Boards›Player Behavior

EU West Elo Hell/Mentality

Giekos·8/7/2019, 12:57:58 AM·1 votes·1,442 views

Well basically, some say Elo hell is true, others say it isnt. Whatever the hell it is , it doesnt matter because certain things need to change in low elo EU west. One thing fundamentally is the mindset which is probably the hardest one to change. People in EU west (or even around the world) at this low elo at least, seem to have a god complex, where their egos surpass anything the world has ever seen.

Now of course this is an exxageration but there is a large element of truth to this. One time I played with a Katarina who with a score of 19/9/8 flamed the entire team for not "playing" as well as she thought they should. I was playing bard with a score of 3/7/21, a respectable score which was achieved through roaming. Other times include the extensive use of flaming which I'm sure everyone is familiar with. the problem is people dont understand the psychology of playing, and they dont understand that big egos and flaming have negative impacts on the performnce of a team, rarely do people thrive when their teammate says they should delete the game and jump off a cliff. People also need to stop using the surrender option, except in extreme cases suchas AFK which as it happens is extremely frequent (about 1 in 5 games to be exact). While it is an easy fix, if you have beaten fairly by a better team then at least give them the enjoyment of destroying the nexus because we all know its very satisfying. This annoys lots of people too, "why no surrender?" , "the game is lost!" "you have been reported!". But this is the wrong mentality that people are adopting. People should look at how much we are losing and in how long the game is about to end, but rather about "How do we win the game?". This is of course idealised but these epic comebacks are what people often remember, I can remember one from a year ago when we once had the nexus at 56 hp. Yet we still won. So why don't we do it?

Unfortunately im more of a history/essays person so I can't give an answer, but this needs to be discussed becuase something needs tp change, and it should happen fast becuase who's to blame when in 20 years in the future the poeple you're living round are a bunch of assholes-thats probably what my friends call me anyway. I have a couple suggestions that might help things on the whole:

  1. You must have a mastery to play ranked. 2.Minimum honor requirement for ranked.
  2. Less rp lossed when scores are better in ranked.

1 and 2 are controversial, I guess. But heres the defence: Ranked, at most levels (dont know about the potatoes in iron IV but we'll skip that part) is competetive, its a climb to the top, and climbing takes effort and time. So why go into ranked with champions or "low" honor to begi with. You are likely to not do well, as you are learning that champion and you will make others unhappy. The trade is one persons enjoyment, traded for the unhappiness and toxicity of 4 others. Thats like skirmishing a fed vayne as mundo-not a good trade. It wont solve the problem, but its a first step worthy to try. Riot could trade this by reducing the minimum champ count for ranked. No.3 is slightly different however. This is for the players that play well, in their games (and if it isnt implemented already) would lose less rp. Playing well, which can mean bing a good helper for your team shouldnt make you as bad as that one feeder on the team.

In any case , this is only a proposal from a bronze 1 Pyke main, but I still think its worse discussing.

Giekos

1 Comments

Hotarµ8/7/2019, 1:24:43 AM1 votes

1 - You must have a mastery to play ranked.

This isn't a good idea for multiple reasons.

Someone's mastery level doesn't reflect their skill level. I've fought against Master Yi's with 3 million mastery points (no joke) that played like they just picked up the champion for the first time and I've also played against people with as low as 1,000 mastery points who absolutely slaughtered us. Ultimately, this change just isn't going to improve the state of ranked.

Adding a mastery requirement also means a massive time investment for anyone wanting to play ranked. Let's just say for an example that you need 25 champions at mastery level 4 or higher to participate in ranked. That's 2-6+ days for each champion, most of which you might not even play. Then there are the rare cases where your preferred champion pool is entirely banned or first-picked by other players, meaning you're out of luck and have to choose a champion you're not fully comfortable with (if you can even pick at all depending on how many M4+ champions you have.)

That time investment is also going to put off new players and casuals from participating in the ranked ladder which means less competition, less satisfaction (from those players), and less money for Riot. There's just too many downsides to a mastery-requirement ranked system, it wouldn't work efficiently.

2 - Minimum honor requirement for ranked.

Personally I'm not a fan of this idea mainly because people genuinely do slip up and it can take a while for someone to get back to honor 2+. Adding a ranked restriction discourages people from reforming or at the very least makes it harder and I just think the current punishment system does enough to deter rulebreaking behavior.

3 - Less rp lossed when scores are better in ranked.

I kind of have mixed feelings about this one. Let me preface this by saying that League is a team game and having a good score shouldn't stop you from losing LP.

I think Overwatch has a good ranked system (atleast in theory) as they do somewhat take your individual experience into account, but not enough to the point where objectives/team based play doesn't matter.

I don't know. I'm probably not the best person to speak on this topic considering I rarely play ranked, even on my alts.