|
Not quite a qq post as much as questions: Did Singed get nerfed already? Because he still seems like a champ that goes from getting nothing done the first 5 minutes of a game and then still snowballs into invincibility. Is there just a very limited pool of champions that beat him? It was a wukong and a pantheon (this was low level) and we made his life a living hell and then he just killed both of us. /o/
I think the thing that annoys me most is when I dominate a lane early on but then lose anyway. I've had games where I killed the opposite team twice in the first 5 levels and then they kill me at and destroy the tower in one go. Should I not even both attacking? What the hell?
As far as the theory of ELO hell goes, the current understanding seems flawed. (Note: I don't personally complain about ELO Hell) If each team has a 50% chance of having someone that is so awful that that team cannot win, then those teams will just stay at the same ELO in perpetuity right? Because they are winning only 50% of their games.
|
On April 24 2013 03:44 Jerubaal wrote:
Not quite a qq post as much as questions: Did Singed get nerfed already? Because he still seems like a champ that goes from getting nothing done the first 5 minutes of a game and then still snowballs into invincibility. Is there just a very limited pool of champions that beat him? It was a wukong and a pantheon (this was low level) and we made his life a living hell and then he just killed both of us. /o/
I think the thing that annoys me most is when I dominate a lane early on but then lose anyway. I've had games where I killed the opposite team twice in the first 5 levels and then they kill me at and destroy the tower in one go. Should I not even both attacking? What the hell?
As far as the theory of ELO hell goes, the current understanding seems flawed. (Note: I don't personally complain about ELO Hell) If each team has a 50% chance of having someone that is so awful that that team cannot win, then those teams will just stay at the same ELO in perpetuity right? Because they are winning only 50% of their games.
Yes, but there are not 2 teams, there are 10 players. If you now assume that you are NOT the absurdly awful player, this leaves 9 others, 4 on your team, 5 on the other. Meaning each horrible player has a higher chance to be an enemy then an ally. Meaning you as a player that does not lose the game singlehandedly should on average rise in elo.
And regarding the rest of your post, you are playing low level games. In general if the enemy is able to kill you after you killed him twice before level 5, you are probably doing something wrong. Either you are not lasthitting good enough, not spending your money, spending your money on the wrong things, tanking tower, or fighting with a lot more of his creeps then yours around. Probably a combination of some of those. I don't think there are matchups with powercurves that differ that much that this could legitimately happen.
If the reason for the deaths to happen is jungle influence, you should get better at warding and/or understanding when the jungler can be dangerous to you.
If Singed is winning a 1v2 against you top, you are also doing something very wrong.
|
On April 24 2013 03:56 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 03:44 Jerubaal wrote:
Not quite a qq post as much as questions: Did Singed get nerfed already? Because he still seems like a champ that goes from getting nothing done the first 5 minutes of a game and then still snowballs into invincibility. Is there just a very limited pool of champions that beat him? It was a wukong and a pantheon (this was low level) and we made his life a living hell and then he just killed both of us. /o/
I think the thing that annoys me most is when I dominate a lane early on but then lose anyway. I've had games where I killed the opposite team twice in the first 5 levels and then they kill me at and destroy the tower in one go. Should I not even both attacking? What the hell?
As far as the theory of ELO hell goes, the current understanding seems flawed. (Note: I don't personally complain about ELO Hell) If each team has a 50% chance of having someone that is so awful that that team cannot win, then those teams will just stay at the same ELO in perpetuity right? Because they are winning only 50% of their games. Yes, but there are not 2 teams, there are 10 players. If you now assume that you are NOT the absurdly awful player, this leaves 9 others, 4 on your team, 5 on the other. Meaning each horrible player has a higher chance to be an enemy then an ally. Meaning you as a player that does not lose the game singlehandedly should on average rise in elo.
You're looking at player skill as some sort of spectrum, though, where it all evens out perfectly. It's much more quantum, though, with many decisions like which item to buy or when to engage. Besides, two average skill players will beat a good player and a bad player. You're also assuming that the hypothetical player is above the 8 other controls. It could be that they are all equal skill level and are all stuck at the same ELO because every other game they get someone who's impossible to carry.
|
On April 24 2013 04:44 Jerubaal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 03:56 Simberto wrote:On April 24 2013 03:44 Jerubaal wrote:
Not quite a qq post as much as questions: Did Singed get nerfed already? Because he still seems like a champ that goes from getting nothing done the first 5 minutes of a game and then still snowballs into invincibility. Is there just a very limited pool of champions that beat him? It was a wukong and a pantheon (this was low level) and we made his life a living hell and then he just killed both of us. /o/
I think the thing that annoys me most is when I dominate a lane early on but then lose anyway. I've had games where I killed the opposite team twice in the first 5 levels and then they kill me at and destroy the tower in one go. Should I not even both attacking? What the hell?
As far as the theory of ELO hell goes, the current understanding seems flawed. (Note: I don't personally complain about ELO Hell) If each team has a 50% chance of having someone that is so awful that that team cannot win, then those teams will just stay at the same ELO in perpetuity right? Because they are winning only 50% of their games. Yes, but there are not 2 teams, there are 10 players. If you now assume that you are NOT the absurdly awful player, this leaves 9 others, 4 on your team, 5 on the other. Meaning each horrible player has a higher chance to be an enemy then an ally. Meaning you as a player that does not lose the game singlehandedly should on average rise in elo. You're looking at player skill as some sort of spectrum, though, where it all evens out perfectly. It's much more quantum, though, with many decisions like which item to buy or when to engage. Besides, two average skill players will beat a good player and a bad player. You're also assuming that the hypothetical player is above the 8 other controls. It could be that they are all equal skill level and are all stuck at the same ELO because every other game they get someone who's impossible to carry.
If all the players at that elo are of equal skill, they are where they belong. I was looking at the most extreme case, as that is the one usually argued for by people talking about elo hell, which is that uncarriable people decide the game. But this is not necessary. If you have a lower skill differential involved, you still get overall the same results, just distributed over a smaller probability area.
There is no reason to talk about other players, just analyze what happens to one player in a given situation, then you can extrapolate that to all similar players. So, if you are "stuck in elo hell", that means that you are better than the other players there, otherwise you would not be "stuck", you would be where you belong. Being "better" means having skills that make you win more games. That is the only definition of "better" that makes sense in this system.
If you analyze this situation logically, you have a person that has skills that allow him to win more games, thus he should win more games and rise in elo until he no longer has that skill advantage over the average of people he meets. However, it is important to realize that this is statistics. This means that i analyze what happens ON AVERAGE. Meaning in the short term, different things can happen, too. But this is irrelevant, since the only thing you need to do to alleviate this problem is play more games.
So which magical effect could prevent this player(A) who has skills that allow him to win more to still be stuck at that elo, assuming his assumption that he has those skills is correct? None of them are mathematically sound. The usual ones are "my teammates are worse", which is statistically speaking absurd, mostly with the explanation that the games are decided mostly by one uncarryable dude. But statistics say that this uncarryable guy has a higher chance to be in the enemy team, and thus should still allow A to rise in elo. The same goes for all of the examples you mentioned. If 2 averages beat a good and a bad player, this is just one of the possible cases. If we have players B,C, and D randomly distributed as allies or enemies, and D is the bad one, then the chance of having good + medium vs bad + medium is double the chance of having good + bad vs medium + medium.
Not to mention the fact that those hypothetical uncarryable players(UCP) themselves should rapidly fall in Elo and thus no longer be a relevant factor at that elo where everyone is equal but "held there" by those UCPs, leaving a final situation where the average players stay where they are but the UCPs get removed to a lower Elo.
I have yet to see an explanation for this "being stuck in elo hell" that would be mathematically sound and lead to this situations. Occam's Razor suggest that people simply think they are better players than they actually are. which would explain this whole situation easily.
|
I don't see ELO hell as a Physical parameter which your teammates are worse or you a in a ELO with players below your skill level that keep you there. I see it as a state of mind when entering a game. If you see yourself as a better player, you shouldn't be forcing things, you should be using your game sense and mechanical prowess to beat your opponent(lane opponent in this case). And if you can't do that you should know how to at least not directly feed the opponent and wait for help. If you can't do those thing you're where you belong.
|
@Simberto- It seems that you are effectively denying the existence of uncarry-able players, though you pretend to account for them. You do this by assuming that all players are accurately measured. If a certain number of these players existed, it would destabilize the system, in however small manner.
|
No, i am not. I am saying that uncarryable players can not make you stuck in elo hell. They can make you lose a game, but on average they benefit you.
|
No no no so ssahiodfiohsubadiooufa NO FUCK THIS
IT'S UNJUST, STUPID, AND I HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO BE UNJUSTIFIABLY AND INCONSOLABLY FUCKING UPSET
Is it myfucking role in life to have the shittiest luck on the whole fucking planet? Is the entire fucking universe consipring against me to take a shit on me at every single moment that I could be a little bit fucking happy?
IT isn't fucking fair. It's horseshit, it's stupid, it's FUCKING ABSURD AND I CAN'T FUCKING STAND IT ANYMORE. FUCK EVERYTHING
ITS' NOT
FUCKING
FAIR
|
United States8298 Posts
Why on fucking earth would you OFFER to support, instalock Maokai support, start with 1 ward and no utility masteries. Then, I as twitch get first blood because an enemy facechecks a bush level 1 (but you werent there because you paid 0 attention) and then i help nasus with blue, but maokai isnt there either. Maokai proceeds to lose 2/3 of his life at level 1 before a single creep dies to harass.
And then he proceeds to be oom every time a fight breaks out because he Qs thin air constantly, so when there IS a fight, i'm basically 2v1ing because he can't do anything.
What fuckwit. I even offered to play support in pregame even though you were last pick. But no, you said you could support.
Team bitches at me a lot (well, bitches at bot lane) though I manage to sorta come back after having one of the most miserable bot lanes ever because I still manage to get an IE at a reasonable time. But maokai derps around, builds no health items and takes 80% life from a single nidalee spear, gets caught at random areas of the map while not even warding (he didnt have wards.) catches spears when hes NOT at full health and dies, etc.
Then I just get run over by Hecapony+Shen in later teamfights because the enemy team finally reigsters me as a threat. GG my fault we lost. Should have just let the mao die over and over so his feeding spree would be worth no gold.
|
I played about 10 games on the Russian server, and I have to say...Not understanding what people say has helped me learn to completely ignore people in real games so now i rage so much less.
|
Everytime I get into promotions, trolls show up to hold me down lol.
|
QQ. Pretty fed as Shen. Everytime I even think about splitpushing my team engages. We even take an inhib after a 4 for 2 and instead of backing 2 decide to go for a 2nd tower+inhib and predictably die. Then, instead of grouping at baron while creeps push botlane we decide for a 4v5 while Garen finally gets his 100th CS (Despite getting basically a free lane because of an early gank!) in the jungle vs. an Amumu Ori MF team!
GAHHH
|
|
|
On April 24 2013 07:46 Requizen wrote:
No no no so ssahiodfiohsubadiooufa NO FUCK THIS
IT'S UNJUST, STUPID, AND I HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO BE UNJUSTIFIABLY AND INCONSOLABLY FUCKING UPSET
Is it myfucking role in life to have the shittiest luck on the whole fucking planet? Is the entire fucking universe consipring against me to take a shit on me at every single moment that I could be a little bit fucking happy?
IT isn't fucking fair. It's horseshit, it's stupid, it's FUCKING ABSURD AND I CAN'T FUCKING STAND IT ANYMORE. FUCK EVERYTHING
ITS' NOT
FUCKING
FAIR
Are you ok, Req? 
|
Top lane Jarvan feeds Akali 6 kills before 10 minutes. Bot lane Kayle/Tryndamere duo queue combo (wut?) also feeds MF 6 kills. Whose fault is the loss? Mine of course, the 3/0/1 jungle Shyvana for not being able to put enough pressure because her ganks suck.
I don't mind losing, and I usually laugh at ragers, but at least direct that pointless anger at the people who are actually doing awful. -_-
|
On April 24 2013 18:47 EquilasH wrote:Show nested quote +On April 24 2013 07:46 Requizen wrote:
No no no so ssahiodfiohsubadiooufa NO FUCK THIS
IT'S UNJUST, STUPID, AND I HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO BE UNJUSTIFIABLY AND INCONSOLABLY FUCKING UPSET
Is it myfucking role in life to have the shittiest luck on the whole fucking planet? Is the entire fucking universe consipring against me to take a shit on me at every single moment that I could be a little bit fucking happy?
IT isn't fucking fair. It's horseshit, it's stupid, it's FUCKING ABSURD AND I CAN'T FUCKING STAND IT ANYMORE. FUCK EVERYTHING
ITS' NOT
FUCKING
FAIR Are you ok, Req?
He's usually alright.
|
Last 2 games last night.
First was Annie. I went 13/3/X. Unfortunately, everything was riding on me that game (their cait got real big), and I got caught by a random support morg binding. Team took too long to engage. I was playing really well, but I got caught and I'm sad.
2nd game, I was Viktor. Was doing fairly well considering their top rengar just completely left top and had gotten 4 kills before our top xin realized he had to push the tower. This one we could have won as well, but we just couldn't get it together to end.
Very bitter ending to 2 games I played really well in. Feels even worse because I contributed to the throws
|
On April 24 2013 19:24 ArcticFox wrote:
Top lane Jarvan feeds Akali 6 kills before 10 minutes. Bot lane Kayle/Tryndamere duo queue combo (wut?) also feeds MF 6 kills. Whose fault is the loss? Mine of course, the 3/0/1 jungle Shyvana for not being able to put enough pressure because her ganks suck.
I don't mind losing, and I usually laugh at ragers, but at least direct that pointless anger at the people who are actually doing awful. -_-
The guy that gets blamed is always the jungler. For some reason lanes feel like its the jungler's responsibility to win them the lane if they cant on their own. Because I main jungle I'm used to it now, so dont let it get to you. Also score doesn't mean that much for jungler's since their main responsibility is to secure objectives. Ganks are secondary.
|
Seriously considering getting my account boosted LOL .. ranked is so bad. won all day yesterday. Get back to my series today and can't win a game to save my life.
|
all i wanted was my win of the day, so i play an interbot game. pick jungle shen for lulz.
i don't get a leash (okay whatever, slow clear but its a bot game).
several minutes later, our mid fid is 0/5 before he quits, the rest of the lanes are doing pretty shit. i gank a couple times and pick up kills, people keep trying to kill zilean but just get bombed to death and trolled by his ult.
i bought a sightstone, then spend an entire hour splitpushing as shen, having to ult back to save our inhib turrets. finish with 400 cs and almost twice the gold of the next person, something like 6/1/12. thereally annoying part was after like 30 minutes i couldnt even 1v1 the bots because my team would feed, then get enough kills to reset their bounties.
in a real game, id be really proud of winning through crazy splitpush, but in a bot game good god so frustrating.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
