If my MMR is high enough to be put to 99 LP when I lose promos

Tentakill Myself·Sep 26, 2015·43 votes·2,301 views

Then maybe I should just get promoted instead of having to do something that is purely decided on luck?

33 Comments

Twink Lover 69Sep 26, 20155 votes

Hmmmm. Nope, I got 99lp three times in the last week. Others should suffer with me.

DocShephardSep 26, 20159 votes

I'm thinking he means that he lost his promo and was dropped back to 99 lp. This is pretty ridiculous.

Riot should really get rid of promos except between tiers.

SukishooSep 27, 20152 votes

Yeah, if they only existed on going from tier 1 to tier 5 then it'd be fine but otherwise they are pretty stupid.

Dunkrius2gSep 27, 20151 votes

If that is the case, then they should atleast make you gain 10-15 lp per win.

PennsSep 26, 20152 votes

Soloq in general is purely decided on luck unless you played over like 500 games lel.

JariSep 26, 20156 votes

The system itself isn't based off of luck, but the problem is the demand that's given for going from, say, Silver III to Silver II. You have to win a game to get to 100 LP, then you have to win 2/3 games. That's, at least, a 75% win rate for those games, which is crazy.

PennsSep 26, 20151 votes

Why is it not based on luck? 5v5 team game with random people + champion picks having a huge impact seems pretty random to me tbh.

JariSep 26, 20151 votes

Based on the statistics, if you were to have an afk every single game, you should actually be climbing because your enemies are more likely to get it than your opponents. Plus champion picks don't decide crap. I've seen people pick Cait into Vayne and then feed their asses off to the Vayne.

PennsSep 26, 20151 votes

your enemies are more likely to get it than your opponents

Doesnt make a lot of sense kek. Even if your enemies have a higher chance to get an afk than you, its till just a "chance", thus its entirely based on randomness. And afks are only one small factor. Also champ picks do decide a lot, guess why that Vayne won against Cait lel.

JariSep 26, 20151 votes

The person never played Cait before, showing it by Eing into the enemy team. Sorry, let me use a better example. According to our great board overlords, Darius is extremely broken. Here's the catch. I ain't seeing it. Hell, which a lot of these "op" champs I ain't seeing it.

But if pick is everything, why not just insta-lock all of the broken OP ones, even if you don't know them. I mean, they're auto win right? Picks are everything. There's no skill in league. That's what I'm getting from that.

PennsSep 27, 20151 votes

I rarely play League atm, but when I do I pick whatever I want because its more fun to play. I rather play a champ thats fun for me than play a boring ass broken champ that would make me win way easier...

Im not saying picks are everything, but I am saying that they are a huge factor. Like, a Garen, Elise, Lux, Vayne and Thresh team is most likely gonna win against a team with weaker champs, regardless of their skill (not really regardless, but if they got matched against in ranked there wont be that big of a difference). A game which you get matched with and against 9 random people in cant be all that skill based.

JariSep 27, 20152 votes

Ya. There is no skill involved in the Solo queue world right now. That's why people can easily climb second accounts or more to their main account's level. It's not because they're good, but because our lord RNGesus blessed them forever to have perfect luck.

PennsSep 27, 20151 votes

Obviously you win most games when youre diamond, playing on a bronze account. But you probably wont when youre playing like gold, on a silver account... See how I cant write "a diamond player wins every single game in bronze", because its not true. Because of luck.

JariSep 27, 20151 votes

So if I ever beat anyone higher rank than me, it's luck. But if I lose to them, I'm unlucky because I ended up against them? All I'm getting from you is that the game is luck, which it's not. The Match Making actually puts people with similar MMR with and against you. To actually quote somebody, "Jeremy," who is someone Riot has actually shared with the community.

"There are unwinnable games, but there's always something you could have done better in every game." Maybe if you worked on fixing some flaws, it'd be better? Also would like to note how little I hear plats and diamonds cry about luck compared to those gold and lower.

PennsSep 27, 20151 votes

Im not crying about luck, its a fact. Like, are you gonna tell me that a game where you get placed with and against 9 totally random people is not generally based on randomness? They can be smurfs, they can be retarded, they can have connection problems, they can pick OP champs, they can pick useless champs, they can first time a hard to play champ,... All of those things make you win or lose, Im not only complaining about losses, Im complaining about undeserved wins as well. There is so much random stuff going on, how is that skill based at all? Lets say you are in the elo you deserve and lets assume everyone in there is just as good as you, what decides games then? Thats basically how it is in LCS as well.

JariSep 27, 20151 votes

The thing is, everyone you get stuck with was there for a reason. People's attitudes aren't luck. If they are, then working must luck too, since you might end up without a day of work. Oh no the power of RNGesus has commanded that random must happen here!

If it's honestly based around luck, go into ranked exactly like that. Go on, I'm waiting. Just go in and don't even try because luck will have it you'll win sometimes even if you afk.

PennsSep 27, 20151 votes

Skill (or playing at all lol) just improves your chances of winning, luck is still what decides. For example a challenger might win a 4v5 in silver, but he would still lose a flat out 1v5. But a gold player probably wont win a 4v5 in silver unless his team gets really fed with really strong champs.

Dextix LTSep 27, 20151 votes

I suggest you to go to school and ask your math teacher to tell you about something called "Probability theory". And how it shows that this game isnt based on luck but rather your skill and being able to interact with your teammates.

Also, it is quite funny that every in silver/bronze cries that this game is about luck, yet pros have proven it 100 times that skill is the main factor of this game.

Berry BlastSep 27, 20151 votes

Also, it is quite funny that every in silver/bronze cries that this game is about luck, yet pros have proven it 100 times that skill is the main factor of this game.

have you ever seen a "pro" win with an afk and someone who is trolling in his game by intent feeding? neither have i and thats about 1/3 games in silver

PennsSep 27, 20152 votes

Skill is the main factor of this game is you play enough games. Id roughly say that you lose like 40% of your games without really being able to do anything with your skill level, you win like 40% of your games even if you did badly and only ~20% of your games are decided by your skill. And that is based on luck/ bad luck until you play like 1000 games.

Like I said, skill compared to the other 9 people in your game just makes the random factor smaller, its still there.

BluePolarizerSep 28, 20151 votes

I'm just gonna put it this way: I'm plat. But whenever I play in gold (due to teambuilder MMR) I get insanely fed. Like, I'm playing Volibear 1st time and I go 17-3 fed. You try to leave kills for your teammates but the enemy is almost jumping into your mouth to feed you.

Meanie40Sep 27, 20151 votes

{quoted}

Based on the statistics, if you were to have an afk every single game, you should actually be climbing because your enemies are more likely to get it than your opponents.

{quoted}

Doesnt make a lot of sense kek.

Look at it this way.

You know you're not going to AFK. (Or else, why would you play in the first place?) Therefore, there are only 4 spots on your team that can be filled by an AFK player, while there are 5 spots on the enemy team that can. Therefore, if you are randomly deciding one player is AFK the whole match, the odds are 55/45 that the AFK is on the enemy team.

PennsSep 27, 20151 votes

I know it does make sense (tho this is kind of flawed, yet I hear it all the time), but he wrote "your enemies are more likely to get it than your opponents" which doesnt make sense because.. you know :D

Tails DollSep 27, 20151 votes

Even if the enemie is more likely to get the afk, that doenst mean the system is fair. Stadistics are weird

There is a 50/50 chance I get tails while tosting a coin

Yet I can get only one tail if a tost a coin 10 times.

IcyPepperSep 26, 20151 votes

But you only need to win one game to get back in your promos?

I know the system sucks currently, but you shouldn't be promoted if you lost your promos. I mean, I'm just saying. MMR doesn't promote you, winning your promos do

But I've heard they're changing the system next season? I'm not sure, I wish I knew more.

JariSep 27, 20152 votes

The problem is, based on just those 4 games (assuming it's not going from say silver to gold) he needs a 75% win rate after that. If it's to silver to gold, we got a 66% win rate demand in a system that expects a player to have a 50% win rate.

TrulyBlandSep 27, 20151 votes

{quoted}

The problem is, based on just those 4 games (assuming it's not going from say silver to gold) he needs a 75% win rate after that. If it's to silver to gold, we got a 66% win rate demand in a system that expects a player to have a 50% win rate.

By that logic you also shouldn't lose any promos, because the system also demands a winrate of lower than 33% for you to lose a promo. You have to look at chances, not winrates. And when you look at chances it becomes kinda obvious why they did a system like that: If you have a factual chance to win of higher than 50% (in other words: The system underestimates you) your chance to win a best of N (with N being literally whatever) becomes even larger. If your chance to win is lower than 50%, it becomes even lower in a series. And when your chance to win is 50%, for very obvious reasons, you have a 50% chance of winning a series.

Best of series are a great way of creating a barrier that is extremely easy to beat if the system currently underestimates you, extremely hard to beat if you don't actually deserve to be as high, and they are more or less the same as winning a best of 1 (aka: one game) if the system has a good estimate of your skills.

And even if you're unlucky: Unless you're superstitious, that's nothing you can't fix by simply trying again. Law of big numbers ftw.

JariSep 27, 20151 votes

How is that demanding a winrate lower than 33%? Think about what you just said. If I'm going from silver to gold, then let's say I won 1 game to get there (because 99 lp.) Then I win 2 of my 5 games and lose the other 3. I have a 50% win rate there and I still lose. 50<33 according to your math.

If you're entering your promo's over and over at 99 lp, chances are you should be going up since it keeps putting you as high as it can. The problem is the demand for it. If they want it for going up huge amounts like silver to gold, then keep that there. The 75% win rate demand (Assuming you basically keep repeat trying it) for III to II is too much.

TrulyBlandSep 28, 20151 votes

{quoted}

How is that demanding a winrate lower than 33%? Think about what you just said. If I'm going from silver to gold, then let's say I won 1 game to get there (because 99 lp.) Then I win 2 of my 5 games and lose the other 3. I have a 50% win rate there and I still lose. 50<33 according to your math.

If you're entering your promo's over and over at 99 lp, chances are you should be going up since it keeps putting you as high as it can. The problem is the demand for it. If they want it for going up huge amounts like silver to gold, then keep that there. The 75% win rate demand (Assuming you basically keep repeat trying it) for III to II is too much.

My bad, misread what you wrote... I figured you were talking about a bo3. Now, first off: My argument still stands. Looking at the winrates is absurdly misleading because it's not normalized. Secondly: It makes no sense whatsoever to count the last game that lead to the series in the weird way that you are doing it. What if you lose that game? You could argue that then you "lost" your series... but in fact if you win the next one you are at the exact same position you left of. And if you then win the next 2/3 games, you'll still have won your series, but at a lower overall winrate. Lose 1.000.000 games, then win the next 1.000.003 games and you are basically at a 50% winrate. Fact is that if you count the games before the actual series, any winrate above 50% can get you to the next tier/division. Want another reason why winrates are misleading? What if climbing up was determined by a single game at the end. Would you assume that's absolutely impossible to achieve, because it would require a 100% winrate?

XonraSep 27, 20151 votes

Had this happen earlier today and I was seriously confused. Lost my promo, 99 lp right back into promo after the win. I was like "wtf"

Berry BlastSep 27, 20151 votes

a great example is earlier in one of my glorious games we had a nasus top with heal and 60 stacks after 36 minute game we also had a support annie who did nothing but afk farm until someone came and killed her then we had a lee sin who would last hit with his ultimate on kills but 50% of the time he just saves the enemy. something along those lines happens every other game or there are people that have no clue what half of the champions are in the game and try to coach other players by flaming the entire time and die while typing