Posted on 19 August 2017 - 09:48 AM
People don't get it. Halved elo is much better. If you reach 2k+ you get +1 from 1400 either way, but if you get killed by 1400 hacker or alt you lose only 1/2 of the points you would lose if there was normal elo.-1
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 09:57 AM
Well said.Posted on 19 August 2017 - 10:14 AM
Personally I like the risk factor involved in the old ELO system however the new system will make it much more competitive at the top instead of having one person who nobody can beat be ridiculously far ahead of everyone else (danteh).Posted on 19 August 2017 - 11:10 AM
+1 you are welcome for my moral support of bringing ELO bac and +1 to gaining the old ELO bac (+31 etc)Posted on 19 August 2017 - 11:11 AM
VojislavSeselj wrote
-1
Last edited on 19 August 2017 - 11:12 AM by UVpickles
The current system just makes each point 2x more "valuable" than S12 elo. In a sense, you can say that the numbers really don't matter because inflation is just more controlled with the current elo, and means that you can still compare the exact same way, but you have to consider that 1 S15 elo is worth 2x more than 1 S12 elo.Personally, I think either system is fine because it doesn't matter. All that changes is elo inflation.
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 11:35 AM
both +1 and -1 from me, I like this ELO but I feel like original ELO was better, more nostalgic and challenging cause of the -31Posted on 19 August 2017 - 12:13 PM
Limeintine wrote
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 12:38 PM
Limeintine wrote
But it would make things more motivating and faster for people to enjoy.
+1
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 12:59 PM
+1. The challenge of breaking Danteh's elo records legitimately (win: +1 lose: -31) would no doubt encourage more competitionPosted on 19 August 2017 - 01:01 PM
GreenArrows wrote
Limeintine wrote...
But it would make things more motivating and faster for people to enjoy.
+1
I don't think ppl would enjoy it when they lose 31 elo in 1 match
Last edited on 19 August 2017 - 01:32 PM by Broken_Username_254473
Limeintine wrote
GreenArrows wrote...
I don't think ppl would enjoy it when they lose 31 elo in 1 match
But 16 elo is basically the same value as 31 elo. If you lose 16, it's the same and then you win your next time which you get 8 back, it's not fun. But with s12 elo makes things more sufficient and less demotivating.
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 02:29 PM
GreenArrows wrote
Limeintine wrote...
But 16 elo is basically the same value as 31 elo. If you lose 16, it's the same and then you win your next time which you get 8 back, it's not fun. But with s12 elo makes things more sufficient and less demotivating.
I'd rather lose less elo per match bc someone would get screwed over if they get tilted and lose 3 matches which would be 93 elo
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 02:30 PM
Limeintine wrote
GreenArrows wrote...
I'd rather lose less elo per match bc someone would get screwed over if they get tilted and lose 3 matches which would be 93 elo
Also it would sniping people a lot worse
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 02:58 PM
Limeintine wrote
no lime ur dumb its so much easier to climb if kids are getting 2.2k in fucking beta
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 03:02 PM
Everyone who is commenting that losing a lot of elo is bad, didn't do well in s12/11 but if you see most of the people who did semi well or did well want elo back. It was way more competitive in s11/12 then it will ever be if we continue to use this system.Posted on 19 August 2017 - 03:21 PM
xSah wrote
How about me?
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 04:07 PM
Gulleboy wrote
Tvjuli wrote...
Well its an opinion, on the other hand having a system that its more focused on the top players makes it more competitive, back in season 12 the difference between danteh and the top 10 was like 200 elo (I dont actually remember) now the idea its to make the top more competitive.
But once again different opinions
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 05:25 PM
BIG +1!Posted on 19 August 2017 - 05:58 PM
-1