[Patch 1.0.0.135: Fiora] General Discussion - Page 228

On March 19 2012 23:42 robertdinh wrote:


Do you think I would expose great players to scrutiny just to satisfy the curiosity of players who don't consider all of the variables and probably use solo queue elo as a measuring tool and consider it more accurate than it actually is?

On March 19 2012 23:33 robertdinh wrote:
You still seem to assume that leavers trolls and dcs happen equally to both teams, they don't. They are random, and you don't play with the same people under the same circumstances over and over. It could happen 90% of the time to one player, and 40% of the time to another player. But players involved in the random elements will move on and play other games, skewing those results as well, until it all ripples out.

On March 19 2012 23:45 Slusher wrote:
weather or not ELO hell does exist the number of people I've met in this game whos' self diagnosis of their own skill was inflated beyond belief. at the "ELO hell" range of 11k-13k (I think that is what people claim it is) a lot of the players can't even tell which lanes are ahead/behind, so naturally they think it isn't their fault.

basically, ELO may exist, but as far as being the real problem, it pales in comparison to 1200s being able to determine a well played game vs a poorly played one.

On March 19 2012 23:46 TheYango wrote:

My mind is still completely boggled by the fact that you can believe that one player's frequency of getting trolls/leavers/DCs on their team can be randomly and inexplicably higher than someone else's, and that this does NOT average out over many games.

The only identifying feature of anyone being matchmade is their Elo. There is absolutely no reasoning by which you can say player X has a higher chance of getting leavers/trolls/DCs than player Y.

On March 19 2012 23:42 robertdinh wrote:
Really? Because it seems like every time they "smurf" they actually tell people in game who they are and to let them have whatever champion they want, or word gets out because they are actually streaming it and not smurfing at all.

Show me a 2k elo player that played a smurf account in complete anonymity and got back to the same elo in nearly the same amount of games played that it took his main account.

On March 19 2012 23:16 red_ wrote:
robertdinh you seem to have missed the opportunity to introduce me to these 'really great players' stuck at 1400. I was aware that they are obviously not famous because of Elo Hell, and was giving you the chance to shine light upon them, get them known, so that they can no longer live their plight. So, if you would please, I am awaiting the information of these players.

On March 19 2012 23:50 TheYango wrote:

OK fine, Saintvicious has a higher chance of getting back to 2k Elo than I do.

The question is, do I fucking care? How about between two nobodies? Are their probabilities of getting trolls different?

I could care less that Saint gets an easy time in solo queue, because he's proven his worth in tournament play.

On March 19 2012 23:51 robertdinh wrote:
That seems to be the issue here, you don't seem to care about accuracy, yet you don't want to admit that solo queue ratings aren't that accurate because they don't take into account a wide array of variables.

On March 19 2012 23:51 Two_DoWn wrote:
What do you guys think of a gardener type champion? She could drop Venus Fly Traps that imobilize and damage foes, Grow vines to pull them around, Use pollen to heal nearby enemies, and her ult could be an AOE effect that gives your team increased movespeed on a bed of flowers she summons?

Id post a concept pic from Google, but for some reason the only pics I can find of Dryads are NSFW. Sick fucks, looking at mother nature like that...

So instead we get some Rainbow Roses. Pretty sweet, no?

On March 19 2012 23:52 TheYango wrote:

Except the number of people whose names are well-known enough that their player name actually skews their chance of winning a solo queue game is so small that it has a virtually inconsequential effect on every other player playing ranked.

Solo queue rating has poor resolution it's true. But that resolution is still good to ~100 Elo at the very least. There are probably 1400 players that could be 1500, but to suggest that there are 1400 players that could be tournament level is ludicrous.

On March 19 2012 23:55 robertdinh wrote:
Yet the thinking that they use, their theories on the game, and the application of such theories is attempted at all elos by players that are much less proficient than them, further skewing results simply based on their reputation.

On March 19 2012 23:55 Slusher wrote:


I like it, but if they were to make another support champ, I'd want a bard. I guess Sona sorta fills this role but, my vision of a bard is a little different.

On March 19 2012 23:55 Slusher wrote:
I like it, but if they were to make another support champ, I'd want a bard. I guess Sona sorta fills this role but, my vision of a bard is a little different.

On March 19 2012 23:48 robertdinh wrote:


This I agree with, but you can also make the argument that elo hell itself helps to skew people's perceptions of how good or bad they or the people in the games with them are.

But back to the spirit behind what you were saying, that kind of issue is apparent at all elos but tapers off a lot after 2k when people generally have a clue of how to play (there are still exceptions even at that high a rating)



Damn man, you are still stuck on probability, i am not talking about probability here, I am talking about reality, and the reality of it is every player is not exposed to the same group of players or the same amount of leavers/dcs/trolls.