0-1400 & 1200-4000 elo bot for ltd and dota

[nabo.]

@godlik3 changed ur idea a bit.

Code: Select all

Bot ID   Games in last week   Last gamename
18   3281   [ENT] Legion TD Mega #39
96   2856   [ENT] Legion TD Mega euro #83
11   2794   [ENT] DotA apem us/ca #23
57   1917   [ENT] Legion TD 3.5 Beta #91
38   1858   [ENT] DotA arem us/ca #58

I would like to suggest that we have two elo category bots: 0-1400 and 1200-4000. It seems it could work with ltd mega, dota apem, dota arem bots considering # of games played.

Advantage:
1) Reduce number of smurf accounts in posession by a player. At least 1200 elo should b played seeing that it will require 10-20 games to get to this elo. There could still b people smurfing for higher elo friends, but at least they wont b able to have 10k aliases. (Not sure if 1100 or 1200 is better)

2) Even out elo avg a bit more and better stats representation. 1000 elo vs 1200 can make quite a difference to elo avg.

3) Time of the day when people from both America and Europe are active, it is hard to join games with a friend at times, i have seen suggestions before asking for another apem or arem bot. May be this will do.

Disadvantage:
Split: In this case, those who have over 1400 elo has to play the 1200-4000 elo bot.

Biggest hurdle would be for 1400+ elo players to play on the 1200-4000 bot instead of making smurf to play 0-1400 bot. But, even if they do people should complain less about unfair games even if it is due to an illusion.

[Hutzu]

Sounds good to me.

[Hatedmaru]

In terms of DotA, Looks good, and the elo differences are also nice; I do believe the 1200 is ok and the best, cause with the difference of 0-1400, you still might find some "high elo teams" and win good elo in the first games (Speaking by experience, starting a new account is easy to get 1100 in 5 games or even less, so 1200 sounds very reasonable in my opinion).

EDIT: I'm not really a LTD player, but i can understand Diablo_ point : There's already the +1100 bot, so perhaps raise the minimum requirement a bit?

[Diablo_]

I don't think splitting the community would be a good choice. Isn't the 1100+ bot enough if you want to play somewhat smurf free and decent games? Elo requirement could also be raised to 1200+ I guess if wanted.

[NumberOneStunna]

I support this idea in theory, but a couple of questions/issues:

1. When you mention times of day, are you suggesting that the ELO restrictions would apply only at the most active times, so, for example, a 1000 ELO player would be able to join either bot early morning/late night?
2. One concern about this is lack of parity. Smurfing has been considered a legitimate (non-bannable but perhaps annoying to some) practice. To that end, pretty much every high ELO player (at least in DotA) has built his account at least in part with 1000 ELO smurf friends. So if we were going to make a change that would make it much, much harder to gain ELO past 1400, we should also consider a one-time-only stats wipe of the whole server. The answer to that, of course, is that many would be upset because they worked hard for their stats. That brings me back to my earlier point, which is that that "hard work" usually involved smurfs. If that strategy is unavailable to players now, its retrospective benefits should be considered.
3. All that being said, I realize a stats wipe is unlikely, so here's my alternative proposal: As I said, it seems we're considering changing the bots here not to stop smurfing per say, but rather to give players a bot to use if they don't want to deal with smurfs. So Instead of 0-1400 and 1200-4000, how about we just do 0-2000 and 1200-4000. This way, only players above 2000 ELO have no choice but to move on to the higher bracket. It would still make it hard for players to gain ELO above 2000, but it's a fairer result than what's currently on the table.

Just some thoughts. Thanks.

[nabo.]

@diablo_
The difference would be that we could force 1400+ players to play the HR bot.

@numberonestunna
1. I never said elo restrictions should apply at certain times. I merely meant that having 2 arem or apem bots could help traffic.

2. You think that current smurfing would give high elo players more elo than when playing more even elo games on avg. You are wrong. The fact that you would still play with a friend does not change. Winning chance shouldnt change tat much either. Why do u think players were able to gain more elo on avg on autobal bots in the past? Assuming players decide to play their mains and play on the 1400-4k bot, elo avg will even out more and it would actually be a lot easier to gain elo on average. Smurfing through new creation of 1k elo accounts has only been acceptable because we have no control over people making new accounts on bnet, not because we think it is an ok practice.

The whole smurfing problem did not started just because players couldnt gain much elo. The main reason imo is because despite having higher winning chance, overall elo gain(elo win vs elo loss based on X games) is unfair due to unstable/unfair match up. If i were to play on my 2700elo account, id only get 1/3 elo of what my other teammates win and my teams' avg elo would be skewed because my elo is too high and we would only gain 0.5-1.5 elo on avg per game no matter who i play against.

3. Does not work since there arent many 2k+ elo players in proportion to lower elos. Games will be hard to fill resulting in these players to just smurf on the 0-2000 elo bot.
--------------------
Whether this suggestion will work, i cant say. Do note tat this is only a suggestion to reduce number of smurf events, not to completely remove smurfers.

[Diablo_]

The 1100+ bot fills just fine, why should we force many (other) players playing there if they apparently don't want to?

[nabo.]

@diablo_

Main reason was to reduce number of smurfs.

Second reason would be to divide players more evenly between the two bots and implement this in replacement of a matchmaking system.

[uakf.b]

What about players who just want to play with their friends who may be different ELO bracket?

[Qvist]

I support this!

Games will be softer for new players and the more serious players will finally get some elo + they will probably also get more varience in their games since playing on mega is like playing for level 7 and 17.

The best about this is that new players/ bad players gets something to strike for.

Personally i was also tired of 1100 elo players on 1100+ bot, there are simply still too many bad players.

[Qvist]

@uakf.b i used to play HoN and some of my friends was low MMR so we couldn't play together but it wasn't a problem since i told them to get some MMR and then they played more HoN

[nabo.]

Suggestion: 0-1400 and 1200-4000

So, if you are 1200-1400 elo, you can play both games.

If your elo is above 1400 and your friend is below 1200 elo, you can make a new account and play with him on the 0-1400 elo bot or your friend can get 1400 elo and play with the higher elos.

[eldryan]

This is a great idea. The only issue will be that 1400 players will, of course, make 1k accounts when they want to play with low ranked friend/buddy and be forced to "smurf" them. However, below 1400 smurfing is far less impactful anyways.

[ColdKiller3]

i think the OP is a superb idea... in fact it is nearly exactly one of the things i suggested a short while ago

[supersexyy]

1) What about players who like the 1100+ bot and want to play no cross? I think the no cross feature of the 1100+ is good.
2) What about players over 4k elo?