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


Tiered Mode

1
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

croxic

Junior Member

08-24-2012

Rarely do I get into a close match of equally skilled players; it's either a landslide victory or an early loss. I know I'm not the only one in this position. Regardless of summoner level, there are players who are on both ends of the spectrum. It's frustrating to be teamed with incompetents, and landslide victories aren't enough of a challenge in my opinion.

To remedy this, I suggest an alternate mode of play, aside from Normal and Ranked.

Tiered Mode would allow users to be grouped together based on statistics gathered from their playing experience. Such statistics could possible include:
Kills+Assists/Game/
Kill/Death Ratio/
Most Played Role/
Communication Levels/
Number of In-Game Complaints.

Thoughts?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

The Best Olaf NA

Senior Member

08-25-2012

Quote:
BlackHeroSaint:
Rarely do I get into a close match of equally skilled players; it's either a landslide victory or an early loss. I know I'm not the only one in this position. Regardless of summoner level, there are players who are on both ends of the spectrum. It's frustrating to be teamed with incompetents, and landslide victories aren't enough of a challenge in my opinion.

To remedy this, I suggest an alternate mode of play, aside from Normal and Ranked.

Tiered Mode would allow users to be grouped together based on statistics gathered from their playing experience. Such statistics could possible include:
Kills+Assists/Game/
Kill/Death Ratio/
Most Played Role/
Communication Levels/
Number of In-Game Complaints.

Thoughts?



thats how the current normal game modes work. It's based off of your hidden elo, which that system works like the elo system does, in the fact that there are players in your elo that really shouldn't be there and sometimes there are people who are lower hidden elo that should be higher. Essentially bad players can get lucky and good players get unlucky because of their team. The game also expects you and your team mates to be either at the same skill cap or the enemy team is stacked with lower elo than you so the system believes that you should be able to carry your handicapped team. which makes them a small amount lower elo than the average team. And thats not even taking pre-mades into account.

Pre-mades is where it messes up the normal game modes match making system because it averages their elo and it does include very bad outliers. Making the system somewhat flawed because of pre-mades.


overall the current system works exactly how ranked works just can't see the elo.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PervySages

Junior Member

08-26-2012

What?
As far as I know, the ranked elo starts in the middle, and then you either go up or down. I don't know if the hidden elo is the same way, but I feel it should start from 0, rock bottom.

Why?
I feel everyone should start at bottom elo and earn their way up. The minimum elo that no 1 can go lower than would be Zero and everyone would start at Zero.

Reasoning:
When lesser skilled players (like me) start with average elo, and then work their way down, it still takes a long time. They will occasionally have team mates who carry them to victory. So they get stuck at mid elo for a little while. This is wrong. If we have all the Pros and good players start at rock bottom, than they will eventually, hopefully, work their way up and get out for good rather than a lesser skilled player getting carried a few times to 1300 and then dropping like a rock to 600 or something. The 1300 elo people would never have to deal with a lesser skilled player ever again once they leave the Zero they started at, because the lesser skilled people won't start at average elo.

Of course, when pros make their way from 0 to X, you would have to deal with exceptionally skilled players rather than unskilled. So, it would be a different feel than league already is, but I would rather have to deal with exceptionally skilled players. That sounds more fun.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LadyAzalea

Senior Member

08-26-2012

I feel like real game stats should be incorporated into matchmaking. I'm level 24? but only have 14 PVP wins because I simply don't play many PVP games right now. I play int bots most of the time because that's just what I feel most comfortable with. If I were to play PVP more often, I'd hope to find someone with a lesser number of PVP games played/won, like myself. I don't think that's how it works right now, but I could be wrong. For any matter, I just avoid them for now. Especially since I'm afraid to get matched with level 26's or even level 20's with 100 or more PVP wins.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Pushover

Senior Member

08-26-2012

Quote:
PervySages:
What?
As far as I know, the ranked elo starts in the middle, and then you either go up or down. I don't know if the hidden elo is the same way, but I feel it should start from 0, rock bottom.

Why?
I feel everyone should start at bottom elo and earn their way up. The minimum elo that no 1 can go lower than would be Zero and everyone would start at Zero.

Reasoning:
When lesser skilled players (like me) start with average elo, and then work their way down, it still takes a long time. They will occasionally have team mates who carry them to victory. So they get stuck at mid elo for a little while. This is wrong. If we have all the Pros and good players start at rock bottom, than they will eventually, hopefully, work their way up and get out for good rather than a lesser skilled player getting carried a few times to 1300 and then dropping like a rock to 600 or something. The 1300 elo people would never have to deal with a lesser skilled player ever again once they leave the Zero they started at, because the lesser skilled people won't start at average elo.

Of course, when pros make their way from 0 to X, you would have to deal with exceptionally skilled players rather than unskilled. So, it would be a different feel than league already is, but I would rather have to deal with exceptionally skilled players. That sounds more fun.


Do you realize that most of your frustration probably comes from having lesser skilled players on your team not performing as well as opponents? Solo queue already works like this, past about 1600 ELO there become fewer exceptionally bad people. So what you would have happen is that the first few games have extremely wide variety of skill, and so the entire game would be random as to which team has more terrible players because the skill gap is really too high.
In the end, I'm pretty sure a team with a 2k player, a 200 player, and 3 1200 players is going to lose to a team of 1200 players, The reason being that the 200 player will feed. And feed. The 2k player might start off doing pretty well, but it is difficult to carry against fed opponents. So the game would basically be which team gets the fewest bad players initially.

Once you are done grinding out of the land of terrible terrible players, you enter a matchmaking system exactly like the one we currently have. When a terrible player gets carried to 1300 ELO like you are saying, they will then cause losses as they fall down to their actual ELO, exactly as the system currently has them fall.

Basically, starting with a floor ELO is a terrible plan because it causes wayyyyy to much trouble to dig yourself up to a decent level. Once you are at that level it functions exactly the same way matchmaking currently does.


1