Broken point system

[Mighty]

Hello. Today I decided to do a bit on PvPing, namely 1 on 1.

 

At the start of the day, I had 1664 points. I won 8 matches in a row, got to 1717. Lost 2 matches, and went back to 1670. Won 7 matches, got to 1710. Lost 1 match, went to 1669.

 

Can someone tell me wtf is this? I have to win 100 matches in a row to get to plat or something?

 

All my matches were against Gold opponents

[Mighty]

No comments from other members?

No comments from GMs?

Is this game really a desert? Guess it's just me and bots now

[JayMagic]

I have no idea how it works, I believe your rank goes up and down (from winning or losing) depending on the rank of the opponent you have faced, but... i think it has more to it than that. :( need more insight into it from the GMs, post it to the main section of the forums to see if you can find answers there?

[wolftonrei]

It depends on the rank of your opponent so if your gold and lose to a silver rank player that means big point loss, and little point gain if the opposite happens. The wider the gap between your rankings the more to gain/lose. Though the most i have ever lost has only been 22 points from a match, and gain 8 points minimum when winning so either your exaggerating or something *cricket*ed up is happening.

[Shirasaya]

The system in itself isnt broken.

It is a very stereotypical elo system which you had in Sc2 aswell.

Especially considering that this game is 1on1 based unlike mobas, its very accurate when it comes down to giving and taking points.

 

The problem that you are describing has mostly to do with the fact that majority of the game that you win that lead to very little Points were most likley games with players with lower rating than yourself.

You sadly cant always choose your opponents like in other games.

Certain games offer the option that you always play against only equals or better players for faster improvement and Point gain.

This game lacks the player base to do so, and it complicates a lot.

When you suddenly drop massive amounts of points its probably that you lost to a worse player.

 

In someone subjective view you think that you only lose to players that are better than you but thats just not the case.

This game sadly isnt balanced at all when it comes to pvp.

 

The lack of HM skills, HM levels and generally speaking latency issues will randomize a lot of things.

Thus creating very difficult countermatchups such as kfm vs sin.

 

Now you may be the kfm god and shit on all the other little kids in arena, but then suddenly lose to a worse overall sin.

This will pull your rating down.

In sum tho the calculations should even out eventually as there are plenty of classes and chances that you meet the same class like 10 games in a row is pretty small, tho possible.

 

the fact that countermatchups exist is sign of weak balancing.

This has been counteracted in kr tho with plenty of hm levels and skills to compensate and make for a diverse play.

 

In Eu/Na you struggle with latency issues in arena alone.

Talking about balance is not even the first priority.

Sadly when it comes to points gained and lost you just have to bite the bullet.

 

For example i main FM and would play very well against most classes except BM with the HM-block.

The matchup in itself was really FM favored in the first place but at a state where you could always argue about "skill".

Them having access to the HM block while FM not is simple telling all FMs to screw themselves and try to win a 10/90 matchup in ranked.

Not only that but i have to hope that those BM's are not always lower rating than myself, dragging me into a pit everytime a loss costs me more than 4 wins.

 

[Riepah]

I just know that I, when I was Gold, got matched against a Diamond player and got barely more points for defeating him than I lost for losing to another Gold player right after.

[Elmoren]

Shirasaya, although not well expressed (I guess English isn't first language) is right. The ELO system is well documented. look it up online. It is often used for games like Chess or Go, and works very well.

 

I don't know how the ELO system fits into the bronze-silver-gold-plat tier system. I'd imagine it is banded, e.g. 1400-1500=bronze, 1501-1600=silver or something like that.

 

ELO works less well here (theoretically) because different classes play differently against each other. Suppose (for the sake of argument) That Blade Dancer beats all classes easily except Assassin, while Assassin tends to lose to all classes except Blade Dancer (this is an example, not a discussion of the imbalance of classes based on fact). In that case a BD starting at 1300 might go up to 1400 beating all the other classes, while the Sin drops to 1200 losing to all the other classes. Then they fight each other, the Sin wins, and both get their ELO reverted back to 1300. If bronze range is 1100 to 1300 then to the BD it looks like he won 4 matches against same ranked people and then lost 1 match against a same ranked Sin, and that he unfairly lost much more rating in the one loss than he won in the others.

 

I think they ought to show the ELO of opponents. I have only just got my rating decided, but in the matches before, my rating went up on every victory, often by quite a bit, but never went down on a loss. 2 of the 3 losses were complete walk-overs. I can only conclude that I was playing vastly more skilled players with a vastly higher ELO (as well as being max level where I am only level 35). The other loss, against a bad Summoner, I still had no chance of winning, so it is possible that they had a high ELO too. But it would have been nice to know their ELO, even if only after the match.