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

< 10 Games 180 1.63%
11-40 Games 819 7.42%
41-80 Games 1,162 10.53%
81-120 Games 1,736 15.73%
121-160 Games 664 6.02%
161-200 Games 928 8.41%
200-399 Games 1,701 15.41%
400-599 Games 1,084 9.82%
600-799 Games 456 4.13%
800-999 Games 170 1.54%
1000+ Games 2,137 19.36%
Voters: 11037. You may not vote on this poll

Help Riot improve matchmaking! Looking for examples of bad matchmaking

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

C00LST0RYBR0

Senior Member

02-15-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freudia View Post
The entry point of 1200 into Ranked is too high. If 1250 is supposed to be the top 25% of players, why is everyone starting at around the top 30-25% mark? Why are they not starting farther down? So what, the top 1% of people can reach the 1800-1900 area quicker?
I'd support starting at 1050-1100 and removing the inital placement system (or talking the normal ranking into consideration), but maybe set the average gain/loss to 15 instead of 12.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

blobbert

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

Senior Member

02-15-2012

i dont have a screenshot of the game, but i went into a normal blind pick game (for u ELO freaks, stop reading here), had about 200 wins on SR, lvl 30, when i checked the enemy shaco's stats end game noticed he had 3400 wins


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

JuniorFisherman

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

Senior Member

02-15-2012

I don't get why people think it's gonna take less than 200 games to get to the true ELO, that's not true, more games you play, the closer you get to your true ELO, 200 games is not enough, that's like 100 wins, 100 losses, which is gone quite easily.

Thing is it takes a long time in this game cz first 15 games, we get placement games, that has a bonus ELO on it. If you get unlucky during placement matches, you have to catch up to all your games and it takes way more than 400 games to reach that.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

OniSioN

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

Member

02-15-2012

reserved


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Ginga

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

Senior Member

02-15-2012

Quote:
This is an idea; however, I want to avoid telling friends they cannot play together. I would like to push for a solution where friends with greatly different Elos can still play together, but we allow the matchmaker to give them a fairer match -- perhaps with the cost of some longer queue times.
Why not just remove duo queue from Ranked?

1) It's toxic for those who are solo since it ruins the game for them.

2) It gives the duo an unfair advantage.

3) And it's just frustrating if the duo happens to be on Skype, and thus never communicate with the rest of the team.


In general, duos will either win you the game or lose you the game. It's too big a factor.


In Ranked matches, this is truly unfair. So why not just enable it only on Normal and Dominion? There is nothing at stake(except a solid 50 minutes...you have to fix this too) like in Ranked. So you can't say anything about unfair advantage, unless you're really just there for the 1st Win of the day (in which case, play Dominion or Coop vs. AI)


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

AA247

Senior Member

02-15-2012

I played goose and lost

EDITED BY LYTE ::: Saved screenshot, then removed due to forum rules.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

KnobbGoblin

Junior Member

02-15-2012

I play with many people who are 1700-1950 elo, and out perform them (or at least perform on par with). However, I'm stuck bouncing around 1300 elo.

People toss around the idea of 'elo hell' With a matchmaking system in place, this shouldn't happen. Unfortunately, it does - to an extent anyway. Why you may ask? There is no personal recognition at all. There is a win or a loss. You lose the same amount of elo if you got trolled by 2 players tanking their elo for fun, or if you fed 20 in 15 mins yourself. You gain the same amount if you went 0 - 20 and build AD on an AP champ, or if you carried the game with 14-0-12 with at a 20 min surrender.

Like many others have posted, it will take FAR too many games to reach your "true elo", unless you get lucky. I'm around 150 ranked games played this season, and while I try my hardest to carry games, there are just some games it is impossible to carry. When 3 or possibly even all 4 of your teammates are feeding, trolling, afking, d/cing, or just all around being a worthless teammate, there's only so much difference one person can make, amazing or not.

Add more variables to your elo rating change.

examples of some variables may be:
k/d/a ratios, gold aquired (maybe even broken down into cs, kills, assists, neutral kills, or gp items), time spent in the vacinity of teammates, enemies, towers (enemy or friendly - assuming enemies are nearby), etc etc. there are so many things that u could tweak elo with, even if it's just a couple of elo. It would make those games where you go 12 - 0 - 6 in lane phase and end up losing the game less painful (say 10-11 elo loss instead of 13) or the feeders/trolls/afkers to loss more or gain less for losses and wins, prospectively.

TLDR: Without some kind of recognition between good players and bad players within games, to reach your elo you have to be lucky, or play hundreds or thousands of games. Instead of just making elo gain directly based on win or loss, add more variables to the equation. If personal responsibility is rewarded or punished more (even if it's just a slight bit), that will drastically lower the amount of games needed to reach your "true elo"

Oh, and like many others have posted, duo is a bit of a problem too. I've had a few games with a 1600 elo player on my team with his 900 elo friend, where his friend just throws the game away for us.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Slayer860

Senior Member

02-15-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
This is an idea; however, I want to avoid telling friends they cannot play together. I would like to push for a solution where friends with greatly different Elos can still play together, but we allow the matchmaker to give them a fairer match -- perhaps with the cost of some longer queue times.
That's what normal games are for. Ranked should be taken a bit more seriously with rules and restrictions.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Clerigon

Senior Member

02-15-2012

What about the first 10-15 ranked games matters a lot? if you win 8/10 is like 400-500 elo, if you end 5/5 or 4/6 you end in the 1000-1100 and you need to play with player with high amount of games there (because they deserver to be there) thats make ranked very unfun.

Example:
i start ranked game, i dont win all the first 10 games and i drop to 1000 elo, now i gain like 12-20 elo per win. The system put me with players with high amout of games played, 200-300-400, they deserve to be there, thats the true elo of that people, so we have a 4 guy who deserve to be there and me with only 12 ranked games. hella unfair.

Or the guy who win the 10 games he start to play in the 1600 zone with players with high amount of games, thats make the game unfun for the people who realy deserve to be in 1600 elo.


Normal game: why are premades 100% first pick? always the last pick is the only guy who solo queue.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sarg338

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

Senior Member

02-15-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
This is an idea; however, I want to avoid telling friends they cannot play together. I would like to push for a solution where friends with greatly different Elos can still play together, but we allow the matchmaker to give them a fairer match -- perhaps with the cost of some longer queue times.
I don't think of it as just straight up telling people they can't play with their friends. If you have a 900 Elo friend and you're 1700, and you want to play with each other, great! Go play some normal blind/draft pick.

However, when you risk the ratings of OTHER people by bringing in someone significantly worse than you and everyone else in your bracket, where games actually affect something besides W/L ratio, I think you need a limit there somewhere. If you want to play with that same friend in Ranked, help him out! Play normals with him a lot, help him learn some mechanics/champions he doesn't understand/know yet! Ranked isn't the place for that.