Thanks for explaining that the new system isn't about trying to get better at the game. Just a way for people to fight over who the best player is at their level. No one will know their elo so now 800 elo player instead of trying to raise their skill level and play the game on a higher level can preoccupy themselves with being the best 800 elo scrub. Oh you are 1400 elo bu the bottom of division 1 silver! Well im #1 bronze league of teemos muffintops so there. It's ridiculous just show us our elos or S3 ranked is just normals v2.0
This makes no sense (and way to turn a fun thread into a soapbox talk) - only a handful of people get to be the best at the game. I have about 99.9% of a player base who still might something other than winning the finals to shoot for.
From a rewards standpoint, this system is better - even despite some of the concerns you guys saw in the Silver 1 bracket and such, the rewards are not a problem.
Ah Morello! I doubt you will actually respond to this but I really have been wanting your answer for a question I have. Do you agree or disagree that if you do good in the match (win lane, ward, play good, have a 2.0 ratio) then you deserve to win the game despite if the rest of your team is doing bad?
No, because it's not a solo game. If this were 1v1 Q3 Arena, or SF4, then yeah, you should always win if you outplay a single opponent. I've had at least one game where I had a good lane, but other lanes fed and made us unable to teamfight. My question is "what could have I done better?", even if there were other people who I played better than. For example, in one of my Malzahar games, I dominated the lane, but failed to clear and gank to give other lanes help they'd need - something to remember and learn from for next game.
In football, a Quarterback can throw perfectly and the team can still lose if the line can't keep him safe. This causes more frustration, but is also where a lot of depth and strategy comes from in team games.
So you're saying that you should do so good that you can make-up for the lack of skill of your whole team just so you can win? What if you never get decent players on your team ever? There's only so much 1 player can do.
It doesn't matter - you can't control other people in a team game, so worrying about how good or not good they are is a waste of energy, and certainly won't let you climb divisions. If you do want a game that success and failure is wholly dependent on your actions alone, then duel games are better-suited. Additionally, you can do premades if you're really serious about winning.
There are external factors, but that's in the core DNA of a team game. You're the only part of that equation you can change (including being better at leading a random team!), so I just think if you're going to try to be successful at a team game, it's the only outlook that leads to improvement.
Let us know when you kick your monitor in. Oh let's have a bet, no using your admin/w.e priviledges you have on the trolls you will SURELY encounter in game. Just bear it and let it marinate you and your brain.
I play on smurfs just to get this experience - people definitely behave differently when they see devs.
You merely report jerks, or do you dial a banhammer?
Contrary to popular belief, I don't have the ability to ban/unban etc. I go through the same support channels as anyone - my only advantage is in a really extreme case, I can send an email to someone in support to make sure it gets looked at.
Do not take this as "Morello can/will help you get unbanned," because I'll get 100,000 emails from "innocent" players And I won't review unbans, but if you're in the top 1% of toxicity, and we're in a game, that will get my attention :P