Boards›Live Gameplay Balance

A Legitimate Problem: ARAM Stacking

ModCaptainMårvelous·3/2/2014, 6:32:30 AM·11 votes·1,323 views

See bold for TL;DRs

###What is ARAM stacking?

ARAM stacking is when people level/make accounts strictly with the purpose of ARAM play. They usually only buy champions very strong on ARAMs and end up dominating with "stacked" odds in their favor. It's a problem and often subtracts greatly from the "random" aspect of ARAM.

###But surely there aren't people who do that, right?

See here (Name withheld because no calling people out)

At first, it looks pretty standard...but look closer. Notice how every match is an ARAM. Further more, all of these are considered "strong" ARAM champions. More so, look at how some of these are obtained twice in the span of just a few matches.

This level of coincidence is beyond simple luck. This is stacking the odds.

###Yeah but even with stacking the odds he can't play these guys all the time!

Let's provide an example. Let's say I'm a summoner with these champions:

Lux Nidalee Ezreal Blitzcrank Gragas Gangplank Jayce Sona Zilean Zyra

Ten "strong" ARAM champions with poke, sustain, etc. (Just roll with me here)

Now let's propose a "worst case scenario" free week.

Volibear Udyr Nasus Leona Diana Aatrox Hecarim Shyvana Trundle Singed

Even with this, the chance of getting a champion that's ARAM-strong is 50/50%. You have a 50% chance with these odds to draw a power pick. Keep in mind, I set up this to be the one of the worst free weeks possible. You will likely encounter free weeks where you own several of the champions (Further skewing the odds) or you'll own champions suited to ARAM beyond these ten.

###Even so they have the reroll disadvantage becau-

The most common argument I see on this but it STILL doesn't negate the problem. Basically what this tells me is "If they botch two rerolls they'll be stuck with a champion they hate". This is not a fix to the problem. At best, this will discourage people from doing this. At worst, this won't do anything.

###Whatever, ARAMs aren't a serious mode anyways.

And that makes it ok? Imagine if I hacked my client (extreme example but bear with me) so that I only got matched up with professional players who carried me every game while the enemy team was always bronze. Sounds unfair right?

It's 5v5 blind pick though, it's totally ok. It's Dominion, it's ok. Etc etc.

The moment you let this argument prevail, you are basically opening the floodgates. At what point do we draw the line? Will it get to the point were any mode that's not 5v5 ranked is just considered "Meh w/e it's not serious" and we treat it as a-ok?

###So how would we fix this?

Tons of solutions. For example...

  • Make ARAM -actually- an ARAM. All champions enabled. Riot doesn't lose money because it's still random, ARAM is actually random, nothing of value is lost. Heck, more people might even play ARAM to test out champions they don't have.

  • Reward people who have more/all champions. If you own everyone or 100+, maybe every game you get one free reroll. Maybe you make it 3 reroll stock instead of 2. Whatever works. Just don't let these guys keep having little-to-no punishment.

  • Force a champion minimum. While this is probably the least effective, it might do SOMETHING toward stifling the ARAM fixing. Even so some action is better than NO action.

  • Add a stacking "debuff" to champions. For every game where you get gangplank, for example, your chance of drawing gangplank is decreased. This lasts 30-ish games or so. Sure, doesn't solve the problem but it's a step towards it.

###General Conclusion

Nobody likes playing a fixed game. Nobody likes having to face a team of:

Lux Morgana Ashe Velkoz Sivir

while your team is basically:

Udyr Karthus Mordekaiser Shen Sion

While Riot has said before "Oh we don't care people suffer enough", they are wrong in this regard. ARAM stacking is a clear, obvious crime and nothing is being done to fix it. So please, if you can take one thing from this entire argument?

TwistedFate "Never lost a fair game...or played one."

15 Comments

MXXIV3/2/2014, 1:35:34 PM3 votes

The big problem here is, that are champions will be required to be treated equal in the randomness, while they're not.

But I'm totally voting for full champiom pool. Make it realy random. make it real chaos.

What pisses me to the most is getting my main champ on ARAM... I play Aram because it motivates me to play free champions, while I don't get stuck with champ I don't like for 45 minutes.

melek3/2/2014, 11:50:46 AM3 votes

How about you pool all the heroes both teams own and random players equally from that? Just as now, no mirror picks. This way everyone, every game, has the same shot to get Nidalee, and stacked summoners just don't add fluff to the mix - since thats really what they want anyway. They want to play fun champs, not prevent you from doing the same.

Nidalee (rawr)

edit: Made a big edit and lost it to an accidental back click :(

Wanted to add that you could make heroes multiple summoners own add to that champs probability to be in the game. That would give some incentive to stacking without unfairly helping one player more.

Kaine3/2/2014, 12:12:17 PM2 votes

but this isn't the best way to get good ARAM picks.

Lets say you own ALL the champions about HALF of them are excellent in ARAM so your % odds are the same as with only the best worst case scenario, right?

But get this You get a reroll almost. every. game. So you ALWAYS have 1-2 ( usually 2) rerolls And can use your 50% odds more than once.

So buy more champions and trounce on thos sad ten pick people :)

Ironstryde3/2/2014, 5:57:39 PM2 votes

I agree that full champion pool should be available in ARAM. To me it would just make the mode a more true reflection of what it should be.

I like that ARAM forces me to learn new champions and strategies.

The thing I disagree with is the assumption that everyone hates playing against a loaded team. While I don't want it all the time, the game mode is RANDOM. You should get an even mix of being on the stronger/weaker team. I do however sometimes enjoy getting the team that is "supposed" to lose.

Nothing more satisfying than when the other team gets the "ARAM Allstars" and through strategy, capitalizing on mistakes and "all in" at the right moment you still pull off the win. Sometimes just waiting til level 6 and not dying can be enough to all in the poke team. Even if you don't, the games are short and it is fun to try. People complain about surrender at 20 being too long. Guess what, you have the option to let them take your base.

While I do agree that full champ pool should be unlocked, I think too many people just give up when the odds are stacked against them. What is the point of playing random if you don't enjoy random results yourself? For anyone who has ever played a pickup game of basketball. The best team doesn't always win. That is the fun of playing.

Xzandrate3/3/2014, 7:47:37 PM1 votes

I do agree that something needs to be done about ARAM, but I think targeting the Randomization like you suggest in the last point will be the most effective.

I have a fair number of champions, I'd think 50 or 60ish, but numerous times I've ended up with the same champions in multiple games in a row, plenty of 3 game randoms in a row. I can distinctly remember just after I received Malzahar as a gift I played him 3 straight games in a row. Which still isn't the 4(6) straight games on Garen (I was then traded him on the 5th game to help a friend, and promptly got him again on the 6th game)

This screams to me that the randomizer is either using a seed without enough variation, or the randomization isn't impacted enough by the seed given. The problem of course is the scale of the game in correcting this.

If we assume that the current randomizer is 99% efficient, with the same champ being selected 3 or more times 1% of the time, that is still likely a few hundred thousand games per week.

Some sort of last 5 played, and a reduced chance may be the best solution, similar to what you suggested.

Tortferngatr3/2/2014, 7:52:47 AM1 votes

Lux Morgana Ashe Velkoz Sivir

Udyr Karthus Mordekaiser Shen Sion

CHALLENGE ACCEPTED

...Jokes aside, my preferred solution to this would be to have the ARAM matchmaker take champion pools (especially relative to level) into account.

People who only or mostly own champions with high ARAM winrates would most often play against other people who own only or mostly own champions with high ARAM winrates. Ditto people who only/mostly own low win rate ARAM champions. Wide champion pools would most often play with other wide champion pools.

I see it a bit like how pre-30 matchmaking detects likely smurfs and matches them against each other.

Nox Aeternam3/4/2014, 4:40:02 AM1 votes

Full champ pool would be amazing. I think Riot will probably not go to the bother of making a system to prevent stacking, so that would be an interesting way to fix it.

Also, dunno if this would even work, but.. what if every champion had a hidden value of how good they were in ARAM, and teams were chosen, by the randomizer, to be as close as possible in number of that value? Like, say (in a 2v2 scenario because it's 11:30 and I don't feel like doing math) Morde has a value of, I dunno, 6. Lux has a value of 25. If one team has Morde and Lux, the other team should have champions with a combined value of as close as possible to 31. This would mean Riot has to choose an ARAM Value for every champ out there, and those values are subjective(ish), though..

I dunno. It's an idea, shoddy yet something.

Drunk Old Man3/2/2014, 8:03:45 AM1 votes

I rather like the idea of A) making the pool include all champions, and choosing at random whether or not you own them; or B) adding a minimum amount of champions owned (I'd say around 16+)

On the other hand, pairing people up based on their champion pools is also a good idea. The problem I see with this [as a programmer] is that it could potentially be a lot more intensive on the server, since you're performing a lot more logic operations than you would be under normal circumstances. Roughly, for 10 people, if they had all 117 champs (it's still 117, right?) that'd be (C*(P*P-1)) extra operations where C is the champion count (117) and P is the player count (10), or 10,530. (Theoretically, you'd have to check each player against the rest, for every champion they own (up to the full amount.)) There are a few ways this could be made more 'optimal', but, you get the point.

xivk3/2/2014, 1:51:35 PM1 votes

Let's say that at least one of these isn't a smurf account. If someone primarily plays ARAM, maybe they want to buy champions they think will be good in ARAM. They also might buy runes that are good in ARAM.

I'm not sure the game should punish them for trying to play their favorite game mode well.

Pyrrasu3/2/2014, 5:56:11 PM1 votes

I don't like the minimum idea, because a lot of new people play ARAMs. This is a fun mode, not ranked. There shouldn't be harsh requirements to even play it.

I actually like the reroll idea. Maybe the more champions you have, the faster your rerolls regen, plus unlocking additional rerolls at 50 and then 100 owned champions (for example).