http://i57.tinypic.com/mczo6b.jpg
"You don't deserve plat because you're obviously bad for losing promos all the time." - rito
Meanwhile matchmaking thinks I am plat and teams me with the potatoes of plat. Whilst the enemy teams are players doing well in plat. Every game.
MudintheWater2 votesI played one last night with a 200 point MMR difference in favor of the enemy team. Their plat Vaybe wrecked our not plat twitch and proceeded to 4 shot us as vaynes do. I almost saved my team from fails by catching bard and ahri out, then our jungler started baron without smite when they had a rengar. Guess who got baron? Fml matchmaking is broken if it thinks a 200 point difference is acceptable.
ValyrianBlade1 votesThose teams actually look pretty even... your team's MMR is actually higher...
Aside from the Vi, which who knows how she's in plat with that sort of a W/L record (was probably boosted, in which case blame the booster not Riot) I don't see anything particularly uneven about this match? Is it because you had another Gold 1 on your team while the enemy team had only 1 Gold 1? (Careful, if you're making that statement then you're really not considering yourself to be Plat level now are you?).
l ChemoDan l1 votesI'm lucky to have another golds in my games...
I am plat level, I managed to hit plat in preseason, and got in there during this season, but I got troll after troll after troll in plat and eventually got demoted, this was whilst playing one - two games a day if that. I had an 80% win rate until the week, and suddenly plats are on my team doing whatever they can do ensure a loss. It's a joke. You do well, get your MMR up, then get teamed with the derps in another division to try and prevent you climbing.
ValyrianBlade1 votesWell, given I had the same experience literally, I know what you mean.
The problem isn't so much with matchmaking as it is with effectively rating individual players in a team game though.
To make some really simplifying assumptions, since there are 10 players per game let's say your impact on a game is 10% (as is each other players). You can contribute anywhere from 0.5 to 1.5 (5% to 15%) in a given game, and the team with more total contribution wins.
It's pretty obvious to see that players who consistently contribute 8% or 9% rather than their fair share for their level of 10% will still do reasonably well - perhaps 20% of them will still win at least 50% of their games if total games played are under 100. Similarly, someone who consistently contributes 11% or 12% (is better than their current level) would have about a 20% chance of losing at least 50% of their games (if under 100 total games). So unless everyone plays 500 games (and most of us don't have the time) our ratings can't be accurately determined.
Riot's matchmaking, in all likelihood, does it's job perfectly - each game has two teams with similarly rated players. The team with slightly higher rated players will receive less for winning (or lose more for losing) and the opposite for the lower rated team. This is a fair system.
The rating system is broken - it's sad when players can look before a game and know with a fairly high accuracy rate which teammates are going to be bad and which will be good. This means that Riot is leaving a lot of information on the table when it comes to rating (which, in only taking W/L they definitely are, and unfortunately they refuse to take anything else for the fear that players will pursue those items instead of trying to W). Nonetheless - Riot really should try something. With how popular this game is, they should be able to create a system which tracks recent and near-future performance of players and determines if a player who wins 50%-ish of their games has been regularly put on teams with players who went on to win >>50% or players who went on to win <<50% of their games. I.e. if I have a 50% win rate, but all my allies combined have a 40% win rate in their next 10 games, and my enemies combined have a 55% win rate in their next 10 games, then I'm doing better than my current MMR and should rise.
Alas, I'm getting off topic. Point is simply matchmaking is relatively easy and is probably being done correctly, rating individual players in a team game is extremely difficult and on top of that Riot is using a relatively simple method to do it (rather than trying to work out something more complicated to add valuable information).
