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


How many games do you expect to play before you reach your true Elo?

< 10 Games 180 1.63%
11-40 Games 819 7.4%
41-80 Games 1162 10.5%
81-120 Games 1738 15.71%
121-160 Games 665 6.01%
161-200 Games 930 8.41%
200-399 Games 1703 15.39%
400-599 Games 1089 9.84%
600-799 Games 457 4.13%
800-999 Games 170 1.54%
1000+ Games 2143 19.37%
Voters 11063 .

Help Riot improve matchmaking! Looking for examples of bad matchmaking

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Lyte

Lead Social Systems Designer

Follow RiotLyte on Twitter

02-15-2012

Quote:
rawpower405:
No, give the TEAM more elo based upon the total TEAM's KDA versus the other team.

If Team 1 has a K+A/D of 10/9, and Team 2 has a K+A/D of 11/9, that's a close game. and elo gain's losses for the two teams should be similar +5/-5 or something.

If Team 1 has a K+A/D of 93/23 and Team 2 has a K+A/D of 50/70 then it was a stomp, and the elo gains/losses for the two teams should be more divergent. The winning team should win more elo and the losing team should lose more elo.

This would NOT evaluate a players contribution to the KDA, but rather would inform the elo gains and losses.

Elo is 1-0 system. which can also be read as a margin of victory(Hence why it works so well in soccer, since most matches are won by an average of 1 point). But in higher scoring games, basketball, football, etc. elo stops working so well and needs to use margin of victory.


This is an interesting idea; however, what is to stop a team from stalling a game so they can pad their Team KDA and continue stomping for higher Elo gains? The other team should surrender; however, what if there is one or two players on the other team who refuse to surrender and choose to now troll their own team?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Birps

Senior Member

02-15-2012

There should be no "Duo" queue in a "Solo" ranked game, that takes all the skill out of carrying and puts the game in your favor, especially if you have two very good players playing together, it just becomes completely unfair. The level of communication that 2 players on skype or vent have is immense compared to those typing in game. A duo lane bot support and a carry becomes very easy to communicate with a service like skype, or perhaps one person in the duo goes top or mid and the other jungles constantly ganking that lane because they can communicate exceptionally well. The win potential that is given to such pairs is unfair because it is not an accurate representation of your own skill in a solo ranked game.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Lyte

Lead Social Systems Designer

Follow RiotLyte on Twitter

02-15-2012

Quote:
rawpower405:
I wrote this over a year ago.

http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=385895

Explains pretty well why pure elo doesn't work.

conclusion:
Elo, predicted win rate: 54.97%
Margin of Victory, win rate: 63.03%
Actual win rate: 64.3%


Added thread to my weekend reading.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ryc Nairda

Senior Member

02-15-2012

Quote:
Lyte:
This is an interesting idea; however, what is to stop a team from stalling a game so they can pad their Team KDA and continue stomping for higher Elo gains? The other team should surrender; however, what if there is one or two players on the other team who refuse to surrender and choose to now troll their own team?


This.

Especially the trolls that intentionally feed.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Jixson

Recruiter

02-15-2012

I still wish you guys would change the system entirely for ranked. I know it can work for some team games, apparently in College Football(the bcs) it is used to some reason, but that is still 60 people or so on one team in one place who play together.

In solo queue(even duo) it is just random people who may or may not communicate. A system originally designed for a 1v1 game(Chess) and that can work for Team games, where the team actually plays together more than that 20 minutes to an hour(or so) that a game takes, you can't get a true reading out of it.

I had a suggestion a while ago, that I can't find anymore(I tried the last 500 post thing, but did not find that one)that would kind of normalize it where the elo gain and loss was based on several factors. From K/D/A(not important overall) to minions, to wards, and several other things that could allow someone who was playing well, and just on a team that COULD NOT WIN ever, in a million years to not just lose that 10-60 elo for the match, and also would hurt someone that the team carried to not gain the 10-60 elo immediately, they would have to have helped in some way to earn the full amount.

It basically broke down that the winning team could have people that gained 0 elo, and the losing team could have people that lost 0 elo. It was a good idea, but sadly has disappeared and it will take a bit for me to rememebr it all.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

rawpower405

Senior Member

02-15-2012

Quote:
Lyte:
This is an interesting idea; however, what is to stop a team from stalling a game so they can pad their Team KDA and continue stomping for higher Elo gains? The other team should surrender; however, what if there is one or two players on the other team who refuse to surrender and choose to now troll their own team?


You could give the adjustments limits to prevent this. But regardless, across all sports and ranking systems, margin of victory massively improves ranking algorithms. No competent sports ranker, or even someone who sells picks, will simply use wins and losses. Or even opponent adjusted wins and losses.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

GalacticFlame

Senior Member

02-15-2012

Well, this is coming from a non-ranked scrub, but I believe duo queueing is a major culprit at hand, much like the others have said. And again, I feel that the "You can't play with your friends!" idea is false, as there are always normals and customs where you can train and help your friend just as much, without the additional frustration you may provide other players in ranked due to the significantly worse player you brought along.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Lyte

Lead Social Systems Designer

Follow RiotLyte on Twitter

02-15-2012

Quote:
TheBirdOfPrey:
Can you give oyur thoughts on This idea i came up with? http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?p=21027543#post21027543


We have talked about this idea in-detail before, but it is not necessarily in the scope of this thread. I might do a dialogue about this specific issue in the future.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Kittsy

Senior Member

02-15-2012

Can I ask what Riot thinks of their current Dominion Elo? My EUW account (Kittal) is ~1600 Dominion Elo, but I recently had a game where I was against two people on the enemy team at 1700+, and three at 1550+, and everyone on my team was 1400-1500 Elo, according to Jabebot which I imagine is reliable. It felt like a really unbalanced match - not just from looking at the Elos, but it was evident by the way we were stomped in game.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Irok4205

Senior Member

02-15-2012

Quote:
Lyte:
I agree with you that players who intentionally rage on someone with the goal of making them quit will eventually land in the Tribunal and be punished; however, we have now created a system where players know it is possible to escape from Elo loss if someone leaves. What does this do to player behaviors?

1) The toxic players will rage and force someone to quit. They will be banned by the Tribunal; however, maybe 1-3+ players quit because of their horrible experience hearing "uninstall the game, you suck, never play again." We lost 1-3+ good people, and still had to ban the 1 toxic player.

2) Players who are moderately toxic now know they have a way to force Elo loss on someone else. Before this feature, these players would have probably gotten frustrated but just played another game or taken a break. Now, they might decide to instead rage on who they believe is the person responsible for the loss. Now, we have made a toxic player more toxic than before, and lost still 1-3+ good people.

Even if it is just 1 game, even if the toxic player is banned, I lose sleep at night thinking about the 1-3+ good players who had a miserable, miserable experience.

This is not to say it is a terrible idea; but there has got to be better solutions to consider first.

Yeah i agree completly but there should be an option open to those 1-3 players to get rid of said toxic player right there and then , how many times have we all been solo qued with someone raging their face off and have to put up with it for 40 minutes, maybe an ingame reporting system complete with a message in chat would serve as more of an immediate stop what you are doing warning to that player then a possible unnoticable report after the game has ended, if the tribunals as fair as we like to believe it will deal with them if they continue to break what ever rule they are breaking and show leninacy if they stop once ingame warned , after all if they know its gonna go to tribunal whos gonna keep digging their grave, only problem I see is what ever tools are given to players are also given to toxic players and are open to abuse by 4 man premades