Riot intentionally gives lower gains/higher losses in diamond.

option paralysis·May 7, 2019·117 votes·22,344 views

https://m.imgur.com/ITSMQrm https://m.imgur.com/ZSUbXNJ

This is the dumbest thing Ive seen from any games ever. Thank GOD I haven't started playing solo q. I am still tilted from last years uncontrolable d1-d4 drop.

So, no matter the win rate, riot intentionally gives lower lp gains and higher losses in diamond. At least before in d5, now d4, you could climb out of it sooner if you had a good win rate, despite trolls and people that play 1 game a month. But clever riots way to make it "more competitive", gives everyone lower gains. God forbid you become toxic tho, nooo, when a troll costs you 25 lp and you gain 15, you should be kind to that troll. Why the fuck would I put myself through that torture ? "More competitive", what a joke, no wonder everyone's toxic as fuck.

Holy shit, this makes me mad and I didn't even start ranked. By the looks of it, I won't, for the first time in 6 years.

94 Comments

QuephaMay 7, 201946 votes

For a ranking system this makes literally no sense. Riot SapMagic's explanation ( https://twitter.com/RiotSapMagic/status/1093281079887200257 ) is that this makes the top of the ladder, "more competitive," but it is actually the polar opposite. If the matchmaker tries to make evenly matched games each time then climbing is all about luck and playing games is a detriment to climbing unless you go on a win streak, and after attaining your desired rank you want to immediately switch to playing the bare minimum number of games to prevent decay. The optimal strategy to go up in rank would actually be to throw a bunch of games (subtly so you don't get reported) to tank your MMR, and then go on a big winstreak when matched against shitters to hope you get lucky enough on the tail end of the streak to win your promo series before your MMR catches up with you and the system starts matching you against better players again.

The fact that Riot would consider implementing something so stupid actually makes me want to question the integrity of the ladder at all ranks.

Kai GuyMay 7, 20194 votes

There are a lot of reasons to do this in a Rating system. Take a look at my post in this thread and let me know if anything's confusing or I am unclear.Its been done in Rating players for chess for ages.

Its not a Riot exclusive Decision, Very least it seems to go back to 1960 in chess. So, Sap is not lying. Its largely to do with keeping Integrity for the top end of competitive ladders.

There is so much ignorance on the topic of MMR its honestly a bit frustrating.

RagnaveilMay 7, 20195 votes

The big thing is, why implement such a system, when it works best for 1v1 type games and not 5v5? Chess is heavily different than league by many metrics. This system is not the right one for League no matter how many changes you do to it. Using Chess ranking to measure a player who has to rely on 4 other people creates this ranked anomaly. Its the very reason why even though Positional was good as an idea, it wouldn't work due to the system itself not changing. Overwatch has it right although. Instead of promos or LP or anything, it gives you the flat mmr and each ranking is tied to it. This extra dimension league has with it causes more headaches than solutions.

Take this from a guy who's played Overwatch, played other games with ranked aspects, and has played this game for a good long chunk of time. League's ranked system is a fossil as it stands right now unless the mmr/elo system is addressed in this system.

Kai GuyMay 7, 20197 votes

Very simple. Its the best options to use for a competitive MM system. 0 MM does not make for great player experiences. There is a reason in wc3 that players used 3rd party apps to rate accounts with Elo formulas. Otherwise teams are complete RNG skill and often are trash quality pub stomping rigged premade clans vs RNG randos.

The entire All-stars experience was very abusive to players, trying to rely on a honor system "noobs only please. New players only please. Pros only please" did not work consistently at all. So Ban lists all started adding Elo systems to help... and it did, besides the fact they did not share data well and name spoofers countered them. Spend a lot of time in a lobby booting players to try and get a fair match... and many hosts would only care about their teammates being near their level then would let the other side be stacked to lose.

Take a look at custom games in League. Its pretty dead Because there's no MM system there.

Other systems that can be used? Majority of them are all Various types of MMR/Elo derivatives.

Stat biased ratings? It wont work. Its just to easy to play to stat pad. So...Stat systems tend to be directly tied into MMR systems as a "bonus" But any one who looks into them finds they are much easier to abuse then a pure MMR system. Stat padding is easyer then playing to win. Really easy example. Two karthus players. Player A Karthus hits R every time its off cd if theres 5 champions alive. Player B his R only to help his team in a fight or secure a otherwise missed kill. Who has more damage at the end of a game only knowing this fact? Make it only KDA? This rewards selfish players. You make a hero save as Braum and die for it? Your better off letting teammate die. End result stat systems fail at helping make a competitive ladder. Its dramatically bad. No automated system is going to do a great job of subjectively rating players. With 0 data points the gap between player skill will create a very wide RNG Range and that Range of skill directly impacts what your trying to use as a measurement of skill. In chess You can beat some one in 2 moves. This only ever happens if white is a noob. This is as fast and efficient of a game you can play but it tells you nothing about Blacks skill other then they know how win when White is trash.

Leaderboards? X games played or just tracking X wins with out accounting for losses or win%? Does not make for a MM system then one that's a MMR Built MM.

Subjective Systems? Players hate them usually because there a perception of the subjective judges being Biased. Also its stupidly hard to automate. Realistically we can not have some one judge each and every game of league played to build the MM ladder so you have to make it something that can be Automated.

The metric used by MMR and Elo is win,draw,loss. Wins and losses are not remotely related to chess. The common misconception is OMG MADE 4 CHESS, and players assume Elo system is Subjective to chess. Look I own Arpad E Elo's book becuas I like to study things I am interested in. Heres a quote from the first page. _Although the system herein described was originally developed for rating chess players, its application is by no means limited to chess. It is in fact a universal system, applicable to any type of competitive activity in which individuals or teams engage in pairwise competition." _ Hell man, Elo rating was used to make FaceMash (what is now called FaceBook.) Also its been used for abstractions like Tinder's Matching algorithms.

Thing is people goof up trying to adapt systems with low understanding of their functionality. The most common mistake made is to take the 1v1 Adjustment of Chess. Rn=Ro+K(W-We) and make it so that you run that for each player on a team. This fails badly because K is a variable that needs to be tracked by each player. You don't expect a player with 0 games played ever to be accurately rated. So K is high to move them quickly to the right range. Take a look at my stand alone post in this thread and you can see me talk about K and We more.

Also people think MMR is a absolute value also. Its not. Its a range. Its your averaged bad and good games when 100% accurate. Its a reasonably close to that value when workable. Good MM is when every player is a Tight value workable Range. Bad MM happens when players are not. https://imgur.com/a/4SFSAf9 Sloppy but this should help people visualize the concept. I might have goofed somewhere but I honestly feel its a decent representation of the concept.

So mismatches happen they suck to play, and the systems in place to protect player Rating in MMR do absolutely nothing to remove the fact that bad matches happen or suck to play. People all want to get to the top yet honestly most players are expected to take forever to do it because most players by definition are not expected to be good or skilled enough to reach the top.

Your always favored in MMR systems to climb if your good, till the point your about as good as the players around you. The issue with players... we treat our Good games as our expectation. The system uses our Mean for its expectations. We dismiss off matches as being out of form, trying something new, or just shitty teamamtes or bad luck vs a "smurf" But its not. its about finding your range and getting that as accurate as possible and constantly updating it off performance and new data. To constantly aim to be self correcting because in games build around Perfect Imbalance you honestly expect player "skill" to change positively and negatively.

and heres why I care. RIOT CAN FUCKING DO BETTER! ( I like riot, doesn't mean wont call them out when its fair) But when everbody and their dog is whining about the wrong thing, if theres no clear community understanding on the topic. Yall will constantly keep going after provably incorrect or false things, why should the devs care? Its like dealing with flat earthers. CANT WORK CUZ CHESS. bah.

Look here's what I care about and want to see improvements.

Duoing as riot does its Massively flawed. Tiers? Not MMR ranges. TIERS are used? Its gross. S4 can be Bronze MMR G1 can be Plat. That's a range of like 80% of the games players. That's awfull. Yes... it will never break the competitive end, it never is going to be an impact for the top players. Yes.,.. I get that players LIKE duoing. but this makes for mismatches, it strains MM ability to make a fair game. And even when its not the worst case like im talking about you can still see skill ranges of 30%-60% of player base very commonly.

Player Toxicity is a huge impact on how fun the game is but MMR never cares about that. If you don't impact your Win/Loss its a nonfactor to MMR. I wont name shame here but look at some of the toxic high MMR players who lose their shit on teamamtes when they feel the match would realistically be a loss. MMR never sees this. Its a Player behavior System.. And if you see toxic players ever 2-5 games then theres a surplus of toxic players that need correction.

SMS verification would lower smurfs some but people seem don't want it because folks get attached to alts. People don't get tiers are not the same. Each Tier is a distraction and can have a MMR value range riot sets for when accounts are accurately in workable ranges. Look at player distribution if you don't get what I mean by this.

And on the topic id love new player experience improvements. I don't care for myself I have had this account from s1. Better tutorials and training tools. Hell there's a change I wanted from when they introduced BE. the rental system can be redone to make it actualy help players find a champion they enjoy, let them keep the discount or get slightly reduced BE for using a rental, shouldn't just be Disenchanting.

So TLDR. MMR systems work but they don't actually care about the gameplay (checks wins, losses and who your playing. thats it.) or match quality 100% of the time (high uncertainty = likely mismatches.) They are also the best documented option if you want a skill built MM system. Riot can improve and Players need to learn before they talk about a topic to stop relying on Anecdotal evidence if they wish to be taken seriously by Devs of giant nerds like myself. The ignorance in comments shows up pretty fast. the moment you discuss the variables and lose some one it shows they haven't even done a single google search on the topic . Check out these links for more info if any ones curious. https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/project/trueskill-ranking-system/ http://www.lifewithalacrity.com/2006/01/ranking_systems.html

QuephaMay 7, 201911 votes

You misunderstand how elo works both in chess and League. Nothing in the elo formula means that 1 win and 1 loss between two players of high, equal skill rating will cause both their ratings to overall go down, but that is what currently happens in League's ranked system at high levels according to what Rioters have said.

Kai GuyMay 7, 20192 votes

You know. You may be correct that I got it wrong. When I get home I will do the math and double check myself. But I want to say that the negative value It would be from the "We" variable not "K". K just multiply the value that (W-We) produces. Part of my veiw comes from a Dota 2 artivle where value stated in rare circumstance you can lose mmr on a win. My assumption is That as "W" variable is simply if you won or lose that a positve "W" value is going to still result in a negative value if "We" is higher. As no mater what value k is multiplying it by a negative value results in a negitive number then the Rn value is a net loss. E.a. You won the game but lost mmr. I know Arpad Elo has 2 Independent formulas that can be used in caculating We. I will double check myself when I have time and get back to you on it. The easy solution is to not have ypur system allow negative RN changes if your W had a positive value but that could still in theory result in 0 mmr gains for a win. Going to have to study up on we better it seems.

kargishMay 8, 20191 votes

Chess uses the elo system, which directly transfers points from one part to another. The difference here is that against an evenly matched or weaker opponent, you'll gain less or lose more depending on outcome, where as the elo system would reverse this with an equal or larger outcome.

Kai GuyMay 8, 20191 votes

Still checking into it more. For just chess I believe its supposed to be "Zero sum" But to my understanding part of making MMR/Team Elo systems you don't have to do this so that you can better account for individual player adjustments.

Right now I seem to have an Inadequate understanding of "We" Variable creation and its system impact and so I am hitting the books on it. I believe that K(W-We) being a negative value is possible if the We variable outweighs the Result of W.

So what im looking into is more information why Arpad used We = ΣPi and We=N x P(Dc) For his system. Then I have to take a look at various MMR Faqs and try to check that concepts Arpad used remain relevant.

Look, I think stuff like this is hella cool. Seeing a bunch of Variables with arbitrary values translate into something understandable is really interesting to me. Its how you and I are able to communicate online, code is just math into something understandable and despite how little people think about it this stuff is part of every day life. Like the entire Adjustment formula could be listed as English.

Rn=Ro+K(W-We)

"To find your New rating after playing a match you take your old rating at the start of said match. The change is off the result of the match subtracted by the Systems expectation for the match which is then multiplied by your accounts Uncertainty value. Your New rating becomes your old rating at the start of your next game."

The amount of information you can contain into these formulas is super cool.

I don't have a lot of super nerdy folks around me IRL, and I actively try to avoid boring people with things I know they wont really care about. One of the advantages to Message boards is you can meet folks of similar interest. Other players can say what they want but if your emotionally invested in a video game to the point your gonna spend your free time talking about it with strangers online your probably a little bit of a nerd as well.

Also it helps me out a lot when others chime in, I can learn faster and adjust my views every time some one proves me wrong.

Don't let people get away claiming otherwise, You have to make modifications on Elo's system to get a functional MMR. Call folks out with illogical sounding claims, Especially me.

Inari Fox OrrionMay 8, 20192 votes

As genuinely smart as you are, it'd be a bad idea to dismiss all of the downvotes as 'people being salty.' The matchmaking itself makes sense, but think of this: if you lose 30 LP on a loss and gain 15 on a win, you'd need to win 75% of your games to climb. It isn't reasonable. One of those two people (or five of those ten people) will lose double the MMR the other person or set of people won.

Now, imagine this set of MMR brackets; [1,250,1,250,1,250,1,250,1,250] vs. [1,250][1,250][1,250][1,250][1,350] and lets say the team with the [1,350] won. One team lost 100 MMR/ea. The other gained 50/ea. The brackets now look like [1,150][1,150][1,150][1,150][1,150] and [1,300][1,300][1,300][1,300][1,400]

This is a problem because, in a game of five people, that is a loss of a total of 250 MMR despite the teams being almost entirely equal, save for one single individual person.

This could work in a singular setting where someone eventually gets to the MMR bracket that they just dumpster the opposition and end up back at their baseline MMR, but this is a problem in a game where there are nine other people who aren't ultra-omega-l33t who still ended up with a net loss of MMR for no reason other than "omegalul competition just like the U.S cable companies."

It's fucking stupid. The matchmaking itself isn't a problem, but the way it handles MMR/LP distribution sure is a problem. Before you say "Yeah, that's MMR, but not LP", look at how the game handles LP distribution and matchmaking. LP is a part of it, especially up against other D+ players, and especially in promotional matches where it uses your actual division.

Kai GuyMay 8, 20192 votes

As genuinely smart as you are,

Let me stop you here. I am not excessively smart. So please, lets avoid that as an assumption or statement. A fair and accurate statement instead would be that I am stubborn and curious. I have made far to many mistakes over the years and the truth is that I don't have a flawless understanding on the topic. I don't think its arrogant to claim I get MMR better then some one who does not understand what a K factor is. Becuase that kind of player has not even done a single Google search about the topic. Also I don't think its unfair for me to dislike players who are effectively demanding Riot rig the MM system by either exclusively providing them with strong teammates or Knee capping good players by balancing their win rates with players to drag it down to 50%. Its painful how many folks don't get that their demands to have high win % players on their team are effectively asking for Riot to punish any one with a high win % in a thread that's literally complaining about a forced 50% win rate. I do get why not everbody is willing to engage with me thou. If you show that you care and show some logic I will do my best to be fair to you. Its the best I can do.

Moveing on. First up, trust it as much as you trust the devs but Riots claim is

so sometimes teams can have very slight skill differences (on average, no more than 4-5 MMR). Sause

so your example should honestly not happen according to both Riot and a Fair MMR system as far as I have seen them. Its a unfair team. Yea... theoretically MM does always have to make a match and some where in the mix this could be the way it has to go... but if it did you wont see the same MMR adjusments. K factor traditionally is not the same for all accounts even In the same MMR range. Making each team only run 1 adjustment screw it all up. You can not port 1v1 Elo to 5v5 systems. the Adjustment formula needs to be run 10 separate times in direct relation to a players history. Its not Zero sum. The situation your describing is not good. Its bad MM. You need to avoid it.

the odds of what your discussing happening should be almost non existent due to K and We.

Riot does not always do things the on paper fair way. I am going to call them out every single time I can see this. I want a better game for everbody.

I don't want to just off hand dismiss players but for fucks sake is it really so unfair for me to ask people to atleast understand Elo's adjustment formula befor they open their mouths on the topic of MMR? Rn=Ro+K(W-We).

This math translates to English when you fill it in. Adjustment happens at the end of a match. Rn= Rating New. Ro = Rating Old. K = uncertainty variable. This is made off # of games and position on ladder. W = win or Loss. We = system expectations on match being a Win or loss.

For Leauge that Adjustment needs to be tracked 10 separate times at a match end and riot might honestly add more variables I don't even know about.

Lp is slower then MMR.I don't think that's a BS statement. I think there is more then enough data gathered by players to make this claim and that its commonly reflected in the Ladder.

I get hella downvotes because I bluntly tell folks they are wrong. Look so i suck at makeing this statment less abrasive but honestly a lot of the time they are. So what the hell should I do? The fact is that Players most the time only take their good games as their normal performance and off games are usually (according to them) just from hard counters, smurfs, or bad teammates, Shit man I myself am personaly aware of this bias and probably STILL overvalue my personal skill. I don't have a good solution to it. I try to let players know that MMR is a range, MMR value when 100% accurate is your Mean performance. But dude, Get this, It will literally change from 100% accurate to Inaccurate if you play 1 more game. Win or lose it wont be that 100% value. Its not about perfection, its about a workable system.

Back to the whole I mess up. I don't fully undesrstand how We is made. I intend to study more. To check myself on it, to look for answeres. I will do my best to help everbody and save other players time if they honestly want to know about systems.

But... it does not honestly look like that's the case here. Most people don't want a fair system, the want the system to favor and reward them personally. It wont, that's not what objective systems do. Is there any better way of explaining this?

Players who constantly make statements that remove personal skill from the equation and make Ladder ranke about luck get upvotes despite the fact its fucking clear what happens when smurfs and purchased accounts show up on the ladder? I hate when I see that.

Pleas, you or any one who reads this wall. Call me out if im wrong. Quepha is a good example of some one who makes me have to check myself. They though I was talkinga bout K factor when it was We.So they are incorrect slightly on the response but I might be wrong about We, thats worth me looking into and discussing so I am more accurate in the future for conversations. Hell man You calling me out for treating downvoters like they are just salty is also 100% fair. That's not what I intend here. Its not what I want. I don't wish to dismiss others opinions I just want people to actualy have some basic understanding on the topic before they mouth off.

inflation is a potential issue in Elo. So... for similar reasons it should be an issue in Elo derivative systems.

Anyhow back to you specifically.

if you lose 30 LP on a loss and gain 15 on a win, you'd need to win 75% of your games to climb. It isn't reasonable

I agree 100% but only if the context is right. If your MMR value is higher or equal to your assigned Tier that is unreasonable. Thats a Slanted LP gain.... as LP tends to move Lower then MMR that looks to likely imply a Slanted K factor. Slanted forces players to move in 1 direction and its completely fucked in higher MMR Tiers, Just my opinion. A lower K is all you need to slow players climb. That treats them the same win or lose. That seems fair. Slanted? Unfair... Imo. The only place a slanted gain is possibly not damaging is for the lower end of the ladder because it pushes accounts trying to lose into a range away from people who are less skilled but want to win... But honestly FK that... people who only try to lose should usualy show up as toxic behavior and the games better off with them getting banned. Yet players don't demand Riot improve player behaviuor systems despite all the tilt about Trolls, inter, flamers, and folks who give up. Thats a system that could get hella better far as I can see.

I mean it man, Please. Call me out, Ask for clarity. I want to help. I am trying to get players to learn so that boards can honestly move on and addresses actual problems with riots system. Duoing is garbage despite how popular it is. The competitive ingenuity of the game only goes up if Riot would change it to be off the same MMR range MM considers fair. Adding the effort to protect accounts by Matching K factors for teams makes for closer games when K is lower Fine I get that high uncertainty accounts need to play and that its a compelat shitshow if they all show up in 1 game. But As a low uncertainty account is there any reason to not add protection after every time your stuck in a high uncertainty game? We do it for auto fill, whats wrong with having a 2-3 next games as low uncertainty as possible. Anyone speak up, Let me know, is it not worth 30-120 seconds of extra que time for a massive amount of the ladder to see better quality matches 3/4 games?

I don't mind makeing this claim. Its a Fact that Riot can do better. Yet what most players bitch about is not going to remotely make things better. Its not about how "smart" I am, its just how the systems work. Check them out on your own, Please don't take my word for it as absolute truth but actually look into and study the topic yall. Info is out there, its not hard to find.

Inari Fox OrrionMay 9, 20191 votes

The LP gains and losses wouldn't matter much if people weren't also being put up against people of higher divisions to shorten queue-times, or being forced to deal with the cost of a low rank/league in their promotional matches, would it? It's not that much of a stretch to think that the general game quality -- and all of the derivatives like the "MegaLUL 5 Gold vs. 5 Silver guess who won" posts -- is because of their prioritization on shortening the queue-time. I think we even agree, don't we?

Let me know, is it not worth 30-120 seconds of extra que time for a massive amount of the ladder to see better quality matches 3/4 games?

It's not just that the LP system is broken in and of itself, though; the entire purpose of the LP system was to show you your progress in a more tangible manner, which it kinda' flops at right now/

I don't think you're wrong, I think that you... like everyone else... may be focusing on the wrong discussion. Remember that everyone says something for their own justified reasons -- the only people who want to be right for their own benefit to the exclusion of all else are psychopaths and to a lesser degree, sociopaths.

If you want a genuine suggestion on how to upset people less... You're trying to tell people they're wrong, instead of guiding the discussion and it's people onto the right path. You're better than that. Convince them that you're right, not that they're wrong. It works well. :)

I called you 'smart' for a reason; you are smart, but you shouldn't be using it just to tell people how wrong they are. You have the solutions to their problems. I hope you know that.

Kai GuyMay 9, 20191 votes

is because of their prioritization on shortening the queue-time. I think we even agree, don't we?

I do agree with you on this but its my bias. I feel that riot likely does make que time priority higher then what I think a fair quality would be. I cant prove it, i wont claim its 100% true. I strongly feel its accurate.

I also feel pretty negatively to Positional MM. It just adds more chaos and makes Tiers even less accurate then they already are. I have had players tell me that Positional was scrapped for D and up... but I have not seen a red post or dev blog about it. I do know that Positional Que was scrapped and wont roll out but the Positional MM Looks to still be in action, I have seen conflicting player info on what parts of the ladder its in thou.

With MMR Matchmaking your going to run into players above your Tier. Untill your MMR and LP gains are the same value there's going to always be a gap between division and Assigned MMR if your climbing. Im trying to help folks understand why, not just LULZ YOUR WRONG DUMMY.

So, lets go back to Sapmagic. If riot as Devs decided hey we don't like the Range of MMR for X division. They can shift it, the entire Tier system can move around .

I'm not 100% on how Riot makes LP gains, what I personally would do so that Tiers have any actual meaning is set each Tier as a Range of MMR values I want that Tier to represent when accurate. Once an account hits low uncertainty and is hovering at 50%, their MMR value should reflect the Tiers Range I want represented.
This matters because if I go and buy a challenger account, Yea I have an account In challenger I can log into and play but there Is no way in hell im that level of skill. I don't magicaly become better because my Tier, its misleading when its inaccurate.

I admit, this is a bit devious because i expect that people are going to treat each division as the same value. They wont think about uncertainty, they see 1,2,3,4 they think equal value, But looking at player distribution by Tiers I don't think that's the case. I don't see anything stopping me from making Tier 1 a range of 150 MMR But Tier 2 could be 250. ^ 100% that I might be wrong, just don't see any reason I couldn't do this. If some one can or does please correct me on it. Riot might have made each Tier the same overall value of Ranges besides the very top and very bottom.

So if riot wanted to shift the range D4 represents. Should they add to the top end of that divisions range and then it will push the rest of them above it up farther. Result of this should be the MMR required to see accelerated LP gains goes up and the # of players seeing lowered gains goes up as a result. Influx of lower LP gains being the topic at hand. That's... fine because I don't really care about Tiers until they are accurate representations by having low uncertainty.

but if riot Slants K factors? That sucks. That's just gross. You could fix your MMR gains even if your losing more LP then you get by maintaining a positive win rate with time. Slanted K you HAVE to maintain better then just a positive win rate to get MMR gains. The entire point of using an Elo derivative system is so players can prove where they belong off consistency of play.

If you want a genuine suggestion on how to upset people less... You're trying to tell people they're wrong, instead of guiding the discussion and it's people onto the right path. You're better than that. Convince them that you're right, not that they're wrong. It works well. :)

I feel like I am making that effort pretty consistently. Look around this thread and see how many times I Pop up. Put a lot of effort into walking people over the topic and am doing my best to remain approachable and helpful.

I called you 'smart' for a reason; you are smart, but you shouldn't be using it just to tell people how wrong

I actively dislike that term for the exact reason your listing. "I am smarter then you thus know better." Look,I struggle with concepts and invest time and effort to get them, stuff that sometimes comes very naturally to others with very little effort. I am stubborn and curious. I enjoy learning. I can own up when I get something wrong. Its a matter of interests not intelligence. I find this kind of variable math system cool. Seeing a formula translate into a sentence translate into a functional system is crazy, its like a puzzle.

Also, screw any one who makes an argument that "your just to dumb to get it." Not everybody is willing to learn but you should be able to get basic concepts conveyed to others. I object strongly to going around on a message board puffing out my chest telling people how smart I am. I usually want to throw a brick at those type of folks, in life or onlineand i'm pretty shure that's a common sentiment.

Inari Fox OrrionMay 10, 20191 votes

I need to make my point clear, since... it's all I have to add; LP being lopsided for anyone is a problem when LP is a direct component in the matchmaking at times. No, I don't have any proof (and there's no easy way to get any, in fact -- Riot doesn't let people take a look at the source code for the matchmaking) but I do have evidence: the vast difference in quality, leagues and divisions that you'll find when you enter a promotional match, or a match found for you within 10 seconds.

I call people "smart" because I think they deserve it. It's a matter of opinion; being "smart" in any way is a matter of relativity, because everyone has subjectively different experiences in life and, so, when confronted with something they may not know, may not understand or just genuinely appreciate the difference of, they may use any number of things as an honorific to describe their appreciation. I used "smart", bite me for it.

I don't care for calling people "a fucking idiot" or something derogatory until they start to jump into logical fallacies to make their point stronger, misrepresenting my argument or attacking me instead of my point. I hate the type of person whose an arrogant asshead about how brilliant they are, and I hate the type of people who won't hold a discussion with someone because they think, and I quote...

"you're just too dumb to get it."

...because, know it or not, it's kind of arrogant to think that someone who may just disagree with you is "dumb" because they disagree with you. The irony is it's a fallacy on it's own!

Kai GuyMay 10, 20191 votes

LP is losely related to MM only becuase its a component when you involve Duoing. Otherwise it should be off MMR. Generally accepted that MMR and LP gains are not the same. MMR is hidden LP is not.

The information Riot has provided is that nothing besides assigned MMR is used to build matches. That's more or less inline with what you should expect from a MMR system.

I feel your using it in the same context I did and that not all of your post is intended to be read exclusively by me but just incase you misread it the full quote was

Also, screw any one who makes an argument that "your just to dumb to get it."

I do appreciate that your intent was to be complimentary. This is a bit late but Thank you very much Kitsune for the compliment, Its a shame but kindness and polite behaviors are rare online. I objected to the term for my own reasons and its not about false humility, I want people to have motivation to look into this stuff on their own and not be scared off that its only smart people. I come from a lower mid class family and collage education is something I lack and was never in the books for me. If i come across or smart on the topic its just because i willing to study up on it. If you like Math its really interesting stuff and Arpad was pretty cool .

Kai GuyMay 10, 20191 votes

Tried to come up with a better Que quality idea. This is what I got. If you have time let me know your opinion. https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/Jb0iuM6Y-i-wonder-how-well-a-clanguild-system-would-work-for-ranked-teams-que

Jesus is SaviorMay 8, 20191 votes

{quoted}

If the matchmaker tries to make evenly matched games each time then climbing is all about luck

This is only true if you have achieved your "true" rank. If you're a master player playing in diamond, then you're going to have a higher than 50% winrate, and it won't be "luck"

QuephaMay 8, 20192 votes

your rank is not used by the matchmaker, so if you were master tier mmr with Diamond 1 rank, then you'll get matched against master players and your rank will go down.

BremerdanGorstMay 7, 201924 votes

The part I think is kinda WTF is "We don't have reliable enough contact with those teams." Even if that's true, is there really not an in-place procedure for inter-department contact? Or is that reserved for the highest priority issues? I suppose they might be saying, "If I try and message someone, they'll probably just ignore me."

RagnaveilMay 7, 20194 votes

I mean, Player Support can handle the concerns, but end of the day its up to the higher ups to do something about it.

5050BSMay 7, 201920 votes

LP Gains and Losses not being Flat allows Riot to completely control how and who goes up and down the ladder.

When you are at 55% win rate but have a low MMR because of Positional Ranks FuFest you are falling in Rank with +14/-22. You have to run like a 64%+ win rate to climb. This could be in any rank.

Its stupid

If Im running over 50% win rate I should be climbing in any rank.

RagnaveilMay 7, 201912 votes

Bingo. 50% shouldn't mean you are stuck indefinitely. It should mean its up to you to climb and get better, not be at the mercy of luck to get out.

GigglesOMay 7, 201910 votes

Reasons why D4 is still laughed about.

People ride +21/-18 to D4. D4 becomes less competitive because too many plats are too easily promoted and noone really leaves D4 because of the absurd lose more than you gain rules.

Thanks riot for killing any motivation I did have to not be in D4.

Xin SuiMay 9, 20191 votes

{quoted}

Reasons why D4 is still laughed about.

People ride +21/-18 to D4. D4 becomes less competitive because too many plats are too easily promoted and noone really leaves D4 because of the absurd lose more than you gain rules.

Thanks riot for killing any motivation I did have to not be in D4.

This 100%. The skill difference of players in D4 has always been big but it's even bigger now.

I think giving out free wins in gold promos and lower proves the ranking system has many faults.

SorostaranMay 7, 201910 votes

This makes neither mathematical nor cosmetic sense.

LP and promotion are supposed to be cosmetic emotional buffers for the devs to play with but constantly gravitate toward their corresponding hidden MMR "norms." What cosmetic emotional purpose does LP serve if the average LP of the entire upper echelon of League is designed to decrease as the season progresses and more games are played?

Top players who play more games will simply end up with LP more mismatched from their hidden MMR and have less LP than players with the same hidden MMR but play fewer games.

[sg-lux-2]

Kai GuyMay 7, 20198 votes

Ignoring MMR completely. I want all of you to understand this is not some entirely a Riot system or decision but this has been a thing in Elo systems for a long time. Wouldent be surprised if it was a part of the Ingo or Harkness systems but as I have not studied them I cant tell ya for shure.

You have K factor slowdowns in higher MMR. K factor directly impacts how much Rating points you gain or lose per match. Most Chess K factor for Masters + Tier gets halved or more. For USCF Players below 2100: K-factor of 32 used Players between 2100 and 2400: K-factor of 24 used Players above 2400: K-factor of 16 used. ^ Rule of thumbs. Actual K factor chart is here. In addition you will still see K factor lower with # of games.

There are a few reasons this is done, Logically I think when comparing the two systems of MMR (which riot uses, just heavily modified) The Main reason Riot is doing this is to deal with Inflation.

Inflation is already an issue when it impacts _We _Variable in Adjustment in Chess. Its a much more present problem for a game like Leauge because MM uses Ratings to build matches. The higher up a ranked ladder you get then the lower the System uncertainty tends to become as your Rating gains should never be so high as to enable luck to reach the top. With Standard K gains of middle of the ladder where uncertainty is highest applied to the top of the ladder you start seeing players _We _get funky.

So. Bad K = Bad We. So with context of Leauge and translated to simple English what that means is that you will potentially see top end players (highest Challenger member in a match.) Gaining very low, 0, or worst case potentially Losing MMR for winning a game for being at the top of Challanger. Its a realistic fear if your Player rating adjustments are to high at the top of the ladder. Because of this Its punishing for the most active and successfully players if you don't account for inflation and if you allow their MMR changes to enable them to be so lopsided that _We _completely screw them over.

I believe that there is ways to deal with this . You make We not represent the absolute value but rather a Assigned value for your top end and bottom end players. But... eh im not a math guru and I also don't have riots 10 or so years of data.

LP is always slower then MMR rating so when K slowdown LP should as well. This is just my best guess on how riot would implement this, the accelerated LP gains require a higher MMR gap. It looks like that starts in Diamond 4.

So its not about dicking you over. Its about maintaining system integrity and ensuring that you don't literally punish the best players in the game for being the best.

Now what would be Fked up is if Riot used a Slanted K factor. Where your K variable is different for a loss or for a win. That would be utter BS. But... No way to ever see that unless riot reveals their system.

RagnaveilMay 7, 20195 votes

Diamond 4 doesn't have accelerated gains. In fact, it has the slowest gains compared to every other tier. Getting 14+ 20- gets me nowhere unless lady luck decides to bless me with 10 matches of no losses (which hint hint, is very very uncommon, even very rare)

QuephaMay 7, 20192 votes

K only affects the magnitude of gains and losses, it could never make a gain worth more than a loss among two equally skilled players.

This Rioter said that you ALWAYS lose more than you could gain at high ranks even though the matchmaker tries to make even matches every time.

KuroradeMay 7, 20198 votes

This shit's annoying as fuck, I want to play ranked and get higher ranks but it's virtually impossible to climb because of this.

Gear5LuffyMay 7, 20197 votes

just hit D4 last week 5 game win streak 12 lp every game and after that of course i got matched with gold 2 and plat 4 21 lp for every loss since then a disgrace

Pandemic PunchMay 7, 20194 votes

Sometimes Riot Support being completely disconnected from the player base and the game has it's benefits, like in this situation :D

EleshakaiMay 8, 20194 votes

This seems like a pretty logical step. The higher you get in rank, the more they expect from you to maintain that rank.

The problem is that people nowadays have been taught that all that matters is their number... so they've cultivated this belief that their value is based off of whether they're diamond x. As a result, this type of system is harder to make work nowadays than it would've been in another era, regardless of how logical it is.

I wish people would focus more on becoming better and accepting that, as they do, their rank will increase... if more people had that type of attitude, they'd see this as a challenge to overcome, not someone holding them back.

Kai GuyMay 8, 20192 votes

Well said.

Familiar FacesMay 8, 20194 votes

The top of the ladder is thinner than below it. Because of this fact it is mathematically the most genuine approach. Not going to be as gracious as Kai and explain. Feel free to salt and downvote but know that you downvote cuz of lack of research on the reasoning of it or salt.

Kai GuyMay 8, 20191 votes

Having your effort acknowledged is a nice feeling. Thank you birds.

I see this and other threads on the topic as opportunity to pool research, explain reasoning, and help remove salt from players. Theres positive change that could get made but wont unless player realize some of the systems they personally like are not ideal for objective quality. The boards are constantly a state of missed opportunity and its bothers me. I was around for the old forums and they where a lot more fun in the first few years of the game. untill the point when they where not, which happened well before the Boards Beta change.

Currently.... I really feel like riot needs to make a choice on if they want to keep Duoqueing or Positional MM. Id personally support the removal of both even thou, Yes You can build it to not break the top of the ladder. I tend to be adamant in my opposition for anything that generates more mismatches. I have made mistakes and I expect I will make more but I honestly enjoy the act of learning.

Anyhow Take care man. Thanks again for the shout out.

JingerbeardmanMay 7, 20193 votes

uhhhhh... really? the amount of assumption that happened in that conversation from the OP is ridiculous and funny. Your reactions to the game being "competitive" and "toxic" are also quite hysterical and go hand in hand. You are competing with not only your opponents in a game but also those in the Diamond brackets as well at that level. the level of adrenaline and testosterone chest puffing is over the top as it is and you expect people to keep cool heads when you clearly do not yourself... You are in the upper ranks and expect to climb to master and challenger like being in bronze? the system is neither rigged nor fixed, it is working as it is intended.

Also if player support were to send every complaint to the appropriate teams in charge of said systems no work would ever get done. if you think you are the only one riding a wahmbulance to player support about how it is so unfair and that you are so much better then everyone else and blah blah blah you are not the first nor the last. focus on improving yourself and your ability to lead a team and maybe you will rise in ranks but if you think complaining cause you are being "trolled" by others acting as butt hurt as you then you might want to look to yourself before looking at them because you cant make them better but you can make yourself better.

ModAcademy KaynMay 7, 20193 votes

God forbid you become toxic tho, nooo, when a troll costs you 25 lp and you gain 15, you should be kind to that troll.

I mean, no one's saying you have to hug them. Just don't make a bad match worse for the other people in the match. It's really that simple.

LatetotheRaceMay 8, 20191 votes

When a games a 100% loss because of a 0/10 laner against a 12/0 assassin monster, (In a game that's respectively 3/15 overall score...) well then you can't really make things worse now can you... Just saying. (Weak argument there buddy)

ModAcademy KaynMay 8, 20192 votes

I don't care how bad a game is going, the last thing anyone wants is to have to deal with a second asshole thinking it's justified to be an asshole because someone else is an asshole. I've had plenty of games where things have gone badly, and the last thing I want is to have to mute my teammates because they're going back and forth insulting each other. It's turning an already bad game, worse.

You can absolutely make things worse. If you don't have anything nice to say, then don't say anything at all. Does it suck to get a troll? Sure as hell it does. Vent all you want outside the game, but don't make the situation worse for the other 3 folk. (Weak response there buddy).

Kai GuyMay 8, 20192 votes

Enjoyment and frustration are part of match quality for many players personal metrics?

EleshakaiMay 8, 20192 votes

A single loss doesn't stop my progress. I can still learn from the game and still have fun, even if the enemy's fed.

However, if a second person jumps into the fray and starts bitching constantly at the first person... it feels way worse.

Original SinMay 8, 20193 votes

Jesus christ..

Bet a red saw this post and ignored it. Shit company

GripaAviaraMay 10, 20191 votes

They should change their logo into a middle finger

qIjKHarrietMay 7, 20192 votes

Interesting... my friend in diamond 4 gains a significant amount more LP than he loses, so I am struggling to understand how this really works, since Dogma claimed you "always" lose more LP than you gain.

KuroradeMay 7, 20197 votes

{quoted}

Interesting... my friend in diamond 4 gains a significant amount more LP than he loses, so I am struggling to understand how this really works, since Dogma claimed you "always" lose more LP than you gain.

Just going to slide on in, but who is your friend and can you provide a name?

MoonscourgeMay 7, 20192 votes

Customer Support has no influence nor any required game knowledge to fill the position. You're creating a hysteria that many people buy into because your ranking was screwed up earlier this year.

Truth is that what CS said comes from a position of good intent and well meaning, but without the knowledge crucial to making that judgment.