Which matchmaking 'issue' is the most important to you? (See post for more details!)

1) AFKs in Champion Select Lobby 4,877 36.23%
2) Duo-Queue Elo Disparities in Ranked 1,008 7.49%
3) Skilled Ranked Players in Normal Modes 666 4.95%
4) Premade Matching 672 4.99%
5) Transitioning from Normal to Ranked Mode 1,347 10.01%
6) Free to Play Champions in Ranked Mode 802 5.96%
7) Random Champions in Ranked Mode 647 4.81%
8) Provisional Matches in Ranked 723 5.37%
9) Duo Queue Prevalence in Ranked 422 3.13%
10) Level Disparities 652 4.84%
11) Team Margin of Victory 1,645 12.22%
Voters: 13461. You may not vote on this poll

After Hours with Matchmaking and Lyte

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

kennyzz

Junior Member

04-04-2012

One question that has been bugging me is, why do I lose Elo when I am completely dominating my lane, but some other guy feeds and loses the game for us. This has been the main reason in my ranked 5 game losing streak.
Isn't Elo a measurement of one's skill?
Then why is my Elo so highly affected by others singlehandedly making stupid mistakes and losing the game for us.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Azadeck

Member

04-04-2012

What about those times you queue for ranked and there's a blank page. It doesn't show champions or anything ect. There should be a "bug" button that allows you to "refresh" the loading of the champ select area. I just had to dodge courteously to let my team have 3 BANS. It absolutely sucks that i LOSE elo because of a BUG AND i have to wait 5 minutes to get a match that hopefully doesn't repeat the process.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

BisquickBroccoli

Senior Member

04-04-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
This is false. The matchmaker does not 'force' players to win only half their matches. A matchmaker's goal is to be an accurate predictor; this means that in fair or lopsided matches, a matchmaker should be able to accurately predict your win percentages.

A lot of players have anecdotes that winning streaks are followed by losing streaks--this is simply how the games unfold and has nothing to do with the matchmaker.
Well if matchmaking is not causeing the win/lose streaks what is?Every big winning streak I have had was followed by a losing streak. Think I had a 13 game streak one time followed by around the same amount of loses. This happened to me multiple times and from what I hear many other people.

Edit:Also what are the chances of hitting a 15 game streak directly followed by a 15 game lose streak


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Lyte

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

Lead Social Systems Designer

Follow RiotLyte on Twitter

04-04-2012
48 of 362 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by FumIsChum View Post
Well if matchmaking is not causeing the win/lose streaks what is?Every big winning streak I have had was followed by a losing streak. Think I had a 13 game streak one time followed by around the same amount of loses. This happened to me multiple times and from what I hear many other people.

Edit:Also what are the chances of hitting a 15 game streak directly followed by a 15 game lose streak
The chances of a 15-game winning streak followed by a 15-game losing streak is extremely low.

The matchmaking is definitely not causing win/lose streaks, there is nothing in the code that breaks your winning streak intentionally. The human brain in general loves seeing patterns where there are none. For example, flip a coin 1000 times and you will see dozens and dozens of 'streaks.'

When some music apps first created 'random' shuffles for music lists, users often complained that the random generator was broken--they heard songs repeat more than they thought they should. Actually, the random generators were random. However, to appease these customers, many music apps start making pseudo- (fake!) random generators that would rarely repeat on purpose, to give customers the illusion the random generation was actually 'random.'


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

DarkR1sing

Senior Member

04-04-2012

The main issue I'm concerned is that Normal Draft mode prioritized premade which leave solo Queue players always last pick. I mostly play late night so I always found myself at the bottom playing the exact role which is support. How can I transition to ranked?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Futonlols

Senior Member

04-05-2012

Matchmaking is completely broken. I've never had a good experience playing with a premade. I wish i could remove myself from ever having to play with them again. Dodge penalties should not exist, i'd rather not get forced into playing with trolls every time i log on just because i don't wanna wait 15 minutes to play. Why are ranked and nonranked elo's not the same? How is it fair that i'm stuck playing a normal game against a 2k elo player? Pathetic.

This would be a really fun game if you guys got your act together and fixed all the issues. Whoever runs your company has a very poor management style. You're all very inefficient and often come off as incompetent. It saddens me to see you still handling what should be a successful company in this way. It's fairly pathetic. Creating a poll in this manner is absurd. Are you seriously that out of touch that you have to ask ridiculous questions like this?

Seriously milk this cash cow as long as you can, because you're driving it straight into the ground with your current business model. Pumping out champions is not the solution to fixing this game. It honestly feels like this game is still in beta with all the issues you constantly have. How are these simplistic things not fixed yet?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

ClatoVerataNicto

Senior Member

04-05-2012

As far as #8 goes. I wish that instead of starting with "placement matches", people started within a range of ELO based on their normal ELO. It should be a tight range to encourage the spirit of ranked play, say +/- 200 from 1200 where people start now. Use people's normal ELO's as a bell curve. Place the 50th percentile at 1200, the top 5% at 1400, and the bottom %5 at 1000 to start. With everyone placed in their appropriate spot in between.

Mind you these numbers are just an example. It would keep people on the higher and lower ends from frustrating each other right off the start. Also a bad/good luck streak at the beginning won't propel you to where you do not belong as fast. It will still take consistent wins or losses to significantly change your ELO.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Spiritside

Senior Member

04-05-2012

I actually don't think any of these are the main concern, Lyte. It's player behavior. That is by far the #1 reason for terrible ranked games. Your list would be a nice touch-up to the current system, but I think you Rioters should spend a lot of resources on finding ways to make it so that 90% of games don't end up with at least one person threatening to report someone. I don't actually think I'll get banned, but the lingering thought that I might, just because people threaten to report me for no apparent reason, is uncomfortable.

The environment in a typical ranked game is just disgusting (although it's getting slightly better at my current Elo); it usually begins at champ select, where people don't get to play the champ they want to or they're forced into a role they can't play well. I don't know that there necessarily needs to be harsher punishments in ranked, but there certainly has to be better and more tangible rewards for good behavior/play. It almost feels as if there's no punishment system considering how frequently games just turn into rage-/troll-fests. Just today I had someone intentionally announce that they'd AFK at around the 10-minute mark because another person on our team started arguing with him whether or not LoL used an Elo system. Yes, that actually happened, you can check my second to last game.

I'd really like to see some effort from Riot to control the quality of games by reducing the stress of the environment, rather than completely focusing on the numerical issues.

Edit:
Also, I totally agree with this guy's idea ^ about normal Elo translating into starting ranked Elo; judging by some of my friends' normal W/L and their ranked W/L + Elo, there's a strong correlation.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

AscendentReality

Senior Member

04-05-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
The chances of a 15-game winning streak followed by a 15-game losing streak is extremely low.

The matchmaking is definitely not causing win/lose streaks, there is nothing in the code that breaks your winning streak intentionally. The human brain in general loves seeing patterns where there are none. For example, flip a coin 1000 times and you will see dozens and dozens of 'streaks.'

When some music apps first created 'random' shuffles for music lists, users often complained that the random generator was broken--they heard songs repeat more than they thought they should. Actually, the random generators were random. However, to appease these customers, many music apps start making pseudo- (fake!) random generators that would rarely repeat on purpose, to give customers the illusion the random generation was actually 'random.'
Thanks for this answer, I've been wondering for a long time whether the game itself actually get rigged to make you lose to prevent too many wins in the row. I study a bit of psychology myself, so your analogy was a great read.


As someone from 1700, maybe my priority of concern isn't the most important for a lot of people. I personally think it's the duo Q math, and in ranked, it's the average ELO.

When I was climbing out of ELO hell, in my mind would be 1400s (any lower elo range, it would end up in complete stomps, took me hundreds of games to get out of 1400). In 1400, most of the time, it didn't matter greatly what ELO each person is at, due to placement matches, smurfs, random good players who's been unlucky.

However, once i got to higher ELO, in 1600 to 1700 plus, there is actually quite a disparity in skills in term of ELO. Every now and then , I would find a team full of high 1600s, one 1700. against a team with 4 low 1600 and a 1750. Sometimes this is caused by duo queue, but as i played more games, I realized this isn't the case. There are just games, where the matchmaking is trying to rush the process. Thus --> just lazily find these people in similar elo and be done with it.

I think the overall ELO average difference shouldn't be larger than 20 or 30. One good player or one bad player doesn't define a game. The team with the most evened out ELO, almost always wins.

I hope riot can take a look at this. To be fair, this probably only concerns a small population of LoL. However I do think it plays a role in the matchmaking system. I hope that system get more refined.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LiegeWaffles

Senior Member

04-05-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheAncalagon View Post
For example: The random button in ranked games. You agree, and we agree, that it should be removed. Why hasn't it been removed?

As a computer science major, I know roughly the amount of work that it would take to remove the button. Having no knowledge of how the game's source code is set up, I could probably do it in less than two hours. Which means that your experienced programmers at Riot could do it in less than ten minutes, since they have much more experience, and much more knowledge of the source code.
That's not how it works, because Riot isn't a single-programmer setup where the programmer knows exactly how each bit of the code interacts with other parts and/or where a "removing X broke Y? Oh well, whatever, let's just release a next version" is acceptable.
It's just like you don't get to add a "quick & easy fix" into the Linux kernel without probably scrutinizing and testing of your code by dozens or hundreds of people and an "OK" from Linus...

tl;dr : Riot is big now and fixes go through many steps to ensure quality instead of by doing 2009-ish quick & dirty hacking the code...