SafeinSound
Member
Have most of you guys gotten your dodge runes refunded? I just checked and mine were refunded I guess as of this morning. Most people I've talked to seem to have had theirs refunded.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
League of Legends |OT2| So free, it's only 8000 USD!
- Thread starter SouthernDragon
- Start date
- Status
Got the refund, instantly bought hp regen quints.
SafeinSound
Member
Yeah, I'm not sure what I'm gonna spend mine on. Hp regen quints sound good.
Decided to buy some AD Quints. Still have a ton of ip left over. Will probably pick up some regen quints if/when I play a champ that needs em.
Decided to buy some AD Quints. Still have a ton of ip left over. Will probably pick up some regen quints if/when I play a champ that needs em.
cool, same mate.
I'm watching a stream right now and every time the guy goes to base, I instinctively press P 
I only got a refund on my old account. My main however is still waiting.
I only got a refund on my old account. My main however is still waiting.
FieryBalrog
Member
This game is too fucking addictive
SouthernDragon
Member
Tell me about it.
SouthernDragon
Member
I'm contemplating buying a full set of all dodge runes possible and abusing the hell out of Jax. All of them will be refunded by the 25th anyways.
True but they are always boots and pots or a doran, and I myself only adept to that when in lane. But maybe that isn't the best way though.
About the dodge refunds, I actually think that goes alphabetical per summoner name.
You can't "abuse" Jax anymore. Right now he kinda just exists to counterpick specific top lane champions.
I'm watching HSGG stream, he's being very informative but he's dropped to the pits of his own ELO hell. I kinda feel sorry for him haha, the teams he's on have been pretty bad.
FieryBalrog
Member
Do you guys know if the Halloween dodge quints get refunded? I hope Riot doesn't overlook those, they're the only dodge runes I have.
Matchmaking is terrible right now. Just played a game where the enemy mid was level 30 with almost 900 wins. Our mid? level 25 with 120 wins. Needless to say, we lost that lane quite fast. And our last pick was supposed to pick some sort of ranged ad, but instead he opted for Olaf. So I had to go bot with Gangplank against a Caitlyn - actually won that lane, but it was a hollow victory.
He actually started dropping elo on purpose to reduce queue time.
He actually started dropping elo on purpose to reduce queue time.
I don't know what's up today, but I am also just having the worst luck with teams being a totally mismatch of skill levels. It's abysmal.
SouthernDragon
Member
This has been happening for a while with GAF premades. We'll have 200-600 wins on our end per player, and be matched with 400-900 win folk.
I just assumed we're getting to those upper bands where people with equivalent wins are scarce.
I just assumed we're getting to those upper bands where people with equivalent wins are scarce.
dave is ok
aztek is ok
Did they have any kind of Christmas sale last year?
Vanillalite
Ask me about the GAF Notebook
I wish blind pick didn't allow people to lock in for like the 1st IDK 20 seconds or so. I hate it when everyone gets into character select, quickly picks the champ they wanted to play ahead of time, locks in to make sure they get it, and then looks. Then half the room realizes they all locked in AD Carry, and there are only two slots left without a tank, support, or AP.
Even worse when they all QQ what we need in chat because they all locked in so dang fast. Grrr.... ugh...
Even worse when they all QQ what we need in chat because they all locked in so dang fast. Grrr.... ugh...
It is an indicator of experience, however, and also potentially an indicator as to how many champions and runes people have available.
After a few hundred wins I agree. If someone is below 300 wins they aren't going to have the skills of someone double or triple that. Your comment works because someone can cheese one or two characters for all those wins without really knowing the game underneath or the characters.
davidpdong
Member
blind pick is my hell. The only thing worse than a shit comp is hitting the loading screen and seeing the other team decided to re-enact Dignitas at IEM Korea or someshit..
SouthernDragon
Member
Well, those 1000 wins are cumulative. What sucks is when the enemy roster looks like this:
500 600 800 900 800
And we look like this
300 400 600 700 400
It does suggest experience, which is a huge factor in a game like this.
500 600 800 900 800
And we look like this
300 400 600 700 400
It does suggest experience, which is a huge factor in a game like this.
ElectraStar
Junior Member
Yeah, but I think you're less likely to find a terrible 1500-win player than you are a 500-win one, no?
*Edit: Why did everyone sound so surprised that the first OT2 post looked so nice?
I always believed in you, guys!! <3
Nope, I think the chances of finding a terrible 1500 win player is the same as a 500 win player. 500 wins is enough to gain plenty of experience.
While I agree someone could be bad with that many games played, that is a minority and you're speaking as though that argument completely negates what we're complaining about.
For the most part, people with 1000+ wins will have much more beneficial experience than someone with 200 wins.
For the most part, people with 1000+ wins will have much more beneficial experience than someone with 200 wins.
Or, you saw a good player with 1500 wins who had a bad game. Have you ever had a bad game? Possibly. Does it mean you're a terrible player?
I am talking probability. Anecdotal evidence about players does not matter in the grand scheme of probability. Take an extreme example. One player has 5 wins, and the other has 500 wins. Which is PROBABLY, for the purposes of matchmaking, a more skilled, more experienced, player, who can contribute more to his team?
Unexpected outcome: 5-win player is a smurf account owned by HotShotGG, the most pro of all pro players. He has also spent over 9000 RP to unlock tons of champions so he can play all the roles even with only 5 PVP wins on his account. He ALSO played 3000 bot games on that account so he had enough IP to buy lots of runes.
Unexpected outcome: 500-win player is a 12-year-old kid who literally does nothing else but play League of Legends when they're not at school. They also have a genetic disorder that prevents them from remembering anything from previous games, so they actually have 500 wins and 4000 losses. Each win is just because their team carried them.
Now, surely it's reasonable to say that the reasonable, probable, actual situation is that the 5-win player doesn't have as much experience, as many champions, and possibly as many runes as the 500-win player. When saying 200 wins vs 800 wins it's more of an even situation but I would suggest that on average, the 800-win player still has a little more experience and might remember some of it.
You might also say that some high ELO players are terrible and some low ELO players are amazing, but again that would be anecdotal, hopefully not true on average past a certain number of games played. Overall, matchmaking has to be based off of something, and ELO is perhaps a reasonable way to do it.
XeroSauce
Member
You're looking at the very extreme cases.
For the most part, more wins indicates more time spent on game = more hypothetical experience at the game.
Sure, you can say that someone with 100 wins has the same chance as someone with 1000, but those are extreme cases and with a game like LoL where you can constantly learning and changing the way you pay, it's more beneficial to have more time under your belt so that you understand the mechanics of the game better.
les papillons sexuels
Banned
I do retarded things in unranked games, the win/loss ratio for it is meaningless. If I wanted I could just play amumu and win 70% of the games I play, doesn't mean I do.
davidpdong
Member
I believe matchmaking uses your hidden normal game elo which disregards your wins and only your ratio.
You get an artificial elo boost if you q with people, the more people the more boost. Meaning if you q with 5 people, it will try to find you another team of 5 people playing. If it can't itll find you 4 people from a higher elo pool. etc.
When it matches you it also predicts if you will win or lose. If you win a game you were supposed to lose, you get a big elo boost with the converse also being true.
This is my current understanding of MM.
You get an artificial elo boost if you q with people, the more people the more boost. Meaning if you q with 5 people, it will try to find you another team of 5 people playing. If it can't itll find you 4 people from a higher elo pool. etc.
When it matches you it also predicts if you will win or lose. If you win a game you were supposed to lose, you get a big elo boost with the converse also being true.
This is my current understanding of MM.
Maybe I phrased it poorly, but that was the point I was trying to make. In general someone with far more wins has more experience and a somewhat better chance at helping the team than someone with far fewer wins. Exceptions can of course occur, I just meant in general.
I didn't realize you could get premade 5 matched against 4 with higher hidden ELO, but I guess that makes sense.
I was mainly responding to SouthernDragon, seen here:
All I'm saying is past a certain point, the number of games is meaningless when comparing skill. What's important is how well the player learns. Comparing 5 games played to 500 games is simply creating a straw man. The only awe a person with many many wins should get is the "woah, they've played alot". Not - "oh my matchmaking is so unfairrrrr".
200-600 vs 400-900 is NOT such a huge difference that you're suggesting (5 vs 500?).
I've checked their lolstats :3. Besides, probability has it that there SHOULD be bad players with 1500 wins. And you love probability.
Lets not go to extremes here where the difference between the players is 100 fold. That's comparing a 200 win player to a 20000 win player. Does that look right? I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. I'm using anecdotal evidence not to prove my statement, but to disprove the contention that "AYHAA SO MANY WINS THEY SO SKILLED".
What's this about high ELO? Wins do not tell you their ELO. All these people are seeing are wins. A 300w 200l player should have nothing to fear from a 600w 600l player.
All I'm saying is past a certain point, the number of games is meaningless when comparing skill. What's important is how well the player learns. Comparing 5 games played to 500 games is simply creating a straw man. The only awe a person with many many wins should get is the "woah, they've played alot". Not - "oh my matchmaking is so unfairrrrr".
Ghost Dad the Whip
Member
dat ult!
If you mean leagueofstats, that website is inaccurate as evidenced by myself and other GAF posters who have posted in the last few days about it. Is there another, accurate website?
Secondly, I don't know what you're basing probability on to say that there should be bad players with 1500 wins, but can you agree that probability says there shouldn't be a high percentage of bad 1500-win players compared to bad 200-win players?
Thirdly, I very clearly said I was taking an extreme example in an effort to illustrate the point, and I also acknowledged in the same post that normal cases (200 vs 800) are more even.
I don't think anyone said "AYHAA SO MANY WINS THEY SO SKILLED". I don't think anyone even used all caps. We are just suggesting that in general, teams with many more wins are more likely to do well than teams with few wins. Has anyone in this thread suggested that ALL players and teams with many wins are going to do better than teams with few wins? Certainly not me.
At a certain point (if everyone has >500 wins, or >1500 wins, or whatever cutoff point you want to choose) there are diminishing returns, sure. I don't know of anyone arguing against that. People are just saying in general that they appear to be encountering teams with overall much higher experience than them. It's a reasonable thing to say, and as far as I am aware it was phrased politely. Did anyone say "unfairrrrr"? I don't think so, so it sounds like your language is a bit mocking, much like your "AYHAA SO MANY WINS THEY SO SKILLED" phrase from the earlier comment. That's not nice.
uh huh...
SouthernDragon
Member
True. I should have amended the opposing numbers to include someone in the 1500 range.
Either way, I don't really mind that much. It sucks, you shrug your shoulders and learn.
I'm aware of the counter-argument; more champs = an edge in champion select. While it might provide an advantage for the few that learn dozens of champions effectively and is important for those same people who actually counterpick, it's not really going to make that much of a difference for most people. Hell, I suspect that most people will reach proficiency with a dozen champs and not much more.
I own, like, 53 champs. I'm not good with half of them.
Leagueofstats has been accurate within a few days for everybody I've played with. Perhaps you're mixed it up with lolstatistics which just has out dated numbers rather than false numbers. They all query the lol servers so ay best the numbers are just old. So it's fine for the purpose I was using it for. Anyway, the point of it is that there ARE bad players with many wins.
So it was all pointless then. Since 200 v 800 is the situation we are facing here.
It doesn't have to be "all". I'm saying that past a certain point there is barely any correlation between number of wins and individual skill. And no, nobody said THAT. But it was implied when they pointed out how many wins their opponents had compared to their own.
Acridmeat was definitely complaining, since he said "it sucks". There is an implied complaint by Sdragon too since he too said it sucks when the teams re like X. (he was not merely pointing out the fact that he played those games.)At a certain point (if everyone has <500 wins, or <1500 wins, or whatever cutoff point you want to choose) there are diminishing returns, sure. I don't know of anyone arguing against that. People are just saying in general that they appear to be encountering teams with overall much higher experience than them. It's a reasonable thing to say, and as far as I am aware it was phrased politely. Did anyone say "unfairrrrr"? I don't think so, so it sounds like your language is a bit mocking, much like your "AYHAA SO MANY WINS THEY SO SKILLED" phrase from the earlier comment. That's not nice.
I'm not mocking anybody but the argument itself. Once you have 300-400 wins, you simply CANNOT blame your loss on that: 1. The enemy team has many wins, 2. Many wins means they're better than us, then 3. Therefore that the matchmaking was broken.
Hmmm...
Amount of Rune Pages: Advantage bought or either 6300 per each. You start with 3. That is a massive advantage
And if you are buying champions, you can save IP for runes. It takes tens of thousands to get what you need.
Full sets of AP, MR, MP, ArmourPen, Mana Regen, and Armour for the standard ones. These being the basics and getting you through most characters. Add on Quints which run about 1000-2000 for most of the good ones.
And then the most specialized sets that help on a character to character base.
Lifesteal, Movement, Attack speed, Damage+, etc. And didn't they just add in more? Making specialization stronger.
And once again, the 10 rune pages to actually be able to do it.
Then we can talk about the character disadvantages in terms of banning and available pool selection.
FieryBalrog
Member
After a certain point, number of wins doesn't indicate much of anything. The difference between 800 wins and 500 wins is negligible in terms of learning to play the game. The difference between 400 and 100 is much more likely to be a true indicator of difference.
SouthernDragon
Member
I agree, actually. I think rune page and rune costs are exorbitant, and is definitely an "advantage bought" scenario that I wish didn't come into play. I said "pretty good" not perfect.
I survived on 3 rune pages for about 600 wins:
AD or top:
Arpen (red), Armor (yellow), Mres (blue), AD (quint)
AP or support
Mpen (red), flat mana regen (yellow), AP/level (blue), AP (quint)
AS jungler:
Arpen (red), Armor (yellow), Mres (blue), AS (quint).
Every role in the game.
-sure there are further specialisations if you want to go hardcore for each champion/rune, but general rune pages are fine overall.
There are even High elo players with only 2 rune pages. More champions, more rune pages, more runes = power is such a moot point at this stage.
Former rank 1 TeddyRO is an example. Undeadjames only plays udyr and only has 2 rune pages also. etc
Reaching High Elo or whatever has nothing to do with the number of rune pages you have or the large number of champions you play. Unless you play champions that are often banned, I don't see how those factors come into account. Rune page numbers and champion repertoire only come into play at a tournament setting where you know who you are playing and you know the ins and outs of their style.
AD or top:
Arpen (red), Armor (yellow), Mres (blue), AD (quint)
AP or support
Mpen (red), flat mana regen (yellow), AP/level (blue), AP (quint)
AS jungler:
Arpen (red), Armor (yellow), Mres (blue), AS (quint).
Every role in the game.
-sure there are further specialisations if you want to go hardcore for each champion/rune, but general rune pages are fine overall.
I agree, actually. I think rune page and rune costs are exorbitant, and is definitely an "advantage bought" scenario that I wish didn't come into play. I said "pretty good" not perfect.
There are even High elo players with only 2 rune pages. More champions, more rune pages, more runes = power is such a moot point at this stage.
Former rank 1 TeddyRO is an example. Undeadjames only plays udyr and only has 2 rune pages also. etc
Reaching High Elo or whatever has nothing to do with the number of rune pages you have or the large number of champions you play. Unless you play champions that are often banned, I don't see how those factors come into account. Rune page numbers and champion repertoire only come into play at a tournament setting where you know who you are playing and you know the ins and outs of their style.
SouthernDragon
Member
If you don't mind, I'm going to copy this. Outside of my Jarvan and Caitlyn pages, they feel so haphazard.
Logged on yesterday to take advantage of the holiday rune sale, ended up playing a game with a few of the newer Gaffers! We had a good game overall, but we ended up losing. I made a few mistakes as I shook the rust off with Singed, but I ended up with a positive KDR at least.
Looking forward to getting back into the game!
Looking forward to getting back into the game!
SouthernDragon
Member
Good to see you're back! I seem to remember playing with you back in the day.
I just bought 3 magpen quints and 3 ms quints. I figure I'll find a use for them.
I'm going to use Boken's rune ideas, but going with tier 1 first. Runes are waaaaaaaaay too expensive, goddamn.
Those flat mana runes are flat mana or mana regen?
God, runes are so EXPENSIVE
I just bought 3 magpen quints and 3 ms quints. I figure I'll find a use for them.
I'm going to use Boken's rune ideas, but going with tier 1 first. Runes are waaaaaaaaay too expensive, goddamn.
Those flat mana runes are flat mana or mana regen?
God, runes are so EXPENSIVE
I'm on 7 pages now after getting the new runes. I could probably do with 4 right now, but I have 3 pages for specific champions: Malphite top, Renekton jungle and Cassiopeia mid. Used to have one for Singed as well.
- Status