Anyone else feel like if Riot restores solo Q/they fix DQ they will just say...

Arakadia·Jun 16, 2016·51 votes·1,752 views

"Sorry about the silence guys, we know we didn't do a good job of keeping you up to date".

Please dont stay silent. Talk to your community Riot. Don't make the mistake.

38 Comments

LokoJun 16, 20168 votes

Dynamic Queue is better. Pretty simple lad.

ArakadiaJun 16, 20161 votes

How so?

SlythionJun 16, 201615 votes

what in the world did they change to make it "better"? The only thing that I can think of is when they removed half of it by only limiting Diamond+ players to trios (oh hey, removing half of it improved everything I wonder what removing all of DQ would do?)...the other 95% of the league community hasn't seen a change in DQ since it's release

LokoJun 16, 20165 votes

I find it fairer. People don't fight over positions anymore. I feel like my team is more stable when they're in a comfortable position. I dunno, well I'm guessing you've had a bad time with the new system. Maybe it's just different for everybody. In my opinion I think it's alright. I think the idea that people can quad queue can be a bit shakey sometimes but that's often flattened out by the fact they'll probably verse another quad queue.

SeekerofSilenceJun 16, 20169 votes

What you're talking about is the new champion select, which can easily be added to SoloQ as well (possibly with shorter queue times since the system doesn't have to match premades).

DynQ is the ability to queue as 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 people, which means you're being ranked on the same ladder as the bloke who has 4 diamond buds that are tired of the 20 minute queue times on their main account and as such use their smurf to help a friend climb from silver to diamond.

You tell me if that's fair.

SlythionJun 16, 201620 votes

The first part of your post was about the new Champ Select System which is completely different from the Dynamic Queue System

As for being able to queue up with 2, 3, or even 4 friends, it's not a problem of "are the team's balanced" but a "does everyone have an equal influence in the game" in which case looking at solo players shoes it's a complete flop.

There's also the issue: How can you give someone an independent ranking when they've only been playing with friends. Their "ranking" (gold, plat, diamond, etc) is basically an average of their skill + their friends which is neither accurate nor fair for those who have a legitimate solo ranking

Tentacle AdvisorJun 16, 20169 votes

{quoted}

The first part of your post was about the new Champ Select System which is completely different from the Dynamic Queue System

As for being able to queue up with 2, 3, or even 4 friends, it's not a problem of "are the team's balanced" but a "does everyone have an equal influence in the game" in which case looking at solo players shoes it's a complete flop.

There's also the issue: How can you give someone an independent ranking when they've only been playing with friends. Their "ranking" (gold, plat, diamond, etc) is basically an average of their skill + their friends which is neither accurate nor fair for those who have a legitimate solo ranking

Despite me being a lowly Silver, I'm still going to throw my two cents in.

When I first heard about League, I was never told that it was a solo player game. Everything I heard concerning the game was team-based. Each side, both consisting of 5 people (or 3 people if playing on Twisted Treeline), had to work together to complete the game's main objective: destroy the enemy nexus. There was never a time where any ads or what-have-you would imply that it was a single player game. Because nothing about this game is meant to be based on a single player. (Hence the "teams" of "5 people")

Now, I understand how a player could want to compare them self to the other players around them. That's something that is simply engraved into the mind of a gamer; "Everything is a competition. Everything." But, when you look at it, no matter how good you are by your stats alone, you can't win every game on your own.

"You're only as strong as your weakest link."

This quote comes to mind whenever I see players trying to (or talking about) carrying games on their own. Yet, when they lose, what's the first thing they do? Blame everyone else on their team. Who knows, maybe their teammates were the cause. Maybe their teammates fed. Maybe their teammates didn't ward enough. Maybe their teammates built items they shouldn't have. However, no matter what you may think the cause is, the true cause is yourself. Maybe you could have advised your teammates on how not to feed their opponents. Maybe you could have asked them to ward more or ward for them if you felt you were safe enough to go without them for a while. Maybe you could have advised them to build different items. It will always be your fault, no matter what.

Now, getting back to my main point, Dynamic Queue is only bad for those players who, for one, have been playing for years and have gotten used to how things already were before DQ was implemented and those players who rely only on their own skill to win this "team-based" game. Is it wrong for players to think that way? No. In fact, it's normal for players to think like that since, by instinct, we always want to be better than the next person. Is Dynamic Queue really as bad as people say it is? The answer to this is subjective, but I will say that it isn't bad at all. And the reason I say this is that Dynamic Queue encourages (or is meant to encourage) the fact that League of Legends is a team game.

Queuing up with your friends should not be seen as negative, and should in fact be encouraged. I will not deny the fact that queuing up with friends gives them an advantage over players who are playing solo, because it is true no matter how you look at it. However, I can say that the players who choose to queue up with friends rather than alone, shouldn't be ridiculed by the "solo players" solely because they chose to have a team of people in this team-reliant game. The tools were given to be used and they chose to use them. It isn't their fault solo players decided to pick up a team-reliant game and try to win it on their own.

But, like I said, that's just my two cents on how I feel about Dynamic Queue. I neither like it nor hate it, but respect it for what it is and what it was implemented to do.

Mandang0Jun 16, 20167 votes

[{quoted}](name=Traps Are Love,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=AYE7gyQp,comment-id=00000001000000010000,timestamp=2016-06-16T09:05:36.973+0000)

Now, I understand how a player could want to compare them self to the other players around them. That's something that is simply engraved into the mind of a gamer; "Everything is a competition. Everything." But, when you look at it, no matter how good you are by your stats alone, you can't win every game on your own.

In the context of creating the default RANKED queue, I think you need to deliver on personal comparison. You can focus on teamplay as much as you like, but when it starts to undermine your ranked matchmaking is when you need to do something. Not saying dynamic queue has no place in league but well... normals have ALWAYS been dynamic queue, and they also aren't burdened by the focus on comparison that you mentioned. Riot should have left solo/duo for those players who don't want to premade, because as it stands now, these players no longer have a queue to accommodate them.

Yet, when they lose, what's the first thing they do? Blame everyone else on their team.

This is no different in dynamic queue. Players don't suddenly become more honest about their performance just because they're in a team. Maybe those who are on a team don't vocalize their thoughts (or they single out the people who aren't in their premade), but I guarantee you the players' psyches haven't changed just because you let them queue with 2 friends instead of 1.

Now, getting back to my main point, Dynamic Queue is only bad for those players who, for one, have been playing for years and have gotten used to how things already were before DQ was implemented and those players who rely only on their own skill to win this "team-based" game. Is it wrong for players to think that way? No. In fact, it's normal for players to think like that since, by instinct, we always want to be better than the next person. Is Dynamic Queue really as bad as people say it is? The answer to this is subjective, but I will say that it isn't bad at all. And the reason I say this is that Dynamic Queue encourages (or is meant to encourage) the fact that League of Legends is a team game.

Just rewrite this paragraph by switching the topic from the players hurt by the change to those benfitting from it, and change your subjective opinion at the end, and it's an equally empty paragraph now in support of the opposite side of things. "DQ only benefits those players who... haven't gotten used to...rely on ganging up on solos..." and so on.

Queuing up with your friends should not be seen as negative, and should in fact be encouraged. I will not deny the fact that queuing up with friends gives them an advantage over players who are playing solo, because it is true no matter how you look at it. However, I can say that the players who choose to queue up with friends rather than alone, shouldn't be ridiculed by the "solo players" solely because they chose to have a team of people in this team-reliant game. The tools were given to be used and they chose to use them. It isn't their fault solo players decided to pick up a team-reliant game and try to win it on their own.

It's obviously not negative for those people in the premades, the solos are the ones getting screwed (and having the way they enjoyed playing the game taken away from them). Also, let's be very clear - solo players never asked for dynamic queue to be destroyed, they just want a solo queue too. The reason people present it as an either/or is because dynamic queue relies on the solo players it screws over.

And your last line is full of it - solo players have ALWAYS been playing a team game, and the game they picked up isn't the one they're complaining about now. What if instead Riot had made solo/duo the only ranked queue and also forced normals to be solo/duo? Would an argument blaming premades for playing a game that was designed to be played by solos and duos competitively not sound ridiculous to you? It's the same argument as yours - that one treatment needs to fit all and that whatever Riot's currently chosen must have been the right one (in that case, it would've been solo/duo).

RoodToobJun 16, 20162 votes

Also, let's be very clear - solo players never asked for dynamic queue to be destroyed, they just want a solo queue too.

I understand both the points from both of you, i just want to address this. This isn't true. Go to any DQ hate thread, on reddit, on boards, wherever. There are people hating on Riot as much as possible and wishing the worst for the company "becuz we've moved to Overwatch lul" There are of course many reasonable people on both sides of this argument, who are subjective or giving an opinion while being nice and reasonable. However there are others who see anything positive about DQ and start to hate on the person who said it. I don't know if its a majority, minority or whatever, but those players exist and aren't too hard to find

Mandang0Jun 16, 20163 votes

Yea, that's my bad for trying to speak for the entirety of the boards.

That said, players who want solo queue would gladly just play solo queue and wouldn't care whether dynamic queue was a thing. I think it's dishonest to say solo queue fans are mad because Riot created dynamic queue. It's only because Riot decided solo queue would kill dynamic queue that the solo players are mad. We're mad because Riot killed off solo queue and forced us to play dynamic. Saying it the other way around makes the solo players sound selfish, which in the current system seems to be the complete opposite of true.

Tentacle AdvisorJun 18, 20161 votes

I see where you're coming from, Madango. And, to be fair, most of my arguments tem from the comments I've seen that RoodToob mentioned in their comment. "The Solo Queue players who wish the worst toward Riot."

I may or may not have mentioned this before, but I don't hate nor "dickride" (as one would call it) Dynamic Queue. I dislike it in terms of Solo Player progression but only in the view of competition between players. I enjoy it for the ease of access of team communication, strategy, and synergy with your team due to your team being premade of friends.

Honestly, though I understand Riot's desire for more friend/team based games, I too do not understand how/why Solo Queue would have hindered that, given that it was it's own queue.

Honestly, when I look back at the two queue types, I often wonder why the 5v5's thing was removed. They said it was because it was difficult to find teams of 5 to play with. It doesn't seem that difficult to get 4 people to play with, so why didn't/couldn't they just switch the 5v5 to Premade v Whatever and just leave Solo/Duo Queue the way it was? (i.e. In existence)

I understand both sides of the argument, but this is the thing that baffles me the most.

Scary DoorJun 16, 20163 votes

[{quoted}](name=Slythion,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=AYE7gyQp,comment- There's also the issue: How can you give someone an independent ranking when they've only been playing with friends. Their "ranking" (gold, plat, diamond, etc) is basically an average of their skill + their friends which is neither accurate nor fair for those who have a legitimate solo ranking

To Riot that's not an issue - They see this as a team game in which TEAMS achieve goals. Individual rankings are given based upon your consistent competence within the structure of a team game. If you consistently perform badly, you LIKELY will be lower ranked or if you generally perform well and work with your team you will climb... this is true of ANY style of ranking system... solo, dynamic, etc. I must say, the longer it goes on, the more I side with Riot.

To me there is almost no appeal to a strictly Solo Queue. Yes, I play ranked as a solo player sometimes, but to have the option is nice.

To those that call the Dynamic Queue system unfair, I fail to see how it is. People point out that they have a team of solos that goes against a five man premade... as if that happens more than .1% of the time... even so, no one ever complains when they're a solo player on the team with a premade and steam roll the other team.

It all evens out eventually. Good players will still climb, bad players will not... if Riot implemented Solo Queue I'm sure you guys would come up with a new angle to bitch about.

6KEMBE4ORBAJun 16, 20163 votes

All of the serious/major arguments anyone can make for or against the DynamicQ as a system/the current matchmaking/ladder and things connected to these are covered in that conversation tree. Feel free to read it.

http://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/IEoRyl3v-daily-reminder-that-we-want-solo-queue?comment=000700000000000100000000000000000000

They see this as a team game in which TEAMS achieve goals. Individual rankings are given based upon your consistent competence within the structure of a team game. If you consistently perform badly, you LIKELY will be lower ranked or if you generally perform well and work with your team you will climb..

This is logically flawed since DQ is fundamentally flawed because it's inaccurate and the MM needs relatively accurate data to work and make fair matches.

League isn't a 1vs1 game - but a team of 5 can still consist of solos and it can work within the game - you just need a system measuring/tracking each of those players and comparing them accurately enough because the teams are not the same every time.

"accurately enough" is reached by the law of large numbers and iretations made by the system. That is why SoloQ works and DQ "dosn't" and is way worse.

--->

Since already stomped someone with similar arguments like yours I'm just gonna post the bit covering the boosted players through DQ. You must still read the whole above-mentioned conversation tree.

Me: Overall your argument consists of: "Having one person who sucks in 100% of your queues will stop you from climbing. If you insist on boosting that one person, then you will hit a point where you are unable to effectively climb."

Which undermines the whole point and logic behind the ranked mode (with the exception of team ranked 5vs5 - oh, wait, they removed that too) and its integrity.

Neither of the two players - the vastly better one and the "bad" one are where they should be and their "current" ranks are meaningless/not accurate.*

The smart ones that play ranked for the competitive side will understand (when being explained carefully) that currently the RANKS/LADDER of the whole RANKED PLAYERBASE ARE MEANINGLESS (+ not accurate/less accurate) which is correlated with how MM works and the purpose of it and thus the whole mode --> game altogether, which is:

_"Matching 10 similarly skilled players (at an even ground) with the single goal of making the fairest match possible between the 2 teams alongside with making an accurate probable prediction of the outcome of the match." _

DynamicQ is a major blow to this and the whole point of the ranked gamemode.

Him: And that problem is mitigated by a few things.

It doesn't matter, if they are both in the same game. Their matchups will still be fair overall.
If they aren't both in the same games, their MMR will self-correct over time. Even a "boosted" player will be forced to improve or be demoted if they go solo, and that's assuming they didn't improve while climbing in the first place. This is the reason Riot was always okay with duo queue and the like, but not okay with players being boosted in a way that doesn't require them to play (i.e. another player using their account).
Opportunities and margins for improvement favour weaker players when it comes to climbing. It takes less effort to become a gold level player from bronze than it does to become diamond from gold.
The situation is in principle not possible above a certain rank. The tenable gap in skill between players will shrink as they climb, as it will become progressively less possible to "carry" the weaker player to a higher rank than their skill would otherwise permit in the first place.

For above reasons, as they do climb, or even while they're not climbing, both players will grow closer in manifested skill relative to their experience, because one of them has more room to improve. The better player is not going to improve much, if at all, without climbing high enough to face players of their own level anyway.

That's what I'm getting at. You contend that the entire ladder is invalidated. My reply is that only the lower ranks lack integrity, and, meaningfully, they always did. I won't pretend to know the exact rank at which the high pressure and low margin for error will squeeze out "boosted" players who don't deserve it (and there's almost certainly not a clear line you can draw where it starts to happen), but I can say with confidence that is the only rank that matters, anyway. That's the point at which rank starts to mean anything at all, and dynamic queue won't change that. It's a condition enforced by the players at that rank, naturally, as they compete. The same is true in any sport with rankings.

TL;DR: A dynamic queue player can only be "boosted" by this system to the bottom of the "real" rankings, before they will have to actually learn and play better. It's not like you take gold seriously, anyway, right?

Me: Real life sports don't allow top players to compete with "amateur/lesser" leagues, nor have individual ranks for every player based solely on their team performance.

"You contend that the entire ladder is invalidated" - this is an absolute statement of mine which is not entirely true just because the game ultimately rewards the "better" players, because that's how the game is designed.

Even with that said - this dosn't speak in favor of DQ in any way and its fundamental problems. Which are (ignoring voice-comm/synergy vs solos) - reduced quality of matches till the system "outseeds" the "bad" players.

You don't know (neither do I or Riot) which rank is the "cut-off" point and how many (unfair match ups) the system needs in any tier. 10? 100? What about 500?

The consequences are reduced quality/fairness of ranked games just because there is the chance of that happening (even in gold).

Him: I don't know where the cut-off is, but I'm 100% certain it's higher than gold. Bronze through gold are never going to be accurate. They're never going to be fair. They're for fun. They're inconsistent enough that variations in individual performance can easily exceed alleged MMR discrepancies. That may extend even to the middle of platinum. And I'm going to remind you that you yourself scoffed at gold when you talked about low-rank players trying to pontificate on this subject, so don't act as if you suddenly think gold was ever a bastion of skill and fairness.

So here's my answer to your question (which I did in fact already give, but now I'm putting it plainly):** it doesn't matter**.

By the time it starts to matter, the players themselves will weed out those extraneous variables. "Top players" who have proven they are top players will not be playing with amateurs in ranked matches. They are vastly more skilled than anyone who could even conceive of being boosted or carried, and players worse than them will have already crushed anyone getting too big for their breeches.

Me: I'm not talking about stuff that I don't have knowledge of or have no way of knowing because there are so many posibilities/variations that no one can predict/anticipate them.

That's why you need clear definitions about any system.

DynamicQ blurs all definitions without introducing new clear ones. You're saying that DQ works - I've never said that it dosn't - but compared to the older system it's way worse in achieving the goals both systems aim at.

The "cut off point" can vary depending on the players and who is matched with who at what time (d groups add to this too). It can vary in rank too.

It represents (more) needless irritations made by the system till it solves the problem. (it dosn't solve the problem of comparing ranks though - that is still unsolved).

So it does matter.

BlanchimontJun 17, 20162 votes

I disagree that it will even out. Good players will always climb, but the hurdle they have to cross is much tougher than that of a group queue. However, players who play together for long periods of time have one advantage, established teamwork. It is much easier to coordinate in a group that has played together than it is with 5 people who are only together for one game. When you have an established team, even if it is just a group of three, it has an advantage over a group of randomly chosen people who are only going to play together for one team.

Dynamic Queue also allows for much more variation in skill between players than Solo/Duo Queue did, which is another problem. It does this because the main focus is on shortening queue times. It's not just premades that are the problem. This focus on shortening the queue makes it much harder for a game to have an even matchup because of the larger variation in skill between players. A Challenger player is deemed as okay to be facing low Diamonds. A low Silver player is deemed as okay to face a medium Platinum player under Dynamic Queue.

When I had to play my promotion series from Silver 1 to Gold, I had to play against Platinum players. Needless to say, I lost horribly.

tempname4864Jun 16, 20164 votes

{quoted}

I find it fairer. People don't fight over positions anymore. I feel like my team is more stable when they're in a comfortable position. I dunno, well I'm guessing you've had a bad time with the new system. Maybe it's just different for everybody. In my opinion I think it's alright. I think the idea that people can quad queue can be a bit shakey sometimes but that's often flattened out by the fact they'll probably verse another quad queue.

you're also a support player who hovers silver 1 to gold 5, you are the posterchild for someone to defend this horrible system, you get your role 99/100 games and all that matters to you is your team staying positive, however the people who've been here since the game started are stuck with autofill, and horrible queue times, and none of the actual benefits of this system, only the bad parts that have had to be fixed/deleted somehow and made more like solo queue to make workable

silver players love DQ because most players are stuck in silver/bronze/gold 5 so it's easy to find people to queue and continue to lose games with

the rest of us, the other 25% of so get fucked, and we play probably 4x as many games on average per person, but we don't continually spend money like new casuals do, so they cater to you...the people who weren't here to help the game grow since it's 300 player launch in 2009, who haven't ever really contributed anything to balance, or the community at all, but since you come in flocks with cash

fuck us right?

LokoJun 16, 20161 votes

So the only problem you've mentioned is Queue time.

tempname4864Jun 16, 20162 votes

{quoted}

So the only problem you've mentioned is Queue time.

problems are subjective to who is having them, your opinion doesn't override anyone elses, would be a good time in life for you to learn that, eventually you have to interract with people who aren't behind a computer screen and you'll probably lose some teeth acting the way you do on these forums to people right in front of you.

LokoJun 16, 20161 votes

Ahh yeah so I'll get bashed for having a stable civilised discussion about a video game. Right.

I didn't want to be salty about this. I can see why you're angry about this. Something you've enjoyed for so long got changed in a bad way. I'd never said that my opinion was important, you as a veteran player probably have a stronger opinion on this. Fuck me dead. Everyone on the forums assumes that every reply is an attack or some shit. Your opinion probably overrides mine.

I think people getting the position they planned to play over some extended queue time for some is best. That's just what I think. Not gunna get some edgy devoted videogame kid to take my teeth out over that lol.

ShadòwJun 17, 20162 votes

NCS =/= DynQ

for the 1000 time now..

General Esdeath Jun 16, 20162 votes

This isn't Memes and Games, get that joke out of here

Knightofthedawn1Jun 17, 20162 votes

In no single way is Dynamic Queue better. Maybe watch this video of a high elo player: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L-sPNcwEcYE

Besides,now it is more like an asymetric PvP game.The team with more premades has and will always have an advantage.A significant advantage.A communicative and psychological advantage. Also solo players have a mathematical disadvantage.

FioraWillCarryJun 18, 20162 votes

{quoted}

Dynamic Queue is better. Pretty simple lad.

Vistha KaiJun 16, 20167 votes

I keep hearing this bullshit for the past three years or so.

Riot, you aren't sorry. Stop lying.

PS. They will say that even if they won't do shit about Solo Queue or the Dunce Queue.

Dextix LTJun 16, 20164 votes

It will be followed with "We will do better next time".

ArakadiaJun 16, 20161 votes

We're have we heard that before!?

DrCabesJun 16, 20163 votes

They already said that in the round table video, and here we are.

eastcoastblazeJun 17, 20163 votes

They've already made the mistake. Its only a question of when they will acknowledge they made a mistake so we can start to rebuild, hopely rhey acknowledge it before jts too late

atomicwitJun 17, 20162 votes

I would much rather have SQ now than wait for DQ to be fixed another 6 months. Even if they do "fix it", it still needs to separate solo performance somehow to be able to measure individual skill accurately so something like SQ is necessary even if it's on the same ladder.

ArakadiaJun 17, 20161 votes

^^^

ÇhåryzårdJun 17, 20162 votes

When Rioters themselves are saying "yea this system is shit" then you really know there's a problem

OneExitJun 17, 20162 votes

As much as we hate the silence, some of it is company policy. Even some of the Rioteers hate the policy. I've seen them mention it once or twice. Wish we could get more clarity though.

macromiteJun 16, 20161 votes

they stay silent because they can see the torches and pitchforks.

RianJun 17, 20161 votes

restore? I can't remember a 100% soloq. But np I'd like to see one. And a ranked queue for the premades. I still don't get the problem.

ps: Funny how people still confuse dynamicq with role placement XD

LokoJun 18, 20161 votes

Dam. Nowhere when I started playing League of Legends did it say it was a single player game. DQ is Riot encouraging teamplay. Riot doesn't exactly what every player to be a solo player. Groups are more effective in my opinion. But hang on... Riot did say that Solo's verse Solo's and 5 queues verse 5 queues? Duo'ing with a player in traditional queue would likely face you against another duo or pair of duos. Opening bigger team queue sizes is even for both teams.

It lets players who play better with their friends get more a chance which is what the game should be about.

ArakadiaJun 18, 20161 votes

Opening bigger team queue sizes is even for both teams.

In a perfect que yes. That was called ranked teams. Its not even because you can have 1 duo and 3 solo's or 5 solo's against a 5 man premade.

It lets players who play better with their friends get more a chance which is what the game should be about.

Why are they allowed to play with such a big advantage. This team of friends can fight a whole team of strangers without team speak. Ranked 5v5's allowed this but fair because each team was premade. Its a team game, but ranked is for measuring YOUR SKILL. DQ lets people be boosted and lets premades fight non premades which isn't fair.

LokoJun 18, 20161 votes

But they don't. The matchmaking would never match a 5 man win 5 solo. And if by the slight slight chance that they did, they would make small LP rewards for winning and the 5 man solo wouldn't lose much. But this matchup is very unlikely to occur in the first place. 4's always go with 4 or 3 or 5. 3's go with another 3 or two 2's. Adjusting LP accordingly. Riot has spoken about this LP balance in plenty of their posts. Over time, playing and playing it always evens out.

"Why are they allowed to play with such a big advantage." The other team would get that as well. Are you saying their skill will not matter after a bunch of games? It DOES measure skill, always. This is a teamgame not a solo game.

ArakadiaJun 18, 20161 votes

A 5 man premade can and has before been matched with a 5 solo team. Even a 2+3 premade vs a 5 man premade have a disadvantage. Overtime playing it does even it out, unless, you keep getting boosted and boosted. Then you never actually stop.

You can get boosted and your skill won't matter. Team game =/= letting friends win the game for you. Rank means very little at the moment.

LokoJun 19, 20161 votes

That's exactly what I just said. 5 vs 2+3, 2+3 obviously has the disadvantage, so LP will be adjusted accordingly. But, those sort of games are unlikely to happen. As Riot said, 5's verse 5's or 4's + another slightly higher Elo player.

This is a team game. League of Legends is %100 a team game. In traditional queue, if there was a duo, you'd verse a duo. If there were two duos, you'd verse to duos. Now in Dynamic, trios verse trios, quads.. etc. If they don't LP is adjusted. So over many games it does become more even.