Would a Group Finder be a good idea?

Yes 145 91.19%
No 14 8.81%
Voters: 159. You may not vote on this poll

Group Finder

12345 ... 11
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TaiigerBlue

Senior Member

10-23-2012

Hello fellow summoners,

With the growing number of players expressing their discontent with the current matchmaking system, I'd like to suggest adding a group finder/role selection to the queue system (Solo Queue).

--------------------

5 STEPS

  • 1st Step: The first screen players see when attempting to queue will show the role selection toggles. Here, players have the ability to select the roles they would like to play. They can select up to 5 roles, and a minimum of one role. These roles are: Top, Jungle, Middle, Marksman (ADC), Support.
  • 2nd Step: The player is now queued and waiting for the queue system to group him with a healthy mix of players that covers all 5 roles.
  • 3rd Step: The confirmation window pops up and the player must click yes to enter the champion selection screen or no to abandon the queue.
  • 4th Step: The player is now in the champion selection screen. Along with the usual process, each of his teammates have the roles they've selected to play in small icons on the right side of their champion avatar. Players can now better organize who to pick and lock in when they are set.
  • 5th Step: The timer ends and the game begins to load, people are happy about their picks as they await the start of the match.

This kind of process would fix many problems, including people upset they can't play the role they want, people who refuse to cooperate and some trolls.

--------------------

Team Builder

Team builder is a nice step in the right direction and shows the potential of having a full set of roles automatically grouped together.

Unfortunately, there are certain aspects of it that are still not ideal in terms of flexibility, and the system isn't viable for ranked in it's current form.

The system proposed in this thread however, retains full flexibility and is entirely viable for ranked as well. Since you are not locked into a specific champion, the picking and banning phase can go over as usual. The only real difference would be that now you're grouped with 5 people that cover all the standard roles, so the champion selection process is effortless.

--------------------

METAGAME

For those of you worried about this discouraging players from trying new things that stray from the current meta I will explain the following points.

First off, it's not necessarily a bad thing to guide newer, less experienced players towards the current meta. Their main focus should be getting the game's mechanics and team synergy down as they don't have the tools or knowledge necessary to form an effective strategy that doesn't follow the current standards yet.

Second, for more experienced players this system would not actually have any tie downs. Which means you can still select any champion you want once you reach the champion select screen. All it does is make aware which roles each person would rather play and allow the queue system to form groups that cover all regular roles so there are no conflicts between teammates. But it is by no means set in stone if you, hopefully with the approval of your team, decide to try a different team composition strategy.

I urge people to rally around this idea as I think this would be one of the best features to implement to League of Legends. If you have any questions I'll be glad to answer them and, as always, feel free to leave comments below about your thoughts on the subject.

--------------------

FAQ

Wouldn't selecting several roles lead to conflicts?
Quote:
If for example a player selects Top and Carry that means they're willing to go with whatever the team needs as long as it's one of those two roles. That player would not go Carry if there's already a Carry and the team is missing a Top, if that's what you mean. If he had a problem with going Top he wouldn't have selected it in the first place.

The beauty of a system like this, like I mentioned, is that it would group 5 people that can cover all roles with what they've selected they want to play. So there should be no conflicts as there are no roles that nobody on the team want to play.
Wouldn't queue times be long like in some MMORPGs?
Quote:
This is not like MMORPGs. Take WoW for example, queue times can be up to 30 minutes. It will never get that high, no matter what position you pick here. There are so many players queuing up at the same time and queue times are extremely low here. They'll go up what, 1~2 minutes if even? The miniscule increase in queue times is hardly a major sacrifice considering how much it would save people from failed matches due to arguments, stubborn people and wacky compositions. It will even save people some time, instead of dodging or getting stuck with trolls who are unhappy they didn't get the position they wanted to play, and counting the seconds to when they can surrender.
Wouldn't being able to select only one role be better?
Quote:
I understand your opinion, but the idea here is not to discourage creativity or different strategies, only to provide a team with a group that can potentially and willingly cover all 5 standard roles, as well as allow a player the satisfaction of playing the role they prefer without stepping on anyone elses toes or getting into arguments over it.
--------------------

Q&A

Quote:
Quote:
Your biggest problem: You believe that there are only 5 roles.
Well, considering most players, including professional players, shout-casters and Riot employees themselves consider these roles the standard, I'm not sure why you consider this "my biggest problem" or choose to personalize your statement to me alone when it is in fact the standard most people have come to accept.

Quote:
Currently Riot has 12 "attributes" for champions.
Pusher, Jungler, Support, Assassin, Ranged, Stealth, Recommended, Mage, Carry, Tank, Fighter, Melee

For argument's sake, we can take ranged, melee, and recommended. That would still leave us with 9 "attributes."

But where do these 9 "attributes" go into your "roles"?
As you so mentioned, these are precisely attributes, not roles. Hence you have attributes like "Recommended" or "Stealth", they do not serve the purpose of specifying what role (or position) the champion is supposed to cover but only what design attributes they possess.

Quote:
A year ago:
the "ADC" was a viable (and sometimes preferred) mid, and an "APC" was the protected role bot. Fighters were junglers, Tanks were top, Supports were often substituted for assasins, another AP, or even an additional fighter. Junglers were commonly not even considered a 100% must have role in every ranked game.
Given the fact that I played in those days as well, I am aware of this. However you must realize that the current meta is what it is because, through trial and error, experience and a better understanding of the game, the general consensus has naturally gravitated to what the meta is at it's current point.

Quote:
Your assertion of the supposed "current meta" might not even be the most viable meta since patch, and yet you want to create a match making system based on it. Um... ok?
I encourage you to double check when a thread was originally posted before making an erroneous comment like this one in the future, considering this thread was posted some time prior to the patch.

Quote:
If you look at Taipei Assassins (season 2 champs) picks for a lot of their games, they occasionally didn't have a tank, or a solid AP. This is contrary to the "meta."
There seems to be confusion on your part as to what "Meta" is supposed to mean. "Meta" is only a word to express what is currently considered the most generally efficient use of an element in the game. Naturally there are different strategies that are viable for specific objectives, like what what you might call a "Kill Lane" for example. This by no means concludes that the Taipei Assassins, or any other teams that have used varying strategies, play "contrary" to the meta, especially considering that apart from a few specific elements for a certain strategy the rest is played on par with the meta, and also given the fact that they still play most of their games with a standard distribution of roles.

Quote:
Actually it would propagate your idealized meta into an accepted standard. If you learn to do something a specific way, you tend to want to continue doing it that way. (Humans are creatures of habit)
Once again you attempt to personalize. "I" (specifically) have nothing to do with what the current meta is. I reiterate the fact that the current meta is what it is because through trial and error, experience and a better understanding of the game, the general consensus has naturally gravitated to where it currently is. The general consensus as in the consensus of the entire player base. Is it unanimous? Of course not. Is it a big majority? Absolutely. Which indeed makes it an accepted standard, and I'm not sure how you can not see this if you don't already see it.
There is truth in that people tend to follow the standards in place, after all it is the easiest thing to do. But I don't see that as a bad thing, on the contrary, as this truly does give newer players an easier platform from which to start from until they're experienced enough to delve into the more advanced, it also gives them a familiar environment and a better opportunity to learn the basics and synergize with other players considering this standard is already widely used by most of them. I confirm what I said before.

Quote:
When the meta changes (as it always does) from your ideal meta, the players who learned on this new system would:
a) complain
b) quit
c) get reported because they have no ability to adapt their solidified idea of the meta because they learnt only one meta
This is a logical fallacy and simply untrue. Once again, meta is formed through general consensus. So it doesn't make any sense to say that people won't adapt to the meta shift because the very fact that the meta has shifted means that general consensus caused the shift by adapting new standards.
I see 2 possibilities of what I think you meant to say but you worded it incorrectly:
1. You meant that some people lag behind the changing standards and when they see something new that they haven't seen before they resist it. But that is not because they don't follow the meta, in most cases it's because they're not even aware yet that this new element is actually now part of the meta. For example, Katarina recently became one of the top bans. A while back she wasn't considered a legitimate ban. One player complains when Katarina gets banned and says it's a stupid ban and thinks the player who banned her is trolling. This player simply lacks the updated information of what general consensus agrees is a good ban at this time and will eventually catch up.
2. You meant that a player is aware of the currently accepted standards, but through his own ideas or theory-crafting, has come to the conclusion that one standard is not good, or that he found something else that he thinks works better. For example, a player decides to go with 2 mids instead of a jungle and a mid. The player thinks this method is legitimately better but the other players complain and think he's trolling. Are those other players resisting the new meta? No, because one person's opinion doesn't dictate the meta, general consensus does, so that "idea" is not actually part of the meta. However, if the innovation of one or a few people actually show promise and start making sense to most, the meta will eventually shift if most people agree that the new idea is viable. An example of this, Lee Sin was only considered viable as a jungler or top for a long time. Then some people, most notably Froggen, came around and started playing him mid. They tested it and found out that it can work well. Many people saw how successful he was playing Lee Sin mid and now because of that the meta has slowly shifted to accept Lee Sin mid as a viable option.
Do you see what I'm getting at? The metagame is a conglomeration of standards formed by the community. Successful ideas or strategies have the power to update or change some of these standards. It is ultimately the majority that will decide upon what a standard is, after all, "standards" become "standards" because the majority agree and accept them as their own.

Quote:
So this pre "role" selection doesn't lock people into roles, but rather trains them to adhere to roles that will likely not exist in the future, or change greatly. What is the point then? To legitimize your demand for a champ select report system? To give you a new official reason to lock people into your ideal meta? I am confused... because it seems like your solution creates many problems and solves none.
I can't help but sigh at this comment. It's rather nonsensical to say role selection would train people to adhere to these roles, considering players already consider these roles a standard. Likely not exist in the future? Perhaps, perhaps not. But it's been around long enough to know it's a true standard that is here to stay. If eventually someone demonstrates ground breaking strategies that convinces everyone a dramatically different role composition is better and everybody starts using that, then there's no reason Riot can't adapt their systems to the change of standard.
I'm not sure how you can overlook all the problems a system like this would almost definitely fix. It would solve arguments where a team can not amicably agree who gets what role. It would solve trolling where someone who didn't get the role they wanted decides to ruin the game for everyone else. It would solve instances where many find it necessary to dodge and wait 30 minutes because of a troll. It would solve the problem where some people love playing a specific role, it makes the game fun for them and unfortunatly they don't get the role they want and are forced to play a role they do not find fun. It would solve the problem where 3 hard headed people decide to all go top. It would solve the problem where nobody wants to support and the person forced to do it is someone who has never supported and doesn't even know that he's supposed to ward or leave the cs for his carry, then, after failing badly during the first 5 minutes of the game decides he doesn't have the patience to continue playing and disconnects, forcing his team to continue the game 4v5.
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfynsong View Post
1. Team compositions are now essentially chosen by the matchmaker instead of by players.
As mentioned in the opening post (and contradictorily by yourself in your next statement), this queue system would not tie you down to a specific position and force you to play it. The goal of this specific system would be to match a group of 5 people that can potentially cover all standard roles without conflict.
But once again I attempt to clarify that given the fact that you won't be locked into your role, if an opportunity arises where you decide to go with a composition different from the standard you have the absolute freedom to do so.

Quote:
2. Role queues are a prime target for trolls who, say, choose ADC and then pick a mid.
Looking at it from a broad perspective this is actually the contrary of what is most likely to happen. Taking into account how many people decide to troll with the current system because they don't get the position they want, the new proposed system would alleviate this problem almost entirely. These players would have no more motivation to take such action.
Then would remain the "true" trolls that just troll to troll, but then again those already exist and would exist regardless of a system like this, and this system doesn't actually facilitate what they try to do any more than the current system does. But frankly, looking at how similar queue systems like these have worked in the past, these types of trolls are an extreme minority and should not pose a problem in most cases. But that is something Reports/Tribunal/Riot will still handle when it does happen.

Quote:
3. Role queues will not assure that a person is good at their role, nor does it ensure that they will work with our team composition.
Neither does the current queue system. However with the proposed queue system, there is at least more likelihood that someone choosing a role themselves is more equipped to play that role than someone who gets forced to play a role because he didn't call the one he wanted to play fast enough or his teammate gets to pick it before him.
Let me ask you this, who would you rather have on your team between these 2 players if all you knew about them was this: Player 1 usually plays mid, he enters champion select but doesn't call it fast enough and is forced to jungle, or Player 2 who usually plays jungle, selects jungle when queuing, enters champion select and picks a jungle.

Quote:
4. Regardless of what anyone argues, it DOES stagnate the meta because now you're limited to having 1 jungler, 1 mid, 1-2 tops, etc. See point #1.
See point #1.

Quote:
5. LF1M support please.
This is actually the only somewhat legitimate argument I have heard so far. Yes, Supports are in the minority overall. Yes queue times will go up. But I can tell you that it would be no where near the increase you may think. Considering the enormous player-base that queue up at any given time in League of Legends, the fact that queue times are incredibly low already, and the fact that I don't believe the disparity between Support and other roles are anywhere near the disparity of roles in some other games that you might be thinking of (I would love Riot feedback on this), queue times will only increase slightly, and will remain acceptable.
But regardless of that, let's think of the benefits. Can you really say you would rather queue up faster but risk getting stuck with someone who never supports, has no clue what to do, and will probably waste your time anyway, then to wait a bit longer to be queued with someone who actually does support, likes supporting and is more likely to play his role well and help you win the game? So I guess at the end of the day it's a legitimate concern but not actually a legitimate argument.
Quote:
Quote:
Wouldn't all players just pick Support in an attempt to reduce their queue and just select an AP mid or bruiser top after? Or are they limited to the certain *support* champions if they select the role?
Like mentioned, there is no limit to what champion you can select after entering the champion select screen. It's only meant to place you into a group of 5 that can potentially cover all 5 standard roles without conflict, with what each person has selected they can play, as well as a visual aid to better organize the team. We're not trying to limit anyone if they discuss a change with their team or choose a different strategy for a particular game (That's the beauty of this system).

It is extremely unlikely that people will choose something they won't actually play as they'd be intentionally reducing their chances of getting a successful team together and eventually a win, which doesn't make sense for anyone just to speed up the queue time a little bit. This is rather obvious in other games that use a similar system where you will very rarely, if ever, have someone join under a false role.
--------------------

Reddit Thread

Please invite your friends to support this thread!


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Raynoc

Junior Member

10-23-2012

The problem with selecting more than one role would be for people saying "but i said top OR adc" leading to more conflicts. Good idea tho but before posting search or read other posts, there has been quite a few on this subject. Most organized i've seen but besides the point.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TaiigerBlue

Senior Member

10-23-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raynoc View Post
The problem with selecting more than one role would be for people saying "but i said top OR adc" leading to more conflicts. Good idea tho but before posting search or read other posts, there has been quite a few on this subject. Most organized i've seen but besides the point.
Hi Raynoc,

I don't think it will lead to more conflicts at all, on the contrary.

If for example a player selects Top and Carry that means they're willing to go with whatever the team needs as long as it's one of those two roles. That player would not go Carry if there's already a Carry and the team is missing a Top, if that's what you mean. If he had a problem with going Top he wouldn't have selected it in the first place.

The beauty of a system like this, like I mentioned, is that it would group 5 people that can cover all roles with what they've selected they want to play. So there should be no conflicts as there are no roles that nobody on the team want to play.

As for why I made a new thread, I'm aware of those other threads but they don't quite cover what I wanted to cover and some parts I disagree with. If I posted there it wouldn't be about giving them feedback anymore and it would be more about me pushing my idea, and I wouldn't get as much visibility and feedback as a first post anyway. So seeing as I want people's feedback on what I think it should actually look like and I don't want to hijack someone elses thread, I created my own instead.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TaiigerBlue

Senior Member

10-27-2012

I'll bump this to see if anyone else would like to leave their thoughts on it.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Meiu

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

Senior Member

10-27-2012

Regardless of how you think it should be used, it won't be used that way. This is a bad thing, just like in MMORPGs that use the same system, it is a bad thing. Everyone always queues the fastest one and then does what the **** they want. It will be EXACTLY how it is now, except even more angry butthurt people posting these threads :/ The issue is the community not the mechanics of picking. Solve this by finding 4 friends and playing together.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TaiigerBlue

Senior Member

10-28-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meiu View Post
Regardless of how you think it should be used, it won't be used that way. This is a bad thing, just like in MMORPGs that use the same system, it is a bad thing. Everyone always queues the fastest one and then does what the **** they want. It will be EXACTLY how it is now, except even more angry butthurt people posting these threads :/ The issue is the community not the mechanics of picking. Solve this by finding 4 friends and playing together.
Hi Meiu,

This is not like MMORPGs. Take WoW for example, queue times can be up to 30 minutes. It will never get that high, no matter what position you pick here. There are so many players queuing up at the same time and queue times are extremely low here. They'll go up what, 1~2 minutes if even? The miniscule increase in queue times is hardly a major sacrifice considering how much it would save people from failed matches due to arguments, stubborn people and wacky compositions. It will even save people some time, instead of dodging or getting stuck with trolls who are unhappy they didn't get the position they wanted to play and counting the seconds to when they can surrender.

I hope you can see the big picture here, and support this idea.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

FlareBlade

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

Senior Member

11-13-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taiidann View Post
But this is not like those MMORPGs at all. Take WoW for example, queue times can be up to 30 minutes. It will never get that high, no matter what position you pick here. There are so many players queuing up at the same time and queue times are extremely low here. They'll go up to what, 1 minute if even? The miniscule increase in queue times is hardly a major sacrifice considering how much it would save people from failed matches due to arguments, stubborn people and wacky compositions. It will even save people some time, instead of dodging or grieving or getting stuck with trolls who are unhappy they didn't get the position they wanted to play.

I'm really surprised nobody sees the big picture here yet. This needs support.
I am 1500+ elo (Even in normals, you have an elo). I don't have this problem. Why should your 1k elo problem affect me because of player stupidity? Also causing my already 2-3 minute queue time to increase to 4-5 minutes or even more on off peak hours.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

DakoDread

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

Senior Member

11-14-2012

I completely agree actually, something like this should be brought into the game. I've never been so frustrated with a game when people start grabbing the same meta champions, at the very minimum this could be added to the ranked option.

What is more frustrating then getting into a game, find 3 other people that get along and are willing to work well with each other than all of a sudden one person is like "I want top so I'm gonna pick a top even though you already chose a top." <- That type of thing RUINS this game entirely. Now at this point, you have TWO options.

Option 1: Join game and try to win even with one person being down.

Option 2: Leave game and be forced to wait 30 minutes on something that is not even close to being your fault, either way you're punished for someone elses behavior. Its not fair at all to the people that actually want to play a fun or serious game.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

DakoDread

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

Senior Member

11-14-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Meiu View Post
Regardless of how you think it should be used, it won't be used that way. This is a bad thing, just like in MMORPGs that use the same system, it is a bad thing. Everyone always queues the fastest one and then does what the **** they want. It will be EXACTLY how it is now, except even more angry butthurt people posting these threads :/ The issue is the community not the mechanics of picking. Solve this by finding 4 friends and playing together.

No, it wont go up that far at all depending on the role. The playerbase in League is triple thht of WoW now


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TaiigerBlue

Senior Member

11-27-2012

Here's one reason why we should have a queue system like this.


12345 ... 11