Discussion on Effect of Improving Match Maker.

First Riot Post
123456 ... 8
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

GG DraKe

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

03-19-2011

mmm


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

GG DraKe

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

03-20-2011

To be honest I think if this thread doesn't get more attention the game will never get better no matter how many people are banned...


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

UrgotToBeKidding

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

03-21-2011

Honorable bump


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

GG DraKe

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

03-23-2011

Still, every game, its the same, one competent person on each team leading the team through, one team has 2 feeders, other team has one, one feeder team wins.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Beatus

Member

03-23-2011

ELO system was designed to evaluate one's skill, not whether one's team has won or lost. ELO does NOT work on team games because of that. I could be the best player of the match and still lose ELO because my team has lost. ELO in LoL simply does NOT represent one's skill level.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

GG DraKe

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

03-25-2011

This is true. I mean, you can argue that team play is what the game is rating. But you can't have good team play without an individual at least mastering basics. It is sad playing with lvl 30s who can't even seem to do that in ranked.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Karl the Pagan

PvP.net Engineer

03-27-2011
1 of 2 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by xdr4kex View Post
Other factors such as relative number of deaths compared to team mates, assists + kills ( as one stat), and so on, must be taken into account.
We generally get this suggestion a lot. However deciding whether or not to include secondary stats (aka placing blame for a win/loss) is above my pay grade.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Molybdenum

Junior Member

03-27-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl the Pagan View Post
We generally get this suggestion a lot. However deciding whether or not to include secondary stats (aka placing blame for a win/loss) is above my pay grade.
I think we all appreciate that you took the time to LOOK at this thread, but it seems like that's all you've done. I understand you may only deal with the actual implementation of the algorithm RIOT has decided to govern the matchmaking. but if you're a PVP.net engineer, you should have an opinion on whether this is a good idea, a bad idea or you just don't care if your customers are happy or if your product is the best it can be. Since you didn't say it was a good idea or a bad idea (I'm assuming because you are trying to be stay out of the politics of pissing off your boss or the players) I'll have to assume you just don't care if your customers are happy or if your product is the best it can be.

To be honest, I can't stand the matchmaking to the point that I can only play this game in small doses anymore. I've gone from +20 hours of playing a week, to +10 hours, and now I'm down to probably less than 5 hours. The IP cost for runes and champions is too high for the current state of matchmaking. I don't want to spend any money on any game period, but if I felt like matchmaking was fair, I may buy an IP boost once in a while. However, because nothing's going to happen to fix it. all I can do is post on the forums about what I would like to see happen and wait for someone who can do something about it to read and reply, which will also never happen.

I'm not raging about losing, I am perfectly fine with losing. However, I would prefer to lose because the enemy team was better coordinated, got an ace at just the right time, had much better team synergy/composition, etc. NOT because ONE member of my team can't do anything but run into the enemy team mindlessly like a hungry no0b until the tower kills them or the entire enemy team that they would have seen moving towards them if they were watching the map, listened to the calls of mia, or the incessant pings tracing the enemy's path of the map towards them and/or where they should be moving towards.

So, if you could please tug on the robes of a higher being than yourself or grow some balls and speak your mind on this matter, that would be great. Thanks!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Lollipopsaurus

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Recruiter

03-27-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Karl the Pagan View Post
We generally get this suggestion a lot. However deciding whether or not to include secondary stats (aka placing blame for a win/loss) is above my pay grade.
Can you elevate the issue then? I mean nothing stops you from mentioning the problem at a meeting. A lot of people make threads like this on the forum, yet many of them get no response, or a response like yours where nothing happens. You didn't say "yeah, I like the idea, I'll mention it later in a meeting" or "no, with our current staff, implementing something like this isn't possible." Even a "yes, we are planning on implementing this in the future" would be work. It's not like this would be a major content leak. It doesn't even take you much time to type that out.

I posted this about a week ago where I outlined something similar to this, and gave some high level design ideas on it.. It got no red posts.
http://www.leagueoflegends.com/board...d.php?t=598260

I'm not saying "wah wah reed mah pozt", but what I AM saying is that this is a support forum, and there should be actual answers posted by Riot staff who can answer the questions with a yes or no. What I feel like is happening now, no offense to Karl, is someone who is told to post on 5 random threads per week so that the members who post on the forum feel like Riot is reading their threads.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Molybdenum

Junior Member

03-27-2011

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lollipopsaurus View Post
... What I feel like is happening now, no offense to Karl, is someone who is told to post on 5 random threads per week so that the members who post on the forum feel like Riot is reading their threads.
If this isn't the case, let's get some real responses. Otherwise, what are we to assume? I think the reason nothing's being done about matchmaking one way or the other is because RIOT wants to retain as many players as they can regardless of the game's quality. The more players they have the more money they make and the more matches they can have in any given time period.

If we assume the current matchmaking system favors partied teams over solo teams, this makes perfect sense and can be logically proven with some required conditions. Because there are more likely more players playing solo or at least without a full regular team partied than there are players playing with a full party every match that they play with regularly, it would seem more important to keep players that play solo than players that are partied because there are more. However, because people that play as a group generally choose to play a game or not as a group, and because a significant majority of the players playing solo don't necessarily care whether they win or lose, or will play anyways, even if they lose consistently.

We all know there are players that take this game seriously, not at all and somewhere in between. More of the teams that are partied probably take their win/loss record more seriously, because they try to increase their ELO score and can see general trends in their playing style/strategies and the results, whereas people that play solo probably can't see the trend of their play style as quickly or clearly and/or don't necessarily try to increase their ELO score in the same fashion.

Because of these facts, teamed players are more important to keep than solo players. The math/logic behind this reasoning that the matchmaking system supports team wins over solo wins requires that the matchmaking system does not take the average standard deviation of a team's ELO score into account and only their average ELO score.

Justification: As a single team of players play together, the standard deviation of their ELO scores will converge to zero (players that play together are more likely to have closer win/loss records the more they play together regardless of their individual skill level or rate of improvement). Players that play solo will end up with other solo players more often than players that queue as an incomplete party, therefore the average standard deviation of a solo team's ELO score will be higher than a full partied team's average standard deviation So the case of having one player significantly more or significantly less skilled than the rest of the team is much greater in a solo team.

If this is not the case RIOT, I would like to know the truth behind the matchmaking system.


123456 ... 8