Thoughts for the Riot Development Team

I have a few thoughts that will take a while to read as you can see:

   I understand Riot can't just up and say "Alright, this patch we want assassins to hold the spotlight" or "This season, we want supports to really shine" they indirectly tell you with each patch. The problem is there isn't a healthy rotation between metas. ( On another note: remember when champions got nerfed they became obsolete. Now, they shouldn't even be considered nerfs; more like adjusts. After nerfs, they are still overpowered. Reducing stats by 2 points or 5 points is like putting a band-aid on a cracked dam; Useless.) Aside from nerfs and buffs, there are 100+ champions and yet half of them are not played on a consistent basis, if played at all. Every champion is supposed to feel unique as they all bring different capabilities and uses to each team structure. Only being able to be successful with a handful of champions makes the game boring and uninteresting. Why are you creating more champs that aren't unique at all (Kai'sa) when players aren't even playing half the other champs? Also, a lot of the champs are outdated. It would have made more sense to rework champs than create champs that take the abilities from other champs in an obvious way and giving them damage steroids (Kai'sa). Ivern was unique but his kit was so overpowered they had to nerf him to oblivion and now he rarely sees game play. Where's the justice in that? 

   I really don't care if a couple champs are OP with stats off the charts, I'll just ban them or hope I can play around them for my team. What I do care about is the fact there are actually more champions that are OP than you can ban with the 10 ban system. It's like no matter what champ you pick, there's always a champ that becomes impossible to deal with when they get a few kills off of whomever. That is unfair to the players who try their hardest, play their best, and don't feed but are still chained to their team (Who so happened to pick a troll pick). 

   Solo Q should reward and punish a little different than flex Q because of the lack of teamwork and communication. In most cases, you have at least 3 people typing multiple ideas and tactics in which no one follows. Some, even me, /fullmute all to not deal with the toxicity or flames in the early and mid game so I can focus on playing to my best ability and not tilt. I'm not saying make the game easier. I'm saying for those who win in solo Q games with no pre-mades, they should get more LP. If they lose, they should lose less. This way, they can climb the ladder to a more honest rank. MMR should be trashed. MMR cancels out the efforts of matchmaking based on rank. On that note, make it possible for friends, one bronze and one platinum, to play together in ranked. It's solo/duo queue. Even if it makes matchmaking too tedious. If one person can lose the game, then the lower ranked friend can make it harder for the other player. If they perform around the same, then allow them to gain the rank to play other players closer to their level. If you're going to have players play against other players with the same skill level, then instead of MMR, you should use their average performance grade in X amount of games. Or even better, use the performance grade to determine how much lp someone should win or lose. This reduces the penalty for losing a game with a troll or AFK, it makes game more centered around actual game play instead of just winning or losing, AND it solves a lot of climbing issues ALL AT THE SAME TIME. Theoretically, you should play against players who are good if you have a high rank and players who aren't with a low rank, but MMR nullifies that simple, basic, and easy idea. There should be no reason why players have to play an LCS simulator in Bronze. I'm not saying add dynamic Q. Apparently, most the player base despises that, but if you're bronze, you shouldn't have to play like a challenger to climb to silver. The only game mode that seems to be different is 3 v 3. 

   While CS is probably the most important thing aside from objectives, kills seem to be more rewarding than cs making it a huge TDM instead of playing the game like the objective-based game it is. Even if you have 30 cs over your opponent, if they have one kill over you, they are on equal footing as you. Snowballing is too extreme, early game damage is too high, too many champions are strong early with no items or levels, too many champions are either feast or famine, and the jungle has too much impact on the game. Bot lane has too much power but that's another topic. It is unfair and quite annoying to have to be scared of a player that AFK farms for the first few minutes without any danger that can just freely go wherever they please and still have enough kill potential to force you to back off. Each lane minds their own business for the early game to cs up. Some lanes just lose, hard. I get it. But the jungler should not be able to just walk to your lane and force you back off losing whatever momentum you have or get rewarded simply because you didn't have enough time to react due to lack of vision. You could be doing well and winning your lane as you deserve to and someone who was picking their boogers all game comes in and ends up doing as much damage as someone who was laning, being in constant danger, and dealing with another oppenent.

   Tbh, I have other thoughts but those are more personal. These are my main thoughts that I believe kill the game as a whole. If you have any other suggestions or thoughts it would be helpful. If you disagree with anything, other than the length, I'll take it as constructive criticism.

P.S. Why haven't you made it to where you don't get punished for having a random AFK? You're so fricking hell-bent on cracking down on AFKish behaviors, but can't compensate the other 4 players who are getting penalized for it and the other 5 players who are getting rewarded for it.