Guys, the solution just bloody hit me and it's an easy one!

AninLegions777·Jun 2, 2016·2 votes·783 views

Why don't Riot make a survey once you login to client saying:

Do you want Solo Queue: Yes [ ] No [ ]

Credible Results: only players with over 50-100 ranked games this season should be included. People who play as premades for more than 50% of their games will share one vote with their premades.

What this solves: It answers the question of which part of the community is the majority (Those who want SQ and those who don't).

The survey MUST be answered before summoners can play. The survey should be carried out by an external organization to prevent manipulation of results. The results of this survey determine if Solo Queue returns.

If you have any sensible comments, let me hear them.

60 Comments

PyrodiniumJun 2, 20165 votes

Your proposal is heavily biased towards people that favor Solo Queue.

By placing a high number of Ranked games played as a requirement, you are excluding a lot of people that started playing Ranked as a result of Dynamic Queue.
Counting people that regularly play as a premade as groups instead of individuals, aside from being a logistical nightmare, would not yield an appropiate counting of the number of people that actually prefers Dynamic Queue.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

1 - Lool. Anyone who likes ranked (solo or dynamic) should have above 50 games. This is even below standard.

2 - I want you to think carefully about your second point. Why did riot make premade reports = 1? Lool. In the same vein, we can count premade votes as 1.

PyrodiniumJun 2, 20163 votes

Reports are neither grouped by premade, nor are intended to gauge popular opinion. They are just flags that the report system uses to look into a player's behavior.

A poll asking players what they want, on the other hand, actually wants to know what is the sentiment of the community.

Under your system, if we assume an average party size of three people for premades, players favoring Solo Queue would need to compromise a 26% of the population to win the poll (as the remaining 74% of players that want Dynamic Queue but have their votes slashed by two thirds).

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

Well considering Dynamic queue users range between 3-5, I'd say there's really no problem.

DrCyanideJun 2, 20163 votes

"If we count people in favor as 1/2 to 1/5 a vote, and people oppose as 1 vote, we'll have a fair poll for what the majority wants!"

If you have any sensible comments, let me hear them.

Why don't you make a sensible post first?

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

It was sensible. You just didn't have enough sense (just an observation) to decipher it. Premades range from 1 - 5. Solo players are 1. Now imagine if there are 600 thousand solo players and 400 thousand premades (made up of 3 teammates. Using the median to be fair). That would mean 1.2 million people will vote in favour of Dynamic queue which heavily skews the results. Understand?

DrCyanideJun 2, 20161 votes

Lets use a nice example of 100 people, assuming perfectly even distribution of 1-5 man groups (20 people in each category). It's unreasonable to assume perfect balance, but we'll go with it.

With your method, the vote would be 20 to about 26.

How is 1/5th being almost on-par with 4/5ths of the population fair? How would that tell you what "the majority" want, when you're actively taking steps to discredit the majority?

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

Mate, those 5 people are premades. They count as 1. Riot even used this logic with reports. Premade reports count as 1. It's common sense. Solo players = 1, Premades = 1 cos they are a team. Therefore they share the vote. I don't know how simpler I can explain this.

Icestar1186Jun 2, 20164 votes

No, all reports from one game count as 1. Nothing to do with premade or not.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

Lool. Mate no they don't. Let's say one person reports for intentional feeding and another for hate speech and another for negative attitude, those are 3 bloody different categories meaning they require 3 DIFFERENT reports. There.

Icestar1186Jun 2, 20163 votes

That's not what I meant and you know it. It would count as one for each category no matter how many people reported them for each one.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

Oh wait wait wait. I didn't even mention this one. And if you argue this out, I'll just leave you to your predicament. Okay, so we know that false reports reduce default value right? Right. So by your logic, the first person to report is the only one with the reduced report value. But that's not the case. EACH individual gets reduced report value meaning that each solo report counts as one.

Icestar1186Jun 2, 20162 votes

No. Everyone reported falsely, so everyone's report value is reduced. It doesn't flag who reported first, it just flags "were they reported?" and "by who?", so it can be one report even if a false report reduces everyone's report value.

DrCyanideJun 2, 20162 votes

Riot counts 5 Solo reports the same as 1 report too, it has nothing to do with premades, it has to do with discouraging fishing for reports and preventing abuse.

If you're so confident that Players wanting Solo Queue are the majority you shouldn't need to stack the deck in your favor. You shouldn't discredit Players for using a system that's available to them. You likewise shouldn't discredit players who are using a system that was available to them before (it was called Solo/Duo Queue for a reason).

If you can't live with there being more players that like Dynamic Queue then you probably shouldn't ask for a poll.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

Let's say one person reports for intentional feeding and another for hate speech and another for negative attitude, those are 3 bloody different categories meaning they require 3 DIFFERENT reports.

No one is stacking decks in anyone's favour. You aren't even getting me. Dynamic queue premades are 3+. Possibly 3 friends who enjoy the concept of free elo or want to play ranked for fun (to the detriment of solo players). So yes, making their votes count as one is the best way to go about it. It even makes the results more statistically correct.

Mysticman89Jun 2, 20163 votes

If the majority of players want free elo and/or want to play ranked for fun, doesn't it make sense to actually listen to that majority, rather than to make their votes count for less?

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

My God! Do you even know what ranked is for? It's for ranking how good an individual is. If you introduce free elo, you might as well remove ranked cos it will be useless. Normals are for fun. This is common knowledge. Please please. Stop making me cringe.

Mysticman89Jun 2, 20162 votes

I liked solo queue, and continue to be a solo player in dyanmic queue for what it's worth.

I'm just confused by what sort of argument you're trying to make here. At first it seemed to be that the majority wants solo queue, then in another post it seemed to be that regardless of what the majority wants it should exists since it has for years, and now you seem to be arguing that it should exist because it's the best assessment of individual skill.

Those are 3 very different arguments, and if you're not actually sticking to any of them, then it's hard to take you seriously as someone who actually does like solo queue, much less someone from riot who might be able to actually influence things.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

I explained in a post to you just now but I'll say it again. Original solo queue players that want solo queue back WILL be the majority not those who started playing ranked when Dynamic queue was introduced. This is my argument. Solo queue being the best assessment of individual skill was a deviation. The person I replied said something unrelated to my original post. Is that clear enough for you?

Mysticman89Jun 2, 20161 votes

Ok, so you're proposing that a majority of players who played ranked prior to the introduction of dynamic queue would be in favour of solo queue.

If hypothetically then, all players who played solo queue prior to dynamic queue were polled, and it turned out that the majority of that population actually didn't want solo queue, would you accept that solo queue not coming back was the right decision in that case?

Or would you assume the votes weren't counted appropriately then? Or would you suggest instead that the majority of that subset of players were actually just making a poor decision and should be overruled?

What if the population of all players is significantly greater than the population of original solo queue players? Is it better business to listen to the greater majority, or to the smaller but more experienced subset?

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

More experienced because they dictate the flow of the game. Don't believe me? Notice how most balance changes are based on LCS/High elo criteria.

I would accept those votes and move on.

DrCyanideJun 2, 20161 votes

Those reports are handled the same way regardless of if a 5 man or 5 solos are reporting the person and you know it. Do we need to remind you that you asked for sensible comments?

Dynamic queue premades are 3+. Possibly 3 friends who enjoy the concept of free elo or want to play ranked for fun (to the detriment of solo players). So yes, making their votes count as one is the best way to go about it. It even makes the results more statistically correct.

You're so clueless it hurts. It literally hurts.

What's the problem with premade groups in Normals? You can't be competitive in Normals. You're with and against players that are trying new champions, builds, and roles, and matchmaking spans across every rank.

If you like playing with your friends and you want to be competitive, playing the best games you can, then you'd take your premade to rank. It has nothing to do with trolling others or free elo, it has everything to do with wanting to play a better game.

It's also not "statistically correct" to clump people together based on if they play in a premade or not, it's a statistical nightmare!

Player X only plays Ranked with his friend, Player Y. Player Y plays 90% of his games solo, without Player X. According to you, Player X shares Player Y's vote, but Player Y doesn't share Player X's vote.

Now imagine that same complexity across multiple groups of players. You've got a giant mess of data that, at the end, tells you absolutely nothing other than "there were people, and they voted."

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

That's what ranked 5s were for but hey, you're the one with the clues. :')

Learn to read please. I said those with over 50% of their games with premades should have their votes counted as one. Don't just try to look for every opportunity to look stupid.

It may be complex for you but hey, we don't all share the same IQ.

DrCyanideJun 2, 20161 votes

That's what ranked 5s were for but hey, you're the one with the clues. :')

You'll find no one with a ranked 5 this season. Every player who liked Ranked 5 is a Dynamic Queue player now. Knowing that and pointing it out doesn't make me clueless.

Learn to read please. I said those with over 50% of their games with premades should have their votes counted as one. Don't just try to look for every opportunity to look stupid.

Yes, and I pointed you to a situation that breaks your situation.

Player X plays 100% of his games in a premade with Player Y.
Player Y plays 10% of his games in a premade with Player X.

If you assume that Player X has the minimum 50 games, then Player Y has played 500 games.

It may be complex for you but hey, we don't all share the same IQ.

I'm giving examples with math simple enough an elementary school student could do it, and you're avoiding it like it's over your head. If you're going to try and be cute, back it up.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

I'm pointing that out cos you didn't take it into consideration.

Great scenario tbh. Can't fault that. There would be some kind of criteria to further straighten out the numbers. You make a good case.

This is normal bants. You shouldn't start getting worked up over an elementary joke such as that of IQ.

Mysticman89Jun 2, 20162 votes

You know that their point regarding reports is that number of reports doesn't particularly matter, not that premades count differently?

4 random players reporting you carries the same weight as a 4 man premade reporting you, which carries the same weight as 1 random person reporting you, since all reports do is flag your account for the system to check it for accuracy before actual rioters look into it.

As for the validity of counting people who engage in 5 man premades as 1 vote, that's pretty blatently biased. People who only ever solo anyway will of course welcome solo queue, since theres no cons for them. For everyone else, it does hurt them, and the idea of the vote would to be figure out whether 'everyone else' is a bigger proportion of the community than the strictly solos. If you start counting the everyone else at 1/5th weight or whatever then you're missing the point.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

Sorry but you have forgotten so soon that solo/duo existed for years. And so did ranked 5s. No one asked for both to be merged. I can't even begin to debate with you right now. Regarding the reports, read what I wrote to the others.

Mysticman89Jun 2, 20161 votes

I don't think anything I said indicated that solo/duo and ranked 5v5 didn't previously exist.

Your argument seems to be based around the idea that the majority* want solo queue, not that solo/duo queue should continue exist on the basis of tradition. If I'm mistaken and your point is it existed for years and hence should continue to exist for years, you should probably make that clearer and avoid all the voting talk which is moot if you're arguing from tradition.

*= for some definition of majority that you seem to want to tinker with.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

I'm talking about the original Solo queue players. A lot of players joined Dynamic queue this year and since they have no experience with the old Solo queue, I don't think they have the right to vote.

PyrodiniumJun 2, 20161 votes

"You just don't have enough sense to decipher that the vote of people that agree with me obviously needs to have more weight"

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

No. Okay let me ask you this. Why don't companies accept referrals from family members no matter how many give? Because they have a tendency to be heavily biased. In this case, people that love dynamic queue fall into one category:

Those that love ranking up based on team dependence

Would have added, Those who want to have fun, but that's what normals are for. So it's only normal for dynamic queue lovers to be biased.

Mysticman89Jun 2, 20161 votes

Aren't purely solo queue-ers biased towards solo queue?

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

Don't think it's biased when you are getting screwed over by the system. This system punishes solo players. Old solo queue and ranked 5s tried to balance both.

Mysticman89Jun 2, 20161 votes

Do you know what bias is?

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

Bias: inclination or prejudice for or against one person or group, especially in a way considered to be unfair

Notice the unfair at the end? Purely solo queue players are used to a system that was fair to both. So if they want solo queue and Ranked 5s back, the only people hurt here are the 4 man premades. But this dynamic queue is unfair to ALL solo/duo players. Therefore solo players can't be biased cos their inclination isn't unfair.

PyrodiniumJun 2, 20161 votes

Polls are meant to gauge the opinion of the participants. That is literally what they are for.

Adding artificial restrictions to a poll just doesn't yield an unbiased result, it just creates a shoddy poll that can't even reflect popular opinion.

If you believe that Dynamic Queue is unhealthy for the game (and you do), why bother with proposing a poll? Your cause stands to lose if we reduce this problem to a popularity contest.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

That's why I said the easiest way. Right now, I'm even fed up with this issue. Seems like there's no light at the end of the tunnel.

Dominick DestineJun 2, 20163 votes

They would never do that.

That would require them caring about the player base and actually wanting to solve the problem.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20162 votes

Riot of old used to listen. But this was before they had this much money and started being pompous pr****.

Darkslayer85Jun 2, 20161 votes

Step 1: Bait players in with an enticing game over four years Step 2: Start slowly ignoring the players over time and hope they don't notice. Step 3: Focus more on hextech crafting and new skins than balancing the game. Step 4: Build a pool for our money so we can swim in it.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20162 votes

Seems about right. You forgot:

Step 5: Playerbase starts shrinking and pro players are porting to other games. Esports scene is in shambles and Tencent pulls out leaving Riot naked in the dust and forced to bring back Solo Queue which won't matter. Cos most of us would have moved on by then.

Dominick DestineJun 2, 20161 votes

{quoted}

Riot naked in the dust and forced to bring back Solo Queue which won't matter. Cos most of us would have moved on by then.

I will enjoy watching that happen while I play Overwatch and/or Dota 2, laughing.... Riot continually spits in the face of their most loyal player base.... what did they think was going to happen?

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

What happens to every other game. They feel massive regret afterwards. Lyte's already left the sinking ship. I wonder who's next.

PyrodiniumJun 2, 20163 votes

Magma Chamber.
Voice chat.
Native replays.
Support for non 1-1-2-J metas.
Chromas reedemable with IP.
Reworking champions that "are perfectly fine".
Retiring seasonal maps.
The Tribunal.
The IoW retcon.
Cutting back on Dominion support.

Riot Games have always prioritized what they believe is the best for the game instead of rushing to please the assumed wants of the playerbase.

Rants about Riot "not listening to the players as they did before" have existed since at least late Season 1, always accompained by arguments about how they have sold out and how it will surely be their downfall.

Icestar1186Jun 2, 20162 votes

Thank you! It's like the Gameplay boards - nerf one thing and the circlejerk just picks something else to hate.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

Sorry I forgot to add that this is relative to recent seasons.

Icestar1186Jun 2, 20161 votes

Ranked doesn't make you good.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

Of course it doesn't. I mean it's not like we know the best players by some ranked ladder... Oh wait

Icestar1186Jun 2, 20161 votes

Ranked is a measurement. Sure, challenger players are really really good. But you could theoretically be that good and not play ranked at all. My point is that you would discount a huge portion of the playerbase for little to no real reason. It's like the people talking about banning unranked players from posting in the gameplay board - it invalidates the opinions of many people, some of whom actually know what they're talking about and have good ideas. It just wouldn't work the way you seem to think it will.

AninLegions777Jun 2, 20161 votes

It's actually impossible, and I say this boldly, IMPOSSIBLE, to become as good as even a Gold player (and I being generous), by playing only normals. Sure you may watch pro streams, tutorials, read guides and all that stuff, but as long as the battleground isn't competitive enough, you'll never get good. I used to think like you. I thought I knew how to play this game until I played my first placements. I think I got 1w 9l. Took me straight to B5. And that was when I knew that normals was child's play. I have a good analogy here for you. I'm guessing you know LeBron James. Imagine if a random dude played with his friends and kept dominating them, do you think he would play as good as LJ just because of his dominance? Hell no! Circumstances change the man. So if you are in a fun place, don't expect to get good as those in a competitive place.