On February 02 2013 02:26 WhiteDog wrote: I gain 14-15 pts per win, lose 25 + ? wtf is this shit ? I'm at 3 points with 4-2. It's going to be fucking slow.
Happens when you're beating same-ELO opponents and losing to lower-ELO opponents. Don't lose to scrubs! :-P
I actually had this problem for a while trying to break the 2k barrier in WoW. We noticed that lower-ranked players than us tended to play certain comps, and actually had a system for ourselves where we took fewer risks against the "easy" comps as opposed to the "skill" comps. In WoW, "easy" comps were TSG, Turbocleave, and Beastcleave, while "hard" comps were Shadowplay, RMP, and RLS. Against "skill" comps we'd take aggressive risks to win, but we'd play "not to lose" against the teams where we thought they were lower rating than us - it actually resulted in a large boost in rating.
In LoL it's harder to tell but perhaps possible. I've noticed that lower-skill players tend (JUST TEND, NOT ALL) to play: Tryndamere, Darius, Mordekaiser, Katarina, Singed, Mundo, Ashe, Blitzcrank, Riven, and Jax. Obviously many of these are just strong champs, but could give some indication.
On February 02 2013 02:26 WhiteDog wrote: I gain 14-15 pts per win, lose 25 + ? wtf is this shit ? I'm at 3 points with 4-2. It's going to be fucking slow.
The amount of points you win/lose isn't static. If you beat a team with a higher average Elo you gain more points, if you lose to a team with lower average Elo you lose more points, and vice versa for both.
On February 01 2013 23:25 WaveofShadow wrote: Well in any case it's very uplifting to know that despite TL's general management ignoring us and the general populace's lack of knowledge of us, we are still apparently a central hub for LoL E-Sports and information.
It's always bugged me that LoL is a redheaded stepchild on this site, yet looking at the viewership on Twitch it is by FAR the most-watched esport right now. Twitch viewership last night (I watch before bed); SC2 5k, DotA 5k, WoW 11k (wat), LoL 75k.
Apparently WoW is really picking up steam with this expansion. Kind of makes me want to play agai-NO REQ NO. BAD REQ. DRUGS ARE BAD.
Well, my guild is looking for healers...XD
I was dual specced Ret/Prot. I healed for part of BoT and BWD in early Cata, wasn't crazy about it.
Also stop. I refuse to buy MoP and resub.
*whimper*
Don't worry, even if it's gotten a bit of resurgance, Ultimately, wow is still wow. No need to resub
Nope. NOPE. I'm done with that crack.
As far as aging hipsters go, I remember when the big names on the forum were Caller, Uta, Shakegizmo, Ezpz, WRAWRAWRAWRA, etc.... Something about Phrost dying (I forget the story now) and 5HITCOMBO being locked out of his house in the cold...? Maybe I have those last two mixed up....
Phrost was fat and died of a heart attack. 5hit got stuck outside one day in the snow so made a tent or some shit with some cardboard. #1 hobo. Callers bravery and speed garen. When 1600 was actually really high elo (like 2k+ today) and people would be like "i'm not 1600 but..." then uta would talk trash about their bad ideas.
Ah, the good ol' days before LoL's ranked system copied sc2's bad system.
On February 02 2013 02:19 Slayer91 wrote: Jesus fuck people think alarics posts are long I bet everyone stopped reading mine years ago
then again alarics posts are often hard to read mostly because its a cognitive dissonance jungle sponsored by the dunning-kruger effect
Na, your post is short but hard to read because I haven't touched these maths in 2 years. Mine would be bad even if they were objective because when it comes to it, I needed 10k characters and 2 and a half post yesterday to say exactly that:
On February 02 2013 01:11 M2 wrote: About the new ranking system, does anyone knows if you lose the division playoffs 2 out 3 where do you go back? at the bottom? Coz if you go at the top than you can play playoffs until you pass through? Additionally, can you fall down from your division when you reach the bottom? do you play playoffs to stay in it?
Answer to my question, guess its usefull for u 2
I'm a sad panda now... The elo rating was so simple and straightforward. I don't think that the new system is worse but it's just insanely convoluted. The video is six minutes long and you actually need that together with a bunch of graphs to explainit. Also why not give players the choice to see their elo? I feel babied by Riot. I can handle the hard truth about how much I suck, mommy.
Now imagine if I was tasked with one of the write-ups.
On February 01 2013 23:25 WaveofShadow wrote: Well in any case it's very uplifting to know that despite TL's general management ignoring us and the general populace's lack of knowledge of us, we are still apparently a central hub for LoL E-Sports and information.
It's always bugged me that LoL is a redheaded stepchild on this site, yet looking at the viewership on Twitch it is by FAR the most-watched esport right now. Twitch viewership last night (I watch before bed); SC2 5k, DotA 5k, WoW 11k (wat), LoL 75k.
I love being a redheaded stepchild, if that means I can discuss in an enviroment with a relative low number of trolls and people that are generally polite to each other. Seriously... why are people so obsessed about increasing the size of this place. I don't care about how many people regularly discuss here, I only care about the quality of the discussion. I'm sure that some people which put so much effort into this sub-forum would like to have a wider recognition and I totally think they deserve it, but selfish-me wants this place to remain small.
Well TL mods are always going to keep this place's discussion high-quality, and so it's safe to assume that even with more people this place will remain relatively the same in terms of quality discussion.
SC2 and DotA 2 subforums suggest otherwise.
Not all shitposting is banworthy.
If it was, this forum would be down another dozen or so recognizable names.
Forum quality tends to decrease with size because bad/shit-posters act as echo chambers. In a small forum there aren't enough of them to really cause many problems, but as a forum grows the echo effect increases. Eventually you reach critical mass and the good posts get overwhelmed in a broadcast storm of stupid.
It takes extremely draconian measures and an incredibly proactive mod staff (SEE: Elitist Jerks) to maintain the quality of discussion in a larger forum. We're unlikely to be allowed to take things that far here, so when/if the forum expands dramatically you can expect a lot less "Seuss and TheYango discuss the cost effectiveness of Aegis versus Locket in a myriad of teamfight scenarios" and more "XxXTEEMOTAUNTXxX asks what the timer for Baron is for the 43,135,834th time".
I think it's already down quite a few high elo posters.
On February 01 2013 10:14 NeoIllusions wrote: I don't get the complaints about Seekers. LiNk thinks that item is going to be popular as fk and I concur.
It's a matter of principle, specifically, "Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.” – Antoine de Saint-Exupery
That quote is kinda wrong though. I guess it's like "well if you have a blade that's half as long as you need it to be and has no hilt it's a perfect half sized blade with no hilt" while "a blade with a hilt that needs sharpening needs something to be taken away".
In mathematical terms he's saying Perfection isn't inf(upper bound) but is sup(lower bound)
infimum of an upper bound is the lowest possible value of the upper bound which in 1-D terms basically means nothing left to ad supreme of a lower bound is his highest possible value of a lower bound still in the function again in 1-D terms nothing left to take away.
In mathematics for a function to be integratable it must satisfy both of these conditions. And from my viewpoint it's the same as perfection. A perfect blade has just enough of something, not too much of not too little.
There's a point in that quote and its eloquent but it's incomplete. Ironically the quote is perfect if you take the assumption that what he says in the quote is true. LOL, fucking french fag hoisted by his own petards gg l2math bro
But he's not talking about math. o.O
The fuller version of the quote is: "A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." Antoine de Saint-Exupéry was poet, aviator, and author of The Little Prince, not a mathematician. He's not talking about bounds, integration, and functions, he's talking about writing, verse, and design.
I'm imagining if I'd quoted "a date that will live in infamy" you'd have said, "lolwut dates don't live".
So I just logged onto EUW to see what was going on...apparently I have Phantoml0rd's smurf on my friends list, k. I check to see what league he's been placed into:
Cassiopeia's Cyclops.
What the FUCK, Riot? Is that supposed to sound epic? It doesn't even make any sense; does she own a fucking legion of Cyclops minions which you are now a part of?
On February 02 2013 02:49 WaveofShadow wrote: Oh WHAT THE FUCK. Now you can't even see anyone else's champion winrates, all they give you is KDA. I hate you so much right now, Riot.
I'm going to assume you can still see your own wins AND losses though, right?
On February 02 2013 02:49 WaveofShadow wrote: Oh WHAT THE FUCK. Now you can't even see anyone else's champion winrates, all they give you is KDA. I hate you so much right now, Riot.
I'm going to assume you can still see your own wins AND losses though, right?
RIGHT?!?!
Yes. If you click on "more information" for yourself (it'll take you to the "ranked stats" page that was there previously), I mentioned it a bit earlier. It's still less user-friendly. You can also get the winrate of a person by looking at their number of games played, then adding together the numbers of wins for all their champions from that page. Won't give you anything champ specific tho.
This new system is absurdly stupid. Old System: Win game, get Elo. Lose game, lose elo. Simple. New system: Win 2 games, get some points. Lose 1 game, all points gone. Lose another game, demoted. No explanation how this stuff works, no reasoning as to why i lose double the amount of points i gain (I assume it is because i was way above my MMR, but then, why did i end up in that league in the first place?)
Why would anyone think that replacing a working simple system with a nonworking complicated system that people already hated in the last game it was in is a smart idea? Basically, my goal should now be to play until i get a winstreak which gets me into plat, and then it does not fucking matter at all what i do?
Ok maybe it takes a patch like this for people to finally realize why I have been saying this game has been going backwards for a while now. It is progressively getting worse instead of better aside from e-sports, which is great for Riot making money and the people that just play and watch the pros, but is terrible for the people in the middle namely plat/diamond level players. We play this game for the competition and that it is a mechanically rewarding and strategy provoking game, but the feeling of competition is only dwindling as they screw around with champs and items and continue to take away things like elo and winrates.
On February 01 2013 10:14 NeoIllusions wrote: I don't get the complaints about Seekers. LiNk thinks that item is going to be popular as fk and I concur.
It's a matter of principle, specifically, "Perfection is achieved not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away.” – Antoine de Saint-Exupery
That quote is kinda wrong though. I guess it's like "well if you have a blade that's half as long as you need it to be and has no hilt it's a perfect half sized blade with no hilt" while "a blade with a hilt that needs sharpening needs something to be taken away".
In mathematical terms he's saying Perfection isn't inf(upper bound) but is sup(lower bound)
infimum of an upper bound is the lowest possible value of the upper bound which in 1-D terms basically means nothing left to ad supreme of a lower bound is his highest possible value of a lower bound still in the function again in 1-D terms nothing left to take away.
In mathematics for a function to be integratable it must satisfy both of these conditions. And from my viewpoint it's the same as perfection. A perfect blade has just enough of something, not too much of not too little.
There's a point in that quote and its eloquent but it's incomplete. Ironically the quote is perfect if you take the assumption that what he says in the quote is true. LOL, fucking french fag hoisted by his own petards gg l2math bro
But he's not talking about math. o.O
The fuller version of the quote is: "A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away." Antoine de Saint-Exupéry was poet, aviator, and author of The Little Prince, not a mathematician. He's not talking about bounds, integration, and functions, he's talking about writing, verse, and design.
I'm imagining if I'd quoted "a date that will live in infamy" you'd have said, "lolwut dates don't live".
you just repeated the quote again as if they proves your post it doesnt matter what we're talking about a story isn't perfect if there's nothing to take away, a blank page has nothing to take away. A perfect story without an ending has nothing to take away but you just cut off an important piece. It's an important quote because it puts focus on keeping things trim to preserve clarity of vision however that's not everything. It's just "less is more" is usually a good guideline because people in design and writing tend to overclutter things when it's not needed. Conciseness is good but that quote shouldn't be taken out of context as I explained in my above post.
EPT
![[image loading]](http://dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/000000/20000/3000/800/23817/23817.strip.gif)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/sHNdVczl.jpg)
