Ranked Dodge Vote Idea

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

Goumindong

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

Senior Member

06-17-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zizoz View Post
I strongly disagree with the assertion that we don't care if dodgers' Elo increases due to dodging. It results in a game where the optimal strategy for gaining Elo involves as much waiting as playing, which IMO is a problem. I don't want to spend half an hour or more waiting to queue because I dodged every time I don't get my best position/get countered/etc, but I equally don't want to play knowing that I could have 100 more elo if I just had the patience to dodge in those cases.
So the short answer is that the assumption that creates the result that people simply dodge if they think their chance of winning at character select is <50% and so it takes ages to play assumes there is no penalty to dodging

But there is a penalty for dodging, and its decently effective in normal. Since the penalty is extended now we can expect fewer(or a similar amount) of people will dodge. As far as i can tell, if you dodge twice in a row you're not going to be waiting 30 minutes for queue, you'll be waiting even longer.


Quote:
I'm not sure what exactly you're getting at in the second part, so could you explain more clearly how dodgers «break» the system? I posited in my earlier post that they would simply cause deflation in elo for everyone, which I agree is undesirable but which I suggested is more fair than loss of elo only for non-dodgers. It also is not the only source of elo inflation/deflation: loss-forgiven games result in net increases in elo, while games where new players to ranked (whose elo fluctuates more per game) are matched up against more experienced players likely results in a net loss in elo, as the experienced players are more likely to win. If the elo being introduced into the system is equal to that being removed, then there is no problem at all that I see. If there is net elo deflation, then IMO the best solution is probably to compensate for it by introducing elo elsewhere.
Let us assume that you do not dodge. The distribution of dodgers on your team is binomial (p,4) and the distribution of dodgers on the other team is binomial (p,5) where p is the probability a player systematically dodges.

We note that E[binomial (p,5)] > E[binomial (p,4)]. Which is to say that for any probability we expect more dodgers on the other team assume we do not dodge.

We also note that f = E[binomial (p,5)] - E[binomial (p,4)] is a function of p. If p increases then f increases, if p decreases then f decreases.

A "general reduction of everyone in ELO with no changes to the probability of winning given your skill ELO and listed ELO" will occur if p is constant and the size of the consistent reduction from dodging is also constant [I don't have a proof for this but it should not be that difficult to show. Note that if its not true then your proposition is false].

If this is the case it should also be the case the ELO loss on dodge behaves exactly like no ELO loss on dodge given that there is no penalty from dodging, since the equilibrium point for dodgers is when their lower skill fails to compensate for them leaving unfavorable champion matchups

If p increases as listed ELO falls, or if the size of the consistent reduction from dodging increases as ELO falls then there is no guarantee that this is the case. Instead there will be section where losing listed ELO will not increase your real chance of winning a game.

If losing ELO does not increase your real chance of winning a game[assuming that you're not dodging] then our matchmaking isn't working and ELO hell can exist. To give an example: there could be people who stabilize at 1000 even though they could also stabilize at 1100 since the chance to win a 1000 ELO game is the same chance to win a 1100 ELO game given that your real skill level should put you at 1050 or 1100.

Figuring out exactly what the chance of winning a game is depending on your actual skill level would require a bit more information about the matchmaker [and frankly a bunch of time I am not willing to spend] but this is the general idea and problem that exists with ELO loss on dodge.

edit: And we have a reason to believe that p is not constant because consistent dodgers are doing so in reaction to the games they're playing, which means that if the ELO of non-dodgers all falls, they're going to respond by dodging more and getting even more favorable matchups


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

sona23

Junior Member

06-18-2012

I lost 3 games ranked because of trolls players
guys it's ****ing awesome idea !!
DO it
BUT make it like 3 times or 2 times you can dodge ! and wait for 20 m for another dodge
So no one can play with system
!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Aiduken

Senior Member

07-02-2012

just got a 1 hour wait time for leaving a game because 4 of them where ranged ad. wtf riot.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Aiduken

Senior Member

07-02-2012

new system is stupid at least you can work off elo quick making someone wait for more then a whole games worth of time is ridiculous and silly. if your going to put such a serious penalty then make the system smarter then just if you leave you wait a ****ton of time period.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

uNSKiLLeD1337

Junior Member

07-02-2012

In my opinion the problem is another... The ELO system itself. It's a concept for a 1v1 game to measure an individual skill against an individual skill. The Problem is, that it's made to get you near enemys, who will probablly win 50% of their Games against you (in individual skill).
Elo is considered a accurate messuring for 1v1 Games ( Individual Skill ) in an fair environment ( Static e.g. no rules change, everyone has the same set of possibilities ). This is where ELO fails: at the Bans. There are just too much diversity in LOL. You cant measure it with the ELO system. If OP champs get banned you should gain less ELO. If you pick an UP champ and win you should gain way more ELO (because of the difference in the possibility to win, as someone said above: some champs are just stronger than others... there ARE counterpicks, there are good and bad jungle champs... one side is nearer to the baron, the other one is nearer to the dragon, one side can ward and steal dragon easier the other one can baronsteal easier. )
So how can the ELO actually be accurate, when the basics for wich this rating system was developed are not even present. Every Champ would need an "Elo amplifier", the guys on dragons side should have a slight elo advantage after the game because they can't get near baron as easy as the other team (which is the main objective in lategame).
Your Stats should matter somehow too, as well as your build. But how to measure those things?! I don't know. I just say a static league system with brackets would be way better for a team game.
So remove elo. And have like a "beginner" "advanced" and "pro" league. you start in the beginner bracket and ofc. only your k-d-a ratio combined with your win-loss ratio should decide your ranking.
When you are within the top 10% of ones league you advance to the next on each months last day. Its much like the system for sc2... even though they COULD use elo...sc2 is made like for elo... still they decided to not to this failure again...


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

CrM0

Junior Member

08-12-2012

The issue with the current system that is implemented to deter queue dodgers is that the only people that are penalized are the ones who actually care about the game, rather than the troll/rager. Instead of the voting system proposed in the OP's post, there should be a voting system where if at least 3 people vote the troll, said troll receives a 1 hour penalty or ban and the game is canceled. This way, teams cannot just vote to dodge a a game they are likely to lose and the troll actually receives punishment for their behavior.

Team could also potentially ban the "mid or I feed" brat that has last pick and is in no position to be playing a team game such as league.

tl;dr: Team votes on troll, troll gets banned for an hour. People who care about game don't receive penalty and trolls finally have something to keep them from trolling.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

LagSpikes

Junior Member

08-12-2012

I love this idea. =)
It really does bug me when everyone can't agree on a Competitive Group