TrulyBland (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=dead men waIking,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=w0H8h5c7,comment-id=000f0001000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-19T18:19:53.367+0000) > > Your counter exemples are dumb. you are the one thinking in black and white, there are many scenarios in which you can die yes. if you die 10 time in a row without much significant kill/assist participation, you are bad, dont justify yourself. I'm not the one thinking in black and white, I'm well aware of all the different nuanced scenarios there are. But I'm not the one who is making a general "All X are Y" statement. I get to choose my **counterexamples** however I want. If they run counter to your statement, they disprove your statement. Again, that is a simple aspect of logic. Oh, btw, you seem to have skipped past my question, since you never answered it: Will that death, despite it being a good decision, increase the chance that your rating will drop because of "feeding"? > the Elo system works, those who are higher elo are basement dwellers that play league 24/7 or do it for a living. it doesn't work for your average player who plays 8-10 games per week. Why not? > "the mathetimatical system" that you keep mentioning that you probably don't know anything about is called variance. No? The system I am talking about - which I never called a "mathematical system" - is the Elo system. Variance is not a system, it's a concept; a mathematical concept though, so that part is right. Now, I'm not sure what exactly you mean with the statement that it "works in the long term"; but I presume you mean that it diminishes as the sample size increases. But that's not even that relevant to the Elo system, as variance only diminishes relative to the total number of outcomes. That does mean that eventually you will have won about 50% of your games. But rating is absolute. So Whether you have won 26 games of 50 or whether you have won 101 games of 100, you would have the same rating (that part's a bit simplified, I admit), despite the fact that the latter is much closer to 50%. The Elo system isn't just based on variance diminishing, it also is based on the fact that the place where your rating is accurate is a natural equilibrium that you are, at all times, more likely to approach than diverge from. That's the case because if the system thinks you are worse than you actually are, games will be skewed in your favour. That means that if you have played 100 games, and due to chance are 10 wins away from your theoretical "true" rating, you are more likely to win your next game. In contrast, if you flipped 100 coins which, due to chance, are 10 heads away from an equal number of heads and tails, you are **still** equally likely to flip heads or tails on your next coin toss. So far I'm mostly talking from memory, but if you want me to get really deep in to that subject which I apparently "don't know anything about" I am more than happy to dust off the massive statistics script that's in a shelf just a couple of meters away from me. Always knew it would come in handy some day. [Edit: Damn, appears I'll have to eat my words on this part, since the script is not where I thought it was. It seems I misplaced it.] > except league is not gambling, and we shouldn't have to play a huge statistical amount of games to make the system work how it's intended. And instead you propose to use something that isn't even based on any statistics at all. You are willing to throw away something that is only accurate in the long term for something of which you literally do not know how accurate it is.
> The Elo system isn't just based on variance diminishing, it also is based on the fact that the place where your rating is accurate is a natural equilibrium that you are, at all times, more likely to approach than diverge from. That's the case because if the system thinks you are worse than you actually are, games will be skewed in your favour. > That means that if you have played 100 games, and due to chance are 10 wins away from your theoretical "true" rating, you are more likely to win your next game. > In contrast, if you flipped 100 coins which, due to chance, are 10 heads away from an equal number of heads and tails, you are **still** equally likely to flip heads or tails on your next coin toss. > Except it's actually worse, to "skew the games in your favour", that's basically putting you WITH and against " weaker" players, except weaker players are MORE likely not less to reduce your individual impact as they are more likely to feed. It is based on statistics, if you feed on multiple accounts, you are a feeder. just take an arbitrary going 0/5/0 + before the 8min mark or 0/10 before the 15min mark. on a 3/10 games basis, as feeding there you go. of course it's an arbitrary number, Riot can adapt it how they see fit. it might be unfair to some people, but right now having one feeder on your team is unfair to four people. And yes eventually you will beat the variance, maybe you have time for that, but i don't.
: URF Canon shouldn't exist.
This, i don't want a zed to randomly spawn behind me when I'm playing a marksman in URF.
TrulyBland (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=dead men waIking,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=w0H8h5c7,comment-id=000f00010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-10-19T17:37:47.939+0000) > >Yes of course it is, except you will not die 8 times in a row early game because of that. what you are saying is pointless. Stop thinking in black and white terms, start thinking in statistics: Will that death, despite it being a good decision, increase the chance that your rating will drop because of "feeding"? > What mathematical model are you talking about? care to elaborate? you are the one throwing blanket statements here lol. The... you know… Elo system? League has moved away from it quite a bit by now, although it's not known how far. But at its core, the system is still defined by the same underlying principle: Have a mathematical model based on wins and losses that allows you to estimate somebody's chance to win, make games with an estimated 50/50 chance to win for both teams, adjust peoples' ratings based on wins and losses until you're right. As long as gain and loss of the rating is symmetrical (and even remotely sensible) the law of big numbers ensures these ratings will eventually be accurate. >Also you are making sound like you are either good or you kill steal, as those are the only two scenarios that exist. your logic is not as rational as you think sigh.. Those are called counterexamples. They are a vital part of logical thinking.
Your counter exemples are dumb. you are the one thinking in black and white, there are many scenarios in which you can die yes. if you die 10 time in a row without much significant kill/assist participation, you are bad, dont justify yourself. the Elo system works, those who are higher elo are basement dwellers that play league 24/7 or do it for a living. it doesn't work for your average player who plays 8-10 games per week. "the mathetimatical system" that you keep mentioning that you probably don't know anything about is called variance. it is true that it works in a long term, it is used by gambling houses and games like poker. except league is not gambling, and we shouldn't have to play a huge statistical amount of games to make the system work how it's intended.
TrulyBland (EUNE)
: You elegantly dodged my questions there. Well, here's the deal: I trust a mathematical model over your blanket statement of when somebody does or doesn't deserve a certain rank. If you go back to your previous post you will also find that you have not even included assists in your previous blanket statement. Since you didn't like my previous question, let me give you a new one: Consider the following scenario: You have very low HP. Your ADC (who has shown the entire game to be a **very** good player, and in fact more useful to the team than you) also has very low HP. The enemy Caitlyn uses her ult on your ADC. Is interrupting that utlimate a good decision?
Yes of course it is, except you will not die 8 times in a row early game because of that. what you are saying is pointless. What mathematical model are you talking about? care to elaborate? you are the one throwing blanket statements here lol. Also you are making sound like you are either good or you kill steal, as those are the only two scenarios that exist. your logic is not as rational as you think sigh..
TrulyBland (EUNE)
: > [{quoted}](name=dead men waIking,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=w0H8h5c7,comment-id=000f0001,timestamp=2019-10-19T15:09:17.996+0000) > > If it's not intentional, and you still go 2/11, then you don't deserve your elo Who deserves a higher rank? Somebody that has been able to prove that they are able to consistently win more games than they lose, or somebody who killsteals* a lot and never ever takes any risk to help their team? *Just to clarify, when I say "killsteal" I mean actions that serve no purpose (or are even detrimental to team efforts) apart from getting the last hit on an already secure kill.
you can't reliably "kill steal" all the time, and it will give others assists as well. if you feed without a high kill OR assist participation you are bad, you don't deserve your elo.
: > Yea I get that but people abuse it all the time Then you don't actually get it. Because you can't abuse **the rules**. I could flip this around - people abuse pick intent to try to bully people out of their rightful bans, and then threaten to troll like children when they don't get their way. Pick intent is there for one reason - so we don't have to waste time saying "Don't ban Morg" like we used to in the Good Olde Days.
Of course you can abuse the rules, they are made by humans after all, they are Godly laws. That being said, it having "declare intent" prevent you from banning a champion would result in even more abuse.
: I've played sports almost my entire life, and none of that casual stuff either. The ones where you need to go to tryouts each year and be evaluated to get on the best teams. I played soccer, baseball, and a bit of hockey, and I can assure you that if you were not having a good day, you would either be benched and forced to watch for most if not all of the game, or be forced to be the reason you're team is losing, **which in person is a lot more embarrassing and makes you feel a lot worse than in a video game where said person can just hide behind a monitor without a care in the world.** I don't understand why talking trash in a video game is a bannable offense in the slightest and I am genuinely curious as to your reply to this, because I am open-minded about most things, but nothing I have seen has made me second guess my thinking. I grew up on xbox live chat rooms and real life sports, and of course the xbox live chat rooms were more toxic in general with the trash talking, but you severely underestimate how much of a %%%% some parents/kids are when it comes to real life sports. Calling someone a worthless piece of shit should not be bannable, and I am astounded that it currently is. If you are sensitive enough that a random stranger on the internet calling you bad is enough for you to not want to play, maybe just stick to casuals and not join a competitive environment where people are trying to win and will get mad if you are doing poorly, and are the reason they are losing. I have been on the receiving end of this toxicity, and of course it can be disheartening, especially so when the entire team is ganging up on you like a fucking hive, but not once have I quit playing a game because someone in one of my games was being mean to me. I mained healer in Overwatch, where people would go on voice comms and yell curse words constantly if you decided to heal someone more important than them. Despite being called a stupid bitch e-thot in more than 50% of my games, I still hit the top 0.1%, because most of the time, if you are being toxic in chat, you are still going to play the game and try, and it was very often that I'd have the same person that called me a worthless piece of shit, say "wow good ult" later on (although most just end up shutting up and not flaming anymore).
This could be easily avoided if reporting someone who feeds on multiple accounts get them punished. let's say you have 10+ deaths in several games with low kills/assists and you get reported, and those games are lost. then for example you drop one rank If it's not intentional, and you still go 2/11, then you don't deserve your elo and rank drop is still justified. This would also deal with the purchased accounts issue.
Jamaree (NA)
: Doesn't your opponent have to deal with that as well. So if you are both dealing with feeders and they are able to carry and you can't, doesn't that mean they are better then you? Edit: Now that I think about it, doesn't this analogy kind of fall apart in the grand scheme of things because if Frieza decided to use his massive power over the other Z fighters at the start instead of wasting his time gloating at how much stronger he was, ie, using his advantage to end the game, he wouldn't have given Goku the time to get his several Zenkai boost. Seriously, Frieza could have went to each village, quickly get the dragonball, not waste time trying to boost his ego and KDA, gotten the balls, then dipped before Goku had time to get there, or even Krillin and Gohan had he not gloated, gotten his scouters blown up, continued to waste time after he got the new scouters from the Ginyus, continued to waste MORE time fighting a person going average instead of getting the dragonballs (fighting Nail instead of you know...doing what he planned to do, AS WELL as bothering to follow him for like an hour, ie being baited into a chase), and then waste even MORE time not using his full strength and then again wasting even MORE time not immediately killing the Z Fighters who he was clearly stronger then by playing around more BEFORE KILLING HIMSELF in the end. So are you saying that you waste time not ending the game to instead pad your KDA and boost your ego?
You are diving too much into the details of the analogy and missing the actual point. the point is it's hard for me and my opponent to climb, not just me. Of course i will climb. but it will be a slower, bad experience. no one has to play an absurd ammount of games to beat the variance to get to their true elo. this is not poker.
Saezio (EUNE)
: In this meta you can easily kill anyone BEFORE they have bought a single item. You can kill at levels 2-3-4-5 easily with how high damage is
high damage goes both ways lol, tell me how you can kill : a malzahar just perma pushing and farming with E and staying behind? a vlad building defensive items and just sustain farming what he can get even missing cs. a mundo building full tank and just farming with his Q. a gankplank farming with barels. those are just a few examples.
Pika Fox (NA)
: So what youre saying is..... The only way youd lose is to be cocky and not take it seriously from the start, then killing yourself at the end? I mean, frieza could kill goku at any moment while hes feeding.
No, frieza and goku fought the first time they met, frieza didnt even know about goku before.
Ameliea (EUW)
: This is actually the perfect analogy. You think you are better than everyone and look down on others, and due to your hubris get beaten by actually hard working individuals who focus on improving over gloating how great you are.
We are talking about a scenario where you have feeders in your team, so obviously you are better than them, i don't see how you fail to see that. "hard working" is just RNG playing in your favour and getting the equally feeding agro player in your lane. actually the other laner can just straight up AFK farm behind their turret and you would still lose if another laner decided to keep dying as fast as they respawn. there is no improving, you don't chose which enemy you are up against, its all RNG, if you get 4 feeders BOTLANE, you will be outscaled by both ally botlane et enemy botlane, thus reducing your individual impact.
: I don't quite understand what you're trying to say. So, you're saying: If I'm an offensive player and both teams have feeders but the enemy team has defensive players, I will lose? However, I will somehow miraculously become Goku, heal up in the Rejuvenation Chamber and become stronger just in time to win the game, yet still lose because there's feeders on the enemy team because there's also feeders on my team?
Not miraculously, if you trade kills with an opponent you both get fed. to illustrate i will give you an extreme example : you are vayne adc vs caitlyn, for the sake of the argument you are both equally matched, you trade kills every time you comeback to lane. both of you have 4 completed items, when the laning phase is over my individual impact is completely lost, and i have to rely on the fed vayne to do all the work because she is the only one who can stop the fed caitlyn that can two shot you with all the lead.
: >Goku and Vegeta fight and beat each other off a few times. Can you be more specific? Asking for a friend.
Super saiyan power has it so that, when you get beat, you get stronger. goku and vegeta fought initially on episode 24 of DBZ and both got insanely stronger.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=floo,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=J2UF0Ojz,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2019-10-19T09:31:44.166+0000) > > No it's only the worst feeders always in the team of the complaining person. And it's always someone else on their team who did the wrong. Yeah, I noticed that. Apparently, no one here EVER has it where the feeder, troll, or afk is on the opponent team.
You are missing the point, the feeders are on MY TEAM and the enemy team. it's not about who gets feeders, it's about both teams getting feeders and reducing individual impact.
: I’ve titled this the: “My botlane always feeds illusion.”
You are All missing the point, if your botlane carries or feeds and you basically win/lose off of that, your impact is reduced to shreds. its like saying that minions get carried by champions just as much as their champions feed. the point is YOUR IMPACT is highly reduced, and it you can't enjoy the game because the result is decided by someone else anyway.
Comentários de Rioters
: > [{quoted}](name=SwiftKitten88,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=Abpg21HM,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2018-08-28T19:10:20.486+0000) > > ?? > silver is only the CENTER becuase they abritrally MAKE IT SO by putting new players into silver. actually silver is the center because it has the highest congregation of players, not because thats where they place them, but because no one ever moves up or down much > > if u think ANY new player has the skill you CLIMB OUT OF BRONZE INTO SILVER then you are delusional.. they dont. i dont tbh, but you said it yourself, NEW. if your accurate MMR is in fact silver then statistically speaking you can > > and climbing out of bronze isn't hard hence why silver is dead center > > becuase u KNOW the enemy sucks > and even if thier fed... they suck. therefore u can easily outplay them. yes > > in silver its mixed about 70-80% of actaul silver players who climbed out of bronze or player who cant climb to gold beccause they reason im aboutt o describe > > and about 20-30% brand new players > > nowe.. w/e team gets the brand new player... LOSES actually thats the reason provisionals are a thing, to get that noob player where they belong ASAP > > it donest fucking matter how good u do.. how well u can carry.. its it worse than a 4v5... becuase in a 4v5 you dont have a playing inting becuase they dont know how the game works. > > and the issue is if they int even if your better than the player they fed.. it is a LOT harder to outplay someone who has map awareness and has knowledge of the game and of thier champions than a noob in bronze who is just button smashing > > so unless u also happened to be vs a partcvially bad silver or a new player its hard to match thier lead.. > > games in silver are flat out decided by match making before u even reach champ select becuase about 90% of the tie u flat out CANNOT CARRY a 4v6. and even most silvers wont know how to let u carry them. thats it though, assuming you arent new, 4 chances for your team to suck, 5 for the enemy. that part is actually balanced in your own favor. > > i climbed out of bronze with a 16 game winstreak. > > and as long as u dont get more than 1-2 losses you can comtinue your climb.. but as soon as you get those 3-4 random losses in a row becuase match making fucking is pissed at your then u no longer get your 30+lp per win.. and getting that back is a nightmare becuase then u get worse and worse teammates. elo evens out your gains losses, and bumps you higher until you actually start losing (which is when it thinks it found where you belong) > > it also donest help that instead of putting you with better oppoents and better teammas as u climb to keep mmr even > like when my mmr reach 3k from 2.5k i get four 3k teammates vs 5 3k oppoents 4 3k teammates plus your 3k is a 5 3k mmr team vs 5 3k mmr opponents. thats intended > > it puts u with the SAME noob oppoents but gives u completly mental teammates to "even" the mmr > > > so i get 5 2.5k oppoents (for 12.5k) > > and i get 4 teammates at like 2.375 all facing 2.5 enemies.. and sure i can get fed vs my opponents but then every freaking lane loses and then one of those 2.5k is actaully a 0.2k becuase thier a new player, and its hell. > during provisionals it places you against them but you dont per say have an actual MMR, thats what its determining > i stopped playing ranked its not worth it same, its stressful when im just trying to relax and play a game
> thats it though, assuming you arent new, 4 chances for your team to suck, 5 for the enemy. that part is actually balanced in your own favor. i totally agree with this, however this is mostly true in bronze where players fall down from silver, in the latter you have new players who are clueless about the game BUT you also have smurfs who just started out and other stuck players who might a bit worse or as good as you are. and then it turns into : the one who gets the opponents who just farms and plays safe loses > elo evens out your gains losses, and bumps you higher until you actually start losing (which is when it thinks it found where you belong) it is possible to run into a big loss streak, and even if it evens out, it takes a LOT of games to do so, to the point where climbing becomes a chore rather than a leisure, much like leveling in MMORPGS.
Galiö (NA)
: Just keep one ticking your cheesey full AP cho and you'll be put of silver on no time. New players arent very good but neither are players in bronze through gold. Plat it becomes tolerable but becomes more toxic. Then diamond it gets better and either you get a super chill or super toxic game. Then it's high diamond/master it's pretty much playing against the same people 80% of the time and hope you dont get the autofill or else you prob will lose. Then its challenger where 75% of your matches will be decided by who had the auto fill.
its scary how people check your history xD
: If they only put new player sin Bronze, Riot would have to actually do something about trolls in order to keep players. Bronze is an artificially non-merit-based system simply by virtue of it not operating like other divisions - you can't lose your way out. If players don't feel like they did this to themselves, and that if you're good you can climb, they'd quit. Because whether you want to admit it or not, whether your self-worth can tolerate it or not, Bronze is a carnival game designed to make you lose. Not intentionally, I don't think Riot meant for that, but it's the result you have when you have a system propping up vagrants, bums, and malcontents while hamstringing decent people who do enjoy the game, the community, and the climb.
glad someone agrees. It just really sucks when you play to win, you're not having fun, so you are compromising your fun at the game to climb, when it doesn't work out you tilt even harder.
Comentários de Rioters
Paroe (NA)
: >Damage was always here, its here now, and it has been here when assassins were meta, remember when you would get deleted by katarina, fizz leblanc, rengar... yet the game was fun. This is false. Damage has not always been at the level it is now, and was _much_ lower many seasons ago. While assassins could always well... assassinate, they arent the damage most people are complaining about and in fact AP itemization has been nerfed over time. >giving high damage to any champions despite of their role is a problem, as demonstrated by support mages in the bot lane having kill potential thanks to aery/orb/electrocute damage, which shouldn't be there, There is 0 things wrong with champions being on relatively equal footing early on. When a bard without lichbane who doesnt land back to back stuns can 1v1 draven in about 2 seconds in the late game THEN you have a problem with low-damage champions doing to much damage. Do. Not. Confuse. Windows. Of. Power. With. To. Much. Damage. Theyre very different things; in fact, champions shouldnt just "win" by default because reasons like so many people seem to think. As for the rest of your post, snowball 1v9 meta was an aweful era where it was carry or be carried with very little actual team effectiveness. We dont want that; We want better overall balance between the classes. The only way to achieve that at this point is, unfortunately, to completely revamp itemization and the runes system so that a champions worth is mostly their _kit_ instead of their _items_ like it is now. Turrets also need to be touched, though. Id love for them to do less damage, but have MUCH higher attack speed. Like... Lets go with 1.5 attack speed and watch so many problems with the game just go away.
i agree, but if this game is made so that your individual impact on the game is only 20%, then remove the current ranking system which evaluates a player based on his team's performance.
: Nah nah nah nah nah, the reason why you can't solo carry is because league is a team based game. Therefore, one person can't win you the game, but one person can most certainly lose you the game. Story of my life right there folks :^]
which means elo hell exists, im adressing those people who say that "if you are good, you will climb, regardless of your team"
: > you could snowball the game and possibly win 1v9, you just have to get fed right? you get fed by killing your opponents, and you accumulate kills to the point where you are unstoppable, the other fed opponents cant face you, This is a bad thing. A team based game should never devolve to the point where 1 player makes the entirety of the enemy team useless.
i never said make the ennemy yeam useless, i said he should be able to get close to influencing the game as to win the majority of his games. because he belongs higher in rankings.
Comentários de Rioters

dead men waIking

Nível 44 (EUW)
Total de votos positivos
Criar uma discussão