EUW - TT - 17/11/2012

[quote=Wayne3100]I've hosted several inhouses and I can say none of them were truly balanced. A truly balanced game would have to not only include two teams of equal skill (which is what the hosts [i]try[/i] to make based on wins/elo or their knowledge of a player), but would also need the host to tell all players exactly which role they would be playing, simply to prevent, for example, a 1200 elo player who would like to try top lane for a change from facing a 2k elo player who mains top lane, therefore pretty much automatically losing his lane and - if played correctly by the 2k player - hugely influencing the outcome of the entire game. And then, even if we assume that were the case and the games were [i]truly[/i] balanced in terms of skill, they could still be onesided, simply because of a team having better picks, making less mistakes, having better synergy as a team etc. LoL games tend to snowball once one of the teams gets an advantage. That's how it works for every game, not only those that are unbalanced but also those that are played by players at the same elo who should (roughly) be of equal skill. Point being: perfect balance is [i]impossible[/i]. All we as hosts can do is try to make equal teams and ask for feedback of others before starting in case we got something wrong (this is the part where GMD would receive the feedback that DisturbedFox is not as bad as he thinks). Also: [quote=BarbJ] The point of the inhouses isn't to create a perfect environment of balance, the point is to learn and play. It doesn't have to be balanced to do that. [/quote] I have to agree on this one (although I don't feel like many people are receiving constructive criticism right now and it's more like we're playing together for fun, honestly :/ )[/quote]

[quote=Pheyniex]learning something while being stomped by someone with 800 more elo than you is a bit of an oximoron... unless that "800 more elo than you" player has some time to share to pin your mistakes in a replay or something, like i learned with my inhouse games with GMD and Wayne shoutcasting.[/quote]

[quote=Mowen]How would you suggest balancing inhouses without using player skill, number of wins, or ELO as a guide? As people said it's impossible to be perfectly balanced but I feel our hosts do the best they can. If you want to play with someone badly you should notify the host because they are not mindreaders. :( They would probably try to accomodate you as long as teams aren't too imbalanced.[/quote]

[quote=Rainfall][quote=Mowen] How would you suggest balancing inhouses without using player skill, number of wins, or ELO as a guide? [/quote] Alphabetical order, silly![/quote]

[quote=Pheyniex][quote=Mowen] How would you suggest balancing inhouses without using player skill, number of wins, or ELO as a guide? As people said it's impossible to be perfectly balanced but I feel our hosts do the best they can. If you want to play with someone badly you should notify the host because they are not mindreaders. :( They would probably try to accomodate you as long as teams aren't too imbalanced. [/quote] i belive adressing an "how can it be more balanced" issue is bad since hosts already do what the ingame matchmaker does, with less players. [quote=Rainfall] [quote=Mowen] How would you suggest balancing inhouses without using player skill, number of wins, or ELO as a guide? [/quote] Alphabetical order, silly! [/quote] inverse date of last modification is way better.[/quote]

[quote=Yukimaru][quote=Mowen] How would you suggest balancing inhouses without using player skill, number of wins, or ELO as a guide? [/quote] Thinking about some own rating for the inhouses.[/quote]

[quote=Pheyniex]btw, didnt gmd shutcast this inhaus?[/quote]