Let's Take a Look at LP

Cellrus·Nov 26, 2017·1 votes·411 views

We should make a fix in LP, so where when someone is AFK longer than 5 mins we get half of what our calculated MMR. Example: half of 23 would be 11.5 (rounded to 12) So, 12 LP lost instead of 23. I'm in Silver II ( I know I'm bad at the game but come on ) and about every game someone rage quits and then we FF at 15 mins. There have been some games where we were able to win the 4 v 5 games, but it's just unfair to the rest of the people who have to deal with losing 17, 20, or 23 LP. The person who did leave, or disconnected will unfortunately lose the total amount. Maybe I'll think of another way to solve that problem

12 Comments

MysterQNov 26, 20172 votes

You should get ZERO lost. It isn't your fault someone AFK'd.

Riot can make the system ignore abusers and such. But for legitimate players, why should they be punished.

CellrusNov 26, 20171 votes

True, but I don't know if there's a way to go around the system. Like (if duo que) have your friend AFK for 5 mins or something you lose 0 lp. That's why :l. But I don't know

MysterQNov 26, 20171 votes

{quoted}

True, but I don't know if there's a way to go around the system. Like (if duo que) have your friend AFK for 5 mins or something you lose 0 lp. That's why :l. But I don't know

I have already shown a while, back you will not go up in rank that way. You would need a lot of friends. Your friends would have to be extremely loyal to take the bullet for you.

And there are many ways around. Code: If player is duo, if duo partner AFKs, player does not get protection. (abuse potential seems real low now) Rules: I don't know about you, but I am scared to AFK. They talk about punishments and such. I don't want my main account punished. So I don't AFK. Time Penalty: Leaving puts you on low priority queue? Eventually you will need alts... A LOT of alts.

It just isn't feasible t move significantly And anyone trying to abuse it could be caught through coding and rules.

CellrusNov 26, 20171 votes

Ah ok I see what you mean now, Thanks for clearing that up.

ChermorgNov 26, 20171 votes

Who would make up for the gain in LP? The way it is right now the enemy team gains about as much LP as your team loses in any given game. Under your suggested system, the enemy team would gain about twice as much LP as your team does (give or take a bit). This would lead to "LP inflation" - where players would all be climbing, and at a statistically significant rate.

CellrusNov 26, 20171 votes

Hm... Haven't thought that far. That's a good question

MysterQNov 26, 20171 votes

{quoted}

Hm... Haven't thought that far. That's a good question

Does LP inflation even matter?

Who cares if there are 500,000 gold 5??? Does it matter. This is a game for fun. You can cap the system off in higher ELO, just like promo wins stop in higher ELO.

And again, we can catch abuse. Abuse would be very difficult to do anyways. But for nonabusers, who cares if their rank jumps just one level lol. Riot so stingy.

MysterQNov 26, 20171 votes

{quoted}

Who would make up for the gain in LP? The way it is right now the enemy team gains about as much LP as your team loses in any given game. Under your suggested system, the enemy team would gain about twice as much LP as your team does (give or take a bit). This would lead to "LP inflation" - where players would all be climbing, and at a statistically significant rate.

Can you prove it is a statistically significant rate? Because if so, I think you have a problem with AFKers that need to be addressed. Especially because said AFKers are ruining games for many people unfairly.

You can implement a system in low ELO only. Because let's face low ELO and high ELO are different environments with different goals and some differences in players. But in the end this would cap off unfair climbing at some point.

Who cares about LP inflation. This is a game for fun. LP is a virtual number. If there are 5000 bronze 5 and 2000 bronze 4 vs 2000 bronze 5 and 5000 bronze 4??? does it matter? Does it affect anyone at all. MMR still exists for matchmaking (although you may have to adjust it a tiny bit). It would really only feel "less *hitty" for honest players who get stuck with AFKs.

Again, why not implement a system. Create methods to stop abuse and punish abuse.

ChermorgNov 26, 20171 votes

Say that one player AFKs every 100 games of League. That means that in 1% of games, there would be an imbalance of LP. There are millions of games of League played a day. So in thousands of those games, there would be an imbalance of LP.

This would not cause anything in the short term, but over the course of a season you would end up with much less people in bronze/silver where they belong, and more people in higher ranks. I agree rank is an artificial number, but it is supposed to be based on your skill - not based on how many AFKs you had on your team.

MysterQNov 26, 20171 votes

{quoted}

Say that one player AFKs every 100 games of League. That means that in 1% of games, there would be an imbalance of LP. There are millions of games of League played a day. So in thousands of those games, there would be an imbalance of LP.

This would not cause anything in the short term, but over the course of a season you would end up with much less people in bronze/silver where they belong, and more people in higher ranks. I agree rank is an artificial number, but it is supposed to be based on your skill - not based on how many AFKs you had on your team.

But you always get the "matches are based on MMR." So who cares if a guy is wearing a silver border or has bronze 5 vs bronze 3 attached to their name. (Seriously I feel like bronze players could deserve a little love.) So, my point. Even if we have more b3 or silvers, matches are still made on MMR. So they can have fun. They may have a slightly higher title (but does it affect anyone) and they are happy (FUN AND HAPPY!!).

And new season comes. They get knocked all the way back down to start again. And due to MMR. If they are overranked, it will progressively get harder to climb and fight the inflation you are worried about. Lp losses > lp gains.

Let's say 50/50 win that Riot likes to use. 20LP gain, 15LP loss. Let's be generous. W = 20 LP L = 5 LP W = 25 LP L wAFK = 25 LP W = 45 LP L = 30 LP W = 50 LP L wAFK = 50 LP W = 70 LP L = 55 LP W = 75 LP L wAFK = 75 LP W = 95 LP

OMG, I am stopping here. Does that look like it is abusable? I mean, someone would have to be super dedicated to you. And this example wasn't for abuse. This example was for 1in100 games has an AFK. Well this was 1 in 4 games (only in losses) has an AFK. And it still took more than 13 games to get to promo. This is way more AFK relief than your 1 in random 100 games. So if someone hit the jackpot, they would hit promos slightly faster.

Very very slightly faster. (But I guess this is Riot that thinks 50 extra BE is a good gain).

Seriously, why be stingy. AFK RUINS games and moods. Get rid of it for lower ELO. You are right, I am shortisghted. But it is a virtual rank that means nothing (esp in bronze/silver). The people at Riot can definitely make some relief system to help people.

Also, you never even mention. "The LP gains are equal to the loss." BS. It may be balanced in the current system. But many people lose 0LP when they get to a new rank. Well the other team just got +20 into the virtual system. Oh noes. 20 extra LP is floating around!

ChermorgNov 26, 20171 votes

Notice how in your example they end up almost an entire division away from where they started...

If the ranked system gets an overhaul to be dynamic and based on MMR, not on the artificial number such as LP, then I could get behind this system. But the system (to my understanding) already takes AFKs into account when determining how to change your MMR after a game, so...

MysterQNov 26, 20171 votes

{quoted}

Notice how in your example they end up almost an entire division away from where they started...

If the ranked system gets an overhaul to be dynamic and based on MMR, not on the artificial number such as LP, then I could get behind this system. But the system (to my understanding) already takes AFKs into account when determining how to change your MMR after a game, so...

I'll finish my example, again assuming generous 50/50.

L = 80 LP W = 100 LP, promo L = x - - W = x W - L = x W ? (In my system Riot would forgive this, although Riot currently counts remakes as losses?) W = x W W Ok, the promo part might need to be worked out. 19 games to raise 1 rank being VERY generous.

No AFK protection. 20, 5, 25, 10, 30, 15, 35, 20, 40, 25, 45, 30, 50, 35, 55, 40, 60, 45, 65, 50, 70, 55, 75, 60, 80, 65, 85, 70, 90, 75, 95, 80, Promo 33 games to promo. It just sounds ridiculous. 3 games to fail promo. Repeat last part of process.

You are right. IF someone had an AFK every 4 games, and won every 2/3 real games. He would climb quite a bit faster vs someone going straight 50/50. But even 19 games is not very fast, and that is being generous with AFK protection. There are plenty of ways to adjust the system to account for this. though. Or Riot can continue to make people have unfair games.

If that is what you want Riot to support by all means. It is a stupid system though.