CRITICAL fix needed for League Ranking System: A Reasonable Approach

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

EnderzShadowz

Member

03-20-2013

This post proposes a CRITICAL fix for the League System, with a focus on the unfairness of LP penalties applied towards well-performing summoners who are members of losing teams in ranked, solo/duo queue (5v5) games in Bronze and Silver tiers.

We've all been there. You're in Bronze IV, have won 5 games in a row, and have 42LP. You're feeling good, so you play another game. For you next game, you are matched up with trolls, verbal abusers, AFKers, or bad teammates in general. You've carried your team, but despite your great game play, your team has lost, unsurprisingly. You have just lost 35LP.

35LP??? How is that reasonable? You've just spent 5 hours winning those 5 games, and you just lost all of that progress due to one bad team that you were matched up with. How is that fair? It simply is not fair, and it needs to be changed ASAP.


The League System has a neat feature where it evaluates your skill level and attempts to keep you there until you prove that you can win games on a consistent basis at a higher level. This is why you can be on a 5-win streak, lose one game, and lose all your LP gained from the 5 wins. The League System perceives your loss as your inability to compete successfully at the level which you were ranked when you lost, so it attempts to bring you back down until you prove you can win consistently at that higher level.

The intent behind the League System's bringing you back down so you can "thrive" seems reasonable at first glance, but it's implementation of how it brings you down, and by how much, is naive at best.

See, in solo/duo queues, players have a high risk of being matched with negative, verbally abusive, trolly, or AFKing teammates. So even if a summoner carries his team, yet his team still loses due to factors outside of his control, the League System perceives his loss simply as his inability to compete successfully at that rank. However, we can easily determine that the exceptional performance of that summoner proves that he in fact IS succeeding and performing well at that ranking. He instead is brought down by factors completely out of his control, and is left hopeless and frustrated at the thought of losing time and rank.

Summoners who lose their 5-win streak progress due to one troll team know that when they rank back up, the probability of the same unfortunate matchmaking happening is high, and they will ultimately be penalized 5x what they earned from winning one game.

This cycle has come to be known as "elo hell", because once the summoner finds himself in the Bronze and Silver tiers, the League System is forcibly resistant to any realistic possibility of success the summoner may have based on his performance: the only factor he can control.

I promise I'm getting to the main point...

The level of penalization from losing in a solo/duo queue, 5v5 game is non-contexual and disproportionate to the amount gained from winning, and as such, Riot's LoL League System is guilty of a famous game design anti-pattern, which VP of Game Design Zileas claimed they avoided when making League of Legends: Fun Fails to Exceed Anti-Fun. For more information on this, see Zileas' List of Game Design Anti-Patterns at http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/...d.php?t=293417.

Simply put, if a summoner's solo/duo queue team loses due to negative, verbally
abusive or AFKing teammates, the League shouldn't equate the match loss
with insufficient skill to compete at that rank level
. It should take into account that summoner's performance in the losing match.

After all, this is a contextual world, and since solo/duo queue summoners are not members of a 5-person ranked team to be treated as a single entity with a single ranking--in solo/duo queue, all team members have their own ranking, not a shared team ranking, like that in a 5-person ranked team--summoners who are part of a losing, ranked, solo/duo game should be penalized according to their performance. After all, we all know that some teammates feed more than others. The feeding summoners should be penalized at a higher level than the ones who carried the team, to no avail.

If the summoner who lost even though he performed well knows that when his solo/duo queue team loses, he can trust the League System to take his performance into account when degrading his rank, then overall rank-play pressure will decrease and morale will increase. This keeps anti-fun from exceeding fun! The summoner can play assured that he will receive what is rightly due at the end of every match. Meaning, if he played
a bad game and the team lost, his ranking should be degraded by about
1-1.5x the reward of a winning game--that's understandable. But if his team loses, although the summoner played well, then the League System should allow his positive K/D ratio to mitigate the LP penalty for losing.


The main point is: the League System needs to account for individual performance when rewarding/penalizing LP at the end of solo/duo queue matches. It can do this easily by taking into account K/D ratio and assists. Summoners who feed should receive ~25-30 LP penalties, and summoners who carry in losing teams should receive ~5-13LP penalties. This helps to keep the level of fun well above the anti-fun and would be a positive force in the LoL community by reducing elo-hell pressure and rage when paired with teammates of less-than-expected skill level.


Suggested Algorithm
Whenever a summoner loses in solo/duo queue, the League System should:

  1. 1. begin by intending to penalize equal to what it currently penalizes for solo/duo queue losses. So nothing therewould change. Summoners are made happy by the following step.
  2. 2. penalize 10% LP less or more for every kill above or below a K/D ratio of 1 that the summoner produced during gameplay. Huh??? I'll explain. It makes sense. Let's say that the summoner performed at a score of 15/5/5. He killed 10 champions more than his 5 deaths. He went positive by +10. Obviously, this summoner did not struggle at his current ranking. He should not be brought down! He flourished at the current ranking, which means he should be penalized 10% less for every kill-over-death he produced in the game. So let's say the League System initially intended on penalizing -30 LP for this loss. The formula would be applied as follows:

    LP_PENALTY = -30 LP + ((30LP * .10) * 10 = -30 LP + (3LP * 10killsPositive) = -30LP + 30LP = 0LP penalized.

The above scenario makes sense because the summoner performed at a level on par or better than the other players with which he was matched. Therefore, he should not be penalized or at most be penalized a minimal amount.

On the other hand, what about the summoners who feed? Well, they should be penalized according to their gameplay, as well, up to a maximum penalty amount.

Let's say the feeding summoner produced an in-game performance of 5/15/5.

League System begins with initial penalty amount: let's say -30LP. For summoners such as the feeding summoner ("feeding" determined by a Riot-determined, negative Kill-death ratio), the League System adjusts its initial penalty amount by cutting it in half to prevent summoners from losing > 50 points b/c of one bad game. The penalty is added onto by 10% of -15LP for every death-over-kill the summoner produced. Therefore, the feeding summoner's LP penalty would be:

penalty = -15LP - ((15LP * .10) * 10killsNegative) = -15LP - (1.5 * 10) = -15LP - 15LP = -30LP lost.

....so the general formulas are:

Non-feeding summoners who are members of losing ranked, solo/duo queue, 5v5 team:

LP_PENALTY = INITIAL_PENALTY_AMOUNT - ((INITIAL_PENALTY_AMOUNT * GOOD_PLAYER_REWARD_COEFFICIENT) - DIFFERENCE_BETWEEN_KILLS_AND_DEATHS)


Non-feeding summoners who are members of losing ranked, solo/duo queue, 5v5 team:

LP_PENALTY = INITIAL_PENALTY_AMOUNT - ((abs(INITIAL_PENALTY_AMOUNT) * BAD_PLAYER_REWARD_COEFFICIENT) - DIFFERENCE_BETWEEN_KILLS_AND_DEATHS)


The percentages could be refined necessarily, but the point of this post is to propose the concept rather than propose exact amounts.

The principle is that the summoner is rewarded or penalized according to his performance in lost solo/duo queue games. This prevents summoners who perform well at certain rankings from being punished for their teammates' performance; reduces anti-fun and game-loss stress/rage; and increases morale in the ranked ladders by promoting a more fun environment in ranked gameplay.

Please comment and like if you agree with this adjustment or similar approach to changing the League System to promote a fairer ranking among losing solo/duo queue teams.


Let me know what ya think. I'm very excited about the possibility of Riot adjusting the League System to reward good teammates for their great performance in lost, ranked, solo/duo games.

Thanks!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Selcopa

Senior Member

03-20-2013

The fundamental problem here is that you haven't successfully proven that the way the LP system gives and takes LP is broken.

In order for it to be broken, there has to be players who are being unfairly stuck in tiers/division that they are significantly better than, but due to the way LP is awarded they are unable to climb to higher divisions.

And nobody has proven that this imaginary player exists.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Hóly

Junior Member

03-20-2013

I've been in this situation, and got to silver 1 tier promotion and then lost 8 games in a row due to people raging if they didn't get their lane or after feeding top two kills they give up and sit an the nexus.

What OP says happens all the time. The only problem with counting KD ratio as "personal performance" is roles like tanks or supports are often sacrificial in order to keep ADCs or mids alive during fights. When a game goes great the tank/support might only have 1 death. But often times in an even game or an uphill battle type game, a good support will save the carries and die in their place which would lower their KD ratio and make it seem like they are a worst player when in fact they were going above an beyond and keeping everyone else alive as much as possible while warding the whole map.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Selcopa

Senior Member

03-20-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hly View Post
I've been in this situation, and got to silver 1 tier promotion and then lost 8 games in a row due to people raging if they didn't get their lane or after feeding top two kills they give up and sit an the nexus.

What OP says happens all the time. The only problem with counting KD ratio as "personal performance" is roles like tanks or supports are often sacrificial in order to keep ADCs or mids alive during fights. When a game goes great the tank/support might only have 1 death. But often times in an even game or an uphill battle type game, a good support will save the carries and die in their place which would lower their KD ratio and make it seem like they are a worst player when in fact they were going above an beyond and keeping everyone else alive as much as possible while warding the whole map.
None of what you suggest proves my post wrong at all.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kamen Tusam

Junior Member

03-21-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Selcopa View Post
None of what you suggest proves my post wrong at all.
except for this entire part

Quote:
counting KD ratio as "personal performance" is roles like tanks or supports are often sacrificial in order to keep ADCs or mids alive during fights. When a game goes great the tank/support might only have 1 death. But often times in an even game or an uphill battle type game, a good support will save the carries and die in their place which would lower their KD ratio and make it seem like they are a worst player when in fact they were going above an beyond and keeping everyone else alive as much as possible while warding the whole map.
now im agreeing with you on most parts, except the KD ratio, only ADC APC and bruisers benefit from this, tanks and supports get screwed.

what we need is a lower penalty of LP for teams with leavers on it. or better yet, all their penalties thrown to that one leaving player.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Selcopa

Senior Member

03-21-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamen Tusam View Post
except for this entire part



now im agreeing with you on most parts, except the KD ratio, only ADC APC and bruisers benefit from this, tanks and supports get screwed.

what we need is a lower penalty of LP for teams with leavers on it. or better yet, all their penalties thrown to that one leaving player.
You having posted anything to suggest that there are players stuck in a bracket that they don't belong for any reasonable period of time. Are you trying to suggest that you are the special case? You will have to provide more than just "your word" show some replays of the system keeping you down when you clearly play at a higher caliber than your division/tier


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kamen Tusam

Junior Member

03-21-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Selcopa View Post
You having posted anything to suggest that there are players stuck in a bracket that they don't belong for any reasonable period of time. Are you trying to suggest that you are the special case? You will have to provide more than just "your word" show some replays of the system keeping you down when you clearly play at a higher caliber than your division/tier
you quoted the wrong player i think, in any case, i dont see how anyone would defend leavers... unless you yourself are consistenly leaving games.

i never said i played at higher caliber or anything, i want to have my results show that but cant get a reliable result out of that with about 20% of my matches having a leaver in my team.

and yes, i understand it can happen to both sides, but my luck seems to have it i get 10 leavers on my team for every one in theirs...

you cant say having a team with a leaver not getting penalized is unfair because under that same logic, if the other team gets a leaver they get the same benefit.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Joefus

Junior Member

03-21-2013

What proof do you need for this? I just was on a five game solo queue win streak in my silver tier 5 ladder, earned 40 points for 5 wins. I lost the next game a few days later I queue'd up for, and I lost 28 points and 11 spots on my ladder. The league system states that players who trend towards 1:1 will generally gain points and have a chance to rank up, but how is this possible when 5 games are only worth 40 points and one game's defeat could be worth 28?

Games worth roughly 8 points per game average on a 5 game win streak do not trend upwards when another game's points are worth 28 points. I ask: if I would have won this last game, would I have gained 28 points?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Fanaticmogg

Senior Member

03-21-2013

Here's the issue with trying to determine someone's rank by things other than their winrate: There's a near-infinite number of factors that can determine whether or not they win, and ALL of these would have to be accurately factored in.

You can try to rank someone based on how they play, making up algorithims to detect how well they split-push, whether they help in team-fights, and how their additude affects their teammates. If even one factor is left out or not accurately measured, the entire system breaks. People who can single-handedly win 75% of their games might end up in Bronze, while people who know how to abuse the system could reach Gold with a 25% win rate.

Alternatively, you can just use the Elo system, and assume that all other factors will even out in the long run. The system is supposed to put you in a place where your win-loss ratio is 50%, so it seems logical that it should do that by measuring your win-loss ratio.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Selcopa

Senior Member

03-21-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kamen Tusam View Post
you quoted the wrong player i think, in any case, i dont see how anyone would defend leavers... unless you yourself are consistenly leaving games.
I'm not defending leavers, im saying they are a non factor because of the fact that they occur on both sides equally(actually the occur on your side less than your opponents) So creating a system to 'fix' something that has no net negative impact on your division is stupid

Quote:
i never said i played at higher caliber or anything, i want to have my results show that but cant get a reliable result out of that with about 20% of my matches having a leaver in my team.

and yes, i understand it can happen to both sides, but my luck seems to have it i get 10 leavers on my team for every one in theirs...
Perception bias, and a lack of an elementary understanding of statistics, this isn't something "My luck is bad" if you want to say "well currently im down so its a little inconvenient" go for it. However you know that statistically its going to swing back your way eventually, its simply undisputable so its completely stupid to try to create a system(THAT WILL BE BROKEN) to fix a problem that will fix itself over a short period of time.

Ever go on an Online Poker forum? You sound the exact same, "My AA lose always and they always hold up, its unfair" EVERY single person believes that they are the statistical minority that gets the short end of the stick, guess what, you are not. You don't get 20% of your games with a leaver on your team, and you don't get a higher % of leavers on your team than the other team does(unless you encourage your team to leave)

The fact is, you are whining, you are complaining about something that isn't broken, because you don't want to have to face the fact that honestly, you are terrible, because getting better at the game is hard work. It doesn't happen by accident, but you don't want to do that, you want the system to magically boost you up in division that you are more comfortable with. Guess what, it doesn't work like that, the sooner you figure that out and stop complaining about stupid things like Leavers and stuff, the sooner you'll actually carry yourself up to higher divisions.

Quote:
you cant say having a team with a leaver not getting penalized is unfair because under that same logic, if the other team gets a leaver they get the same benefit.
It all balances out in the end, why is this concept so difficult to you?