothing. Its a 5v5 game and there is just way too much BS. If you think you are so good and lose to some of this **** how exactly do you think people who don't belong in the elo will fare?

I do not think you should hav e to carry players worse than you or lose rank because of them. Otherwise it can never be representative


I wish i were the bad on teams


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Selcopa

Senior Member

04-20-2013

Quote:
tempnameA076:
Even if you are better than the average player, there are a lot of factors. You are very optimistic about the system in my view. Most of the time my teams feed. Should I believe that somehow they are equal to the enemy team then? How does that work? If they don't even demonstrate any sense of what to do when, how do I say they are just as bad as the opp when the opps seem to know what they are doing? Not saying the opponents don't mess up but not nearly as much as the teams I get.

There also seem to be pockets of bs. I climbed from silver 5 to silver 2 and all of a sudden all my teams turned into crazies.

You guys neeed to stop pretending as if you know it all. you cannot even begin to tell someone there is no such thing as elo hell for them because you have not seen their games. I had a player doing that once and I had him go on my account to play. He went 19-4 or some **** with several turrets etc, going full tryhard and lost like he did nothing. Its a 5v5 game and there is just way too much BS. If you think you are so good and lose to some of this **** how exactly do you think people who don't belong in the elo will fare?

I do not think you should hav e to carry players worse than you or lose rank because of them. Otherwise it can never be representative


I wish i was the bad on teams

You lack a fundamental understanding of an elo system temp, you are not qualified to have a meaningful opinion.

Your examples are anecdotal and you seem to not understand how statistics will predict your teammates and enemies.

Furthermore you suffer from perception bias because you believe your team feeds more than the enemy, that only is true if you personally suck, so either your team feeds an equal amount as the enemy team, or you suck, take your pick, this isn't a 3rd option.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Gabelous

Senior Member

04-20-2013

The truth of the matter is this is a team game, and in the sense of computations and quantifiable variables it is impossible to do. On a team, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts so it would be impossible for computers right now to validly establish a number with a player's skill. In 1v1 games like SC2 that is much easier to do, you simply look at win/loss ratios. But in a team game you are not solely responsible for a win nor a loss, so there isn't a way to viably award you a number based on skill.

Also the ELO system was originally conceived around chess, which is a 1v1 game. So it is much easier to quantify one's skill at the game when you and you alone are the sole mechanic by if you win or lose. But a team cannot in essence do that, there are far too many variables involved in a team winning or losing a game for a computer right now to accurately quantify individual skill.

The truth is there will never be a way to "make it fair". This is a F2P game and as long as people are freely allowed to make extra accounts, there will always be a population of players who are either trolls or simply bad. The only way I see to "make it fair" would be the "black ribbon" system I thought up, or automatically throwing out the game if someone DCs for longer than 3 minutes. But they won't do either of that, in the dev's eyes the system is working well so there isn't a need to change it.

So you can either sit here and whine and complain you can't win games even if you go 14/0/8 or you can MAN UP and think about how you can HELP THE TEAM rather than saying you are winning your lane and calling it a day.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Nyutrig

Senior Member

04-20-2013

Quote:
Selcopa:
You lack a fundamental understanding of an elo system temp, you are not qualified to have a meaningful opinion.

Your examples are anecdotal and you seem to not understand how statistics will predict your teammates and enemies.

Furthermore you suffer from perception bias because you believe your team feeds more than the enemy, that only is true if you personally suck, so either your team feeds an equal amount as the enemy team, or you suck, take your pick, this isn't a 3rd option.


if youre going to reference an understanding of an elo system template, at least do a little reseach. you will find that LoL solo que does not follow an "elo system template" but instead a bastardized version of one. i dont even know why they call it "elo". it simply does not correlate.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Selcopa

Senior Member

04-20-2013

Quote:
Gabelous:
The truth of the matter is this is a team game, and in the sense of computations and quantifiable variables it is impossible to do. On a team, the whole is greater than the sum of its parts so it would be impossible for computers right now to validly establish a number with a player's skill. In 1v1 games like SC2 that is much easier to do, you simply look at win/loss ratios. But in a team game you are not solely responsible for a win nor a loss, so there isn't a way to viably award you a number based on skill.

A 1v1 game will allow you to determine your elo more quickly than a 5v5 game, doesn't matter what system you use.

Its not impossible to establish a number that defines a person's ability to win(which is what elo does), obviously its not an exact number as your rating will orbit around your true elo, however it will give you a reference point.


Quote:
Also the ELO system was originally conceived around chess, which is a 1v1 game. So it is much easier to quantify one's skill at the game when you and you alone are the sole mechanic by if you win or lose. But a team cannot in essence do that, there are far too many variables involved in a team winning or losing a game for a computer right now to accurately quantify individual skill.

You are right it is "easier" in a 1v1 environment

While you aren't solely responsible for wins/losses, you do contribute to them, this applies to 1v1 games as well, you are not solely responsible for your wins/losses, its dependent on your opponent as well. Its the exact same concept in a 5v5 game, only now there is more "Noise" in the system.

Noise is the variance of your rating due to dealing with people that you cannot control, once again it exists in 1v1 games, if you are playing against a player rated 1500, the enemy might not play at the average level of a 1500 on that particular game, over time however you will eliminate noise and get a more accurate reading of your rating.

The same concept applies to 5v5 games, again this time you have 9 other players you cannot control, as a result there is more Noise in a 5v5 system than a 1v1, however overtime you will isolate your rating from the players around you by playing more and more games.

In the case of league of legends, typically between 75 and 100 games is sufficient to isolate your rating and determine your level, while its entirely possible that it takes more time for a truly unlucky player, there still will be only a very select few people who wont reach their true rating after 150+ games, and even then, they'll still be close to it. People really don't understand how important the individual skill is in this game.


Quote:
The truth is there will never be a way to "make it fair". This is a F2P game and as long as people are freely allowed to make extra accounts, there will always be a population of players who are either trolls or simply bad. The only way I see to "make it fair" would be the "black ribbon" system I thought up, or automatically throwing out the game if someone DCs for longer than 3 minutes. But they won't do either of that, in the dev's eyes the system is working well so there isn't a need to change it.


In order to subscribe to this theory you have to accept the concept that there are players who lucked their way into diamond even though they only perform at the silver level, as well as plat-diamond players who are stuck in bronze even though they play as consistently as a diamond player, and we just don't see it, it's not happening.

Also I have free apartment internet right now, it occasional goes down for 5 minutes, even in game, I have lost many games because of it, but ive won a decent amount of games after disconnecting and coming back into the game, so I would not recommend throwing out games with dc's.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Baxter the Teddy

Senior Member

04-20-2013

Necromancers...


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Selcopa

Senior Member

04-20-2013

Quote:
Nyutrig:
if youre going to reference an understanding of an elo system template, at least do a little reseach. you will find that LoL solo que does not follow an "elo system template" but instead a bastardized version of one. i dont even know why they call it "elo". it simply does not correlate.

So it follows the elo system template.

Its just a bastard version of it, but still the same template.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Cavo

Senior Member

04-20-2013

Quote:
tempnameA076:
and we hate non-elo hell believes


The two things I hate most are kids who go hunting through 3-month-old forum posts to reply to something no one cares about, and people who have no idea how to use hyphens.

1) Non-elo hell believers=People with no elo who believe in hell.
2) Non elo-hell believers= People who do not believe in elo hell.

Sometimes the details are important.