Greedy Goblin

Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Is a win a week too much to ask?

I greatly improved my "teammate evaluation method". My last 20 games contain 11 wins, 5 losses and 4 remakes. Actually they should be 11-3, but I had a promotion chance to Silver 2 and queue dodge counts as a loss, so I took those two games despite the team was bad with "maybe the opposing team is even worse". What was the magical update?

I look for the last 14 days of games of teammates and consider everyone "bad" who doesn't have 2 wins with his chosen champion in two weeks. Also those who have horrible winrate with their chosen champion. I mean, is it too much to ask to have two damn wins in two weeks with the champion you pick? I have 30 wins and 13 losses with Warwick while 5 wins and 7 losses with Nunu last two weeks. So it's not like I expect something I don't deliver. Those who have 4+ wins and good winrate are considered "good". I take the game if the team if good - bad > 1.

Let's get back to the statistics. Last season the average players had 207 ranked games. That's less than one per day. OK, there are non-ranked games too, so let's double it. That means 20 games over 2 weeks. That's about 1/3 of what I'm doing. Yet, people don't focus on a few champions but have dozens in play. The result: they can easily pick a champion they didn't play for weeks because "it's a counter" and they look stupid when they end up dead. What did you expect punks, playing an unknown champion in a twitch game on ranked?!

Anyway, this new evaluation method will help me climb pretty well. And once I'll be lucky with promotions! It will need some luck as I'm currently rejecting 70% of the games, since asking for a win a weeks with the champion he just picked seems to be over-the-top elitism.

PS: at the time of writing this, my last game was a Warwick win with 8 / 8 / 20.


Hanura H'arasch said...

It's indeed strange that such a simple requirement isn't met in the majority of cases.

Blizzard introduced a requirement of having at least reached lvl 5(~10 games if playing alone and without stimpack) with a given hero to be able to play him in ranked for precisely that reason. I was already high up the ladder at the time, so from experience I thought that this change would only affect a tiny amount of the player base. However, in reality lots and lots of people complained about it, suggesting it did affect quite a lot of players after all.

I can only conclude that the majority of people really do treat ranked just as normal "fun" games, with no real intention to win.

Anonymous said...

Almost missed this comment from last week:
>Riot has recently decided to clarify their position on queue dodging.
>By recently, I mean Yesterday. It seems that they're rolling out anti-dodging initiatives.

Surely this is just coincidence.

maxim said...

This is not a tactic that will keep on working.
In fact, you are going to hit very hard diminishing returns as soon as you get in leagues where there are more competitive people.
I guess it is not a bad tactic for skipping early leagues, but there is no good rational reason for doing so (plenty of bad irrational reasons, though).

99smite said...

The problem at hand is not RIOT or LoL or game design.
The problem is PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Only a few people are able to perform well in competitive games. And whoever is challenging this fact, I kindly ask to look at sports competitions in real life. While there are millions of people exercising one sport or another, only a tiny fraction does compete in tournaments, trials or competitions and only a tiny fraction of these participants are "competitive ebthusiasts" who have what it takes to outperform their opponents regularly.

In online gaming, this is no different. Alas, every m&s has the time, money and opportunity to participate as well.

While in sandbox games and rpgs, exploring and collecting items are part of the "fun" and player themselves may choose to do whatever they want to have their share of "fun", games like LoL or WoT are based on competitive actions. The performance of an individual player depends on his results compared to the players who participated in the same match...
While some players may have the same ultra competitive attitude Gevlon has shown us, the majority of the rest is just in it for the fun and for the lulz. Sadly though, they are the ones crying for achievements and rewards just for spending time in a game. Time they spent impeding the progress of their team mates.

And, sadly again, game desingers have bills to pay too, therefore, they cater to the dumb to make a living.

The longer I follow Gevlons experiences in LoL, the more I am convinced that Gevlon needs to play with more competent people. I do not know the game mechanics of LoL, but I strongly advice that Gevlon teams up with similarly competitive thinking people.

I do not consider myself a M&S, but I do not permanently seek competition in my spare time, work life offers much more rewarding opportunities... I really like rpgs and sandbox games, so that I can drift through an artificial world.
But, when I play competitive games, I want to perform well and I really hate to have teammates that have no idea how to reach the game's objectives...
There is nothing more frustrating when you need to capture a point in order to win and all the players hop around the cap circle, trying to "snipe" the opponents who quietly sit inside the cap circle... YOLO!

And these are the times where I wish I could do damage to "teammates"...

Alessandro said...

It would be cool to automate the check, using your "formula".

I'm afraid of the anti-dodging changes that Riot wants to make...

Lykos X said...

Its almost like riot team is trying to work something out with the players :^)