: Honest opinion on League ranking system
Du Ma Mi (NA)
: I used to love laning against Yasuo, but now I'm terrified
1) Trading windows minimize to reduce conqueror effect. How? Akali shroud. Fizz Q, E, you can choose. 2) Tabis.
QQ2Me (NA)
: I am toxic, but Riot promotes this.
Why did you get downvoted? Ungh... Another day in the Rift Post-Lobby. Another day in the forums.
AmazoX (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=DummyTroll,realm=EUW,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ExygQgiE,comment-id=000700010000,timestamp=2018-03-13T13:27:04.042+0000) > > They don't care. > > "The short point is people are babies, and riot is more concerned with not having people get their feelings hurt by words of simple disagreement (i.e. stating an opinion, or saying what you saw, without in any way saying anything directly offensive to someone) than people actively ruining their game." What a bitchy move from their side, someone should get this situation visible to the public so they know how fucked up their punishment system's creator RIOT TANTRAM is from Riot Games, the company that has the biggest playerbase in the multiplayer genre & how he thinks this case is okay, shame on Riot Games.
I moved on. Playing more and more Fortnite, and less and less League. The way "they start caring" is when the player base starts not caring. You can't beat a company as Riot in the Public Marketing. No way Jose!
AmazoX (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=ValyrianBlade,realm=NA,application-id=ZGEFLEUQ,discussion-id=ExygQgiE,comment-id=0007,timestamp=2018-03-12T18:59:58.002+0000) > > The short point is people are babies, and riot is more concerned with not having people get their feelings hurt by words of simple disagreement (i.e. stating an opinion, or saying what you saw, without in any way saying anything directly offensive to someone) than people actively ruining their game. > > Someone can int for 20 games straight and say stuff like "oops got caught again" and never see a punishment. Someone can say in that ONE game that the guy doing it is a loser with no life if he has to ruin a game for other people, and get banned. > > Riot has just lost it on the punishment side. Since when does a witness in a court get prosecuted for pointing out what they saw or what they interpreted? That's basically what they're doing. > > If they want to stop people talking too much, they should set a limit on number of messages you can send per game. > > The simple truth is that NOTHING you said is against the rules. Riot is full of it to claim otherwise. > > If I counted in chat, typing 1, 2, 3, ... One number per 20 seconds, I'd probably get a ban too. For what? Who am I hurting? > > USING THEIR OWN ADVICE, ANYONE CAN MUTE MY SPAM AT ANY TIME, AND LITERALLY NO DAMAGE IS DONE BECAUSE I HAVEN'T SAID ANYTHING OFFENSIVE. > > You voiced a different opinion in an adult way, and got punished because of it. Protectionism is unreal. This comment deserve's to be pinned right under Riot Tantram's comment to show how horrible his thoughts are.
They don't care. "The short point is people are babies, and riot is more concerned with not having people get their feelings hurt by words of simple disagreement (i.e. stating an opinion, or saying what you saw, without in any way saying anything directly offensive to someone) than people actively ruining their game."
mah1foo (EUW)
: I do 100% agree that my method wasn't the best available even if my intentions were, and I've already learned in the previous thread how to act next time :) Thanks for your words still. > So if your MF was flaming the enemy, why was it necessary to go in all chat for that long? Because she wasn't the only one, enemies were flaming too. If MF and enemies are gang flaming him in the all chat, that's where I feel like I should defend him. This would've been much cleaner if it was one guy flaming him, but it was literally three enemies and MF from my team. > It doesn't look like you stood up for someone who got called "some of the worst slurs available" it only looks like you were addressing inting so what you say now doesn't match what your chat log reflects. Yeah but he was being called a retard and whatnot _because_ they said he's trolling and inting. Which he wasn't. If they say "wow report this retard inter", I say that they got it wrong and he's not inting. The only reason they call him by slurs is because they think he's inting. > However, the rest of the game you were still arguing with MF. What was the point of that? If you have a constructive conversation like we are having in trying to figure out what the problem is and how to best address it, then it's going to have a point. I wanted to teach him that not everyone who dies is an evil inter. Maybe she'll remember it next game and maybe she'll be the next guy to stand between the bully and the victim. Unlikely, but I can dream. But yeah again, I agree that my method wasn't perfect. I still don't agree with Riot's punishment.
"Toxicity is the degree to which a chemical substance or a particular mixture of substances can damage an organism". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxicity#Etymology At some point, a Rioter decided to use that word (the adjective) for another purpose. Marketing. The League Of Legends community is one of the lowest ethically base, spread around the internet. That is a fact. Defending someone is not negative. It is noble. Can you defend someone, even yourself, in League. Think it twice, they call it retaliation. And then there are the double-edge moralists. I wonder how many of those NA-Rioters are pro weapon-law. Self-defense? Everything has the same base ethics. Internet or not Internet. Wonder why there is no tribunal? Why everything is automated? " The League Of Legends community is one of the lowest ethically base, spread around the internet." They can't afford people in the payroll to check things. Bottom line, if you like the game, which it's not bad. Mute all and don't try to be noble. Just do your thing. Play.
mah1foo (EUW)
: (Follow up thread) Riot found my punishment for defending an enemy who was being bullied correct
Fortnite and move on. I got a 14-days ban because I am on stage 3 on this account. The only thing I did was spam "quote me, scroll up". Because someone report called me for flamer. And yeah, I was tilted because I had dont know how many games in a row where someone was report calling. Funny facts, one of the games that was given as proof of my negative attitude, we were 4 vs 5, with an AFK top. The player who reported me. And 2 others. I got 2 honors. And a ggwp post lobby from our enemies. Spamming "quote me" is a major offense, even if you got tilted by a real negative player. Big time *** up system.
Artemia (NA)
: The logic behind this change is absurd. You want to force midlaners to stay in lane and to encourage interaction between midlaners with this change. Your intentions are fine, except you failed to realize several things. 1. **The only way for a midlaner to have a major impact on the game is through roaming during the midgame. ** This meta is dominated by ADCs and Supports. Whichever team has the better botlane will prevail in the end. If your botlane feeds early on and the enemy ADC can just take down bot turret, dragon, and then rotate mid to siege, there is nothing you can do as a Midlaner. If your botlane wins, then congrats for the free win as long you played decent in your own lane. However, midlaners spike during the midgame and they have a chance to help their ADC get fed and carry the late game. That is done through roaming. By limiting the number of opportunities to roam, you are taking away even more leverage that midlaners have over the game. You are essentially forcing midlaners to play the 1v1 while they have no realistic way to control what the botlane will become. And guess what? It doesn't matter how fed you are as a midlaner (unless you're playing hypercarries like Vladimir, Cassiopeia, or Azir); your botlane is the one deciding the game. And you need to help your botlane overcome the enemy botlane. By taking away roam power, you are actually REDUCING the macro knowledge required for midlaners to thrive in the current state of the game. If you want to fix this problem, then fix the absurdity with how ADCs are scaling so fast. Fix the insane number of ways that supports can peel for their ADCs while providing them with steroids. Playing ADC is just too forgiving with the number of protection items existing in the game, while midlaners are forced to either act as secondary supports for their ADCs or engage in an assassination where one tiny mistake will screw everything up while perfect play won't necessarily yield any rewards. If extended 1v1s favor any particular midlaners, it's going to favor those who can potentially 1v9. Look at the competitive meta right now: Azir, Cassiopeia, Ryze, Corki. All of them are hypercarries. You are only strengthening those who are already strong and nerfing the weak ones even further. 2. **This change will heavily favor midlaners who have insane waveclear and can still easily clear the wave despite these changes (eg. Taliyah). ** You are pushing through a change without considering what the current meta is like, who has the greatest leverage in deciding the game's outcome, and what midlaners need to do in order to make an impact on the game. Increasing minion HP growth won't change the fact that midlaners need to roam in order to have an impact. This will favor champions whose waveclear is already above average and can probably still clear the wave with ease despite the change. Taliyah is a notable example, since she can already one shot the entire wave with one single rotation. She's going to be fine with these changes. But other midlaners won't. This makes Lux, who is practically the only midlaner who cannot one shot caster minions even if she keeps up with her items, is going to become even worse. This also punishes champions whose waveclear is just strong enough to kill caster minions with one rotation. That makes the midlane meta even less diverse. You want to promote diversity by encouraging interaction and mechanical skill, but in the end it leaves fewer midlaners as viable choices. If the enemy picks Taliyah and clears the wave with ease, who am I going to pick in response? The champions who used to clear waves with ease are no longer an option. And if I pick a weak waveclear champion, Taliyah is just going to outroam me, have a greater impact on botlane, and make their ADC extremely fed while my ADC is left to dry after being dived over and over while I cannot do anything because I'm farming under tower! So if you want to encourage more interaction in mid, then reduce the leverage that botlane has on the game. Fix the state of affairs in bot before you keep making midlaners worse than they are right now.
Leaving aside the ADC discussion. "However, midlaners spike during the midgame and they have a chance to help their ADC get fed and carry the late game. That is done through roaming. By limiting the number of opportunities to roam, you are taking away even more leverage that midlaners have over the game." ... "This will favor champions whose waveclear is already above average and can probably still clear the wave with ease despite the change. " Totally true :) I guess mana-less Assassins are directly buffed too. Or anyone with low resource wave-clear (autos?).
: There are edge case you didnt consider actually. You can freelose until you reach the lowest mmr ever, let's say it's 0. Then you keep losing a thousant game at this elo. Then you start playing seriously, litterally winning every single game : in less than 100 games you'll be diamond, yet your total record would be 100 - 1000 which is a bit less than 10% winrate, yet you are climbing. There are some other few edge case as well, but what you have to remember is that it's your winrate on your last 50-100 games which is interesting to look at.
:) True. I wasn't taking into account edge cases.
: I'm not overly worried about Brand's stun in particular. Yeah, it's there, but other champs have better CC options (looking at you, Morgana). Brand's issue is that the stun is usually set up by an unmissable E, then followed up with a W that you won't be able to dodge. EQW followed by passive detonation is a stupidly massive amount of damage early on that Brand realistically only has to land one skillshot for.
Hence, dodge the Q. Hey, lets remove Q from Blitz, if he lands it on Adc level 2 is GG. Hey, lets remove R from Fizz, if he lands it you are dead fish. Hey, lets remove Annie passive. She just point-and-click killed me. Hey, Malza just R me to death... Hey, lets remove ... You know the drill. I agree on one point, every spell in LoL should be a skillshot. EVERY ONE.
: Waveclear work for 8.6 or later
Smite in Lane incoming :)
: >Promos for Gold V >Top lane is Bronze II >Mid lane is SIlver V on a 10 game loss streak >Bot lane is a duo but are very toxic I know the feel man.
Yesterday I was matched vs a team whom had a player in promos for gold 5. Their top laner had bronze 2 mmr at silver 5 :) They lost. :p I have to say the game went on forever... I was cringing... 40 mins long. But, well, kinda funny a Bronze 2 mmr guy in a gold 5 promos :)
Bârd (NA)
: Azir can roam. Nobody disputes this. The issue is that he shouldn't be roaming if it means running directly behind an assassin. He can 1v1 well... on his terms. An assassin getting the jump on him thanks to brush can easily kill him. Also, Azir isn't the only one with this issue. Almost every mage has the exact same problem following roaming assassins.
Op words: "I play Azir, ALOT, and laning phase he's just straight up terrible in 1v1's " "Now, they're just going to ping mia on me and ask why I don't roam. It's obvious, Katarina is going to kill me." I thought it was all about the post. And as I said. Azir should kick Katarina ass 1 vs 1. It is DESIGNED to mitigate most of kata kit at least. You can argue with other assassins, like Zed. But Azir kit destroys kata. Yeah, if you argue that kata is 1 item ahead... any assassin will destroy you. Then, OP states that "he is not roaming". His bot lane (I assume he is male) asks him to roam, they don't ask to roam to bot. For god sake, if kata went bot and you see her at bot. Well, what about going top? Too scared of enemy jungler? Are you just afk farm your lane until win or loss? This guy (OP) has no clue about mid, no clue about kata azir matchup and no clue in general. Push to win! And do something with the time you win from that. Being reactive don't win games. You just scavenge enemy mistakes. Being proactive, you can decided if you win or lose by your own hand.
: That's a matter of perspective. A gold looks godlike compared to a bronze, put me in front of a bronze and I'll crush my lane, farm nearly perfectly, even If i do mistakes you probably wont notice it because I will not get punished for these mistakes. Put a master to face me and I look trash, he will punish every attempt to farm, i'll miss CS trying to avoid his poke, i'll get rekt, any single mistake I do will backfire instantly. In the two games I would have been the same player with the same skill, yet in one you would want me in your team and in the other you'd report me for feeding. When someone feeds in your team : "Omg he's so bad". When you get fed : "Omg I'm so good". The brain is really good at finding excuses when we are mediocre, else I think we would all be suicidal, but as a matter of fact, 99% of us just SUXX at this game. The 1% left might have some clue how to play this game, at least the basics. > winners find solutions losers make excuses Remember this. No matter what your mom did tell you, you are not special.
Haha "Remember this. No matter what your mom did tell you, you are not special." Loved this one. In some cases is quite the opposite :) Remember this. No matter what your mom did tell you, you are special. "The brain is really good at finding excuses when we are mediocre, else I think we would all be suicidal, but as a matter of fact, 99% of us just SUXX at this game. The 1% left might have some clue how to play this game, at least the basics." Everything is relative as you stated previously. And by matter of fact, there are only 3 kind of players: Those with 51%+ win rate. Those are improving and climbing the ladder. Thus better than their current rank. Those at 50%. Those are at their spot. Those at 49%- Win rate. Those were boosted, duoing boosted, meta or RNG gods favored. But decaying to their place. Where are you at?
LankPants (OCE)
: I'm pretty sure Socrates predates Aristotle by a fair bit. According to Wikipedia Socrates died in 399 BC, while Aristotle was born in 384 BC. Remember BC dating works towards 0 as its end date, so 1 BC is a year later than 2 BC. Aristotle would have been using some form of the Socratic method. The problem with both is that they didn't have the strict idea of trial by experimentation which defines modern day science either way.
*face palms* Ok, let me put it clearer. He was "ahead" because he left aside the Socratic method pursuing the empiricism... Which sets some basis for the experimentation... Because it is based on "OBSERVATION". Sorry for the use of capital letters. Trying to put it clear and loud. Aristotle kept using the "logic" and applied the logic on his observations. Mostly, what current scientists do... His err about "flat Earth" comes from that "experimentation" watching the Sun go "down" in the Horizon and applying math... Also related on how the light curves out entering the atmosphere I think. The thing is, Aristotle, was "way ahead" of Socrates because he was quite a pioneer on "scientific method"...
Infernape (EUW)
: Once he scales up and has a few items. His early game damage isn't that high compared to a champion like Katarina.
Kata damage is low as well. Only passive and W out shines early. And you step on those, you deserve the death. Specially when you can dash out as well as Azir. The only way for kata to get into range for her W is to dash in with E. Or that Azir is dumb enough to walk into a dagger. Her poke Q damage is even lower than Azir poke damage.
Bârd (NA)
: He beats Kat in lane by poking her out. He beats Kat in teamfights by keeping his distance and murdering her. If he's following Kat's ganks, he doesn't have time to poke, he's putting himself right in range, and he doesn't have the items to have a good all-in. Also, Kat can easily shunpo into Azir's E path, canceling his escape.
assumption 1: he doesn't have time to poke. assumption 2: he's putting himself right in range assumption 3: he doesn't have the items to have a good all-in. By the way, you don't want an all-in... You want a poke to death. Or better said, stab to death.
LankPants (OCE)
: That's true, but at the same time I don't actually think the sun moving around the earth was part of that. In the complete void of any of the modern day techniques or knowledge about the dynamics of the solar system it was equally as logical to say the sun orbited the earth as the earth orbited the sun. After all, the sun and moon seem to follow a 24 hour cycle in the sky from the ground that would be expected from a ternary system where two smaller objects of equal size orbit around a singular large object, until further experimentation was done there's not really a lot wrong with this conclusion. The people making the mistake weren't Aristotle and his contemporaries who made the best assumption they could with limited evidence, it was the people in Galileo's time who continued to insist this was how the solarsystem worked in the face of mounting evidence. As for the other issues, they were problems of the Socratic method not valuing experimentation, it's why even when someone like Newton is wrong he's considerably less wrong and what he gave can still be a valuable approximation even if it's not exactly how gravity works. The scientific method used by Newton's time is just superior to the Socratic method.
Well, precisely, Aristotle was way ahead of Socrates... The argument about Socratic method is out of the blue here... He started using empiricism, which bases itself in observation. It is true that experimentation might have not been developed 2300 years ago, but he used "natural cases" as base to that "experimentation" for sure... "Aristotle immersed himself in empirical studies and shifted from Platonism to empiricism.[9] He believed all peoples' concepts and all of their knowledge was ultimately based on perception. Aristotle's views on natural sciences represent the groundwork underlying many of his works."
NemeBro (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=LankPants,realm=OCE,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=6A9LzYXA,comment-id=00020004,timestamp=2018-03-05T00:44:30.117+0000) > > The difference is that Dopa can be assumed to be working with an up to date knowledge of his subject and he is at least in some senses an expert. At one point Aristotle may have been an expert, but knowledge has advanced to the point where his input to the scientific fields are no longer really relevant, 2500 years of progress will as it turns out do that to just about anyone, even people who said far more credible things like Newton are now challenged by newer and better fitting theories. > > If you look at scientific publishings over the last 10 or so years they will generally not be challenged unless they were poorly conducted. This really has nothing to do with fame vs being unknown, it's recency vs time to have a better theory replace it. As absurd as this statement is Dopa has an advantage over Aristotle because he has more recent testings. There's not necessarily any difference. Aristotle said a lot of dumb shit that was self-evidently wrong even during his day, like that because male horses had two more teeth than female horses, men had two more teeth than women.
TO be honest, probably your brain is a peanut compared to Aristotle's. I didn't read the whole oeuvres of him, just some fragments about politics and derived works. He was accurate and some of his ideas are still valid. About "flat Earth", he used a scientific method of his era. And math. And those two gave him a high probability of a flat earth. But it's what you can have as scientific. Sometimes you err. That, doesn't make it "dumb shit". You can err. When you observe the Horizon, without any other tools than the very basic. Applying math, the most probable is that Earth is flat... And about OP. Nothing new under the sky. It's called meta. Some picks give you the edge to win. Because damage ratios, % damage reduction, mobility, item synergy, champion synergy, etc...
: Finally reforming
Stay steady on your chosen path. Ignore the puns, as you know better, because once you were like that. Everyone has the right to troll, be bad or mad. So it's yours as well the choice.
Bârd (NA)
: Well, the "comical" silver 4 player seems to know more about the game than you do. If Azir tries to follow a roaming Kat, Kat will notice he's not in lane, turn on him, and eviscerate him. This is just how it goes with mages and assassins.
I thought Azir kit destroys kata... Poked range vs melee assassin. Escape mechanism to avoid kata passive. Ulti to interrupt ulti. Losing as Azir 1 vs 1 with kata sounds wrong. By the way, "map awareness" is a player skill... Not a champion skill :p
: Getting an early lead and punishing is THE way to solo carry. You do this by capitalizing on bad play from the enemy. You get first tower by capitalizing on either the enemies poor back timing or making them so weak they cannot fight you and have to give up tower. Both of these are cases where you punish the enemy for being worse than you. Explain how they aren't related. At 40 minutes nothing is solo.
This. At 40 min. in, you are yelling for a random result. I slightly disagree about "At 40 minutes nothing is solo.", in the sense that, mistakes are solo and winning is more about what you do as a team about those solo mistakes. It is true that snowballing bot is more effective but because 40% of the team resources are located there.
Rioter Comments
Ifneth (NA)
: You have much to learn. Lemme help you with that. Start with this video series: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iko2tqmDpJQ Watch it every so often and apply its lessons every game. If you can apply it consistently, then your early and mid game should reach a mid-diamond level. I am not joking. If you are playing a solo lane, then remember that you are not playing a solo game. You have to notice the plays happening around you and around the map. Otherwise, what you describe will happen, as fights happen without you and fed enemies push lanes to your teammates’ turrets. This is especially true for midlane. You mentioned your jungler. While poor warding makes the enemy jungler hard to track during soloqueue games, even in higher elo, your jungler is on your minimap. You should always know more or less where he is, so you know when he can help you, and run to help him if he gets into trouble. “But my minions!” you might say. This is where League really gets interesting, and I’ll explain to whet your appetite to learn. I hope. The closer the wave is to your tower, the longer it takes to clear the wave, and the slower and weaker your champion is early, the harder it is to help your jungler because you will miss more farm for a smaller chance of helping him. The reverse is true, and these two things combined are called lane priority. If you have it, then you can do all sorts of things, like help your teammates, place deep wards, or eat honeyfruit. The jungler doesn’t need to establish priority, so he can always do this stuff, but if you can establish it, then you can not only become a ‘second jungler’ for your team but also shut the enemy jungler down by forcing him to choose between wasting his time ganking a losing lane or letting it fall further behind as you crash wave after wave of minions under your opponent’s turret. Trust me: not you or I or almost anyone can easily get all the minions under there. This is how you carry the game. Even if your jungler is off-main, off-role, or autofilled, you can ‘win your lane’ to ‘carry’ him. I put quotes around that because you can see how much more technical and interesting the whole process would be than that. Does this help?
This person knows what s/he is talking about. Wave clear/push, easier win. Basically as it stated: " "The closer the wave is to your tower, the longer it takes to clear the wave, and the slower and weaker your champion is early, the harder it is to help your jungler because you will miss more farm for a smaller chance of helping him." Merely, setting wards on enemy jungle while enemy laner depushes your wave helps your team: it gives info about WHERE or not is enemy jungler or potentially roamers.
Bultz (NA)
: I feel like the jungler makes top and mid to irrelevant now a days
Solo deaths and 2 vs 2 deaths have more impact than jungler presence. When someone dies 1 vs 1 or 2 vs 2, means that the enemy is better than you (it might be a level/item power spike, but doesnt excuse the player because they should have known better too) AND they are ahead. Which results on: a losing lane. If you died to a gank(jungler or enemy laner roam), that doesn't imply that you are worst that your enemy laner. But most likely she is ahead now. So, Nop. It feels like you do nothing maybe because "you do nothing" to carry. To be honest, If my top or mid pushes their lane, I praise them. Well, if they do something while the lane is pushed. If they are being pushed in, they are creating enemy pressure. They are a liability. They are being carried. They are not contributing for the win. Nop. They are safer in their lane, but my jungle is compromised or other lanes are compromised because the enemy laner has time to pressure somewhere else without losing farm. Stop the whining.
: Queue dodging
It is already heavily punished. After 3 dodges I think you get 30 mins penalty queue. While trolling in champ selection is never punished. NO thanks.
: Why cinderhulk on Jax jg
4% of Max health is meh. It is also not AoE. Damage per second AoE + tankiness is far better. Shyv being an exception due the nature of Q and Q (while dragon form).
: try to manage a wave agaisnt a 300 armor malphite who will walk up to u and stand on top of u if u try to cs or freeze. try to manage a wave when the jungler is ganking you.
Dang! A 2:30 min 300 armor malphite. That champion is broken. I would shyt my pants too. I would also avoid to counter-gank that lane. I will start spamming malphite... Can't wait to queue up!
Eedat (NA)
: > I assume > I assume > I assume You can't make a study and then just assume half the parameters. Like stated, your study is pretty much 100% completely worthless
There are many forms of reasoning methods... Deductive, abductive... Inductive... Sometimes assumptions need to be made. Premises. And I used the sentence "I assume". But I meant that we all give for granted that the game matches you according to your MMR. The quetion is: is it biased by winning rates? But actually, you have a point. There are premises that you can take and some that not. I started adding mates MMR, also mine (as provided in OP GG for this account) Because the real MMR is available.
: > So it only matters the current win ratio. Yeah, sure, the "current" win ratio **at the point in time when they were matched with you**. Which is not the point in time when people will be able to see your results, since you don't show them "in real time". See what I mean?
Yeah I understood that. And that s why you said as well (I think) "I think there are more interesting and less obvious stuff to experiment with and that you're just wasting your time" And yeah, Human race will not benefit at all of a case-study about 100 or 50 or whatever number of League of Legends game. Also is meaningless, because it will be just 1 case (with X games). It is also meaningless because if the matchmaker is not biased (or the other way around), Riot can change it at any point without us noticing. But it s not meaningless in the sense that I would have an answer... Even if it is outdated :)
Leonerdo (NA)
: What OP is doing here is not debating the validity of the conspiracy, but announcing to the public that it's not even a debate; it's a lost cause. There is no proof for the conspiracy. OP is just trying to keep people from spreading it, lest some gullible souls eventually get convinced by the sheer zeal of the conspiracy theorists. You don't need a case-analysis to assert a basic assumption (that matchmaking is based on MMR, not WR) which has stood for years. Still, the effort you are putting into this case study is appreciated. No one _should need_ the evidence to believe the basic assumption, but I suppose it would help convince the conspiracy theorists.
:) Well, from a scientific point of view. Those 2 statements have the same validity without proof: 1) Matchmaker matches you with lower win rate mates when your own win rate peaks above X%. 2) Matchmaker matches you with randomly win rate mates as long as you have similar MMR. Basically, that a guy denies a conspiray without proof is so paradoxal... Is like having your own conspiracy that states the contrary. I feel annoyed that the OP doesnt see the irony of his post. And like I said, before I was more visceral and really believed on this... Now, I dont care of true or false. But I would like to know. I probably will not be able because its impossible (for me) to keep so high win rate for a large sample... I am not that good at this game. But I will try my best. And just post the results.
: Basical all of that is invalid without the enemy teams info Also matchmaking is done by MMR (I may be wrong but I thought they had changed MMR so that it included other factors now) so why wpuld you not use that instead of winrate?
Because the discussion is about win rate. Not MMR. I assume that my team mates and myself have the same MMR. I assume that If I have MMR 1200, I will matched with and against people of around 1200 MMR. I dont include enemy information, because precisely, the discussion is about YOUR team mates. By the way. It s a case-study. I am self not convinced about the VALIDITY of the assumption. So far, 10 games: I have a WR ranging from 65 - 75% and the "team average" current WR of my mates is 44%. My WR is a range because when I started the case, it was 65%... I use current WR with last 20 games. Because obviously, everyone would have 50% win rate at the end of the journey. So your average, no matter what. Will end at 50%. If you play a large sample of games.
: > So the question comes down to: does the matchmaker matches you with people with significant less WR when your WR hits the 65% or above? No. Plain and simple. But sure, please do the research. I think there are more interesting and less obvious stuff to experiment with and that you're just wasting your time, but if your study manages to convince some of those conspirationists... Well, worth it, I guess. Not sure how you will make it verifiable, though. By the time you finish and publish your results, your team-mates' winrate might have changed a lot compared to what it was when you were paired with them.
To be honest, my research has nothing to do about convincing anyone. I do it for myself. It's not a waste of time. In the sense, that I do not profit from it but it helps me relaxing. By the way, I was a firmly believer of that "conspiracy" before. Not anymore. But those beliefs were biased on my emotional state of being tilted. Verifiable... Well, It's players history. I don't figure out random numbers. And again, future or past win rates doesn't matter, because the assumption is: "matchmaker matches you with low win rate mates when your win ratio peaks above 65%". So it only matters the current win ratio. Everyone win ratio tends to 50% at the long run. Even those with current 20% win ratio. By the way, I like your arguments on the forums. Thanks for giving your point of view.
: The over-layer isn't used by the match-making. You can be in Silver 3 and matched with people in Gold, or whatever. The over-layer has no influence. If you are at 1200 MMR you might play with people at +/- 100 MMR, but that's simply because there isn't enough people at exactly 1200 to create a full game of 10 players with all the right positions. That's not because of the over-layer, it's entirely independent. The problem of boosters and decay is entirely different. I won't start another debate over that and I'll stick to the point at hand: the matchmaking doesn't choose the results of a match beforehand, it does its best to create fair matches where both teams have the same chance of winning.
I know I was off-track. But talking about MMR in a Win Rate % discussion is also off-track. The real question is as follows: I agree that the matchmaker matches players with close MMR. But, what would you prefer being yourself a 1200 MMR player. A mate with 1200MMR and a WR of 20% in the last 10 games. Or a mate with 1180 MMR and WR of 80% in the last 10 games. The first would point to a poor game knowledge that got favored by a patch meta shift. Or simply boosted: even duoing with someone. Or just a tilted player. Or network issues. Or recently handicap. Or ill. But for sure not a positive factor. All factors indicate that he might continue not performing well. Best case would be "tilted" and you have 0 guarantee that s/he would not tilt during the match. So the question comes down to: does the matchmaker matches you with people with significant less WR when your WR hits the 65% or above? And that's what I am doing. I use my bronze 2 placed account this season to conduct the test. I write down results and when I hit 100 games. I would publish it. It is not an easy task, because: 1) I need my winning rate to keep constant above 65%. So far, so good. Hanging around 75%. But, I know that, as I climb, it will decay eventually. Unless I improve. The thing is, I don't give it for granted. I just do the research.
: > [{quoted}](name=Kai Guy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=08rlJOkc,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2018-02-14T09:43:50.803+0000) > > KDA does not directly result in a win. I used to love AP trist season 2 and 3. I could easily go 20-5-6 Legit 1 click 1 shot with her R doing 1700 to 2100 damage. but.... if we did not take objectives I would fall off and frequently lose. I'm 20+ in my KDA, I did hella well right? Is it my teammates fault then? > > turns out, Destroy the nexus, this is what matters most for a win, and if your unable to consistently make this happen for your team, your KDA and damage are meaningless. I learned this first hand, Coordination and cooperation make for better wins. > > you have 2000+ games, so you must have experienced a loss when the most feed person on your team was to busy staying in their lane, farming, killing folks by them self, that resulted in your team losing because the did not contribute to a team oriented condition to destroy the nexus right?\ > > Look over the replays your in, how much are you working for objectives that matter? i didnt said kda is everything , but for the most part and the quick answer over one look , kda is the best spot to look at ...... and your kda with your top played champion is 2.2 53% winrate .... i know objectives matter the most .. but to say kda is nothing is being ignorant ... also there is no way to know if a player have done well objective wise in a game other then watching the replay ... are u suggesting i go watch peoples replay every time i wanna mimic their performance ? :))) im gonna get old like that brother
Dude, you have the wrong mindset... Kai Guy gives you positive advice and you just spit on it. And no, kda just reflects a little portion of something. The stats to look at: - main jungler? check Vision score and objective damage stats. - support heavy CC-control? Check CC score and vision score. Also check KDA of your fed carry to see if you did well. - Top? This one is trickier... But I truly think a top laner should foremost map pressure, aka forcing multiple resources into him(mostly due split push pressure, thats the optimal win srategy). How to check? Turret damage, KDA, total damage dealt, KP %, but best way is to look replay for top laners. - ADC: damage dealt to objectives and champions. - Mid: also tricky to check on stats and depending on mid-role. I think best way to check your performance as MID laner is: CS/minute and KP % and compare those to enemy MID laner. You are ahead? you roamed better and/or influenced better the fights that mattered. Watch out, a nice CS without KP% means you afk farmed while enemy roamed. SO basically poor.
: Simple enough. Check random accounts on OP.GG or whatever, and you'll see that most of them aren't exactly at 50%. Check the Top Challenger and Master accounts and you'll see they are **far above** 50%. If the system was *forcing* people at 50% winrate, he could give very bad teammates even to a Challenger player to make sure they got 50%, but that doesn't happen. Most people are around 50% but it's just a consequence, not a goal, and so it's very approximative. What the system tries to do is giving you fair matches. If it manages to do that, if your matches are actually fair, you will win half and lose half. But the goal, the priority, is giving you fair matches, that's exactly the opposite of forcing the results.
The thing is now there is an over-layer with tiers/divisions. On paper if you have 1200 MMR you should play with people with 1200 MR. The fact is, that overlay makes and placements make me play wtih people 100+ MMR above. That overlay makes boosted people don't decay as fast. Believe me I had games at plat4 MMR past seasons where mid/adc did 8K damage each and had the cheek to flame mates. In a 40 min game. Now I realize those people are/were clearly boosted. But the systems allows and encourages that. If you don't have a tier-safety and your MMR decays weekly (or daily, no matter your MMR). That would reflect your MMR more accurately and would force boosters to play EVERY day the effort to boost. Impossible. Probably, we would see then an increment of scripters or other cheat mechanisms like back in S3. I started playing when they introduced the tier system and I thought with my lack of knowledge about MMR that the change was cool... Well, know I can say is just there for the ever-complaining Millennial that cant look at him/herself to improve.
: Please stop embarrassing these boards with your "forced 50% winrate" conspiracy theories.
To disclose this, I have started a study of my own games. With relative WR, average WR, position WR. I post a daily report usually with stats on EUW off-topic board. I use to give comment on mates performance and then check WR stats. Most of the time, the worse I rate them before checking stats, the worse is their WR or/and their MMR compared to my current MMR. Only of my own team. I don't think useful to post enemy team WR, so far because I have to teamwork with mine, not the enemy. I might include enemy's stats in future reports... May be. For this case-study I used a Silver 4 MMR account who was placed into bronze 2 at start of this season. Usually, I level 1 to 4 accounts each season to gold and then I stop playing those accounts. The purpose of this case-study as stated above is to disclosure if the matchmaker assigns worst WR to you once above certain WR%. I post my own WR and mates average. Of course, in my team average I do not apply mine. I use current WR to calculate this, so if you have an overall WRo f 51% but your current WR is 40% (last 10 games) I use the second. @OP Irony of your post: When you do a statement about the non-existence of a conspiracy without performing a case-analysis... You are conspiring about the non-existence of a conspiracy. I started to conduct this analysis because around bronze-silver-gold MMR, most of the players are like you. State things that are really paradoxical, visceral and most of the times... Non factual.


Level 68 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion