2013-05-18, 11:52:45
(2013-05-18, 00:08:40)GEN_Schwarzkopf Wrote: I have considered this carefully, EarthR.actually i dont mind new players since they are new and its expected for them to play bad. What i dont like is seeing players with over 300-400(some even with more than 1-2k games play just terrible) games playing worse than new players. they are the ones that ruin balance not new players. you can play a game and deal with it if only 1 player plays bad. the problem is when 3-4 players play bad in a game.
We both recognize the problem does occur either way. My point is about the stead-state: what happens after 20 games.
As I see it more new players ruin game balance than smurfs, plus the new players are resented for this, which is making battle tanks less attractive to new players.
1500 would be an average ELO if it was based only on winning and losing.
- Rob
Here is an example: You are in a team with a new player. First thing you gonna do is make sure he doesnt go lane. This is a critical point because all those over 300-400 games players all go to mid to avoid strong opponents. I have seen many games that the new player has to take 1 lane because nobody else is going there to face a strong opponent. As a result he feeds and then he is either kicked (most cases) or get flamed. Thats a point where you lost the game and its not because of the new players.
Second if the new player goes mid. Its expected because he is new to creep less than the other 2. Also because the other two play selfish(99% of the cases) as a result they only mass weapons take all the creeps then go stupid tanks like
airship or thunder and blame the new guy when because of the new guy they are fed like hell and dont use that advantage.
Because this is team game because 1 player plays bad doesnt make the team lose. There is (almost)always 1 bad player in enemy team also. In most cases 2-3 players play bad in each team. I dont think the elo solves anything.