champion mastery is a joke

SantanaTheSlick ·May 16, 2015·3 votes·883 views

http://matchhistory.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-details/NA1/1825392319/43133123?tab=overview look at this fucking game and tell me i only deverse 300 mastery points. Riot can go fuck right off

18 Comments

JustMyBassCannonMay 16, 20153 votes

Champion Mastery is totally fucked. Win a game? Doesn't matter that you D-ranked and were totally carried, here's >1100 points to your champion mastery on a champion you probably literally never played before.

Oh, you lost? It doesn't matter that this is your main and that you got [at least] an A ranking, you get 200 points because you(r teammates) are shit.

ZmuecatMay 16, 20153 votes

Yeah. It's a bad system. Could have been good, but it's just another grind added into LoL.

http://matchhistory.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/#match-details/NA1/1824043125/33932676?tab=overview

I got a B for that game. Granted I don't care too much, and I was really happy we turned it around. It's just after I saw the massive lead they had (I only understand graphs and pie charts) I was like "The hell do I do for an A? Or an S for that matter?"

Deep Terror NamiMay 16, 20155 votes

It doesn't matter how good your stats are if you can't win a game. The objective is the nexus, not KDA and CS, so it's only natural for them to weigh that far higher than anything else.

If they compromised and gave losers more Mastery points, they would just take it directly out of the winner's points in order to keep progression at the same speed. Why would they punish the winners only to benefit those who can't win half their games regardless of their scores?

ZmuecatMay 16, 20151 votes

I won the game though. I won the game even though the odds were stacked against my team after poor plays early. Just felt odd.

Did you mean to respond to JustMyBassCannon?

Deep Terror NamiMay 16, 20152 votes

Sorry bout that ya

JustMyBassCannonMay 16, 20152 votes

It makes sense to have the winning team score more than the losing team. I'm not saying they should be graded completely individually; indeed, even though this is supposedly a measure of your mastery of a champion, it would be remiss to disregard teamwork and whether or not you won the game.

But scoring at least triple, more often 6-7 times as much for wins over losses is fucking bananas. If the winning side was just getting 50% more points because, y'know, they won, I wouldn't be having any problems, because it's still supposed to be a measurement of my personal skill as well as my team cohesion.

When the difference is that massive, and when the grading is incoherent and most likely not taking everything into account, it changes from a grade of your personal mastery to rewarding you for winning and punishing you for losing, separate from the fact that you won/loss the game and regardless of the circumstances.

Does the scoring take into account the MMR of your teammates and your opponents?

Does it take into account just how much you were doing for your team?

Does it keep track of their allies' scores and compare them?

No, of course it doesn't. Oh, you won and got a D? Here's 1100 points.

Oh, you lost and got an S? Here's 250 points.

It's absolutely baffling how someone can defend this systemic flaw. It's not that I get fewer points for losing--hell, that's how IP works, and that's how it works in any other game where you reap rewards even when you lose--but the fact that the variance between win and loss score is so large.

I would gladly be "punished" for winning 1100 points on a Taric game when I'm probably the worst support and a terrible Taric player, getting a C rank to prove that I'm only slightly better than my neighbor's beagle. I would trade that for even just 400 points on my B+ Draven game, or my A rank Shyvana game. This system isn't "Who can win most often," but "Which champion is your favorite/main/best?" So have the scoring based more heavily on the grade than the win/loss.

Hell, I don't care if the winner gets +100% more than the loser. It's when the winner gets +330-700% that it's less "competitive benefit" and more "Thank god I can't punch people through the internet, because that smug-ass troll would have blood instead of teeth by now."

Deep Terror NamiMay 16, 20153 votes

Like I said, if they moved more points to the losers they'd simply pull it out of the winners to keep progression the same. If you are winning an average number of your games (50%), then there is zero problem for you. If you're winning more, then you have an advantage. Only if you are losing more than you win is this a problem for you.

JustMyBassCannonMay 16, 20152 votes

It's not supposed to be win-entitlement, it's supposed to be the player's mastery of the game.

That's the core problem. This is supposed to be scoring the player's mastery of the game. Not their win/loss ratio, but their actual gameplay and skill.

The entire system is based on a lie. The alleged point of Champion Mastery was to grade players based on how well they played specific champions. In concept, that sounds amazing.

Making it so that the points gained is almost completely unaffected by your grade means that it's not about your gameplay or skill. It's just a secondary IP tracker to unlock a title and a special emote that you have to unlock for champions individually.

If you wish, go on with your belief that the system isn't so polar that the Equator and the North Pole share more in common. I can't really take you seriously when you defend such a poorly optimized system. It's like saying standardized tests are improving American schools.

Deep Terror NamiMay 16, 20153 votes

My belief doesn't matter, because I simply don't care. Win half your matches and you'll be fine.

JustMyBassCannonMay 16, 20152 votes

If you don't care, why do you oppose the idea of rebalancing the system?

Deep Terror NamiMay 16, 20153 votes

I'm not going to repeat what I already wrote... If you don't like it, I don't have an issue with that either.

JustMyBassCannonMay 16, 20152 votes

You misunderstand the difference between win rate and player skill.

And I see it is beyond you to give a damn. You oppose it because you can't tell the difference between two things that aren't the same.

I have an issue with openly ignorant people intending to continue being openly ignorant.

Deep Terror NamiMay 16, 20153 votes

Never said anything like that but if the only way you can feel good about this is by tossing out insults keep at it, it's not like I value your opinion.

JustMyBassCannonMay 16, 20151 votes

If I tell you to explain yourself, you'll ironically repeat that you don't want to repeat yourself. If I tell you how I came to the conclusion that you are being openly ignorant, you will, ironically, ignore that too.

I've known, every time, that this is an exercise in futility. Congratulations, you have officially lasted longer in being boring and deflective, because actually addressing and explaining opinions is too much work.

I never believed my opinion mattered to you. I've just stuck around, waiting for you to make it extremely obvious that you're taking cues based on my response, instead of actually debating the point. Now, that exercise in futility is complete, and you can entertain me no further.

Deep Terror NamiMay 16, 20153 votes

Not my fault you fail to understand and instead decided to take it as a personal insult lol.