Why matchmaking is the real problem of the game

GripaAviara··2 votes·402 views

It's clear. The game has changed. The increase in damage and lowering in defensive capabilities of towers and teams is a fact. This leads to faster paced games. But also, since the damage scales a lot through items, to snowbally one-sided games.

And it's simple to explain: https://www.leagueofgraphs.com/rankings/win-stats , if we look here , win after first tower is 70%. 1 tower tips the balanced by 20% in favor of one team.

I want you to stop and picture what happens when every lane is nearly balanced in skill. The game will progress slowly. What happens if one of the lanes is heavily outmatched? Well, it creates pressure for the objectives.

All it takes is a little unbalance to tip the game. Now pair this with the damage that is currently in-game. It will simply accentuate the problem. An outmatched lane will die more often tipping the game even further into chaos. Remember, early, when a laner dies, they will not only feed the gold from the kill, but also will give free CS to the opponent.

**Ask yourself, have you experienced this? : Being in an engaging lane smartly battling your opponent, where neither you or the opponent gets a definite advantage, only to get a push from a lane that is 5 kills ahead and solid CS on which you feel helpless to completely destroy your lane **

And yeah, shiet happens. But how often were you either pointing 'gun' or in front of the 'barrel'?

So why is matchmaking the real problem then?

First, let's look at this old post from Zileas, VP of Game Design http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=12029 . While things have changed probably, most likely the structures remain somewhat the same. 2 lines draw the eye:

  1. Once in the pool, the system starts trying to find you matches, the goal being to get a match where the teams are equal and both have a 50% chance of winning.
  2. We use various proprietary methods to identify players that are significantly more skilled than a typical newb, and boot their rating up a bunch behind the scenes when we notice this.

What can we extract from this: the matches are made with a 50% odds of winning, but if you are performing well the system boost your rating.

All is fine, except if we look on stats from various matches we can clearly see that they are not lane paired on skills. So a top lanner of skill X will not be matched vs another top lanner of the same skill. Statistically this should be compensated by other lanes. Except here comes the problem with _ boot their rating up a bunch behind the scenes when we notice this._ If someone that was overperfoming with a champ/lane gets on another lane, he will def lose the boost up rating advantage. And it happens. A lot. Just look at players match history.

Bottom line is, if Riot wants to keep the snowbally pace, it's fine. But they need to tweak the matchmaking accordingly. The current system worked fine in a slower envirounment, but now the limitations are starting to show. They need to balance the game based on laner skills, not based just the overall team MMR. An unbalanced lane will trigger a snowball fest. And people are getting super frustrated.

22 Comments

haaaaaaalp3 votes

So if I remember correctly, this "boot up" part of the system only applies to new accounts to counteract smurfs. It does not exist in ranked or anyone who played enough games to get off of the newbie queue.

Any problem that you are seeing in games post level 30 or in ranked is due to other issues in the game.

GripaAviara1 votes

No, i doesn't say that it only applies to new players. It just says in another line that they try not to matchmake new players with old.

Pandeonor2 votes

{quoted}

And it's simple to explain: https://www.leagueofgraphs.com/rankings/win-stats , if we look here , win after first tower is 70%.

And it was in the years before..... how much? https://web.archive.org/web/20140719051837/http://www.leagueofgraphs.com:80/rankings/win-stats

7/2014: 70% 7/2015: 68% 7/2017: 71%

That is just one example taking 1 stat in order to proove an own opinion. But without any sense.

"Simple to explain" is just another fact. That it is all but simple. And that random facts don´t proove anything.

GripaAviara1 votes

I dont get your point really, did I said that changed since last years?

DeathBurst1 votes

No, but you did argue that the match-making was good enough before, but isn't good enough anymore because the game is now too snowbally. Except the stat you used to prove the game is too snowbally now didn't change, so the game was probably just as snowbally before. So your reasoning isn't valid, and that was their point.

GripaAviara1 votes

No, i said is more snowbally because, quote: "since the damage scales a lot through items, to snowbally one-sided games."

The turret is argument for one-sided games, you get your items faster if you outmatch your lane and get early fast kills, you have the strength help other lane to early take the first turret, and bam 20% more chance just like that. It's linked to the next paragraph:

I want you to stop and picture what happens when every lane is nearly balanced in skill.

DeathBurst1 votes

EDIT: oh my god. I actually went and read the article you linked after posting that comment. It dates back to the bloody closed beta!! So, the "boost" you mention is absolutely irrelevant now, it was only used to bootstrap the system during the very beginning of the game. The system has tremendously evolved since then, most notably with the addition of Position Select two years ago, and there has been tons of posts and comments about it. There is still a special boost (the one Haaaalp and I mentioned) which is used for new accounts to differentiate smurfs from real newbies, but apart from that, it's just a variant of Elo: you win, your MMR increases, you lose, your MMR decreases, game by game, and that's all.


The matches are not "lane paired on skills", because all the people in a given game are supposed to be at the same skill level. If they are not, it's usually because of premades, but the system can't do anything about it, and this is why there are a lot of restrictions on premades in Ranked.

And even without the boost you mention (that only applies to new accounts, as Haaalp mentioned), people not getting their main role/champ will not perform at their usual rating, even if it wasn't boosted. Everyone most likely lose more games when they are auto-filled than when they aren't. But well, do you want to get back to the time of pick order and getting 30 s to negotiate with your team before the game begins? For once, I wouldn't go back to that, given the choice.

GripaAviara1 votes

They are not on the same skill, the skill discrepancies in silver are absurd. And I'm not talking about just about smurfers. Is the team overall average skill base the same, maybe. But if you read the post it's not that relevant anymore in a snowbally game

(Also let's take a smurfer, if the system is pairing skill based then smurfing would not be such a problem, but it is.)


The article is old, yes, i mentioned this. But i'm 90% sure that the current matchmaking is an iteration of the original algorithm

DeathBurst1 votes

Of course the current version is "an iteration". But the specific point you're complaining about, that's the mechanism which was put in place to bootstrap the system, to give it a way to start from scratch before LoL had an established player base. It's totally irrelevant to today's match-making. It's THE one point you can be sure isn't used anymore, and you managed to focus on that...

And even if that wasn't the case, there is "old" and there is "god-damn fucking old, geez I swear". An article from 4 years ago is old and outdated, but an article from 8 and a half years ago is from before the game was even officially released, before it was even considered "complete".

They are not on the same skill, the skill discrepancies in silver are absurd.

But the system isn't matching "any 5 people from Silver" in a team. First off, it doesn't look at Rank, it looks at your MMR, which is a hidden stat. Second, it uses much thinner intervals than just "Silver", and in most games the difference in MMR between all the players will be equivalent to no more than a single Division, not a whole tiers. A Silver 3 player will play with/against other Silver 3 players (or at least, players with an MMR equivalent to Silver 3).

So yes, people in a (Ranked) game are all the same skill, unless there are premades involved. And yes, if premades are involved, it fucks everything up, if you let a Silver 5 and a Gold 1 queue together, it's not gonna end well, but the match-making can't do anything about it. As long as Riot doesn't want to increase yet again the restrictions to queue in Ranked together, we'll have to deal with that. But specifically, it has nothing to do with that "boost" from Zileas post you're complaining about.

(Also let's take a smurfer, if the system is pairing skill based then smurfing would not be such a problem, but it is.)

The system IS pairing skill based, but it takes some times to estimate accurately the skills of a fresh account. Smurfs can be a bit annoying before the estimation is accurate enough, but they quickly climb to the level they deserve, and they don't stay in Bronze and ruin other people's game forever. And I say "Bronze", but what I really mean is "Bronze-equivalent MMR", because again, the system looks at your MMR, not your Rank. So even if your smurf dodges all their Promo Series to stay in Bronze, they will have a Rank of Bronze, but they won't be matched in game with other Bronzes.

GripaAviara1 votes

So yes, people in a (Ranked) game are all the same skill, unless there are premades involved.

This is just an assumption you made, which can be easily refuted by looking at your match history, or mine or anybody elses that's bellow plat. You confuse MMR with skill. While MMR is influence by skill, MMR in team games is not influenced solely by skill. Eventually having tons of games it will reach a point where the MMR will reflect the skill, but that's something not feasable .

I can tell you about tons of games where teammates don't know the basic objective order or how to initiate a split push or even buy pink wards. So no, the teammates are not equally skilled. I agree that the overall team might be balanced, but the idea of the topic is balancing the lanes not the overall team MMR

I don't know why you feel this urge to refute the argument that the current match making is not balanced. I'm looking at your soloq match history and you clearly can see discrepances in skill lane base in your teams (like that velkoz vs diana recent game) . I'm super curious about this, and I would grateful for an answer

DeathBurst1 votes

MMR isn't skills exactly, but it's the best, most accurate quantitative measure of something as intangible as "skills" as we have. So, yeah, basically, MMR is skills. And the "tons of games" argument has nothing to do with the fact that it's a team games. Chess Masters also need hundreds of games to reach their "true" MMR.

I can tell you about tons of games where teammates don't know the basic objective order or how to initiate a split push or even buy pink wards. So no, the teammates are not equally skilled.

And yet they are. "Skills" is a multi-faceted concept. If they don't know the basic objective, maybe they CS better, or are much better mechanically, and carry through sheer outplays. But the gist of it is, they win just as often as you, against just as good opponents as you. So their overall skills are just as valuable as yours. Deal with it.

I agree that the overall team might be balanced, but the idea of the topic is balancing the lanes not the overall team MMR

I never said that the overall team is balanced. You keep saying that, and "agreeing" with that, but it's your argument, not mine. My point is that you don't need to balance the lanes because everyone is of the same level. And the idea of the topic is nonsensical. Even if I'm wrong (and I'm not, but even if) how in hell would you actually "balance lanes"? By looking at the position selected in lobbies? But nothing actually forces people to go in the position they selected. People swap and trade all the time. And what about the Jungler? A Jungler doesn't really have to beat the enemy Jungler, it has to beat the enemy laners. Put 2 "lane balanced" Diamond Junglers in a Gold match, it won't be fun for anyone. Balancing lanes is a terrible horrible idea. Impossible to implement, super easy to game and abuse if it was somehow implemented nevertheless, and not even effective to reach your actual goal (which I assume is more fun and entertaining matches for everyone, and not the lane balancing itself).

(Oh, and you may think I sound arrogant, but Riot engineers confirmed my understanding of the system a couple weeks ago, in that dev blog, go have a look at the comments from Riot Gortok: https://nexus.leagueoflegends.com/en-us/2018/02/dev-matchmaking-real-talk/ And by the way, that's a far more recent and useful post than your 8-year-old post, if you're interested in matchmaking. There were also Questions about match-making on Ask Riot.)

I don't know why you feel this urge to refute the argument that the current match making is not balanced.

I urge to refute the argument because the argument is fucking bullshit and I'm tired of people complaining about match-making for no good reasons. There are enough REAL problems to solve without wasting time with myths and lies and disinformation. Premades are a real problem, the huge discrepancy in match-making quality between Solo/Duo and Flex is a problem. Auto-fill is, if not exactly a problem, at least a sub-optimal situation. Imaginary boosts and so called lane balancing on the other hand, are not real issues.

Concrete example: I spent last night in Flex with 2 buddies, we were Gold/Plat/Diamond, and we were matched against low gold opponents, because our MMR in Flex isn't aware of our true skills. We won 5 of 6 games, and I'm not gonna lie it was fun from our side, but it's certainly not what I call a fair match. You wanna talk about match-making issues, go talk about that, for instance.

you clearly can see discrepances in skill lane base in your teams (like that velkoz vs diana recent game)

This is just ridiculous. No matter how evenly matched people are, one is still gonna win, and the other is gonna lose. Yeah, Vel'Koz won this match and carried. Now go check their full profile. The Diana is a solid player ending in Gold two Seasons in a row, and this was a match at Silver 2 MMR, so she clearly wasn't out of place. All players in that game were clearly high-Silver/Low-Gold, all of the same skill level, as I claimed.

If you look more closely: Diana was not on her main role, she's an ADC main. Humm, let's check the MF who was actually given ADC, then? Hey, guess what, she was premade with the Leona, and probably caused the Diana to be auto-filled, she was out of her element, had a bad game and didn't understand how to play from behind (which, in her defense, is super hard on Divers/Assassins). So what was the issue this game? Premades and auto-fill, and not skill discrepancy. As I claimed.

So, can we stop right here?

GripaAviara1 votes

Ok, it's your opinion that matchmaking is perfect, I respect it.

But you bring 0 concrete arguments to the table otherwise. You just said Diana was outmatched because in lane he is not skilled enough compared to velkoz. It's exactly my argument, that the matchmaking doesn't take this in consideration and the game gets fucked because of this and people are having a bad tilting time.

In this case you are right, there were premades, but this sort of misplacements happen all the time without premades, i just took the last game to prove i don't have to dig to get to the point.

How can the system keep track of this?

It's simple as hell. Keep a role MMR deviation stat. You have a base MMR that slowly grows and a role MMR. Base MMR + Role MMR = Matchmaking MMR. And this is just one raw solution. There are countless better ones, but more complex. The thing is they don't want to do it. The game works this way and is not their priority so they invest resource into other stuff


I did not link that post because it says mostly the same thing as the old one (proving that is an iteration) but with less concrete details, in the PR manner of assuring everybody and also contradicts itself like: "As your MMR goes up, you’ll stop being the “standout” player and your teammates’ skills will be higher. This can also happen to anyone else in the game, which can give the impression that you have “worse” teammates, when really they might just be newcomers to your skill bracket." (first part, your teammates’ skills will be higher then just be newcomers to your skill bracket, which is bullshit because the perspective is from you, the one that climbed so the second part has no connection to the previous idea, is just put there because of the lack of a real argument; but i don't want to delve into this, it's just specualation and totally not the point i try to make)

DeathBurst2 votes

Are you for real? Let's compare a few quotes...

Me:

There are enough REAL problems to solve

You:

it's your opinion that matchmaking is perfect


Me:

that's the mechanism which was put in place to bootstrap the system, to give it a way to start from scratch before LoL had an established player base. It's totally irrelevant to today's match-making. It's THE one point you can be sure isn't used anymore,

You:

you bring 0 concrete arguments to the table


Me:

The Diana is a solid player ending in Gold two Seasons in a row, and this was a match at Silver 2 MMR, so she clearly wasn't out of place.

You:

You just said Diana was outmatched because in lane he is not skilled enough compared to velkoz.


So what about you stop deforming everything I say, and you start discussing in good faith, huh?

And your stuff about "main MMR + role MMR"? It's useless. Can you be sure Diana wasn't assigned Bot and decided to trade in Champ Select? Like it happens all the time? Of course you can't. Except anything that happens in Champ Select, it's too late for the match-making to take it into account. There is no way to ensure to positions assigned will be the positions actually played. And I already said it 2 posts ago, among the "0 concrete arguments" I didn't bring.

I also asked you about Junglers, because Junglers don't directly fight each others but assist their laners. So even perfectly paired Junglers (more evenly paired than by taking ALL players in the game from the same MMR, if that was somehow magically possible to do), that will do nothing if they are not of the same levels as all the laners. But surprisingly, that's not what you decided to reply to. I wonder why...

Pffft.

GripaAviara1 votes

That's why there's a base MMR, in case there's a swap. The role MMR is just a deviation.

Team is matchmaked at 1000 base MMR . Then the game looks a the 1000 base MMR pool and tries to make a team based on role MMR. Take the Base MMR as the current MMR algorithm. Nothing changes there. Role MMR its an additional factor. If the team swaps roles, good for them. I wouldn't change anything in that context as it's now.

I don't get why would you oppose a better algorithm, just so you can showcase superiority

you:

If you look more closely: Diana was not on her main role, she's an ADC main.

me:

you clearly can see discrepances in skill lane base in your teams (like that velkoz vs diana recent game)

So yeah: "You just said Diana was outmatched because** in lane **he is not skilled enough compared to velkoz.", i stand beside this argument. in lane clearly was refering in the context to MID


I didn't respond to jungle because i thought it was obvious. It's just another role, there are parameters to a successful jungler, so you can compute a MMR. The idea is not to get the same style jungler (or role) vs each other, but to get aprox skilled junglers overall

DeathBurst2 votes

I don't oppose a better algorithm, your suggestion is horribly flawed. I mean, if it was easy to do, Riot would have done it already. There was an Ask Riot a few months ago where Ghostcrawler mentioned this very idea himself, so Riot is evidently aware of it. If they haven't implemented it yet, it's because it's far from being as simple as you make it sound. And Im' not trying to "showcase superiority", I'm just trying to explain you WHY it's not that simple.

For starter, the match-making CANNOT KNOW THERE IS A SWAP. The swap happens AFTER the match-making is done. Like, I can't believe I have to spell it out, but you know, the match-making select 10 suitable players, properly matched with their correct "lane MMR" (as if that was easy to do... hint: it's not), then people arrive in the Champion Select lobby. And HERE, Jung and Top decide to swap, and suddenly your properly matched lane by lane players are not properly matched anymore. And they are not even properly matched based on their "main MMR", because the match-making DID take into account the "lane MMR" already before creating the lobby, so it's an even worse situation than without a "lane MMR" at all.

And Jungle is not "just another role". Junglers don't fight each other. Your system making sure both Junglers have the same "lane MMR" (for whatever it's worth) is not useful, if Junglers are not also of the same skill level as all the other laners. A good Jungler can feed itself off a bad laner, so balancing lanes isn't that important anyway, it's balancing the whole team and making sure that everyone has the same level that matters. And Jungler is only the most obvious case. Top with TP Ganks and Mid with River Roams can do the same with to a lesser extent.

GripaAviara1 votes

Lanners don't fight each other either by that logic. Counter jungling, counter ganking are all things junglers do when they fight each other. And it's irelevant, there are other perf metrics than plain KDA

As for the algorithm, I DOESNT NEED TO FREAKING KNOW THERE"S A SWAP. That's why the base MMR is in there. You create a match for 20vs20 players and based on lane MMR you create the 4x 5v5 teams that are more balanced. It will not be perfectly balanced, but it will be better.

I never said is that easy. This is just an outline. There are prob better solutions. The thing is there are solutions, it need's just dedication from Riot

DeathBurst2 votes

Lanners don't fight each other either by that logic.

Yeah?... Which is why I mentioned TP Ganks and River Roams, and argue that "lane MMR" doesn't really matter, even if it was easy to take into account. But that was only a secondary point. The main point is that it's not easy to take into account, it's hard as hell.

As for the algorithm, I DOESNT NEED TO FREAKING KNOW THERE"S A SWAP [...] It will not be perfectly balanced, but it will be better.

No it won't. If you make your balancing based on the assumption of a certain lane distribution, and you take into account the "lane MMR" for those specific lanes, and then the actual lane distribution isn't the one the match-making took into account, lane MMR are making the matching worse, not better. Even worse than with no lane MMR at all, because it pushes the balancing in a false direction compared to just using the base MMR. Concrete example: If you match me thinking I will go Bot, my worst role, and put me against weaker opponents than my "base MMR" indicates because of that, but then I swap and go Top, my best role, where I should have better opponents than my "base MMR" indicates, the lane MMR you use is not simply useless, it actually caused you to do the opposite of what was needed to get a balanced match.

I never said is that easy. This is just an outline. There are prob better solutions. The thing is there are solutions, it need's just dedication from Riot

Pfft. You did say it, though. "It's simple as hell. Keep a role MMR deviation stat. You have a base MMR that slowly grows and a role MMR. Base MMR + Role MMR = Matchmaking MMR. And this is just one raw solution." Except that this isn't a "raw solution", it's no solution at all. It's not simply "not perfect", it's actually detrimental to a good match-making, as I just illustrated above. And I didn't even mention how you can exploit this problem on purpose to game the algorithm, I just assumed it was an honest, good faith swap. Because if you want to "cheat", that's super easy too.

So, does a solution exist at all, somewhere? Yeah, probably. But, also probably, it's a super complicated one that needs to overhaul completely how the match-making works, including how people select roles and everything else in the pre-game flow. It's not just a problem you can solve with a couple of programmers hammering out a few lines of code. It's not just that "it needs dedication from Riot", and this is what irks me so much, to see you hand-wave it and conclude "yeah, Riot can just sort the details out themselves". Well, with enough time probably, but we're talking something of the order of a few years, if ever. not something easily done in a couple of months if only they were "dedicated" to it.

Kythers1 votes

the problem is autofill causes skewed matchups every time, even if a player is a diamond 5 toplaner, autofilling him in support makes him into a low plat player in a diamond game essentially

GripaAviara1 votes

I agree, autofill is part of the problem. But if they would matchmake based on lane skill, then the autofill would not be that harsh. Think about it, you have a an average MMR as base like now, but you account with small deviations in skill based on different lanes efficiency of the player.

More from Gameplay

More by GripaAviara