ELO Reset

[dweiler]

The problem is that it is impossible to have Elo reflecting your skill in a 4v4 game that is hugely random. Maybe if this game was 1v1, or perhaps 2v2, it would have some merit, but right now it is just used as a tool to rank you, comparable to your win/loss situation, and keeping your Elo won't change that. It just makes sure that everyone stays in the place where is put at (caller if you're high elo, follower if you're low elo). One thing I like about Elo reset is that followers can become callers and vice versa.

[Meshtar]

@Tom_hardy you are right, I didn't see things from that perspective. Well, in that case seasonal ranking could be done by doing (total elo +seasonal elo)/2 thus making it half about total skill and half about derivative skill. That way people would feel their improvement is being rewarded and bottom ranked players wouldn't be so unmotivated
Personally, I think all 3 of our ideas would be an improvement over current system.

[Tom_hardy]

@Mick

I am sorry, but I dont believe that to be true. From a mathematical point of view the luck evens out if your games sample is big enough. We just never tried it. Solo rankings in team games have always been a little iffy, especially since everybody thinks they are better than their rating (See topic "lihl explained in 5 minutes") but if we look at other games, for example dota, it works pretty well. You are right about the big difference that a caller makes, but I think that could be compared to a carry or mid in dota. Not to the same extent, but you get the idea. Anyway, everybody can contribute to calls in ltd. Now its about what we want. Either a place where everybody gets to be yellow or red once to lead calls through the mess a new season makes, or a competetive environment with representative ELO (not perfect, but a lot closer). Guess thats on the community.

[FadingSuns]

I dont see much sense on all this. Elo reset is needed else the "season" concept makes no sense. Can u Imagine if Real Madrid wins a league witn 90 points and they start next league with 90 points? Then it will be impossible to win for other teams, no matter if they score 85 points in new league and madrid does 70. Imagine Tin who won a season with 2k+ Elo, he start next season with 2k, he could perfectly win 5 consecutive seasons cuz its almost impossible reach that elo, all because he had 1 brilliant season.

This approach does not fit at all with the season concept. We want to delete the season concept? then ok. But what about the following:

1) We make 1 year seasons, from 01.01 to 31.12.
2) At the end of the season, players with less than XXX games played get unvouched (let say 500 games for a year is fine?)
3) At the end of the season bot 5 players are directly unvouched and from 6 to 10 are moved to trial section with a revaluation after 2/3 months.

We can develope more the idea, but the concept of having seasons with no elo reset is pure tk and makes no sense. Srsly 0 sense. Players will start with advantaje (or disadvantaje) of previous seasons making the season concept irrelevant and unfair.

Tom said it doesnt happen in other games and thats totally false, every game season based and with ladder system gets reseted every X months, and i could give a unlimited list of games that work that way.

I dont support this idea as it is right now, but im not against deleting seasons or making them longer, just having season system with no elo reset makes 0 sense for me

[n1ll3]

I think you have a wrong point of view here @ace. You can absolutly not compare this to an football league because you can lose elo here. Furthermore tin had only 2000 elo because we had no real elo system this season. I highly doubt anyone can reach 1800 elo or more because thats the way the elosystem works. If you have 1800 elo you would nearly allways play with the "worst" players. So you have to be super focused to see every tk on every lane. And nearly all top players only tryard at the end of a season. If we say potentional Ranz will reach the 1800 elo this season we would have a max gap to the second player with about 300 elo. And we all now you can lose 300 elo within 2 days. So if he can manage to keep his elo he deserves to win a second season its just important that he plays a specific amount of games (200 or 300)

[Tom_hardy]

I dont mean to be rude, but I am not quite sure you understand the concept of ELO Ace. This is absolutely incomparable to a football league with its point system and has nothing to do with each other. In football you play against every possible opponent, and if you win you get full 3 points, if you lose, you lose nothing, no matter the current points of the teams. Of course, if ELO would work that way it would be a ridicoulos idea. People would drift further and further apart, like in the season you mentioned, where that ridicoulos score of Tin happened, where every game gave 15 ELO no matter the balance. But thats not how ELO normally works. The more you get, the harder it is to get more, First u get paired with worse players, if you still keep winning the score is not gonna be 15-15 after a while. It is capped for everybody, be it above or below 1000. The only real changes this proposal would have is that games are fairly rated from the beginning of the season and that ELO in general comes closer to its real value. The thought you guys have of starting with a disadvantage or advantage in reality is gonna be minimal. Play the first 100 games that are needed and you will see. With our current system it just takes longer because of the time it takes to get close to representative ELO. This change will barely have any to no impact on people that play 1000 games per season. Its gonna be the same. This change is mostly for people that dont have the time to play that much.

Edit: by the effect of the change on people I am refering to their final ELO of the next season. Of course it would also bring the benefit of fair and fairly rated games all season.

[dweiler]

Now its about what we want. Either a place where everybody gets to be yellow or red once to lead calls through the mess a new season makes, or a competetive environment with representative ELO (not perfect, but a lot closer). Guess thats on the community.

Yeah, that is a nice nuanced summary of the positions. I feel like it is much harder to get a different position in LIHL (to caller, or to get help with calling) if people keep being in the same situation. Since I don't believe Elo to be of that much value in a 4v4 game where people get carried hard, I prefer giving people new chances and start with a new slate to show they improved and can handle a different position in LIHL. Of course it is possible to climb up if Elo stays, but it is much harder and you won't get in new situations easily.

(Also randomized teams and Elo can take care of this btw, but that is a different suggestion)

[iamyoursenpai]

full support for this idea! uses the proper way of the elo system.
100% agree with tom in all points

[Jamo]

Can't there be 2 elo numbers? A seasonal one and a long-term one? Long term would just never be reseted (or once a year maybe) and it would maybe be similar to the public elo. Just for long term view, maybe also used for votebalance. and then the seasonal elo, just like now, that decides who wins a season?
I kinda like the idea of compressing the elo of everyone after a season and project it on the freshly reset 1000k elo. And yes, it can be depressing for bottom players (like me), but so what?!

[Meshtar]

Can't there be 2 elo numbers? A seasonal one and a long-term one? Long term would just never be reseted (or once a year maybe) and it would maybe be similar to the public elo. Just for long term view, maybe also used for votebalance. and then the seasonal elo, just like now, that decides who wins a season?
I kinda like the idea of compressing the elo of everyone after a season and project it on the freshly reset 1000k elo. And yes, it can be depressing for bottom players (like me), but so what?!

It is what i proposed if you read up.

That way total elo would be representative of your absolute skill and seasonal elo would show improvement or fall compared to the season before. I suggested also that end season ranking could be done (total elo + seasonal elo) /2 thus giving a chance to people who continuously improve to win a season.

[FadingSuns]

if i like anything in here is jamos and mesthar approach.

In terms to see "season winner" i prefer a season based elo.

In terms of balance games, possible unvouch or whatever you prefer, i like this "global elo concept".

U all focused on my soccer example, but what about the other games with ladder? they all get laddr reseted every X month with no exception and the season winner is based on season ladder and not cumulative or historical.

Whit the only global ladder approach i see for example quite impossible for a new vouch to win a season (hodor case). Also, using this season as example it can be that ranz did end last season with 800 elo (like he did 2 seasons ago) but this season he has 1600... isnt it fair that he wins this season?

[FateStayNight]

I think toms idea has no negativ effect in the long term.
Because i remember this stuff (mid of season) "im 800 elo, i just semi focus and build cuz season already gone for me, blabla". With the perma Elo it would make every single game way more valuable and tbh if you are at 500elo and start building in a proper way, it will take less than a month to get 1k elo.
@Mick
Everyone can always call, its just a bad habit from all of us to focus on red/yellow to make the calls and tbh 80% of lihl players arent that interested in making level 1-10 calls anyway.

I also think it would make it possible to win a season for players that arent playing that much but surely have the potential to win it.

[FadingSuns]

@fate tbh win season with no play cuz ur living based on historycal elo is pure lame thing. To win a season u need to play and be the best of a season, the potential winers should nvr win if thwy barely play

[Tom_hardy]

That was the third point of my proposal and indeed very important ace. If you dont play enough games that season, you wont be listed in the ranks. Nobody is supposed to just sit on their ELO. I proposed 100 games as minimum to be ranked, but that can be readjusted.

[FateStayNight]

@fate tbh win season with no play cuz ur living based on historycal elo is pure lame thing. To win a season u need to play and be the best of a season, the potential winers should nvr win if thwy barely play

Well we suggested something like 100 min games for winning season. If you are that high elo 100 games can you lose you alot elo very easily unless your worth your elo and in the end worth to be season winner.