All those threads talking about role-queuing.

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

11-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolvenlight View Post
1) Any changes in meta won't be taken into consideration by a role/lane-queuing system until later in time. For combating this, there is not using it or queuing with friends, but that's really it until Riot changes algorithms.
This is essentially the main argument against the bulk of your post.

You're right, generally speaking in solo-queue, on a game-to-game basis, people play by the meta. And on a game-by-game basis, the meta doesn't change in solo queue. Meta changes are initiated, typically, either when a top team starts having success playing a different style (and so lots of people want to start copying that), or when a new team rises to the top using a new strategy.

This new strategy is devised by a group of 5 players who play and queue together.

But there's a time lag between players seeing and wanting to try this strategy and Riot actually getting around to changing the queuing system. And for at least some portion of time, a good chunk of the community will want to play by one strategy and another chunk by the other strategy, so what do you do with the queuing system then? Split it into three queues?

And for people who queue separately, will they be match-made against each other? Will a meta-queuing team be paired against a team that queued using the system as we know it?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

11-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jushiiro View Post
You queue with friends who are actually open to non-meta gameplay instead of pissing off people in solo queue who are afraid of anything different.

Personally I would love this system because I am tired of every game being
TOP
MID
JUNGLE
...ok I'm stuck support well that's fine.

Fifth locks in as a second mid because either they weren't reading chat, or they're too selfish to work with their team.

then the trolling and *****ing begins
As opposed to the suggested system, where the troll (who is going to troll either way) queues as a support to get in the lobby the fastest and locks in as a mid anyway.

The only real difference between the current system and this proposed system, with regards to trolling, is that you'd have to wait longer to get trolled since you're most likely queuing as one of the more popular roles.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

11-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
But if I know the forums, I know I'll have about 25 links by Thanksgiving.
I don't remember the exact day this thread was opened, but I just added the 10th link. Today is November 8th.

Thanksgiving is Thursday, November 22nd. If we continue to average 1 new thread per day, we'll hit 24 threads on Thanksgiving day.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Jushiiro

Senior Member

11-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
As opposed to the suggested system, where the troll (who is going to troll either way) queues as a support to get in the lobby the fastest and locks in as a mid anyway.

The only real difference between the current system and this proposed system, with regards to trolling, is that you'd have to wait longer to get trolled since you're most likely queuing as one of the more popular roles.
You're assuming people _only_ queue with the intention of trolling, and I agree _some_ do.

The ability to queue as a role reduces the people who reactively troll due to not getting the role they desire.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KnightxSScarlett

Senior Member

11-08-2012

But it doesn't reduce the people like me that troll in ranked because that's the best place to hit people when it comes to trolling. Now, the chances of someone that trolls by reaction to not getting their role dodging are probably high enough that this won't matter.

However, this opens up a new field of trolling for those of us who will queue adc and pick Soraka just because it'll make everyone angry. So yes support this idea. It will make trolling that much easier and A LOT more fun!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Wolvenlight

Member

11-08-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
This is essentially the main argument against the bulk of your post.

You're right, generally speaking in solo-queue, on a game-to-game basis, people play by the meta. And on a game-by-game basis, the meta doesn't change in solo queue. Meta changes are initiated, typically, either when a top team starts having success playing a different style (and so lots of people want to start copying that), or when a new team rises to the top using a new strategy.

This new strategy is devised by a group of 5 players who play and queue together.

But there's a time lag between players seeing and wanting to try this strategy and Riot actually getting around to changing the queuing system. And for at least some portion of time, a good chunk of the community will want to play by one strategy and another chunk by the other strategy, so what do you do with the queuing system then? Split it into three queues?

And for people who queue separately, will they be match-made against each other? Will a meta-queuing team be paired against a team that queued using the system as we know it?
In regard to your last sentence, I just want to start by saying that it would be really interesting to see two different metas go up against each other. So I'd hope they WOULD get put against each other.

As for the rest, it's just who chooses to use the system. Those that don't can either get placed with others teammates that don't use it, or thrown in with a mixed batch of those who don't use it and those that do, (Someone should pro/con those options, because I don't have time right now, but mainly I think the first option keeps the meta open to change while the second option makes queue times less likely to explode. However, mixing them up would most likely have many people not using the system stuck in the support role.)

Who's against who is pretty much irrelevant since you win by whatever works, and use whatever strategy you think that works against whatever strategy is employed against you. So the system would really only apply to teammates.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

11-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jushiiro View Post
The ability to queue as a role reduces the people who reactively troll due to not getting the role they desire.
Okay, but when you make a statement like this, you basically admit you ignore every possible downside to the system in favor of the one upside.

You don't care that trolls who decide before queuing that they're going to troll are now going to be worse.

You don't care that the system locks the meta and stifles creativity.


All you care is that you really want to play mid and you think this system will let you play mid more.




And you know what else? Here's an argument against this system for ranked. If you're playing ranked, more is expected out of your ability as a player. If you can't play every role, you don't need to have that high of an Elo. Sure, as it stands now, you can dodge out when you don't get your role, but between time penalties for dodging and a policy of occasionally going through and banning people that dodge too much, Riot has made it more difficult for you to gain Elo by demanding that you get your role or else.

If we're going to lock ranked players into the meta, I'd rather see a system that randomly assigns them a role. I don't want Elo to be a representation of how good you are at mid. I want Elo to be a representation of how good you are at every position. If you can play every position at a 1500 Elo level, you should have 1500 Elo. If you can play mid at a 1600 level, but every other position you're an 800 Elo, then you don't deserve to be at 1600. You should be closer to 1000-1200 Elo.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Jushiiro

Senior Member

11-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
Okay, but when you make a statement like this, you basically admit you ignore every possible downside to the system in favor of the one upside.
What are the downsides, exactly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
You don't care that trolls who decide before queuing that they're going to troll are now going to be worse.
Trolls can already queue with the intention of trolling, this change would neither make them better or worse. It would as I said, keep people from trolling because their role was taken.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
You don't care that the system locks the meta and stifles creativity.
This is absolutely true, but everyone already jumps down your throat if you try to play outside the meta. This is what normals are for, not ranked.

Oh you want to mid teemo, clearly troll rage rage rage dodge.

If we're not supposed to be locked into the meta, tell riot to stop balancing around it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
All you care is that you really want to play mid and you think this system will let you play mid more.
Of course, I want to play my best role.

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
And you know what else? Here's an argument against this system for ranked. If you're playing ranked, more is expected out of your ability as a player. If you can't play every role, you don't need to have that high of an Elo. Sure, as it stands now, you can dodge out when you don't get your role, but between time penalties for dodging and a policy of occasionally going through and banning people that dodge too much, Riot has made it more difficult for you to gain Elo by demanding that you get your role or else.

If we're going to lock ranked players into the meta, I'd rather see a system that randomly assigns them a role. I don't want Elo to be a representation of how good you are at mid. I want Elo to be a representation of how good you are at every position. If you can play every position at a 1500 Elo level, you should have 1500 Elo. If you can play mid at a 1600 level, but every other position you're an 800 Elo, then you don't deserve to be at 1600. You should be closer to 1000-1200 Elo.
This is basically "STOP LIKING THINGS I DON'T LIKE"


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

PogoPogoPogoPogo

Senior Member

11-09-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
Which is pretty much the main counterpoint to all of this.

Any sort of role-queuing, no matter how lenient people dream it up to be, is going to lock certain compositions in, because the system is choosing people who preferred certain roles and pairing them with people who preferred other roles. I mean, if the system isn't doing this and setting compositions up, then what's the point of it?

But if it is, we're getting stuck with a team comp, and the way ranked games are played won't change until Riot has decided on a different meta.
This thread exists so that rather than rehashing the same argument over and over again, the discussion can actually be advanced. Please read through at least a few of the previous pages.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Wolvenlight

Member

11-10-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by PogoPogoPogoPogo View Post
This thread exists so that rather than rehashing the same argument over and over again, the discussion can actually be advanced. Please read through at least a few of the previous pages.
I agree on that, people should try to read through previous arguments. On that note, I can't help but think that once this thread eventually grows beyond... I say 10 pages, it'll have the same problem you pointed out that multiple threads do.

Might I suggest that once we're past a certain number of pages that you make a list of some/all of the proposed ideas, throw them into one of those reserved posts on the first page, and make a quick summary of pro/cons, problems they face that need to be addressed, and reasons why some of the less stellar ideas wouldn't realistically work?

It'll probably be lot of information to keep track of as well as work after a while, so I'll understand if you don't, but that would help stem the repeated-idea tide.



Also, regarding leniency and creativity, I fail to see how an optional, and therefore lenient queuing system, (assuming we ever have one that works well,) would stifle creativity in any unbreakable fashion. If anything, I see it bringing those that want to metameta together so they can metameta, and those that who like to experiment, (or at least are okay with experimentation,) together so they can do silly things that either work or don't work.

(Assuming of course we're going with a queue system that separates potential teammates by which side of the system they chose to be on. Also assuming we don't just rely on quint-queues for that.)