Posted on 19 August 2017 - 07:47 PM
+1Last edited on 19 August 2017 - 08:24 PM by Broken_Username_254473
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
Same value, same grind and the amount of time it will take to get it back. It's not fun getting 2 elo per game when you're only 1800 in kits
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 08:31 PM
+1Posted on 19 August 2017 - 08:40 PM
GreenArrows wrote
Limeintine wrote...
Same value, same grind and the amount of time it will take to get it back. It's not fun getting 2 elo per game when you're only 1800 in kits
Then there will be 100 masters… It should be something special if u get masters
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 09:31 PM
Limeintine wrote
GreenArrows wrote...
Then there will be 100 masters… It should be something special if u get masters
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 09:32 PM
GreenArrows wrote
Limeintine wrote...
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 10:21 PM
+1 pleasePosted on 19 August 2017 - 10:38 PM
GreenArrows wrote
Limeintine wrote...
No because everyone would already be so high in elo where u get a lot and getting high ranks is not as good anymore.
Posted on 19 August 2017 - 11:00 PM
Ny_ wrote
For the last year or so, the community has been unhappy about MMR. You guys (the administration) have argued back for a long time, saying that MMR is more balanced, it favors skill more by reducing the impact of a single match, it creates much better targets with its promo/demote matches, and it's more polished. Regardless, the community rejected this system. The only apparent reason for this, was that ELO has been around so long that it is the community's frame of reference for skill in this game. We don't know how good an emerald 3 is, we don't know if ComboDombo or HattoWolf would've been Masters, and we don't know what rank really is equal to 2K.
So ELO was brought back, and I can't say enough how happy I am that the decision was made to do this. I was on board with MMR at first, I liked the ratings and I thought it could work better than ELO. But I'm glad that after it didn't work out, you guys saw the rejection of it and decided to switch back. Successful networks see their mistakes and acknowledge them rather than trying to work around them.
Now, here's my issue with the new system: ELO is cut in half. The reason people wanted ELO back is as a reference, a comparison, because it's familiar and they know what the numbers mean. To change it on a such a fundamental level completely changes the meaning of the numbers in the ELO system and ruins the biggest reason people wanted ELO back this whole time.
Bring back the original ELO system. If you're going to use ELO, go all the way and use the ELO people want to see.
its still in beta so hopefully the devs will decide to go back to old elo
Posted on 20 August 2017 - 05:39 AM
+1Posted on 20 August 2017 - 11:43 AM
Limeintine wrote
GreenArrows wrote...
No because everyone would already be so high in elo where u get a lot and getting high ranks is not as good anymore.
Say if your 2.3k Elo in Diamond and fighting a 1900. That 1900 sweated the hardest he can on you and you beat him after 10 min and only get 2 Elo. That is not fun
Posted on 20 August 2017 - 12:00 PM
GreenArrows wrote
Limeintine wrote...
Say if your 2.3k Elo in Diamond and fighting a 1900. That 1900 sweated the hardest he can on you and you beat him after 10 min and only get 2 Elo. That is not fun
Also wouldn't be fun if I lost 32 elo from sweating a 10 min match. They contradict each other
Posted on 20 August 2017 - 12:03 PM
-1 the current system is much better imo. You don't have to fear queuing and losing -31.Posted on 20 August 2017 - 01:43 PM
Limeintine wrote
GreenArrows wrote...
Also wouldn't be fun if I lost 32 elo from sweating a 10 min match. They contradict each other
Posted on 20 August 2017 - 01:45 PM
GreenArrows wrote
Limeintine wrote...
Slower bc its more rewarding.
Posted on 20 August 2017 - 01:47 PM
Limeintine wrote
GreenArrows wrote...
Slower bc its more rewarding.
Posted on 20 August 2017 - 02:16 PM
GreenArrows wrote
Limeintine wrote...
I honestly don't mind it. I'm 1750 in diamond rn I still get 3-4 elo from a 1400 so it's not that bad. And if u read this thread: https://www.badlion.net/forum/thread/184602 look at the leaderboards. There will actually be competition and it would be rare for someone to be way ahead of someone else on the leaderboards.
Posted on 20 August 2017 - 02:39 PM
Automatically DeletedLast edited on 20 August 2017 - 03:20 PM by Broken_Username_254473
Limeintine wrote
GreenArrows wrote...
I honestly don't mind it. I'm 1750 in diamond rn I still get 3-4 elo from a 1400 so it's not that bad. And if u read this thread: https://www.badlion.net/forum/thread/184602 look at the leaderboards. There will actually be competition and it would be rare for someone to be way ahead of someone else on the leaderboards.
Posted on 20 August 2017 - 03:22 PM
GreenArrows wrote
Limeintine wrote...
You know you don't always queue 1400. Most likely you will queue 1600 and no one is even 2k yet in diamond.