This new ranking system is a bunch of bullshit to hide the issue.

Onotori··46 votes·13,929 views

So, a diamond player is diamond, no matter what. They can swap roles, play new champs, all that -- but they're still diamond. They have a better understanding of the game, the champs, and all those little interactions you learn over time playing the game. A diamond ADC main who is playing mid for the first time ever will still dramatically outperform a silver mid main (assuming that diamond actually deserves their rank). Despite that, they could still lose because their bot lane decides to feed, and despite everything that diamond player does, they're unable to stop the snowball. That's got nothing to do with the diamond player in an offrole.

The issue is not people playing offroles and doing worse, it's that the ranked system does nothing to recognize each individual player -- it's all about the outcome of the game, which is determined by 9 other players who are out of your control. ######(Moreso these days than previous seasons, with how fucking absurd damage is)

If you want to make ranked fair for the individual, don't just cover up the issue like you're doing. Retool the ranked system to modify LP gains / losses based on your individual performance (not per game, but over an average that builds with every game you play), based on stats that are important to the role you play.

For example: A diamond player who was boosted feeds every game, and can't function in high ELO. But because they were carried by a booster, they got a rank they don't deserve, since ELO is based on nothing but the outcome of the game.

Now, with a proper ranked system, that person who paid for a boost is performing horribly every game, and so their LP gain is penalized, while the booster gains LP faster, eventually making the rank disparity too much, meaning the boostee can't be boosted anymore -- forcing them to either pay a new booster, or just give up and stay in their own rank.

A second example: A silver player who plays far better than most people up to say high plat can't climb because of bad teammates. With a system based on individual performance, even if the silver's teams are bad, if their performance is consistently higher, then they'll eventually climb to where they belong, since their LP losses are minimized, while they gain quite a bit more on winning.

If you wanna talk about fair matching, that seems pretty fair to me. But it doesn't artificially extend the average playtime of the population, so it doesn't have any kind of money making potential, and I know it won't happen.

TL;DR: Make a ranked system based on individual performance, and all the complaints go away.

68 Comments

DarkSoul19948 votes

I can tell you now, Ranked dies if it becomes based off individual performance. That said, I think you should lose less LP if one person loses a game for you single-handed.

I think that making the Ranked System become based on individual performance only rewards the so-called 'toxic soloQ players' who tend to play at the expense of their teammates.

Grunt6663 votes

{quoted}

I can tell you now, Ranked dies if it becomes based off individual performance. I think you should lose less LP if one person loses a game for you single-handed.

I think that making the Ranked System become based on individual performance only rewards the so-called 'toxic soloQ players' who tend to play at the expense of their teammates.

Disagree, rank will finally thrive, because no longer are you held hostage by that toxic "idont care if I win but instead of play normals i'll punish ranked players by ruining their game" solo q players. The real toxic players are the one who come to rank have no interest in trying to win, the entire point of ranked is to provide a competitive experience, that is why ranked que and normals que exists, yet many funzies types like you feel obligated to bring your passive aggressive toxic self to ranked and ruin games for others, and then QQ OMG TOXIC SOMEONE SAID IM BAD! as you then snicker to yourself that you got someone to report.

DarkSoul19944 votes

Literally, what?

MegaHuff3 votes

He's saying that there are people that go into competitive with the mindset of a normal game, and "oh it's just a game why so serious," or at least that's what I'm picking out of it.

While I do agree with that sentiment, and a little bit of the sentiment that individual performance should affect LP gain, or at least that one shouldn't be punished for somebody going 1/20 in their games, I still think it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

I believe the system that is/was in Overwatch (I played a handful of seasons in, but not anymore so I wouldn't know) is pretty similar, and it got abused by people who would one-trick champions and try to boost certain stats to make them "better" than other players of that said character.

I hate losing because somebody doesn't know how to stop 1v3ing as much as the next guy, but a system like that needs a lot of though put into it as to not be abused.

IainG101 votes

Just because a system needs a lot of thought doesn't mean it shouldn't be done; it should just be done carefully.

DarkSoul19942 votes

yet many funzies types like you feel obligated to bring your passive aggressive toxic self to ranked and ruin games for others, and then QQ OMG TOXIC SOMEONE SAID IM BAD! as you then snicker to yourself that you got someone to report.

Yeah but what the hell was this part about? I'm the least toxic type of SoloQ player.

TempName548467 votes

A diamond ADC main who is playing mid for the first time ever will still dramatically outperform a silver mid main (assuming that diamond actually deserves their rank).

LUL

A silver player who plays far better than most people up to say high plat can't climb because of bad teammates.

OMEGAFUCKINGLUL

TL;DR: Make a ranked system based on individual performance, and all the complaints go away.

so what happens to people that play smite nunu support, proxy singed, proxy trynd etc.?

KonJoo5 votes

what skill performence exactly ? damage output ? kda? gold ?

Grunt6662 votes

{quoted}

what skill performence exactly ? damage output ? kda? gold ?

They arleady have a system that is why you might get an A grade or maybe a C grade. ITs a culmination of things, but make no mistake the truly meaningful parts of this game are easily tracked by metrics, you might want to think doing the lowest dmg on your team as ADC but you pinged dragon each time makes you a super valuable teammate but you are wrong. Your KDA (important is the assists as well as kill and deaths) encompasses an incredible amount of "untangible" game skill, map awareness, moving to support teammates, taking advantage of right situations, avoid bad situations, application of dmg, etc....

So the current system would need some ehancing and tweeking but the idea that metrics like CS, gold earned, KDA, kill participation, dmg dealt, dmg healed are not very strong indicators of your skill and even more so when compared toy our teamamtes and the enemy team for your relative performance int he match would be extremely inaccurate.

FilDaFunk6 votes

Right, so support players risk their ELO to save their carries, now?

y0r1ck1 votes

Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think you needed the comma before now. Reading it with a break before the now implies that you're asking what happens now, and I don't think that's what you meant.

FilDaFunk1 votes

You have the correct implication but you missed out the fact its a response to the context, so the "now" (with or without the comma) is a reference to the time frame in which the changes exist.

The comma is not there in more common usage, but this is my preference. Grammar is a description of the conventions, rather than a set of definite rules.

y0r1ck1 votes

Got it. Turns out that you're just wrong. That comma should not be there. Thanks for making that clear.

FilDaFunk1 votes

K

Kaìju1 votes

So support players are supposed to risk their ELO for their carries?

y0r1ck1 votes

What...?

Kaìju2 votes

You didn't answer his question, you dodged it brining up grammar instead of answering it.

y0r1ck1 votes

Oh, I think he's right in general. He just has an extra comma where there shouldn't be one. For what it's worth, I did already upvote him.

Kaìju1 votes

But you didn't answer it, whether you agreed or not doesn't stop that you avoided the question.

Demoman781 votes

{quoted}

They arleady have a system that is why you might get an A grade or maybe a C grade. ITs a culmination of things, but make no mistake the truly meaningful parts of this game are easily tracked by metrics, you might want to think doing the lowest dmg on your team as ADC but you pinged dragon each time makes you a super valuable teammate but you are wrong. Your KDA (important is the assists as well as kill and deaths) encompasses an incredible amount of "untangible" game skill, map awareness, moving to support teammates, taking advantage of right situations, avoid bad situations, application of dmg, etc....

So the current system would need some ehancing and tweeking but the idea that metrics like CS, gold earned, KDA, kill participation, dmg dealt, dmg healed are not very strong indicators of your skill and even more so when compared toy our teamamtes and the enemy team for your relative performance int he match would be extremely inaccurate.

I feel that objective participation should also be included in this system, since it shows that the player is attempting to work with their team,and truly roots the idea that the player is actually doing something, and isn't being carried by a much better team.

SB Arneeman5 votes

The grade system is far from perfect, and this new system would be as well - just that people would intentionally try to abuse it. Just to mention a few problems this would create:

  • KDA players
  • People would fight over farm
  • Less ''sacrifice'' plays, like a risky Azir shuffle etc that will most likely kill you but also win the fight
  • Kill farming at end of games/stretching out games to get better KDA and farm
  • Much more focus on individual plays, leading to everyone playing carry champs - and more toxicity
  • Less reward for good team play

Overall your impact on the games leads to your winrate in the first place, so your performance is already counted for - over a longer period of time of course, you can do well and still have a loss streak. This would just hinder those that win by shotcalling, playing supportive styles etc in favor of the ME CARRY GIVE ALL GOLD type of players.

k wìx4 votes

Yes please. +1

Please start focusing on giving additional gains to players who outperform their peers regardless of game outcome.

**It is absolutely critical to the health of league that you do this. **

TeCoolMage3 votes

/s?

BiochemicalZombi3 votes

This would never work, many people in the past have brought the same idea up and it’s been proven through common sense that it would never work out.

I’m suprised people are up voting this idea but it’s just boards I guess.

You can go 32/4 but have like 6cs per min and get an S- In mastery. Even their mastery system cannot account for if you are killing you can’t cs at the same time.

Leetri2 votes

Also the fact that Overwatch had to remove this feature from higher ranked games proves it creates more problems than its worth at the higher end while being pretty useless for the lower end.

Soraka Rules3 votes

I don't believe you can play on plat level and be stuck in silver because of bad teammates... Stop using that excuse! Get a bigger influence in your games and you should climb statistically

IainG102 votes

Come down to Silver, see some of the shit that is somehow not in B5, then say that. Junglers not taking jungle objectives, supports not warding, tanks building full damage even when losing lane....

Soraka Rules2 votes

{quoted}

Come down to Silver, see some of the shit that is somehow not in B5, then say that. Junglers not taking jungle objectives, supports not warding, tanks building full damage even when losing lane....

I've been Silver for years actually. Also check lolking and you'll see I've played ranked since s1, so I'm not lying. If you don't belong in silver then your influence should be greater than your rank and it should show in the long run (if you're consistent). If you're stuck in silver you most likely belong there *50% wr over 100 games. Not trying to be offensive, but I've had the same belief of elo hell when I couldnt even get gold 5.

Grunt6662 votes

{quoted}

So, a diamond player is diamond, no matter what. They can swap roles, play new champs, all that -- but they're still diamond. They have a better understanding of the game, the champs, and all those little interactions you learn over time playing the game. A diamond ADC main who is playing mid for the first time ever will still dramatically outperform a silver mid main (assuming that diamond actually deserves their rank). Despite that, they could still lose because their bot lane decides to feed, and despite everything that diamond player does, they're unable to stop the snowball. That's got nothing to do with the diamond player in an offrole.

The issue is not people playing offroles and doing worse, it's that the ranked system does nothing to recognize each individual player -- it's all about the outcome of the game, which is determined by 9 other players who are out of your control. ######(Moreso these days than previous seasons, with how fucking absurd damage is)

If you want to make ranked fair for the individual, don't just cover up the issue like you're doing. Retool the ranked system to modify LP gains / losses based on your individual performance (not per game, but over an average that builds with every game you play), based on stats that are important to the role you play.

For example: A diamond player who was boosted feeds every game, and can't function in high ELO. But because they were carried by a booster, they got a rank they don't deserve, since ELO is based on nothing but the outcome of the game.

Now, with a proper ranked system, that person who paid for a boost is performing horribly every game, and so their LP gain is penalized, while the booster gains LP faster, eventually making the rank disparity too much, meaning the boostee can't be boosted anymore -- forcing them to either pay a new booster, or just give up and stay in their own rank.

A second example: A silver player who plays far better than most people up to say high plat can't climb because of bad teammates. With a system based on individual performance, even if the silver's teams are bad, if their performance is consistently higher, then they'll eventually climb to where they belong, since their LP losses are minimized, while they gain quite a bit more on winning.

If you wanna talk about fair matching, that seems pretty fair to me. But it doesn't artificially extend the average playtime of the population, so it doesn't have any kind of money making potential, and I know it won't happen.

TL;DR: Make a ranked system based on individual performance, and all the complaints go away.

Bingo, just made a similar post. It also could have the side effect of inducing those passive aggressive quitters (who the report function will never punish) to play through the game, instead of QQ and sit alone somewhere afking minions to avoid being reported even though the reality is they did quit playing. Got some jerk on your team decides he will feed and make you lose? Ok well he will lose twice as much as me, so he is punishing himself even more, if you are just bad and misplaced because you abused duo q with your really good friend to legally boost yourself? NP you will get crushed every match you play alone and atleast drop much faster as you deserve to. Your teammates are all misplaced and all go 0/12/0 while you went 7/3/9 well atleast your losses are minimized theirs maximized so that each of you can reach your proper rank faster.

y0r1ck2 votes

I agree with the sentiment, but the problem is your system only considers people who conform to the meta. Meaning someone who plays off-meta might be able to gain elo very quickly by doing the right things, or might never gain much elo if they play in a way that's very different from their average position.

I'm trying to think of a way around that problem. Imo the best solution I could think of is something like the efficiency ratings in professional basketball. If you don't know, it's basically how good or bad a player is boiled down to a single number. Even though it's not perfectly accurate, it uses all of a players contributions and mistakes to calculate the number and doesn't compare it within the player's role. As such it's a better indicator of how much a player helped his team, rather than how well he did compared to other players in his role.

The difference between efficiency rating and your idea is that efficiency rating doesn't take role into account. So I think it'll work better to determine if you deserve lp or not.

Grunt6661 votes

{quoted}

I agree with the sentiment, but the problem is your system only considers people who conform to the meta. Meaning someone who plays off-meta might be able to gain elo very quickly by doing the right things, or might never gain much elo if they play in a way that's very different from their average position.

I'm trying to think of a way around that problem. Imo the best solution I could think of is something like the efficiency ratings in professional basketball. If you don't know, it's basically how good or bad a player is boiled down to a single number. Even though it's not perfectly accurate, it uses all of a players contributions and mistakes to calculate the number and doesn't compare it within the player's role. As such it's a better indicator of how much a player helped his team, rather than how well he did compared to other players in his role.

The difference between efficiency rating and your idea is that efficiency rating doesn't take role into account. So I think it'll work better to determine if you deserve lp or not.

Please provide some sort of example of how this would not work? So tell us about this off meta play that somehow is a large contributor to winning that bypasses all metrics?

y0r1ck1 votes

Yorick support doesn't get a high cc score, despite having decent cc and peel with his wall. He also helps his team by creating pushing lanes and taking objectives. Usually supports don't do these things and yorick doesn't do the usual support things. So even though I have a 56% winrate on yorick support, I'd lose lp under op's system.

Besides I didn't say it bypasses all metrics, just that it may not win or lose the same way as other champions in the role so it shouldn't be compared within the role. Rather compare it to all players so it's a measure of how much you contribute to a win, instead of how well you can follow the meta for your role.

exigentomic2 votes

Actually, ranks don't make as big of a difference as you think when people are off-role or on champs they don't play much. It's at least a whole tier of difference for some.

NineTailedMystic2 votes

Except they're not going to match a diamond adc main in a silver game when he plays top. At worst it's going to be gold, or plat.

KonJoo1 votes

the riot philosophy is that your mmr ist based on winning and loosing but nothing else. I can understand it then othersie people woud care more about their stats than winning a game. For example if i initiate a fight and suicide by assasinating the super fed enenmy adc i ll have a bad kda and propably not as much damage as my top laner who tries to poke down a hp regen tank like mundo or garren. but it will help win the game if my team can clean up afterwards.

On the other hand i highly agree with u that the system itself is crap due to my own experience. I d loove to doupple my queuing time to get 9 other people who are more even in their acc. skill. or maybe a system that recognize ppl who have palyed 300 games on 150 different champtions. or maybe a system that puts people with the same experience togther. why the hell does matchmaking think that a new lvl 30 player is as good as a payler with 3 years experiance ?

so i think there are a lot opportunities to improve the matchmaking. taking individual performance into condideratrion is non of them. sorry.

Onotori3 votes

Who cares if people prioritize stats over winning? If they do, then they won't climb because they'll lose games.

I'd much rather have a system that's based on skill, rather than getting lucky with the coin flip.

KonJoo1 votes

{quoted}

Who cares if people prioritize stats over winning? If they do, then they won't climb because they'll lose games.

I'd much rather have a system that's based on skill, rather than getting lucky with the coin flip.

dude, how do u want to measure skill ? i wrote u an example to show u why this is nto working well..

Feel Apathy2 votes

{quoted}

dude, how do u want to measure skill ? i wrote u an example to show u why this is nto working well..

**1. Vision Score

  1. KDA

  2. Average representation on that champion from the pool of players depending on your rating [grading system]

  3. Tower Damage

  4. Creep Score

  5. Dragon / Baron secures | Enemy Blue / Red buffs stolen as a group / individual

  6. Average Damage/healing/effective shielding done overall **

Aside from #6 red/blue - the rest are already hidden or shown as stats in the game / client.

Unker1392 votes

[{quoted}](name=Feel Apathy,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hi8Ogcz4,comment-id=0001000000000001,timestamp=2018-04-26T07:44:29.081+0000)

**1. Vision Score

  1. KDA

  2. Average representation on that champion from the pool of players depending on your rating [grading system]

  3. Tower Damage

  4. Creep Score

  5. Dragon / Baron secures | Enemy Blue / Red buffs stolen as a group / individual

  6. Average Damage/healing/effective shielding done overall **

Aside from #6 red/blue - the rest are already hidden or shown as stats in the game / client.

  1. Vision is good but there are times when other players have it covered that one player would help the team more by using the vision rather than placing it. Making it affect your LP makes it a requirement.

  2. A KDA of 1/0/1 is technically better than 10/1/10. Better for LP to get a kill or two then hide.

  3. Grading system is already manipulated. Best way to get an s is to have a good game with an off role champion.

  4. Some champions are better are dealing tower damage than others, so you would need 140 modifiers to balance LP adjustments that would also need to be reevaluated every patch.

  5. See 3. Plus if the team is down, I can minimize LP loss by farming instead of defending.

  6. Good in theory but it also means you can artificially boost your team's LP gain in a snowball by not taking the nexus and kill 10 dragons and 4 barons and refusing to just end the game.

Skill based means the skills become more important than the win. A 40% win rate player can rise as high as they want by focusing on the stats to minimize LP hits on losses and not closing the win when there are opportunities to pad your stats on an easy game.

Feel Apathy3 votes

{quoted}

  1. Vision is good but there are times when other players have it covered that one player would help the team more by using the vision rather than placing it. Making it affect your LP makes it a requirement.

  2. A KDA of 1/0/1 is technically better than 10/1/10. Better for LP to get a kill or two then hide.

  3. Grading system is already manipulated. Best way to get an s is to have a good game with an off role champion.

  4. Some champions are better are dealing tower damage than others, so you would need 140 modifiers to balance LP adjustments that would also need to be reevaluated every patch.

  5. See 3. Plus if the team is down, I can minimize LP loss by farming instead of defending.

  6. Good in theory but it also means you can artificially boost your team's LP gain in a snowball by not taking the nexus and kill 10 dragons and 4 barons and refusing to just end the game.

Skill based means the skills become more important than the win. A 40% win rate player can rise as high as they want by focusing on the stats to minimize LP hits on losses and not closing the win when there are opportunities to pad your stats on an easy game.

You're trying a tad too hard to discredit what I said.

The grading system is set on averages - if you're better than the average player, and performed as such, you should get more and lose less.

Trading a 1 for 1 is almost never a good idea, especially if you're confident in your own skill to pull through in teamfights. - Dying to "make a play" is the absolute worst thing you can do, and if it doesn't work out - you've probably set your team for a defeat.

10/1/10 is always better than 1/0/1 - for all you know that guy participated in at least 80% of the kills in the game, while the 1-0-1 might've been a top laner that hasn't moved or used his teleport whole game.

The grading system adjusts itself based on your items/kills/lane . [not 100% positive on this one ]

3< So if jinx and tristana deal the most tower damage, and you play Anivia . fear not - it will measure you against other anivia players and not jinx or tristana averages. - a person would think this is easy to comprehend.

Nothing will "affect your LP" - if you perform better, a bonus of 16+5>21 is alright. If you lost a bonus of 16-5>11 is okay.

Unker1391 votes

[{quoted}](name=Feel Apathy,realm=EUNE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=hi8Ogcz4,comment-id=000100000000000100000000,timestamp=2018-04-26T14:31:20.427+0000)

You're trying a tad too hard to discredit what I said.

The grading system is set on averages - if you're better than the average player, and performed as such, you should get more and lose less.

Trading a 1 for 1 is almost never a good idea, especially if you're confident in your own skill to pull through in teamfights. - Dying to "make a play" is the absolute worst thing you can do, and if it doesn't work out - you've probably set your team for a defeat.

10/1/10 is always better than 1/0/1 - for all you know that guy participated in at least 80% of the kills in the game, while the 1-0-1 might've been a top laner that hasn't moved or used his teleport whole game.

The grading system adjusts itself based on your items/kills/lane . [not 100% positive on this one ]

3< So if jinx and tristana deal the most tower damage, and you play Anivia . fear not - it will measure you against other anivia players and not jinx or tristana averages. - a person would think this is easy to comprehend.

Nothing will "affect your LP" - if you perform better, a bonus of 16+5>21 is alright. If you lost a bonus of 16-5>11 is okay.

My point is that there are far too many skill and factors that go into a game that you cannot accurately put skill into the equation that doesn't force a play style or can be manipulated making the skill stat more important than the goal of winning.

10/1/10 is better than 1/0/1. I agree even though the KDA ratio is better on the latter...but what if it were 10/12/10. Still better? What if the 1/0/1 was a 100% paricipation and the 10/12/10 was a 30% participation?

Trading 1 for 1 is not the best strategy, but not everyone agrees with that. Trading 1 for 1 and taking an objective might be ok.

And even tower damage compared to others of the same champion can is a moving target and can be manipulated based on build.

AlienPrimate1 votes

So what about me? I have been playing a lot of Taric top recently and according to leagueofgraphs, I'm in the top 0.1% for damage to champions, damage to towers, and cs. Does this mean that my performance is so insane that I deserve 35 LP per win? A system that rewards based on performance by champion is flawed because of off meta strategies. Playing Taric top skews the numbers showing that I'm the best in the world at Taric for damage stats while someone going something like J4 support would be skewed the other way.

Wolfeur8 votes

Riot stated already that they don't want to put things like "stats rewards" because they want players to ultimately play to win and nothing else.

If they put stat checks in LP gain/loss, you'll have two scenarios:

  • You're winning: People will complain for every KS because you're "stealing their stats"
  • You're losing: People will only try to diminish the LP loss, instead of actively trying to win.

With stats mattering, people won't ever want to sacrifice for the greater good of the team. Everyone will play extremely selfishly.

Häxel1 votes

A dieamond player is a diamond player: Well if this stays true there will ofcourse not be szenarios in which way you are a diamond adc and a silver mid. More likly you are a diamond 2 adc and a diamond 4 mid. or a (currently) diamond 5 top (cause diamond 5 probably huge contestor of beeing one of the 2 new tiers). So wher exactly is your problem? that getting elo will be harder? Also yes, a diamond adc ihas even playing mid a better udnerstanding of the game as a silver midlaner. But still he will ahve a less good udnerstanding of playing mid in diamond. And that will be the point: That autofilled players get ranked to their knowledge.

If you want to make ranked fair for the individual, don't just cover up the issue like you're doing. Retool the ranked system to modify LP gains / losses based on your individual performance (not per game, but over an average that builds with every game you play), based on stats that are important to the role you play.

Most times this is combined witht he idea like "hey why not let sue the champion mastery ranking like geting a note between s+ and d- decide your rank. The problem with this is that it not only is hard to do proberbly but fast abusive. You can jsut force to play around kda or playing invidual isntead of sacryficying you few times for the team. Even if you get camped top and can't do much a winning game cause you did not loose entirely top and bot and your jungler used it good that enemy jungler focused top the whole time is something you earned too. How would your system solve this, probably by giving the feeding toplaner nearly nothing am i right?

its just how games work: The winner takes it all. In no game you have players get advantages for loosign just cause they still performed good. A Messi who kicked 7 soccer goals wills till not accomplish the next stage if he lost with his team 7:8. He can get maybe player of the day or the tournament but these are not the real deal. Similar how you can still get honor after a game.

Onotori2 votes

So wher exactly is your problem? that getting elo will be harder?

Well, being a fill main, this ranked format is the biggest "fuck you" I've ever seen; If I want to climb, I have to do so in 5 different roles (or stop being a fill main), rather than just by playing the game.

And yes, while people will try to abuse it at first, those people will inevitably drop in rank, leaving only people who actually try to win in higher ranks. Once people realize that playing for stats isn't how you win and climb, people will go back to playing like normal people.

As for your example of a top lane being camped... people in higher ELO don't feed if they can't win lane. They just farm as well as they can and roam, helping out other lanes. The system would recognize that.

Power Cosmic1 votes

Now that I think of it, winning actually not being everything would be a very good thing in soloque play. It would be nice if fun was more consistently up to me rather than matchmaking.

Onotori2 votes

Exactly. I don't have fun when the enemy team doesn't play as well as I do, and I don't think people at the receiving end of shoddy MMR matching feel good about it either. If I was always against people who challenged me, and if matching was based on your performance, everyone would have more fun in the long run.

Power Cosmic1 votes

Definitely.

50Shades0fTrynda1 votes

and how would that fix da problem?(LP gain modification). You'll still get silver bronze and gold in one game mixed in someones favor ... in other words, how this fixes the predetermination of the outcome of almost every match ?

Onotori1 votes

Well, because we wouldn't be matching people based on some arbitrary number (MMR) -- we'd be matching people based on their average performance.

More from Gameplay

More by Onotori