Boards›Gameplay

6 (or 9) things that should change about ranked solo/duo/flex ques + my crybaby rant

Evil Shawn·8/28/2017, 9:43:52 AM·1 votes·353 views

  1. Create some sort of tutorial about runes/masteries that a player must complete before they're allowed to do ranked at all. Also, require a certain amount of tier 3 runes to have been purchased by the player. (Lets say at least 20,000 ip in purchased runes is required and all players get 5 pages for free to start with).

  2. Require a certain amount of normal WINS be achieved before a player is allowed to do ranked at all. (Lets say at least 200 match made SOLO QUE wins)

  3. Increase the required owned champs to 40 from 20 to be able to do ranked at all.

  4. Require mastery 3+ to have been achieved on at least one of every type of champion (assassin, mage, tank ex.) before a player is allowed to do ranked at all.

  5. Bar players who have been punished for any reason from playing ranked for a certain amount of days (depending on the severity of their demerit), to help eliminate toxic players from being in ranked ques.

  6. Never allow a player to demote an entire league unless they have 10+ losses at 0 LP AND have been consistently reported in those losses leading up to the 10th game. (to prevent someone from sitting in a league and trolling). Also, allow for decaying rank to exist for players who haven't done ranked que in a while, basically the same system we have now in that regard.

Here are the less serious ones but I still think are worth a discussion:

  1. Static LP gains/losses? See 9.

  2. Remove all promos

  3. Using the same system that rates a player for their performance during a game (like C, B, A, S, S+) is what determines their LP gains/losses (not yours or enemies mmr). So for example, it would be possible for someone to gain/lose a maximum of 33 LP depending on their performance. This way, you don't get punished with losing a predetermined amount of mmr ( based on you and your opponents mmr) in a game where you go 20/0/0 but your whole team feeds and thus you lose. Likewise, undeserving players who feed but the rest of their team picks up the slack and wins for them won't get that unfair predetermined LP gain. I firmly believe that your performance in an individual game matters. Just because its a 'team game' doesn't mean you should only ever be punished/rewarded by the very end outcome of that game. That isn't how real sports work, that isn't how this game should work.

Now, here is my rant:

I'm not going to post anything about how the mechanics of like mmr and shit works or anything like that. I just want to say, that there is no way its balanced and fair.

Last season I made it to S2 almost S1. When this season started, it fucking placed me in B5 and its been impossible to get out of bronze ever since. I often play normals with gold, plat, even diamond friends from college. In those games there is literally no difference in the skill/expertise of the players I end up with/against in my "bronze" tier ranked games. Sometimes, I even find myself educating and coaching my PLAT friends! Bronze/silver elo is literally the biggest cesspool of completely unbalanced garbage, getting out of it is at this point UNDENIABLY, EVIDENTLY NOTHING BUT LUCK BASED.

I would bet my life on the FACT that MOST (obviously not all) people who have a league rank of gold+ are only there through the LUCK of playing when the game was young and a bit more balanced with less players and are thus 'grandfathered' in their rank in a sense. Either that, or they have a full 5 person team that effectively avoids all of the trash (trolls/dc's/poor skill/poor attitude/poor communication) you find in solo/duo/flex games.

As I said previously, I see little to no difference at all in the skill of players I'm with in norms who are ranked gold+. The reason being that most EVERYONE in bronze/silver doesn't actually belong there. Its full of smurfs, casuals, actual bad players (a small %) and then unlucky players like me who have been trapped in this hell of needing to literally win 80% of the time to progress at all (Right now I'm literally gaining/losing 17/32lp per game).

I want to propose a thought and a question:

Lets imagine someone plays the game on a regular basis (say at least one game per week at a bare minimum). Throughout their time playing, they eventually achieve the league rank of Silver 5. Now lets imagine (in a perfect hypothetical world) this player begins to plateau in their progression, winning exactly 50% of their games (per every 20 games, random w/l streaks scattered in between). Does this mean that the player is actually bad, or "worse than S5" and therefor deserves to eventually be demoted back to B1 (even though hypothetically, they perfectly plateau at 50% w/l)? Is this plateau suggestive of a magic 'loss in skill, knowledge and experience' thus justifying them being demoted? Even though they were good enough to achieve the rank in the first place?

The point I'm trying to make, is that as long as a person is consistently playing the game (proving they still have an understanding of it and aren't returning from a long hiatus) it should never be possible for them to be demoted an entire league EVER (that means even when a new season rolls around). Of rouse the concept of decaying status should still exist (if they are purposely avoiding ranked or if they are returning from a long time of not playing).

It is my opinion that since I almost achieved gold league, that is where I belong, forever (as long as I'm consistently playing the game). I was stuck in high silver for some time struggling when this new season came and FUCKED ME.

Now the game is a complete joke. I've taken to making a 'smurf' or what I call, a FAIR CHANCE and it fucking places me in silver. But I want this account, the one I've spent all my money and most of my time on to be in silver.

3 Comments

DrCrackerr858/28/2017, 9:55:36 AM1 votes

i didnt bother ready past your 9 reasons. These are all really stupid to be honest. Especially the ones with holding players from ranked matches. There are different leagues for a reason, so people that dont know wtf they are doing go to bronze 5 and figure it out. Player 200 games of normals is ALOT of games to play just to start ranked. I could go on but this would cause a shit storm if any of this went through. Horrible ideas.

EternalSmiley8/28/2017, 12:00:39 PM1 votes

TL:DR at the bottom if you do not desire to read the entire post.

They wouldn't do rune page tutorials though. Are you aware they are getting rid of runes and masteries during preseason (link to article at the bottom of this post). It will be something new and in that event they won't create a tutorial that will soon be obsolete. As for the 'play enough games before you can do ranked, or have enough champs before you do ranked' i shall tackle that in 2 easy to read paragraphs for everyone's convenience.

1. Playing X number of games as a Ranked Unlock requirement. There IS a benefit to this as sometimes the games that you play getting to level 30 might not be enough for some players however as with all things there are pros AND cons. If somebody was good and wanted to do ranked they would have to grind out games just to finish that portion of unlocking ranked. Then the interesting thing would be with long time players, or anyone who plays 2+ seasons. For players who already played one season, for the next one do they need to play x number of games again during the new year to unlock Rank or do they just dive right in. We already do a certain amount of that to a degree with the placement matches so adding onto that for returning players will agitate more than alleviate.

**2. **Doubling the amount of champs you need to own before playing ranked can do 1 of 2 major things (ignoring the minor consequences). It can potentially earn more money for riot but it can also decrease enthusiasm for ranked. New players who often play competitive games and are looking for another one might be discouraged to even keep at it as 40 champs isn't even cheap with the IP prices that most of them have, nor would some like the idea that it makes them feel like they are forced to buy Riot Points to even play ranked by buying champions. And let's not forget, not everyone wants to or has money to spend on games they just got started into.

What i do feel you are proposing is putting up Ranked walls everywhere in order to force players more time to learn the game. That is fine, you have your valid points, however it doesn't garrentee still they will be good when they do unlock it if they keep at it. Nor will learning to play league in norms translate 1:1 into ranked. Both have different mindsets for example. And you can prepare all you want but it is not the same as simply playing ranked. You can do all you can to prepare for college in high school but it's not enough, you can't go into college with the mentality oh im 100% prepared i'm fine and good. It is different, even though it is similar and one mustn't stop learning because one did all one could up to that point.

TL: DR -----All in all my Response is this.

Too many and/or too high requirements to unlock ranked game mode isn't self-beneficial. A balance would be more desirable. That isn't saying what we have is perfect either. A Tutorial on runes will already be obsolete, though a tutorial on the system that replaces runes/mastery is an intriguing idea. Even if the exact suggestions you mention in your OP were implemented, it isn't easy to say how effective it would be or how damaging (or not) to the games long term success it would result in.

LINK: Runes Reforged (The Runes and Masteries Replacement system) http://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/features/coming-preseason-runes-reforged