|
On September 04 2015 01:18 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2015 01:12 nafta wrote:
Lol you definitely need bans pls don't be ridiculous. Well if all the broken champs aren't in ranked or there just aren't broken champs then front loaded bans don't actually do anything. That's kind of the logic I can see people making a case for. If there will ever be a case like that is another story.
Except that is literally not possible to accomplish so it is irrelevant. And bans do a lot of stuff.
Even if what you say somehow could happen say I want to play tf mid. Why wouldn't I ban 3 champs that are really good vs him to increase my chances of carrying the game?
|
On September 04 2015 01:45 nafta wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2015 01:18 Numy wrote:On September 04 2015 01:12 nafta wrote:
Lol you definitely need bans pls don't be ridiculous. Well if all the broken champs aren't in ranked or there just aren't broken champs then front loaded bans don't actually do anything. That's kind of the logic I can see people making a case for. If there will ever be a case like that is another story. Except that is literally not possible to accomplish so it is irrelevant. And bans do a lot of stuff. Even if what you say somehow could happen say I want to play tf mid. Why wouldn't I ban 3 champs that are really good vs him to increase my chances of carrying the game?
You know what, I think I get it. I've always looked at league as game about two teams going against each other but that's actually the wrong way to think about it. At it's core it's about a individuals against individuals. That's why the team aspect isn't viewed as big as the solo aspect of it. It couldn't be about teams as the way the content is structured doesn't allow people to do this unless they have unlocked enough of it. In dota there was always a mentality of "pubs don't matter" since the game is fundamentally a team game which is why I had this mentality in league but that's been wrong all this time.
That was just a random epiphany I had that I thought I'd share. As for how it ties into the TF example well my initial reaction was that it is ludicrous to decide what hero you are going to play without seeing any heroes from either side so the act of banning 3 "counters" before anything happens is silly. Now I'm wrong obviously since prioritizing yourself over team is how league works because it's not about the team. Getting yourself into the most favorable position may just be the best way to win regardless of how teams work out at the end.
|
How is it ludicrous? You are fp you have to pick your shit first. How do you pick something that works vs the enemy team when the enemy team picks after you?
It isn't just about prioritizing yourself over "the team". In soloq there is no way to know what your enemies are playing. This isn't a tournament.
You get matched with 4 random people and probably at least 1 person will not even get their role why the fuck would you trust them over yourself?
Not to mention the system gives you a solo rating that is decided by team results. How you can think this is accurate is beyond me unless you play A LOT of games.
|
On September 04 2015 00:23 Caiada wrote:
If you could explain how pick order determined by MMR was somehow better than random, that'd be cool, since that's what your argument was actually about.
I think, outside of obvious shit like Skarner/pre-nerf Elise and some others, people put way too much stock in bans outside of a competitive environment. I think there should be a proper competitive draft mode (and have no idea what it'd look like, probably not Dota's), but for soloq, it's honestly hard to give a shit.
On September 04 2015 00:27 Caiada wrote:
Determined by a system with inherent statistical variance, determined by a random number generator, what is honestly the functional difference?
Here, I will explain this to you.
If the 1st Pick/Pick Ban is determined by ELO it is more likely that that person will be a competent player for the average MMR of the game, and he is most likely to be the best player on the team. Its actually pretty simple.
Just as an example, imagine MMRbot is creating a game ~ 2100 elo. So it picks players A-E for one side. A is 2200 B2150, C2100, D2050, and E2000. I have no way of telling you with certainty that E is not Bjergson leveling an alt, and A is not some Bronze shitter that Xiaowiexaio ELO boosted there, I can't. However, in the statistical model, A is the most likely on the team to not have a "true MMR" below 2100 and is statistically most likely to have the best "true MMR" which is about equally likely to be even higher than what this game wants (I.E. he is the most likely on the team to hardcarry).
|
First pick is no longer determined by ELO. And the difference between the players in a matchmade team should still be negligible.
edit: on that note, I'd be very interested to see some statistics on how often the highest mmr person in any matchmade game either wins or can be determined to "hardcarry". Anyone here into the rito api?
|
On September 04 2015 03:20 Osmoses wrote:
First pick is no longer determined by ELO. And the difference between the players in a matchmade team should still be negligible.
edit: on that note, I'd be very interested to see some statistics on how often the highest mmr person in any matchmade game either wins or can be determined to "hardcarry". Anyone here into the rito api?
I was of the understanding that Riot does not share MMR. And basing any study on LP and division is a bad idea because MMR fluctuates so much more than LP due to win/loss streaks.
I personally welcomed the change to make pick order random (was quite a while ago I think). There's no strong correlation between banning skill and MMR in the small range of a game, and it means that you don't have to deal with stuff like 'dude I'm the best player on this team/you're last pick=worst player'. It also means that if you get queued with other people multiple times your pick order is not always predetermined (two players want same role, one guy gets it one game? Doesn't mean he'll get it next game).
|
On September 04 2015 03:37 DarkCore wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2015 03:20 Osmoses wrote:
First pick is no longer determined by ELO. And the difference between the players in a matchmade team should still be negligible.
edit: on that note, I'd be very interested to see some statistics on how often the highest mmr person in any matchmade game either wins or can be determined to "hardcarry". Anyone here into the rito api? I was of the understanding that Riot does not share MMR. And basing any study on LP and division is a bad idea because MMR fluctuates so much more than LP due to win/loss streaks. I personally welcomed the change to make pick order random (was quite a while ago I think). There's no strong correlation between banning skill and MMR in the small range of a game, and it means that you don't have to deal with stuff like 'dude I'm the best player on this team/you're last pick=worst player'. It also means that if you get queued with other people multiple times your pick order is not always predetermined (two players want same role, one guy gets it one game? Doesn't mean he'll get it next game).
The last time Riot divulged how MMR/Elo matches up to the ranked system was when they transitioned from the 7 "division" with shown elo to the 5 division hidden elo system so people would know what they would transition to. Since then it's been a black box to the community and there's 0 guarantee that it's been changed.
|
Being good or bad at LoL isn't a linear progression. Look at the LCS for instance. They're all top players in theory and some are bad at csing and good at team fighting. Some are good at team fighting and bad at csing, etc, etc.
I think the most amusing part of VayneAuthority's rant on the difference between a Diamond 5 and Diamond 3 is the fact that Diamond comprises the top 2% of LoL players. Forget elo for a moment. How about lower divisions when you have people on your team that are 10%-15% higher or lower on the bracket?
|
Alright guys, I now see the argument for just displaying Elo.
|
Random question, does anyone ever type glhf in your games? Nobody ever seems to reply to me when I do it lately.
|
On September 04 2015 04:09 Ansibled wrote:
Random question, does anyone ever type glhf in your games? Nobody ever seems to reply to me when I do it lately.
Never. I rarely see it either. What is this? SC? You think LoL is mature enough to understand GLHF isn't a taunt? I should probably say something back when I see it though. Lately I've been seeing a lot of players spam GG at the end of games.
|
|
|
I sometimes do it and I usually get a response, something like u2 or just gl hf back.
|
On September 04 2015 03:57 Sonnington wrote:
Being good or bad at LoL isn't a linear progression. Look at the LCS for instance. They're all top players in theory and some are bad at csing and good at team fighting. Some are good at team fighting and bad at csing, etc, etc.
I think the most amusing part of VayneAuthority's rant on the difference between a Diamond 5 and Diamond 3 is the fact that Diamond comprises the top 2% of LoL players. Forget elo for a moment. How about lower divisions when you have people on your team that are 10%-15% higher or lower on the bracket?
Because the short answer is that you don't. You just don't know because you don't see their mmr. For the vast majority of players riot could have changed the system and they wouldn't have know. For the vast majority of players riot could have not changed the system and lied and they wouldn't know. Even at the top 2% area there are just too many players during normal playing time. If you don't see the same players in most of your games then you've got nothing to complain about.
It is true, as clutz says, that better players will tend to get to ban in a particular game because while a players MMR is random it's still centered on their current value. I am not sure that this is worth the pain that comes in games when people "know" that another player is "worse" than them. Especially because the difference between the centers and the amount of variance in a typical MMR has mean that while, in the ordering system, the top player is indeed the player with the highest likelihood of being best, that likelihood is not so much higher than 20%. 20% is the liklihood that the top player is he best in the random system.
In my experience champion select toxicity went down a lot with that change. A whole hell of a lot. People were more likely to tell you you sucked before anything happened. People were more likely to rag on you in game of you were last pick and something went wrong. People were less likely to talk about bans except saying "I am the best so listen to me"
Shit you all probably ban incorrectly anyway because it's easy to not see the whole of pick and win rates and instead rely on personal feelings of effectiveness. I may update my pick/ban spreadsheet today for the new patch/settle into 5.16 meta changes today (may not though)
|
On September 04 2015 04:09 Ansibled wrote:
Random question, does anyone ever type glhf in your games? Nobody ever seems to reply to me when I do it lately.
The only thing I consistently do is call GG with a :p if someone gets a gold lead from frostfang.
|
On September 04 2015 04:13 Sonnington wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2015 04:09 Ansibled wrote:
Random question, does anyone ever type glhf in your games? Nobody ever seems to reply to me when I do it lately. Never. I rarely see it either. What is this? SC? You think LoL is mature enough to understand GLHF isn't a taunt? I should probably say something back when I see it though. Lately I've been seeing a lot of players spam GG at the end of games. probably has more to do with tons of people being chat restricted and not being able to use /all chat
|
On September 04 2015 04:27 Goumindong wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2015 03:57 Sonnington wrote:
Being good or bad at LoL isn't a linear progression. Look at the LCS for instance. They're all top players in theory and some are bad at csing and good at team fighting. Some are good at team fighting and bad at csing, etc, etc.
I think the most amusing part of VayneAuthority's rant on the difference between a Diamond 5 and Diamond 3 is the fact that Diamond comprises the top 2% of LoL players. Forget elo for a moment. How about lower divisions when you have people on your team that are 10%-15% higher or lower on the bracket? Shit you all probably ban incorrectly anyway because it's easy to not see the whole of pick and win rates and instead rely on personal feelings of effectiveness. I may update my pick/ban spreadsheet today for the new patch/settle into 5.16 meta changes today (may not though)
lol thanks for the laugh
I honestly wish one day you reach high elo and understand why bans are done and the reason isn't looking at numbers on a website  .
|
On September 04 2015 04:36 nafta wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2015 04:27 Goumindong wrote:On September 04 2015 03:57 Sonnington wrote:
Being good or bad at LoL isn't a linear progression. Look at the LCS for instance. They're all top players in theory and some are bad at csing and good at team fighting. Some are good at team fighting and bad at csing, etc, etc.
I think the most amusing part of VayneAuthority's rant on the difference between a Diamond 5 and Diamond 3 is the fact that Diamond comprises the top 2% of LoL players. Forget elo for a moment. How about lower divisions when you have people on your team that are 10%-15% higher or lower on the bracket? Shit you all probably ban incorrectly anyway because it's easy to not see the whole of pick and win rates and instead rely on personal feelings of effectiveness. I may update my pick/ban spreadsheet today for the new patch/settle into 5.16 meta changes today (may not though) lol thanks for the laugh I honestly wish one day you reach high elo and understand why bans are done and the reason isn't looking at numbers on a website .
?
http://www.lolking.net/summoner/euw/28968221
http://www.lolking.net/summoner/na/19883872
|
On September 04 2015 04:27 Goumindong wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2015 03:57 Sonnington wrote:
Being good or bad at LoL isn't a linear progression. Look at the LCS for instance. They're all top players in theory and some are bad at csing and good at team fighting. Some are good at team fighting and bad at csing, etc, etc.
I think the most amusing part of VayneAuthority's rant on the difference between a Diamond 5 and Diamond 3 is the fact that Diamond comprises the top 2% of LoL players. Forget elo for a moment. How about lower divisions when you have people on your team that are 10%-15% higher or lower on the bracket? In my experience champion select toxicity went down a lot with that change. A whole hell of a lot. People were more likely to tell you you sucked before anything happened. People were more likely to rag on you in game of you were last pick and something went wrong. People were less likely to talk about bans except saying "I am the best so listen to me"
IMO if you care about the words expressed in champ select (i.e. Shitter, fag, etc) then you are correct. But the substantive portion has gotten worse as everyone has a "claim" on whatever their main is and the rigid (and at least somewhat accurate) hierarchy that used to exist is gone. Given that you are unlikely to see these players again, a military model is probably the best for moderating the interactions.
|
On September 04 2015 05:01 Goumindong wrote:Show nested quote +On September 04 2015 04:36 nafta wrote:On September 04 2015 04:27 Goumindong wrote:On September 04 2015 03:57 Sonnington wrote:
Being good or bad at LoL isn't a linear progression. Look at the LCS for instance. They're all top players in theory and some are bad at csing and good at team fighting. Some are good at team fighting and bad at csing, etc, etc.
I think the most amusing part of VayneAuthority's rant on the difference between a Diamond 5 and Diamond 3 is the fact that Diamond comprises the top 2% of LoL players. Forget elo for a moment. How about lower divisions when you have people on your team that are 10%-15% higher or lower on the bracket? Shit you all probably ban incorrectly anyway because it's easy to not see the whole of pick and win rates and instead rely on personal feelings of effectiveness. I may update my pick/ban spreadsheet today for the new patch/settle into 5.16 meta changes today (may not though) lol thanks for the laugh I honestly wish one day you reach high elo and understand why bans are done and the reason isn't looking at numbers on a website . ? http://www.lolking.net/summoner/euw/28968221http://www.lolking.net/summoner/na/19883872
lol someone took the name thats random
http://euw.op.gg/summoner/userName=xN0SC0Pe360MLGxX
Like you don't even play ranked why talk like you know what you are supposed to do to get good winrate?
Like don't get me wrong I don't think I am good or anything but anyone who has reached >d3 will agree with me on this - you don't just ban the statistically highest win rate champs. Even at lower elo with how much elo boosting there is you should still ban shit like riven/rengar every game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
