what you think of the idea?

I agree 7 43.75%
I disagree 9 56.25%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll

Anti-noob rules

12
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

CNevor

Member

05-09-2011

Always League of Legends game mode PVP I'm disappointing. lately I've only played inexperienced players. These players often act against the code of conduct, but even when reported, they are not punished.

To improve the level of the players, I decided to think some basic rules:

1 - Usually when a player is reported only once, it is not investigated and goes unpunished. so that this does not happen we most clacificar report with points. these reports receive more points the more days pass after each report made. then create a list of cases for trial. which whoever has the most points goes to the top of the list.

2 - A player previously reported in a match can be reported by the same player in another game.

3 - When a player is found guilty of having acted against the code of conduct in PVP mode, it should go one day without being able to play in PvP. If the same player is found guilty again, he must stay two days without being able to play in PvP, and so on. being the maximum period of punishment should not spend 4 days.

4 - If the player breaching the Code of Conduct for Co-op vs. AI mode, applies the same penalty as described above, but will not play for Co-op vs. AI too.

5 - When the player loses a game he should not receive experience points. because players must play against others with the same level of ability. the current model forces players level up quickly without even having the ability to play yet.

6 - To use the mode ranked player must have at least 400 wins and be at level 30.

I believe that by implementing these simple little rules the game can become more fun and more competitive.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kai The Exile

Senior Member

05-10-2011

6. If rule 5 is implemented then it should just be level 30 to play ranked.

Currently I think being level 30 and having 14 champions should be the requirement. Some of the arguments for not making it a requirement to have 14 champs are that people don't but that many. I think the number of champs is a good way to deter people who only play a couple of champs and don't play competitively . 1 of my friends is like this. He plays 2 champs and thats it. The rest of us have at least 20 champs where he has like 10 but only plays 2. The few times i have played ranked with him, he decides what champ he wants to play regardless of what the other team picks. The champs he plays are only carries. This is the main problem for people in low elo such as myself. I hate getting matched with teammate who are playing competitively but only for "fun". To me playing competitively is "fun" but to most people its winning or owning. My friend well QQ if he does bad even if as a team we are owning. In the opposite situation where we are getting owned and he is owning, hes having a great time.

THere needs to be a separation in ranked from causal players to competitive players.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

CNevor

Member

05-10-2011

we can not exclude the requirement of 400 victories, because even if the rule 5 is implemented, there will be players who are already at level 30, but still not know how to play.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sidoney

Junior Member

05-10-2011

youre actually stupid. 400 wins? i only just started playing about a month or so ago but im freakin awesome at this game... its just microing 1 unit. i play SC2 in master league which is microing a lot more units all at once. im currently at only around 130 wins (hit level 30 around 100 wins). 400 no one would play.

assume each game takes about 35mins on average. you go 1-1 usually because you cant pick your team mates. now 800 times 35 minutes. thats 19 and a half days of their life. screw that.

my only ranked losses so far have been down to team mates feeding. dont just assume that time makes you better, some people are gamers and just get it.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

isobold

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

Senior Member

05-10-2011

400 wins is just stupid. There are many really bad players with more then 1k wins, and there is at least a bunch of useful players with less than 300 wins. Wins mean nothing. Also why restrict it? Bad players just drop in ELO fast (+/-50 ELO for the first few games I heard), problem solved ...


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

CNevor

Member

05-10-2011

Maybe 400 wins is a very high number really, but it is ideal for the current model.

I still do not reach 400 victories, but I became better from the 300 victory, but still not consider myself good enough to deserve to play in ranked.

I believe that number of victories do not count much, but players with more victories thus played more, and made ​​good strategies several times then he has more sense of play to compete in ranked order.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

CNevor

Member

05-10-2011

where is your god now? =(

*******http://img864.imageshack.us/img864/920/lglgdlvrs1.jpg********
win a totally unfair!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TaLeJeLuMa

Junior Member

05-10-2011

*******http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_wz7haVkWFAE/TQ8Qm-zL0XI/AAAAAAAAABs/r1ARpknWIP0/s1600/hitler_ban_all_noobs.jpg********
I agree with cnevor


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

isobold

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

Senior Member

05-11-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by CNevor View Post
Maybe 400 wins is a very high number really, but it is ideal for the current model.
How is 400 ideal? Why not 350, 550 or 2k? As I said, its just stupid. There is no second measure to ELO needed, ELO is the measure already. To be able to join ranked, you have to be level 30 and have a hole bunch of champs. That's all one need. Then you get into the noob-island where you are thrown against other noobs to measure your elo. You do 10 games there. With the first games changing your rank by 20-50 ELO per game, those 10 games will most likely bring you where you belong to. I really don't get how imposing another prerequisite will help with your issue? I regularly (when playing with friends who just started lol and barely made it to level 30) get matched with people who played more than 1k games, who understand nothing of the game (they play their champ rather well, but don't know how to not push, how to watch the mini-map, how to protect against ganks, where to ward, not to face-check and all those basics). The number of games is not at all correlated with your actual skill, so using it will not help ...


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Reepo

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

Senior Member

05-15-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by CNevor View Post

6 - To use the mode ranked player must have at least 400 wins and be at level 30.
how many people does it take to prove that experience does not equal skill? i mean really...

One of my friends only has about 150 wins total, but he is still better than me at the game.

Also- on reason this will never happen is the fact that to do something like this Riot would basically be making ranked exclusive for a limited 'few' players. now I don't know about you, but I didn't buy my 1st skin til I could play in a ranked match- this is a source of revenue, and by basically discouraging purchases from some people they would only be hurting themselves.


12