Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a ton of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out the boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

GO TO BOARDS


All those threads talking about role-queuing.

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TJ Crimson

Junior Member

12-24-2012

How about not splitting the queues and instead prioritizing the preferences over standard?

That way, people will still get into a match and queue timers will not change drastically. This has been done in many games already, notably Halo: Reach, where one can choose the personality type of players they are matched up against and decide if they want to be matched up with players with good ping or native language speakers. I'm not sure if the options/tools are available for Riot to create a similar system that should have virtually no negative effect with queues.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

12-24-2012

I'd like to see Riot implement a system that matches us up with players with good ping or by preferred language first. We don't even have that (and I don't feel we necessarily need that).


There are a lot of other problems with the role-queuing idea besides just queue time, however.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TJ Crimson

Junior Member

12-24-2012

Well, it's more like a realistic matchmaking service rather than a role-queue system. Select common, non-meta roles that apply to the game itself (tank, support, mage) and choose what you do/do not want to be matched up with, along with selecting what you're good at.

I understand that this isn't a necessary addition, but I feel it will help players 'trapped' in ELO hell feel like they're not alone and possibly have an easier time getting matched up with like-minded players.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LogicalTautology

Senior Member

12-25-2012

Quote:
TJ Crimson:
Well, it's more like a realistic matchmaking service rather than a role-queue system. Select common, non-meta roles that apply to the game itself (tank, support, mage) and choose what you do/do not want to be matched up with, along with selecting what you're good at.

I understand that this isn't a necessary addition, but I feel it will help players 'trapped' in ELO hell feel like they're not alone and possibly have an easier time getting matched up with like-minded players.

Let us say that you and I are identically skilled in every phase of LoL. Every single champion we play the exact same way, etc. In every possible way, we are equally skilled.
However, I enter every queue with "I'll fill in as needed " and you with "Mid."

Quite frankly, I deserve to be a higher Elo than you. And I won't feel bad that the current system will have that effect. (To say nothing of the fact that someone who can play Mid at a 1600 level and every other role at a 1000 level is not a Gold player, and should not be able to reach 1650 Elo by queuing as mid in every game. The player who plays every role at a 1300 level is the much better player.)


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

12-26-2012

If you want your Elo to be based entirely on your ability to play one position and one position only, create a ranked 5s team and recruit around your position.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KlunkTheSpaceCat

Member

12-26-2012

Quote:
LogicalTautology:
Let us say that you and I are identically skilled in every phase of LoL. Every single champion we play the exact same way, etc. In every possible way, we are equally skilled.
However, I enter every queue with "I'll fill in as needed " and you with "Mid."

Quite frankly, I deserve to be a higher Elo than you. And I won't feel bad that the current system will have that effect. (To say nothing of the fact that someone who can play Mid at a 1600 level and every other role at a 1000 level is not a Gold player, and should not be able to reach 1650 Elo by queuing as mid in every game. The player who plays every role at a 1300 level is the much better player.)

If the goal of the Elo system is to match players with similarly skilled opponents, then a player's Elo should reflect their skill. If we assume that your skill levels are identical, your Elo should be identical.

However, if the "mid only" player only ever plays mid, and does so at a skill level identical to yours, your Elo will be higher by virtue of the fact that you will have the flexibility to counter-pick. I would also argue that your knowledge of other roles will give you an advantage while playing mid, but I don't think that's really where you were going with your proposed situation.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KlunkTheSpaceCat

Member

12-26-2012

Quote:
XxAWAX21xX:
Ive read alot of these posts and i consistently see the starter of this thread BASHING on anyone who suggests this. Quit being so arrogant this game needs changes and help in the "lower elo class"

I read about 2 que's. THATS A BRILLIANT IDEA. That way the higher elo players could still have there conventinal way to play. But this system really needs to be fixed. Elo hell is very real and it does exist.

As far as pogo goes. Be more respectful to people instead of laying into them over some idea you dont like. Its just rude


I'd respectfully disagree. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think Pogo is just frustrated with the large number of new threads that pop up regarding this issue. He does a really good job curating the forum and keeping this thread updated. (Again - props, man.) I agree with him; having one huge thread reflecting the interest level is probably better than having many smaller threads. Yeah, he thinks that role-based queuing it's a bad idea and I think it's a good idea, but he presents his arguments in a civil way and I likewise try to be civil. We all love this game, so it's perfectly natural that we all have deep opinions about how and whether it should be changed - it's human nature to get emotionally charged about it, but sometimes you've just got to cut people on the internet a little slack. =]


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KlunkTheSpaceCat

Member

12-26-2012

Quote:
PogoPogoPogoPogo:
By splitting players into yet another queue type (giving the option), you're actually making the queue length for BOTH kinds of queues even worse than it would be if you're just forcing them into one type or the other. This isn't a solution to the queue time issue.


I agree that splitting the queues would not achieve positive results. A few pages back I asked a hypothetical question - "If there were two queues, one where players would declare their preferred role(s) and another where they didn't, which would be more popular?" I feel like looking at the issue in this way helps to make it clear that most people would prefer the role-based option. Of course, maybe I'm biased.

I think actually having two queues would just make the non-role-based one really long or prone to skill mismatches, only because most people would prefer to avoid the drama of arguing over roles during champ select and would choose the role-based queue.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LogicalTautology

Senior Member

12-26-2012

If OddOne and Dyrus are duo-queuing, what if they would like to play Double-Jungle? Under the current system, they'll ask in chat if it's cool, and if someone is willing to solobot they'll go for it. Otherwise they'll pick two other roles. How does this work in a role-queuing system?

Possible counterargument: They should queue as Jungle and Support, then have the same conversation with the team.
Response: First of all, it is possible neither of them want to play Support if they don't double-Jungle. Also, the fact that someone else specifically queued for ADC probably means they are going to be playing a hypercarry traditional ADC like Graves/Vayne/etc, rather than the tankier ADC you would need to run in a solobot lane.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KlunkTheSpaceCat

Member

12-26-2012

Quote:
LogicalTautology:
If OddOne and Dyrus are duo-queuing, what if they would like to play Double-Jungle? Under the current system, they'll ask in chat if it's cool, and if someone is willing to solobot they'll go for it. Otherwise they'll pick two other roles. How does this work in a role-queuing system?

Possible counterargument: They should queue as Jungle and Support, then have the same conversation with the team.
Response: First of all, it is possible neither of them want to play Support if they don't double-Jungle. Also, the fact that someone else specifically queued for ADC probably means they are going to be playing a hypercarry traditional ADC like Graves/Vayne/etc, rather than the tankier ADC you would need to run in a solobot lane.


Really great point, thanks for contributing to the thread!

I think that if any player or two players (pro or otherwise) want to try something non-meta in solo/duo queue draft, they are going to have to sell their team on the idea during champ select. It's not impossible, and it could be a ton of fun, but I don't think that they have a better or worse chance of pulling it off in the current system versus a role-based one. I think you are right, in your example they need to get someone who can solo bot; but I don't think that either system really helps you find that player more than the other.