Can we please fix the ELO System already?

123
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Amatzikahni

Senior Member

12-02-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alekseyev Karrde View Post
EDIT: I looked you up too. We're both 40 and 46 in ranked. What are the odds of that lol.
If you look at statistics in-game, the wins/losses are filled in by your current statistics. This has been an issue for quite some time, and I would like to see it fixed. I'm only 13-10 in Solo Ranked atm, but anyone you look at will be 40-46.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alekseyev Karrde View Post
No system is without flaws, but I see little provision in the current one for a problem we both know exists. There could be improvements made. Now I'm not saying my solution offered here is a magic bullet, I was just trying to point out a potential low-barrier-of-effort way Riot could take steps against troll games in ranked play. If I think they're no fun, and you think they're no fun, the question then becomes what COULD be done to reduce the impact (or frequency of impact) of toxic players in ranked that there's low incentive for non-toxic players to abuse?
This goes along with the "I've yet to see a good suggestion made regarding the issue" problem. Unfortunately, LoL is free-to-play, and free games naturally take in many more bad apples than games you need to pay for, so the problem is a lot higher here than elsewhere.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alekseyev Karrde View Post
But if we can agree that toxic players are not to be protected and games with them arn't fun, repeated threads of "I'm frustrated with elo because I had 1-2 troll players in all of my seed games and now I cant seem to play more than two games in a row without them" might indicate a problem worth solving. Riot and the community knows these players exist and that they're a problem (Tribunal, honor system, etc), a logical step would be taking that into account in some way.

If your team has a feeder or other trolling behavior, how much can you reasonably learn from that game? You can improve your mechanics (last hitting perhaps) but from my observations (a little under 1k games i think, most of that in the low elo range) mostly you learn how to be frustrated, that the LoL community is ****, and that ones team will implode at the slightest sign of trouble. If the other team has a toxic players, what are you learning? That snowballing is fun and it's easy to split push when the other team has 4 payers. Not all the time, but a lot of the time.

You mention it taking over 140 games to reach your "true" elo. Keeping in mind that the time it takes to play 140 games of LoL is about how long it would take to get professional certifications, it becomes easier to see the source of the frustration at the lower end of the rankings when most of your games unfold as I described.
These are major problems that, again, I don't know of any solution for. A good indicator would be to only pair players with <10 games in Ranked with players who have >100 games in Ranked and force those teammates to judge the player's skill on a scale of 1-10 or something, and the average of his team would force the player's Elo to adjust more toward that level. For example, if a player's teammates gave him a 7-8, then he would gain 60-70 Elo instead of 47, and if his teammates gave him a 2-3, then he would only gain 20-30 Elo instead of 47; likewise, upon a loss, just reverse the scenario. This way, players don't have to compete against and with both inexperienced and highly experienced players simultaneously which easily skews the win/loss idea. Another suggestion could be to start players at 0 Elo every season and work their way up (without being able to fall below 0 Elo) and a system like ICCup could be used to force a scaling Elo curve (and an effective Elo cap). However, these would all require major overhauls of the current system and I haven't taken the time to mathematically prove or disprove any of these scenarios in terms of effectiveness, and most of these systems won't affect the current toxic-player-conundrum that plagues the current system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alekseyev Karrde View Post
Thing is, toxic players have either a low or dropping elo (fact, since they're causing their team to lose a lot matches). Ranking system exists to match you up with players of a certain elo ranking. Thus, on average, the lower your elo is below 1300 (just under the "unrated" elo range if i understand right) the higher your chances of being in the mix with toxic players. This is why, above their normal human pride feeling they should be rated higher than they are
I admit that I've never been below 1200, and I haven't thought about this; my idea was that most toxic players quickly get reported and banned before they cause much harm. I'll have to consider this in future threads; thanks for the insight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alekseyev Karrde View Post
Try your hand at it? It would be a refreshing change to have leadership against toxic players coming from high elo players and being embraced by the community instead of rage against toxic players from the community getting dismissed by high elo players.

It might also actually get something done and be good enough to earn that Red post I think we'd both like.
http://www.bungie.net/forums/posts.aspx?postid=14414600
However, this system can be implemented for a game like Halo because every player starts with the same weapons and can get any weapon at any point in time. Being able to keep the Rocket Launcher or Sword for a killing spree before dying will boost your KDA well over your teammates' KDA's and in that case you won't be dropping as heavily as they will when you lose the game (in some rare circumstances, I've actually gained rank when I lost simply because I did absurdly well despite losing). However, in LoL, there are different roles and different circumstances: if you could win a 2v2 and you back off to watch your teammate die, your teammate would suffer from a heavier Elo drop than you would even though he may have made the right play and you made the losing play. When you get to a certain rating, people will want to win and therefore the system won't be as heavily abused, but at low Elo games, someone could just be playing uber passively while their team loses a 4v5 and he won't lose as much Elo as his team will (even if his participation could have forced a win).

The biggest issue would be copyright. I don't know if these systems have copyrights in place, and if they do, then using such a system with enough modifications to avoid the copyright may not be sufficient enough to solve the current system's problems.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

CredibleMushroom

Member

12-02-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amatzikahni View Post
I admit that I've never been below 1200, and I haven't thought about this; my idea was that most toxic players quickly get reported and banned before they cause much harm. I'll have to consider this in future threads; thanks for the insight.
It might be attributable to sheer volume (as you note, free to play after all) but corrective measures are not keeping up with the number of problem players. I've partnered with a 2k elo friend of mine and can carry over a toxic player in most cases, so it's not INSURMOUNTABLE. But I'm not 2k elo ;p And it does suck the fun out either way.

Using k/d might disadvantage support players as well, who typically do not get lots of kills compared to the rest of their team but are never the less helping their team immensely (wards, assists, buffs, escapes). The forced rating isnt without problems either, although Riot has reportedly been able to stay on top of Honor abuse (which isnt a rating, but is similar enough)


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Fat Kid In RL

Member

12-02-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Selcopa View Post
A 1400 elo player does not shoot up to 1850. Anything beyond +/- 200 elo is extremely rare and unlikely.

800 elo players believe they belong much higher, 2k players frequently believe they belong higher.

The suggested modification to the system is terrible. Its been discussed to death countless times always determined to be bad. I'm about to make a damn wiki that catalogs all the stupid suggestions this forum has come up with that get shot down on a weekly basis
This, selcopa doo eeeet


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Mizter President

Junior Member

12-03-2012

Regarding how to change the amount of ELO you gain or lose from a win/loss, I don't know of a reason to change that. But someone mentioned in an earlier post to use the tribunal more in helping with situations where you had a member of a team do something that virtually guaranteed the outcome of the game like leaving or feeding. I think first, a method for keeping these folks from getting into the game in the first place is important. In que so often there is the one player who can't cooperate, insists on his lane and attempts to bully. I know that many people have said that a kicking option would be abused but think that if a 4-1 vote passes, the kickers get a 5 minute penalty and the kicked gets time penalty based on how many times they have been kicked. This would also require a que similar to WOW where you can say before you get into a game what rolls you were interested or capable of playing.

Once in the game, when you have a feeder or a leaver, an elo refund would be easy to implement. If the violating player is reported for an offence that effected change on the outcome of the game i.e. leaving, feeding, or assisting and is punished, the a portion of the ELO should be refunded to the loosing team. The winners keep there's.

Just some suggestions, I unlike many of the players at my elo (about 1065 as of this writing) feel that I am close to the score I should be at but am convinced that my score would be different if several of my losses were reversed because the predominant reason for the loss was a toxic player. I can happily accept a lower elo, I am no pro, but it would make the game so much more enjoyable if we had a system to deal with those who try to ruin it.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Larrythetapist

Senior Member

12-03-2012

as much as I want to not be a low elo scrub, I understand that elo has to be a zero-sum, harsh and unforgiving system in order to mean anything.

if everyone can get to 1850 elo just by simply not trolling, not afking, and buying 5 wards each game,
then getting to plat rank becomes a meaningless achievement that anyone and their 5 year old brother can get.

I want to be a gold player one day, because I actually improved, not because they set the bar lower.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Amatzikahni

Senior Member

12-03-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by TequeKnow View Post
I think first, a method for keeping these folks from getting into the game in the first place is important.
The best suggestion I've seen is to add pre-game chat to the Tribunal including bans/picks+order. This way, if someone was "forced to dodge" because of a troll, that chat would be added to the tribunal and the player could be punished (less harshly than in-game of course). I don't know how much of an effort it would require on Riot's part to implement this, though. I never dodge; if I get into the game and the player is clearly doing stupid stuff, then I will report him, accept my potential loss (it's not 100%), and move on to the next game. Since I'll presumably be facing less skilled players in the next match, I get to do a bit of practice while working my way back up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TequeKnow View Post
In que so often there is the one player who can't cooperate, insists on his lane and attempts to bully. I know that many people have said that a kicking option would be abused but think that if a 4-1 vote passes, the kickers get a 5 minute penalty and the kicked gets time penalty based on how many times they have been kicked.
This has been mentioned quite often and will be heavily abused if implemented. If everyone agrees that they've been out-picked in champ select, then instead of someone dodging and incurring a 30 minute penalty, everyone would group up and attack one specific player at random and 4-vote him out so that they can get another queue without the dodge penalty. If Riot implements the pregame chat tribunal thing, then this wouldn't be as much of a problem. Riot also needs to add the ability to honor/report players in pregame chat, again not as heavily weighted as postgame reports.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TequeKnow View Post
This would also require a que similar to WOW where you can say before you get into a game what rolls you were interested or capable of playing.
Whenever I argue against this, I get a lot of support; it's almost universally agreed that this is a bad idea. This will solidify the meta which is both against the spirit of the game and against Riot's wishes in terms of what direction they're going with LoL.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TequeKnow View Post
Once in the game, when you have a feeder or a leaver, an elo refund would be easy to implement. If the violating player is reported for an offence that effected change on the outcome of the game i.e. leaving, feeding, or assisting and is punished, the a portion of the ELO should be refunded to the loosing team. The winners keep there's.
This could still be abused, but if Riot can implement a very strict rule against abusers, then it will work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larrythetapist View Post
as much as I want to not be a low elo scrub, I understand that elo has to be a zero-sum, harsh and unforgiving system in order to mean anything.
LoL's Elo system isn't zero-sum; it's extremely close, but it isn't.

Just to specify, most of these ideas would work with good monitoring and lots of manpower. The problem is in trying to implement a system that requires nearly no manpower; there are millions of games being played every day, and even if you could judge one game per second, a 24-hour shift by one person can only cover 86400 games. A computer algorithm that's unbiased or a truth-based system that hopes the community will be honorable in their decisions will work, but since the current honor/reporting system has its flaws (Riot has to monitor abusers as mentioned in this thread), then one has to consider the potential influx of many bad apples that can gang up on good players. This was the tragic end of SOCOM 1 as far as I know—anyone who didn't have a hack/exploit would be banned from every game since they were putting their team at a disadvantage.


123