An ELO system where a loss of the game doesn't mean you lose elo.

Dalcron··3 votes·261 views

Can we get an ELO system that is a bit more dynamic? I just lost a game because our 5th person left some 15 mins into the game (I got an S+ rating). It took the other team 50 mins and 2 Barons to beat us. Yes, there's probably something we could have done if our ADC didn't enjoy the way her ears rubbed against the inner lining of her small intestine but that folks is ELO Hell.

Some things I'd like to see a new system incorporate, especially at the lower ELO levels:

  • S ratings enable you to gain ELO even in the case of a loss (maybe this goes even as low as A+ but nothing too low).
  • a game played with X% of the game down a person gives that % is LP loss reduction. Example, I'm set by normal calculations to lose 18 LP but I had a leaver that left 20 mins into a 50 min game. This means I played 60% without her. Then, 18 * .4 (the % played with the leaver) = 7.2 LP loss (rounded down?). I mean, my team stuck it out and played to the end. They should get something for not just /ff. You could also restrict this to any game that exceeds 25 minutes so that a team that does /ff won't get the loss reduction (so people can't game the system).

I wish I had a 3rd bullet point but that alone would make life a little easier at lower ELOs.

8 Comments

Sona Ping3 votes

"[Can we get an] ELO system where a loss of the game doesn't mean you lose elo." No.

  • Because you lost. Not losing is one of your goals.
  • Because destroying the enemy nexus is the point of the match so it does not makes sense that you won't be rated whether or not you succeed at that.
  • Because the Mastery System has nothing to do with mastery of the champion. The mastery system is nothing but League's version of Xbox achievements; just a little number for players to collect to try to trick them into playing more. That's all.
  • Because an S does not even say you played well. It's not hard to get an S. You can get an S on champions you don't even play.
Dalcron1 votes

I think you missed the point. Thanks for your response, though.

Sona Ping2 votes

Well what was the point then? Was it "asking for something to do about leavers"? I didn't take it as that because your writing didn't address that but other things.


P.S. IDK if you have angered someone who is passive aggressively taking it out on your vote count.

Dalcron

No, I'm saying that if you play really awesome, you should be able to progress and not be held down. Additionally, if you have a leaver, it shouldn't affect you like a regular loss - ESPECIALLY, if you played well despite the disadvantage.

Sona Ping1 votes

"No, I'm saying that if you play really awesome, you should be able to progress and not be held down. " But that's already the case. And the "mastery score" does not have much correlation whether or not a player played awesome; as I said, it's not hard to get an S on a champion you don't even play.

"Additionally, if you have a leaver, it shouldn't affect you like a regular loss - ESPECIALLY, if you played well despite the disadvantage." Though I do agree that Riot needs to do something more about problems like leavers, etc. what ever that something may be.

Surr20plz2 votes

I wouldn't mind our mmr being affected by performance grade (assuming riot would spell out what gets you higher grades in each role) but not lp.

Dalcron1 votes

MMR wouldn't be enough. Otherwise, you would have tougher opponents and still be at lower rankings.

Sona Ping1 votes

But if you have a higher MMR than your division, you gain more LP. So you are suggesting that anyway.

More from Gameplay