Hey guys, been playing again off and on. Took a hiatus to play Secret World and am still playing a bit of Guild Wars 2.
Ran across this interesting read.
http://www.reignofgaming.net/blogs/...gustaf/21500-gaming-like-a-gentleman-elo-hell
Which also links to 5hitcombo's post about no elo hell. The problem I find with their whole argument for no elo hell is they fail to take into consideration the two major components of WHY people have elo hell.
What is elo hell? being stuck at an elo level where as a player you are probably a lot better than. Both article make mention that some games, no matter how good you are as a player, are completely un-winnable and can not be carried. But their biggest argument for no elo hell is that as you increase your elo level, not only are your team mates better, but so are your opponents. Which is a very true statement to a degree.
They just fail to address the main concerns about WHY there is an elo hell. These are my argument points to elo hell.
1) Amount of games played.
A person with high elo is going to typically have tons of games played in ranked. Hundreds if not thousands. This also lends credence to that fact that these people play often enough to have a lot of practice. Which is true. However, the game mechanics are in themselves quiet simple for the vast majority of champs and team comps. A person does not really need 100 games per champion to master the game mechanics. Not at all. Even they mention that in the articles. The argument I have in regards to games is not everyone who is good CAN dedicate 10 hours of gaming to ranked games day in and day out. Why is that needed? The more games you play, the better your chance of having more wins over losses. Not to mention the match making system is a bit better in matching up your next game based off your most recent string as other similar players are currently also playing.
The problem comes in for elo hell where good players can only play 1 or 2 rank games every so often. The match making system tries to match you up with others of a similar elo as well as match people on winning streaks with people on losing streaks. A good player on a losing streak playing several games in a row will eventually be matched up with current players on winning streaks that are also recent. That does NOT happen as nicely when a person can only play every so often. The system may not match you up correctly because of that.
2) True solo versus duo/solo.
The casual good or even great player may only be able to do an actual SOLO ranked game here or there. While someone playing 10 hours is more likely to have a good friend to duo with. Duoing makes a HUGE impact on games won over a long stretch of time. 2 good players on a team every time stacks the odds on winning over 1 for sure good player.
3) Being on a team of like minded players actually trying to EARN elo.
This mindset is significantly different at higher versus lower elos. The higher you go, the more likely players on both teams are actually going to play for 20 minute games. Why? It's MUCH better to play for a 20 minute game than an hour long game win or lose. Players going for 20 minute games are going to play 3 games in that same space and are more likely to win 2 out 3 in that time frame. Playing shorter games and making those decisive is massive to gaining elo. Lower elo players just rarely get this concept. At the 20 minute mark your team is either winning decisively or surrender. Period. Once you are the lower end of the elo spectrum, most players would rather play out a losing game for an hour than just move on even if they know they will lose. Many do it to be spiteful. Again, I'm not saying that there can't be a comeback win. I'm just saying it's pointless. Why waste an hour or more on a comeback win, when you could just take 1 loss and have a higher chance of 2 or more wins in that same time frame the 1 come back win took? You'll earn far more elo over all with that mindset than the one of trying to play out every game to a prolonged conclusion.
4) Early elo makes a HUGE difference.
Those starting ranked for the first time are going to get massive elo gains. If you are a good player and starting ranked, you have a greater chance of winning a few games in a row to garner a very high elo level. 10 wins off the bat from scratch will put you over 1800+ elo. A player with 400 wins and 400 losses doing a 10 game win streak will still be at most 1300ish elo. Once you've gained a good amount of elo, a single loss here or there won't subtract as much.
And therein lies the biggest problems with elo hell. There are a few more minor nitpicks, like the match making system and what elo is all based off on that also contributes to elo hell, but not as much. Basically you could be one of the games best players, but if you got a really bad start with a large losing streak when starting rank due to un-winnable games you may be stuck permanently in elo hell. More so if that same great player can only play very casually and rarely are able to duo over solo.
and with 450 ip in the bank i've got ways to go before i can join in. FML. I think i may have to shell out some dough to speed things up further.
Facebook
Twitter