[DotA] Europe Server Empty - Proposal

[AnotherWorld]

Hello,

Since i would like to play back on DotA @Europe (Getting 20ms instead 70ms & more on us/ca), i propose a simple thing to motivate people getting back on it. (8 players over 10 average on the day GMT+1 are EUROPE players on US/CA Games... totally stupid).

I propose you to set 40 elo or 50 elo per games in EU instead of 30 on basic.

This way, they could feel more attracted to play back & filling it, than staying on US. Looks like getting 50ms more isn't a pb to them (looking their skill i understand)

What do you think of this?

Thanks a lot

[staalseminstaal]

Incentive to get players to use everything offered by ENT is always a good thing to consider, but offering more ELO in my opinion is not the way to go.

Objectively, ELO is the system that "ranks" every player based on the set amount of ELO "points" that are available in every game; in this regard, every game is equal to every other game in terms of what is available to lose/gain (30 ELO is split between two teams) to all players.

If you offered more ELO on any DotA bot, it would make the ELO system entirely irrelevant (I'm in no way actually saying that ELO is a good or suitable ranking metric). If you think of ENT DotA games as a sports league (soccer, basketball, hockey etc), it's essentially offering teams in one conference/division more standing points for a win than the other conferences/divisions. For DotA, it would actually create incentive for North American players to not use their own bot: if the reward for winning games is receiving ELO, and increasing your "rank", why play for only 30 ELO when you could play for 50?

My timezone is PST and late night/early morning games (3am - 10am) usually feature 8+/10 European players, so the players themselves are choosing to play on US/CA bots regardless of lag issues. Seems more likely that there just isn't a large enough European player base to support its own bot, regardless of incentive.

[aRt)Y]

@AnotherWorld This belongs in the suggestion forum, as you propose something.

Objectively, ELO is the system that "ranks" every player based on the set amount of ELO "points" that are available in every game; in this regard, every game is equal to every other game in terms of what is available to lose/gain (30 ELO is split between two teams) to all players.

Therefore, the suggestion is denied.