| Forum Index > LoL General |
|
Slayer91
Ireland23463 Posts
On March 15 2013 03:45 TheYango wrote: LoL takes advantage of the law of large numbers too though. . If the game is legitimately taking advantage then the tryndamere has ways to shut that down. | ||
|
LargoLeGrande
United States16 Posts
On March 15 2013 03:42 thenexusp wrote: MTG does best-of-3s for everything. You can even include 15 extra cards that you can swap into your deck for games 2 and 3 so you don't randomly lose to a counter deck. The top 8s of big tournaments are best of 5 as well, and tournaments are basically always done using Swiss style rounds (with a cut to a top 8 for anything larger than small game store tournys). So there's a fair amount of compensation for the amount of variance that goes on when playing MTG. | ||
|
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
On March 15 2013 03:47 kainzero wrote: i dunno, the super bowl and march madness tournaments are really fun to watch arguably i like march madness more than the nba finals Too difficult to compare because of the snowball-y nature of League in particular. It'd be more apt if, say, after each touchdown you got to field another player. Sure, you can get close games, or come back from a big deficit, but more likely than not the team that takes an early lead wins. Wasn't there a statistic that said something to the effect of first blood or first dragon results in victory more around 70% of the time? Each eSports match plays out wildly differently than the last (for the most part), but the same cannot be said about regular sports. In a best of 1 finals, a strong counterpick or cheesy first blood/tower strat can cause victory where it might not "be deserved". But that's all rambling mostly. | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On March 15 2013 03:47 kainzero wrote: i dunno, the super bowl and march madness tournaments are really fun to watch arguably i like march madness more than the nba finals The issue with the NFL is that if you go Bo3 for each round with a week off in between round, the playoffs would go on for 4 months, almost as long as the regular season. | ||
AsmodeusXI
United States15536 Posts
On March 15 2013 03:51 Slayer91 wrote: If the game is legitimately taking advantage then the tryndamere has ways to shut that down. Deep cut. | ||
|
jcarlsoniv
United States27922 Posts
On March 15 2013 03:51 Slayer91 wrote: If the game is legitimately taking advantage then the tryndamere has ways to shut that down. I love you | ||
|
kainzero
United States5211 Posts
On March 15 2013 03:58 Requizen wrote: Too difficult to compare because of the snowball-y nature of League in particular. It'd be more apt if, say, after each touchdown you got to field another player. Sure, you can get close games, or come back from a big deficit, but more likely than not the team that takes an early lead wins. Wasn't there a statistic that said something to the effect of first blood or first dragon results in victory more around 70% of the time? Each eSports match plays out wildly differently than the last (for the most part), but the same cannot be said about regular sports. In a best of 1 finals, a strong counterpick or cheesy first blood/tower strat can cause victory where it might not "be deserved". But that's all rambling mostly. i'm not saying bo1 in lol is a good idea... just that bo1 does have a place in some situations. | ||
|
Ghost-z
United States1291 Posts
The simple way to fix the snowbally feature of LoL is to just have items become less efficient when you combine them and more efficient at the low tiers. This way players would fill all 6 item slots before combining to larger (more slot efficient) items. As the game is right now you would be a fool to base with 3k gold and not purchase a major item. The problem is that once you get ahead, the items allow you to become even more ahead. | ||
|
UniversalSnip
9871 Posts
On March 15 2013 03:51 LargoLeGrande wrote: The top 8s of big tournaments are best of 5 as well, and tournaments are basically always done using Swiss style rounds (with a cut to a top 8 for anything larger than small game store tournys). So there's a fair amount of compensation for the amount of variance that goes on when playing MTG. built into the invite structure as well | ||
|
Requizen
United States33802 Posts
On March 15 2013 04:27 UniversalSnip wrote: built into the invite structure as well Perhaps the Challenger tier will help with this. Currently, I don't think an invite structure is feasible due to the (relatively) small number of "top teams". Unless you're only inviting like 4 teams, you end up seeing the same 10-12 teams at each tournament. It would be great to see an invite tournament with 8 teams off of the challenger tier that maybe people haven't heard of, but become big afterwards. | ||
|
JALbert
United States484 Posts
On March 15 2013 03:58 Requizen wrote: Wasn't there a statistic that said something to the effect of first blood or first dragon results in victory more around 70% of the time? Correlation != Causation. Also, Riot is genius with Bo1 and the variance. Their goal isn't to give us the most accurate determination of the best team, it's to create drama and keep people talking about "who is the best?". If LCS matches were Bo5 to get a win we wouldn't have upsets, interesting power rankings, and all the shit that makes it like following other high variance sports. I mean, I sit around daydreaming ways to improve college football matchmaking so we can actually figure out the best team, but let's be honest - the strict desire to figure out the best system to determine who is better than who isn't necessarily congruent with keeping the most people entertained with your sport. | ||
|
phyvo
United States5635 Posts
On March 15 2013 03:45 TheYango wrote: LoL takes advantage of the law of large numbers too though. It's not like a single crit or dodge determines the outcome of a game. In the case where you got crit in a level 1 or 2 engage, that doesn't equate a lost game unless you and your team make a long series of misplays after that fact. The effect of these things is spread out over the course of the entire game. Yes, which is why I still play LoL and I'm not pushing for it to change. But hard randomness is not an inevitable feature of a game the same way a player's performance randomness is, you can simply not include it in your code and it's gone. Moreover, unlike MTG and poker you could remove all randomness from LoL without drastically changing the nature of the game itself. TF's pick a card and tryndamere's RNG crit focused flavor would lose their character much like MTG would but the vast majority of champions (AD carries included) would not be damaged in any serious way. In cold terms of pure competition I think eliminating it entirely would be a step up, I don't think dealing with hard randomness raises the skill ceiling enough to warrant the risk of masking winners or the burden of lengthening games to compensate. If LoL is so shallow that someone feels they *need* hard randomness to make it interesting to watch in competition it is a weak game and Riot should strengthen it rather than trying to mask the weakness by coding in more dice. Luckily for us though LoL is still a strong game and the team aspect gives it the skill ceiling it needs IMO. (I also acknowledge JALbert's point above and agree that too many trials do reduce a sport's ability to tell an entertaining story. I don't see how crits are necessary for that story though and I probably lean towards more-trials-is-better). | ||
|
onlywonderboy
United States23745 Posts
On March 15 2013 04:41 JALbert wrote: Correlation != Causation. Also, Riot is genius with Bo1 and the variance. Their goal isn't to give us the most accurate determination of the best team, it's to create drama and keep people talking about "who is the best?". If LCS matches were Bo5 to get a win we wouldn't have upsets, interesting power rankings, and all the shit that makes it like following other high variance sports. I mean, I sit around daydreaming ways to improve college football matchmaking so we can actually figure out the best team, but let's be honest - the strict desire to figure out the best system to determine who is better than who isn't necessarily congruent with keeping the most people entertained with your sport. Any system besides the BCS. | ||
|
sob3k
United States7572 Posts
need a fun little casual game for all this sitting around but they are all usually so simple and boring. Path of exile just doesn't do it for me for some reason.  | ||
|
mordek
United States12705 Posts
| ||
|
onlywonderboy
United States23745 Posts
On March 15 2013 05:02 sob3k wrote: Man, I'm on oxycodone right now, and I just cant play leagues....other than it making me kind of bad, i just get all sad whenever I lose....ruins the fun. Now what am I supposed to play, SC2 way too hard when high on narcotics......boooooored need a fun little casual game for all this sitting around but they are all usually so simple and boring. Path of exile just doesn't do it for me for some reason. Dominion? | ||
|
Gahlo
United States35174 Posts
On March 15 2013 05:02 sob3k wrote: Man, I'm on oxycodone right now, and I just cant play leagues....other than it making me kind of bad, i just get all sad whenever I lose....ruins the fun. Now what am I supposed to play, SC2 way too hard when high on narcotics......boooooored need a fun little casual game for all this sitting around but they are all usually so simple and boring. Path of exile just doesn't do it for me for some reason. Try FTL. | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On March 15 2013 04:20 Ghost-z wrote: If games didn't snowball so hard in league, best of 1s would be more viable. There's also blue/purple imbalance right now. | ||
|
overt
United States9006 Posts
On March 15 2013 04:41 JALbert wrote: I mean, I sit around daydreaming ways to improve college football matchmaking so we can actually figure out the best team, but let's be honest - the strict desire to figure out the best system to determine who is better than who isn't necessarily congruent with keeping the most people entertained with your sport. I'm 99.9% certain that the system college football uses isn't designed to find out who the best team is. It's designed to make money. Ideally tournaments would do bo3 for LoL. I think that long leagues such as LCS or Garena ProLeague or whatever are fine doing bo1s since the teams will play each other so much during the season that it doesn't really matter (also doing a season with all bo3s would likely take too long). | ||
|
onlywonderboy
United States23745 Posts
On March 15 2013 05:09 overt wrote: I'm 99.9% certain that the system college football uses isn't designed to find out who the best team is. It's designed to make money. Ideally tournaments would do bo3 for LoL. I think that long leagues such as LCS or Garena ProLeague or whatever are fine doing bo1s since the teams will play each other so much during the season that it doesn't really matter (also doing a season with all bo3s would likely take too long). BO2 would be ideal but BO1 is OK. | ||
| ||
|
|
Patches Events
PiGosaur Cup
Kung Fu Cup
Replay Cast
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
OSC
IntoTheTV X SOOP
Reynor vs Solar
ByuN vs SHIN
Clem vs MaxPax
herO vs Rogue
WardiTV Invitational
IPSL
WorsT vs nOmaD
Dewalt vs andersOn
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
