|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/7UJkkQX.jpg)
Drew something in paint real quick. The main issue with defining good is whether you are doing it relative to the population, or relative to the pro's, and even then, to which ones. The skill gap between an average diamond player and Faker is as large as that of the average diamond player to an average bronzy(If you didn't watch OGN, faker made Save look like a scrub every game, not easy to do at such a high level).
No matter where you place the arbitrary "good" marker, the people who are actually good at the game make up so little of it.
|
On May 09 2013 08:02 AsmodeusXI wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2013 07:49 Slayer91 wrote:
If you don't think you're bad you're terrible
even at the pro levels there is a massive disparity in skill level
lets say CW old mid vs bjergsen lolololol
or even some NA mid like nyjacky or link who are pretty solid compared to bjergsen/froggen/xpeke/alex ich
any jungler vs diamondprox etc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_that_I_know_nothingHas always and will always apply.
Only a Sith deals in absolutes.
|
United States23745 Posts
Conversations like these make me question how I even have fun playing LoL considering how bad I am x_x
|
Baa?21245 Posts
That chart grossly overestimates how much better plat/diamond compared to gold/plat and grossly underestimates how much better professionals are than diamonds
|
On May 09 2013 08:11 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
That chart grossly overestimates how much better plat/diamond compared to gold/plat and grossly underestimates how much better professionals are than diamonds
But what if it's a logarithmic scale on the X-axis =O
But it's purely for illustrative purposes, the average gold player has more of a chance to kill an average diamond player than the diamond does of killing somebody like faker in lane.
|
Baa?21245 Posts
On May 09 2013 08:13 Amui wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2013 08:11 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
That chart grossly overestimates how much better plat/diamond compared to gold/plat and grossly underestimates how much better professionals are than diamonds But what if it's a logarithmic scale on the X-axis =O
Statement stands.
|
On May 09 2013 07:57 kainzero wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2013 06:06 Amui wrote:
I think that this is roughly the same for LoL. Until you get to at minimum plat level mechanics(whether past or present doesn't really matter, because understanding doesn't fade with time unlike mechanics), you don't really understand the game. The ability to look at a comp, and figure out exactly why they drafted the way they did, understanding map movement, presence, relative strengths and so on doesn't come without either watching a TON of games(not streams, you need the spectator client to see the whole picture) or else actually playing the game at a high level. all the stuff you just mentioned under ability is completely different in 5s compared to solo queue though. the way a (good) team moves in ranked 5s is just completely different. if you're not playing 5s, you'll learn a lot more about 5s by watching pro games than playing solo queue. and yeah, my team of 2 silvers, 2 golds, and 1 plat 5 has upset teams that have all-diamond in solo queue. bly has said it before and has said it happens often, and in my experience i'm inclined to agree. i think solo queue rating is highly overrated when it comes to analyzing 5s play.
I think I have posted this here in the past. If your team's players can perform at that level in ranked 5s, then I think they would improve their solo queue rating significantly with enough time should they take it seriously. I do not understand how someone can play at a high level in ranked teams and be stuck at a low solo queue rating.
Furthermore, I'm not really impressed by ranked 5s partly because of the matchmaking. Our collegiate team routinely messes up swaps so we have AD leona or AD anivia or some of us connect to the game 5 mins late and we are currently D3 and should get D1 easily now that we actually practice. One of my solo queue friends who made a challenger ranked 5s team said that they didn't really play many good teams to get challenger, and that ranked 5s rating is pretty meaningless.
I argue that you can more from solo queue than you think, and that you learn less from ranked 5s than you think. I'm not debating that ranked 5s are an invaluable tool.
|
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/56lmyGr.jpg)
I think I fixed it. Actually not quite. Where the first squiggly lines are should be challenger tier.
|
On May 09 2013 08:11 Carnivorous Sheep wrote:
That chart grossly overestimates how much better plat/diamond compared to gold/plat and grossly underestimates how much better professionals are than diamonds
as I said, there's a huge range in "professionals"
the difference from top diamond to challenger to the worst professionals to the medium professions to the best professionals to the koreans is going to be similar to plat/diamond gold/plat etc
infact top diamond/challenger has huge overlap with the worst professionals and somewhat with the medium professionals
with regards to the chart its simply hard to draw it to "accurately" reflect the population of pros/diamonds etc. because the lines are getting really close to the axis and aint nobody got time fo dat
the only reason you don't see a huge gap between plat/diamond and gold/plat is I'm guessing you're in that area already and your personal range on a good day/good champ vs bad day/bad champ is easily within that.
and obviously pros always seem good when you see them on TV. A lot of them seem average in game.
(for example wickd and yellowpete arent that scary in solo queue, certainly solid, but i've been ass raped by bjergsen a few times)
|
On May 09 2013 08:11 onlywonderboy wrote:
Conversations like these make me question how I even have fun playing LoL considering how bad I am x_x
Because playing video games is fucking fun. Who cares if you're bad, sometimes being bad makes the game all the more fun.
|
On May 09 2013 08:11 onlywonderboy wrote:
Conversations like these make me question how I even have fun playing LoL considering how bad I am x_x
Why do you have to be good to enjoy playing a game?
|
On May 09 2013 08:11 onlywonderboy wrote:
Conversations like these make me question how I even have fun playing LoL considering how bad I am x_x
So long as there are 9 other people as terrible as you, you can still have a good time because now everybody sucks. You might be playing a different type of game than 10 challenger players, but it's still an enjoyable experience.
|
United States37500 Posts
On May 09 2013 08:32 Amui wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2013 08:11 onlywonderboy wrote:
Conversations like these make me question how I even have fun playing LoL considering how bad I am x_x
So long as there are 9 other people as terrible as you, you can still have a good time because now everybody sucks. You might be playing a different type of game than 10 challenger players, but it's still an enjoyable experience.
Pretty much this. It's all relative.
Play with other people your level where the lanes and game can be challenging but not a flat out stomp and the game is fun.
|
On May 09 2013 08:19 Capriccioso wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2013 07:57 kainzero wrote:On May 09 2013 06:06 Amui wrote:
I think that this is roughly the same for LoL. Until you get to at minimum plat level mechanics(whether past or present doesn't really matter, because understanding doesn't fade with time unlike mechanics), you don't really understand the game. The ability to look at a comp, and figure out exactly why they drafted the way they did, understanding map movement, presence, relative strengths and so on doesn't come without either watching a TON of games(not streams, you need the spectator client to see the whole picture) or else actually playing the game at a high level. all the stuff you just mentioned under ability is completely different in 5s compared to solo queue though. the way a (good) team moves in ranked 5s is just completely different. if you're not playing 5s, you'll learn a lot more about 5s by watching pro games than playing solo queue. and yeah, my team of 2 silvers, 2 golds, and 1 plat 5 has upset teams that have all-diamond in solo queue. bly has said it before and has said it happens often, and in my experience i'm inclined to agree. i think solo queue rating is highly overrated when it comes to analyzing 5s play. I think I have posted this here in the past. If your team's players can perform at that level in ranked 5s, then I think they would improve their solo queue rating significantly with enough time should they take it seriously. I do not understand how someone can play at a high level in ranked teams and be stuck at a low solo queue rating. Furthermore, I'm not really impressed by ranked 5s partly because of the matchmaking. Our collegiate team routinely messes up swaps so we have AD leona or AD anivia or some of us connect to the game 5 mins late and we are currently D3 and should get D1 easily now that we actually practice. One of my solo queue friends who made a challenger ranked 5s team said that they didn't really play many good teams to get challenger, and that ranked 5s rating is pretty meaningless. I argue that you can more from solo queue than you think, and that you learn less from ranked 5s than you think. I'm not debating that ranked 5s are an invaluable tool.
i think that's the thing, that you have to play a lot of ranked solo to equalize your rating. if we assume 20% of games are troll games... well, that's still 20% of games that you wouldn't have to play in ranked 5s because hopefully your team doesn't troll itself.
i'd still think that challenger ranked 5 means infinitely more than solo queue though. granted, at that level you should start running the amateur tournament circuit instead of laddering.
regardless i would still take the analysis of an experienced 5er versus a solo queue plat/diamond and i wouldn't be surprised if there are people who just watch pro games who have better 5s analytical skills than solo queue plat/diamond.
|
On May 09 2013 08:09 Amui wrote:Drew something in paint real quick. The main issue with defining good is whether you are doing it relative to the population, or relative to the pro's, and even then, to which ones. The skill gap between an average diamond player and Faker is as large as that of the average diamond player to an average bronzy(If you didn't watch OGN, faker made Save look like a scrub every game, not easy to do at such a high level). No matter where you place the arbitrary "good" marker, the people who are actually good at the game make up so little of it.
Not including chinese players... do you even LoL?
|
United States23745 Posts
On May 09 2013 08:31 nafta wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2013 08:11 onlywonderboy wrote:
Conversations like these make me question how I even have fun playing LoL considering how bad I am x_x
Why do you have to be good to enjoy playing a game?
Because I want to be good so I don't live up to my own expectations. I'm like my own stern parent that is only satisfied with A+'s
|
On May 09 2013 08:49 onlywonderboy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2013 08:31 nafta wrote:On May 09 2013 08:11 onlywonderboy wrote:
Conversations like these make me question how I even have fun playing LoL considering how bad I am x_x
Why do you have to be good to enjoy playing a game? Because I want to be good so I don't live up to my own expectations. I'm like my own stern parent that is only satisfied with A+'s
Confirmed for Asian; Probably Han asian too.
|
People on TL vastly overestimate the skill difference between pros. Do you really think the chance the average NA pro can win lane against the average KR pro is the same as the chance a bronze player will win lane against a plat?
|
United States23745 Posts
On May 09 2013 08:50 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On May 09 2013 08:49 onlywonderboy wrote:On May 09 2013 08:31 nafta wrote:On May 09 2013 08:11 onlywonderboy wrote:
Conversations like these make me question how I even have fun playing LoL considering how bad I am x_x
Why do you have to be good to enjoy playing a game? Because I want to be good so I don't live up to my own expectations. I'm like my own stern parent that is only satisfied with A+'s Confirmed for Asian; Probably Han asian too.
Nope, super white. Moral of the story is I'm just too hard on myself lol.
|
On May 09 2013 08:09 Amui wrote:Drew something in paint real quick. The main issue with defining good is whether you are doing it relative to the population, or relative to the pro's, and even then, to which ones. The skill gap between an average diamond player and Faker is as large as that of the average diamond player to an average bronzy(If you didn't watch OGN, faker made Save look like a scrub every game, not easy to do at such a high level). No matter where you place the arbitrary "good" marker, the people who are actually good at the game make up so little of it.
Pro-tip: use log-scale
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
