I used to have 55% winrate in normal matches.

Wow. Congratz you were lucky. Now go tell matchmaking is balanced to millions of players who experienced the same thing i described. Plus even today my mathes prove that what i say is true. Hard stuck people going 0/10 in 15 mi utes and keeping 1v5, flaming, tilting after 1 death just right after 8 games winning streak that put me from plat 5 0 lp to plat 4 20 lp. I actually manage to win some of these games but it doesnt change the fact this pattern repeats itself. And while riot lies to players faces that matchmaking is fair and doesnt try to fore 50% wi rate other companies admit matchmaking working like that in their games and the exact thing happens there as in lol. So no. Matchmaking isnt fair nor balance and is based on average mmr which fks you over as you win too much.

{quoted}

Who downvoted you? It's SO easy to see!

I just played my first two ARAM games on my smurf today (fresh MMR). First game, 20 second queue, and it was an ABSOLUTE stomp. 1 bot. And the second game? 8 freakin' minutes queue, 3 bots. (15 minutes total from a dodge) - I'm sure as heck not being matched, at great effort, with bots because I played badly. It was a jagged attempt by the system to generate a 50% winrate.

Support is notoriously hard to carry with when your teammates are disrespectful and uncooperative (a bastion of low elo) even if you get an adc that's worth feeding, there's a chance they'll just ignore you and facecheck a bush right before Baron. There's a reason the role's unpopular.

So let me get this straight here...

You think you were purposefully matched with bots in an attempt to force a loss because you won a game previously, on a fresh account, in ARAM?

I'm sorry but the logic there is pretty rough.

Firstly, we all know bots are banned in waves to prevent detection systems being discovered, so they could have been marked by riot. But what is infinitely more likely is the fact that fresh mmr is going to be where the most bots are. They are going to be fresh accounts matched with other fresh accounts. The fact that you think Riot is marking bots and matching them up with people to force wins/losses is pretty insane. Especially because bots don't exist as you climb the ladder why devise a system that only works at a specific place on the ladder?

Secondly, I know that the idea of the system working against you is comforting when climbing is difficult or a string of losses falls out of nowhere but seriously believing that riot would devise a plan to keep you from climbing? What do they have to gain from that? The system is called a "ladder" a reason. It conceptually is a ladder with every player occupying one rung along the way. If you move up you're one rung higher and somebody else is one rung lower because you passed them. The closest you can get to this is your personal mmr value. That quite literally is you're place on the ladder. Now your rank is a representation of your position on the ladder but it has a cushion. That cushion is your rank and your LP. LP has less deviation per game than mmr can, this is why if you are much much more skilled than your current division or league you can straight skip ranks because your mmr is SO MUCH HIGHER than where you currently stand. This raised mmr is gained through continuous win streaks and very high win percentages. It does happen and it isn't luck.

Thirdly, somebody stated that even at the top of the ladder the system will intentionally put you at worse and worse odds to force a 50% win rate. That idea is so asinine how would people like apdo/dopa be throwing up win percentages in the 70th percentile if that were accurate? Yes arguably the best player in the world or at the very least in contention for it and that is the point. If you're on top of the ladder you continuously crush your competition until a challenger arises that can match you.

Fourthly, the original ladder was a pure representation of your mmr AKA ELO. You rose and fell on the ladder based upon one value. There were no ranks divisions LP or whatever. This lack of cushion meant if you went on a loss streak you could infinitely free fall with no floor (Rank 5). You could also infinitely gain with no ceiling or cap (promo's). The cushions are here because people would stop playing and literally play one game at the maximum amount of time to prevent decay in order to preserve their rank on the ladder. This became unhealthy for the game and the cushions were put in place to make players feel safer playing ranked. The side effect of this is now the system is slightly more muddled to the uninitiated. People seriously believe the system is rigged against them when they are actually playing in "easy mode". The LP/Rank system prevents hardcore rubber banding while still giving highly skilled players ways to quickly rank up alternate accounts. A challenger smurf could win enough games in a row to start matching with diamonds at high gold/low plat before their rank finally caught up with them. You aren't being selected against, you're being outclassed/outlucked on matchmaking. Bad games happen and the strings of them stick in your mind much more easily than the good ones.

Player wins 7 games in a row "I'm hard carrying these games, I'm sick, hot damn!" Player loses 7 games in a row "The system is rigged, fuck riot, I'll never climb because they devised a system that won't let me, despite THOUSANDS before me doing it!"

Its not about proof. Its about how the algorithm is supposed to work.

So I have a 2100 mmr, I am pared with two 2200 and two 2000 mmr players. The average on my team is 2100. So the matchmaking takes that average and matches me with a team that has around the same average. But that team could look like 1800/2400/2100/2100/2100 but because the two teams average is 2100 its considered a "balanced" match.

Now assuming that 2400 MMR is the rank 1 player right now. If he is so good that he climbs to 2900 and every other player is 500 mmr at least behind him, In order for the system to reach eaqualibrium it would have to make is teammates 500 elo combined below the opposing team. so the rank 1 with +500 mmr on everyone would have a team that looks like 2900/2000/1800/2000/2100 and the opposing team may have 2200/2000/2200/2100/2100

to the matchmaking this looks fair as its 2160 mmr on rank 1's team and 2400 on the other. But in reality that 1 winning lane against 2 losing and 1 even. assuming mmr accurately reflects skill. So at the end of the day yes. That is what the matchmaking system is supposed to do. It is intended to pair you with worse players if it cannot pair you against better ones.

To be fair I had a 59% winrate with riven over 417 games accourding to my end of year thing. And a 65% winrate with annie over 78 I think. And that was the vast majority of my games last season. so long story short matchmaking doesnt always work. That being said with the way matchmaking is supposed to work my comment is accurate. If challenger is 2400 mmr and you consistantly win games the game will simply have to average you with lower and lower mmr players to offset your high mmr to balance with the average against the other team. so if your say against 5 masters players and they average 2300 mmr, And your mmr is 2600 because you are so damn good, you /would/ be forced to have teamates who offset that extra 300 mmr. so they would have to be something like 2200/2200/2200/2300 to offset your really high mmr. Eventually the system (if its working correctly) will catch up and your teammates will have such a low mmr you will hit your 50% winrate.

This doesnt even speak to my consistant 60% winrate with riven over the last year. Unless I was winning on average like 25% with every other champion I played because easilly 2/3rds of the games I played were on riven and annie.