Bârd (NA)
: A big part of damage creep isn't just the raw numbers, it's the items people buy early on.
You're getting things backwards. The reason people rush offensive items now is because base damage is lower across the board. Feel free to go through the patch notes and look at how high the base damage on abilities used to be in S3. This is why mages would get away with rushing Abyssal Scepter first item. Also ADCs rushed BT because it gave 100 fucking AD, it wasn't some defensive item(it didn't even have the shield passive back then). The flat and %pen change was also in Season 3, and people weren't complaining about S4 and S5 being some insane damage seasons(in fact both were heavy tank metas, especially s5).
: You dont know what your talking about. Ryze does not do 1600 to multiple targets in a teamfight. Quit making false claims. 2nd she does more raw dps than Ruze, her E is at a 1/2 second cd once she hits max cdr. In addition, she can kite much harder and has better anti mobility cc. Ryze has more upfront burst, but Cass is way better in a 1v2 1v3 than Ryze. Like I said Ryze lacks sustain, which Cassiopeia has. Cassiopeia can still do AOE dmg, not as mich as Ryze, but lets stop pretending Ryze blows up whole teams with just EQ. Unless your team is dumb enough to be that close to each other, or you get wombo combod, Cass is a mich better teamfighter than Ryze. She has more potential CC, she can perma slow multiple targets with Rylais Q, she has grounding (One of the STRONGEST not ultimates in the game), and more CC on her ultimate. Cassiopeia beats Ryze in : Raw DPS (she is probalby top 3 in highest DPS) CC, Kiting, Teamfighting. Ryze beats Cassiopeia in : Upfront burst, objective control (with ult) I dont think I’ve had a problem with Ryze unless im playing Teemo or some immobile melee champion.
>Ryze does not do 1600 to multiple targets https://i.imgur.com/2U0vRCX.png Explain this then? That's Showmaker doing 1723 damage with an empowered Q to multiple targets. Sure, it would be less to champions with higher magic resistance but he has void staff anyway >Let's stop pretending Ryze blows up whole temas with just EQ If you watched worlds at all that's literally what he does lategame.
: Yeah, like, I think Cassiopeia does more dmg than Ryze, has more reliable movement speed buffs, has more CC (since she usually builds Rylais), and has more sustain. I dont think people are calling Cassiopeia bullshit at all.
>Cassiopeia does more dmg than Ryze When you see Cassio Es doing 1600 damage to multiple targets you get back to me.
: No, the solution is to fucking provide voice chat so the jungler can actually tell you he's going for the dragon so you can hold the opponent jungler hostage top side by playing passive-aggressive. This isn't a team based game without voice chat, no matter how much you guys may hate the idea.
You don't have to die or even burn flash to a gank for that gank to seriously ruin your entire lane. If the enemy jungler is topside you now can't contest the wave, your opponent can do whatever they want with it. They can now stack up 3 waves in a huge slowpush and have the jungler come and dive you. Even if you ward everything out, read the dive and back off you're still losing: 3 entire waves under tower(450ish gold, more than half a level in XP early) probably 2 plates if your opponent has demolish(320 gold) So now you're down 770 gold, more than 2 and a half kills worth of gold AND xp and the jungler hasn't even touched you. The only dragon that's even remotely worth it in this situation is Infernal, mountain isn't even that great in soloQ because people don't play around baron in the same way. Because towerdiving is so easy you can't just stay under tower and try to outplay the dive, you have to back off all the way to your tier 2 and cry as you miss a ton of gold and experience. Voice chat would in no way fix this issue, it would just piss people off when their lane is 100% over at 0/0/0 and the jungler just says "dw guys I got ocean drake xd".
Cräfty (EUW)
: A message from a jungler to all lanes!
A message to all junglers from a toplaner: WATCH SOME GOD DAMN WAVE MANAGEMENT EDUCATIONAL VIDEOS. When you "tax" after a gank and I'm recalling make sure the wave fully crashes into their tower. Don't just kinda push it out and then leave, the enemy reinforcement wave could come in and stop it from fully getting under the tower creating a really shitty wave that doesn't bounce back to me for a while and causes me to lose a ton of gold and XP. To do this you'll have to walk under tower, get aggroed by the enemy wave, then walk past the tower, dragging the enemy wave with you and making sure it doesn't delay our minion wave from fully hitting the turret. If there's a huge juicy wave and I'm recalling with intent to TP back then fuck off, I'm obviously planning to set up a freeze there and you "helping me push" isn't very helpful. Go take your own farm and don't mess up my freeze. When you ask for help and your laner is under tower, just concede a camp and do something more productive. Nobody is going to give up 4+ creeps in XP for one jungle camp, it's just not worth it. Don't expect the enemy jungler to randomly stay and fight you to the death after I leave lane. As soon as I leave he's going to back off and I'll have wasted a ton of time. So I won't leave in the first place and you shouldn't be starting a fight over nothing. You didn't "catch them", they agreed to fight you and as soon as they see the odds turning(by lanes going missing) they'll decide they don't want to fight you anymore and go away. If I have 2-3 waves stacked up under tower don't gank. It's an insanely stupid idea I'm probably down in XP and I REALLY want to collect all that gold and XP under tower as well as clearing the threat of a massive minion wave(seriously, that shit hurts earlygame). IF you gank now it's extremely risky. I'll be missing cs and I'll have to tank that massive fucking creepwave. It's only ever worth it if we get a very quick kill, if we have to chase them down I might even miss on creep XP and if we only get flash and no kill then I'm actually screwed because I'm losing resources under tower for that gank. Just hold it in for like 15 seconds and let me deal with that stacked up wave. Also: don't start fights we can't win. If I'm like Ryze against Renekton don't be stupid and start dumb fights over scuttle, we can't win that at lvl 3, Renekton is so much stronger than me in that 2v2. If I set up a freeze don't expect any further help from me. If I'm freezing I'm obviously not playing for pressure or to leave lane, I want to use that freeze to stay safe against the enemy jungler while also zoning my opponent off. If they overextend feel free to come for a free kill but if I leave lane that freeze is going to push into my tower and I'm going to be fucked. If you're really dead set on going for an invade or Herald give me a 30 second advance notice so I can get my wave management in order before I have to leave lane. Don't ping me like 3s before you go, wave management takes time. To get a wave where I want it I might need the next reinforcement wave and those spawn in 30 second intervals.
: > [{quoted}](name=SMURFF NAME HERE,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=zE2a8GUp,comment-id=00050000000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-11-06T08:38:33.108+0000) > > It's not. It's just the way S@20 aggregates their data. > > Lethality Items > > Set bonuses removed - these were feeling more like punishment than bonus, so this iteration makes all of the lethality items standalone and choices should depend on their unique value > Lethality item stats buffed (to compensate for lost set bonuses) > New item added Umbral Blade - this item takes on the blackout passive from Duskblade and is a cheap utility focused niche > Umbral Blade - 2400 total cost, Serated Dirk + 2 Long Swords, 50 AD + 10%CDR + 10 Lethality + Blackout passive > Duskblade now has Grevious Wounds on the Nightstalker damage proc, and the blackout effect is removed to create a bit more context for when Duskblade is the right choice > > Energize Items > > Some tuning on the individual items > Zeal now builds out of Cloak of Agility instead of Brawlers Glove (total cost 1400g and now has 25% crit chance) > Cloak of Agility crit chance 20% -> 25% > Brawlers glove removed from the shop" > > > These are the 11/5 changes, everything else is just repeated, including conqueror which was not changed. Conq has had the 15% healing effect(but no true damage) for a while. And it's definitely adaptive. I know the damn healing and true damage have been there for awhile. It could have changed today like how Cloud Drake Soul used to give a Spear of Shojin passive but now gives a burst of MS upon ulting. The Presence of Mind rune also got changed today too but didn't get put on the listing of general changes like the specifics of the Conqueror change. It also says again that Conqueror got changed to only AD. What are you trying to source that says it still gives Adaptive since I don't know you and have no reason to believe you vs something that has a high accuracy at reporting PBE changes. They not only have a reputation that makes me believe it gives only AD now but visual proof that it does so.
>Has a high accuracy at reporting PBE changes They had conq listed as "attack damage" a week ago. Yet everyone who played on PBE knew it was adaptive, S@20 didn't even change their post for an entire week. What makes you think they'd change it now?
: > [{quoted}](name=SMURFF NAME HERE,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=zE2a8GUp,comment-id=000500000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-11-06T08:01:29.775+0000) > > The change wasn't today, it's been out for a week on PBE. Today's update didn't even touch conqueror. Today's update was bringing in Preseason changes for one more time before they go to live. The update says as of 11/5 that Conqueror had a new effect "Basic attacks or spells that deal damage to an enemy champion grant 2 stacks of Conqueror for 8s, gaining ?X? Attack Damage per stack. Stacks up to 10 times. Ranged champions gain only 1 stack per basic attack. When fully stacked, heal for 15% of the damage you deal to champions." It says specifically Attack Damage per stack and not Adaptive Force. The photo I showed earlier was also from the update on 11/5 where is reads the same this as above where it only gives Attack Damage. The link as listed with that comment says the same thing and comes from a reliable source.
It's not. It's just the way S@20 aggregates their data. > UPDATE 11/5 Lethality Items Set bonuses removed - these were feeling more like punishment than bonus, so this iteration makes all of the lethality items standalone and choices should depend on their unique value Lethality item stats buffed (to compensate for lost set bonuses) New item added Umbral Blade - this item takes on the blackout passive from Duskblade and is a cheap utility focused niche Umbral Blade - 2400 total cost, Serated Dirk + 2 Long Swords, 50 AD + 10%CDR + 10 Lethality + Blackout passive Duskblade now has Grevious Wounds on the Nightstalker damage proc, and the blackout effect is removed to create a bit more context for when Duskblade is the right choice Energize Items Some tuning on the individual items Zeal now builds out of Cloak of Agility instead of Brawlers Glove (total cost 1400g and now has 25% crit chance) Cloak of Agility crit chance 20% -> 25% Brawlers glove removed from the shop" These are the 11/5 changes, everything else is just repeated, including conqueror which was not changed. Conq has had the 15% healing effect(but no true damage) for a while. And it's definitely adaptive.
: > [{quoted}](name=SMURFF NAME HERE,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=zE2a8GUp,comment-id=0005000000000000,timestamp=2019-11-06T06:52:56.296+0000) > > Yes, it's adaptive, people have already played with it on PBE. This was a change done today. So did your source test it today because today they updated it. I'm not trying to be a pest or a dick to you it's just a big difference I wanna be clear on since I'm seeing one thing from a source (Surrender@20) I've found to be reliable but hearing another.
The change wasn't today, it's been out for a week on PBE. Today's update didn't even touch conqueror.
: > [{quoted}](name=SMURFF NAME HERE,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=zE2a8GUp,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2019-11-06T06:25:37.038+0000) > > It's adaptive force, not AD. The tooltip just changes to "attack damage" or "ability power" depending on which you have more of. Essentially the tooltip itself is adaptive so they don't have to print "adaptive force" into every tooltip. https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-d_PejC4Dx-I/Xa-E09UUAVI/AAAAAAABaFM/6Kuudo8gXycRxRFead3mE6zhIsa7J6zHQCLcBGAsYHQ/s200/conqueror.png Are you sure about that since it is a pretty big difference? I'm just going off what it reads off Surrender@20 and the tooltip in the Rune screen just says AD instead of Adaptive Force.
Yes, it's adaptive, people have already played with it on PBE.
: [New Effect] "Basic attacks or spells that deal damage to an enemy champion grant 2 stacks of Conqueror for 8s, gaining ?X? Attack Damage per stack. Stacks up to 10 times. Ranged champions gain only 1 stack per basic attack. When fully stacked, heal for 15% of the damage you deal to champions." This is the new version on the PBE as of 11/5 per Surrender@20. http://www.surrenderat20.net/2019/11/115-pbe-update-pulsefire-thresh.html#more I do play these champions and I did like the idea of the heal as not all AP champions would want to get Hextech Gunblade,which is the only AP item that has a Spellvamp effect anymore, and could maybe use the new Conqueror but the fact that it's only AD now hurts the odds of that happening. Sylas,Mordekaiser,and Ryze who I could have seen using it the most lack AD ratios and therefore don't benefit as much from it as say Garen or Illaoi would since they get all the benefit for it.
It's adaptive force, not AD. The tooltip just changes to "attack damage" or "ability power" depending on which you have more of. Essentially the tooltip itself is adaptive so they don't have to print "adaptive force" into every tooltip.
: You know what I personally like the most? season 1-4 They were never 1 shotting, everyone had enough roam to survive. And the tanks were building full tanks because the tank Items were so useful back then Now the tank items are disgustingly boring flat defense only, and none of us like that Therefore, all they need to do is decreasing the damage of the game and adding more tank items
>They were never 1 shotting, everyone had enough roam to survive. lol Go back and watch some season 4 games and you'll see plenty of people getting oneshot by DFG. In fact it was disgustingly easy to oneshot people, champions like Leblanc could kill you with just DFG-Q-R, never needing to use W or E for the damage. W was almost always used for mobility since you never needed the damage. And you could play cheesy shit like "support" Annie and "support" trist(AP) and 100-0 people as soon as you got DFG. Legit just delete them in 0.5 seconds. And AP Malphite is not a new thing, it was played professionally even. https://youtu.be/gVwQcxglTzo?t=31
Xintium (EUW)
: Disclaimer: I am not high elo myself, but I know (in-real-life) some Diamond+ players. > [{quoted}](name=SMURFF NAME HERE,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=X12pxYhg,comment-id=001000000000,timestamp=2019-11-05T06:44:06.214+0000) > >Though there's pretty much no reason not to do it since it's strictly better than random autofill. At that point you could also just give people a full role preference list making sure that outside of really freak occurrences with extremely small player pools(like challenger) you never get your 4th/5th role. This. High Elo needs full role preference. Full role preference is strictly better than Autofill. The fact that it isn't a magic bullet doesn't mean it shouldn't be implemented, leaving a strictly worse system (aka autofill) in place. A note on role-distribution: this is Riot fault, no matter how you look at it. Considering the huge number of high elo players (across the globe), the fact that some roles are consistently viewed as "bad", except by a relatively small percentage of dedicated players, simply means that Riot balancing of that role is flawed. Top Lane seems to be the main issue, nowadays. I do not know the specific role-distribution now, but back in the day, being a support (also called a "ward-bot") just felt miserable, yet a necessity, and Riot publicly admitted that support was the least played role, causing insanely long (30 minutes is a joke, do you suffer from long-term memory loss? 1+ hour Q-time says hello!) Q-times at the very top of the ranked ladder. Full role preference can mitigate (careful: not "solve") all of this. And how can you prevent 1+ hour Q-time at the very top? Simple: add a MAX_TIMER (say, 30 minutes), which players can see while they are queueing. After (Q-time > Max_timer), two things happen: 1. The player-in-queue gets an alert, saying that Q-time exceeded the max_timer; 2. This means that the MMR range for the match-making will get slowly extended as time passes. If the player is fine having to play against a larger MMR range, he just needs to keep waiting. Most likely, after 5-10 more minutes (35-40 minutes total Q-time), he will find a match. Not "the" perfect match, but likely a somewhat fair match nonetheless (MMR isn't perfect anyway, it's already an estimate with a bad variance, so...). If the player isn't fine and really, like _really_ wants that "perfect" MMR match, he will wait 1+ hour. His choice. When you get to Grand Master (or even Master, depending on the average number of active players, but only Riot has the data to decide this) and above, let players pick the MAX_TIMER between the following options: 1. Zero: you are willing to play a match where the algorithm will search with increasingly large MMR from the very beginning - you don't care playing against Faker in midlane as a GM, since you think getting trashed by him is a learning experience in itself - and one day you may actually snatch a win against him! who knows; 2. 10-20-30-40-50 minutes: the usual deal, with varying degrees of allowed waiting; 3. Infinite: you don't care about waiting 1 day or more, just get that perfect match. After a transitory phase, where players will learn (at their expenses) that trying to abuse the settings only to get their 4th role after 3 hours of Q-time wasn't such great of an idea, the situation will just be a strict improvement compared to now. **Conclusion**: Full role preference is strictly better than Autofill (fact #1). Q-Time and Game quality have an inherent trade-off (fact #2) and this is exacerbated at the top of the ladder (fact #3). Instead of having the system arbitrarily decide what is the priority and having autofill ruin games, let the players pick that. At most, the players will ruin themselves. But after a transitory phase, where players trying to abuse the system will get trashed by it, the situation will significantly improve. _**The numbers/ranks given here are purely made up**_. I don't know if MAX_TIMER needs to be 20 minutes or 30 minutes. I don't know if it needs to be tunable from Diamond 1 or from Grand Master. Only Riot, having full datasets, can make these precise fine-tunings. But if you have the full picture, iteratively tuning this system is very doable. And it can only get better.
Here's the big problem with too much player choice in how you queue. Splitting up the queues and making them essentially incassesible to eachother makes for longer queue times and worse game quality for everyone. If people are queueing for a fast game and there are 8 other role-compatible players queuing at the same time you could just put 2 slightly lower role-compatible players or 2 "autofills" in that game and start it up. But now if 3 of those 8 people are in the "1 hour good matches only" queue you suddenly need 5 extra players instead of 2. This decreases game quality for "fast queues". And since fast queuers are constantly being snatched up there's hardly any players to match with those 3 1 hour queuers. It also really fucks with the matchmaking as outside of happy coincidences where fast queuers just happen to be availible and role-compatible at the perfect time they won't be matched with/against slow queuers, essentially creating 2 different ladders. Maybe you suddenly realise that if most people are fast queueing that by slow queueing you'll dodge most of the best and most practiced players, being able to earn Elo against worse players and inflate your rank. At high Elo the absolute last thing you ever want to do is segregate the playerbase, you want all the best players playing against eachother whenever possible. As an added negative it would also be insanely abusable for duo boosting/wintrading, it would be so much easier to snipe games together and either get a "free" duo or end up against eachother and decide on who's gonna trade the win.
Whiisp (NA)
: It would not be 35 minutes for Diamond. Because for one, the higher you rank up, the more players in support and top you will find simple fact, just play at those rank and look up everyone before every game. There's not really that misconception that every 1 get's support. Every single role other than mid, gets auto fill thrown into them, because the system does not wait to find people, it throws everyone in ASAP. Second, Current dodges occurrence already put queue times at around 30 minutes. Why not get a first queue pop at 30, which won't happen, and go into game rather than wait for 5 dodges in a row(No exaggeration, this happens a lot). Take the Master+ Bracket, queue times aren't long/fast because of auto fill. The queue time is defined by the amount of players camping LP, no denying that. Again, Auto fill itself does not need to be removed, if it is tweaked in a way that works, awesome. Add a 3rd role for example to choose from. Better than getting your 5th role. There's compromises. Work Around. Those incentive in D2+ Makes people want to play on those accounts, maybe not this alone, but it's a start, therefore queue times get better. You would be surprised how many people don't play games other than decay games... Pros also barely play in NA, and do in house instead or don't play cause soloQ is garbage. Just keep up to date with high elo players complaining about how little player actually play in that elo and you will get my point. Current queue time on my D1 account is 1-3 minutes at peak hour(4pm to 12am). with 1-2 auto fill. Wait 5 more minutes and I guarantee you, it finds all on roles players. That's not long at all. There's enough player on any role to fill it. Queue times would be very high in the morning for EST though, that yes I can see it as it is already long with auto fill on. It's a thing to tweak for certain hours. Maybe enable no auto fill for 6 hours a day at peak hour... Who knows what magic can happen. The main problem right now, is that the system does not try to wait long to find people. You can see by the amount of time people get autofilled mid lane and say ''how the fuck am i auto filled mid'' As obviously the most played role should give you a big enough number of population to be able to give you an on role mid laner every single game,.... RIGHT?!.... Nope, that does not happen all the time.
> the higher you rank up, the more players in support and top you will find simple fact, just play at those rank and look up everyone before every game Played in diamond just today. And there are definitely way more toplaners in plat and below than diamond+, the popularity of that role drops off a fucking cliff in high elo. As long as role selection is imbalanced you'll either need autofill or game-long queue times, try to balance the role selection by adding more roles to choose from(meaning the more popular your primary is the more you'll get secondary or tertiary) which, while somewhat helpful, would still make people dodge all the time. You think all the dodges are from people getting literally their worst role? Some even dodge if they get secondary and aren't even autofilled, plenty of people only play 2 main roles and dodge everything else. Adding a third role would only help for players that are actually competent at 3 roles. Even if you have more players playing that just means you need more matches. Expanding the pool of players does not help with a ratio issue. If the ratio of most popular: least popular roles is 2:1 you're back to 35 minute queues or autofill. Let's say it's "prime time" or masters players start playing again and now you have three times as many players to choose from. Great!, you can make more fully on-role games. But you also NEED three times the number of games in total which means you again need to fill three times as many top/support slots(or whatever happens to be the least popular role).
Yenn (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=SMURFF NAME HERE,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=X12pxYhg,comment-id=0010,timestamp=2019-11-05T05:59:39.410+0000) > > Ok, and how the fuck would you match Diamond players with other Diamond players when role distribution isn't a perfect 20% per role and autofill is disabled? > Let's take EUW as an example. You've got roughly 100k players who are D4 or higher. Since master+ is around 2 thousand.... ish... they can be ignored since 100k is a nice and round number. > > Top and support are the least popular roles with ~10%~ of the playerbase picking those roles as primary or secondary. <- This is a guesstimate and might not reflect the actual numbers but it's useful to get the point across. > > So now you have 10k support players, 10k toplane players(primary OR secondary) and 80k ~other~ players. Let's for a moment assume that players willing to play toplane and support don't play any more games than other roles on average which I believe is reasonable. If suddenly every single diamond player was online and looking for a game which is your best-case scenario you can now make 5 thousand matched games with no autofill(since you need 2 toplaners and 2 supports per game). Now you still have 50k players looking for a game and still need 10 thousand toplane and support players but literally none are left in diamond. Your options are: > > 1.)Pull lower ranked players, they're plentiful. This will hurt the quality of the games and since you're pulling lower ranked players from only a few roles it will increase the autofill rate for platinum where it's still enabled. If your goal is more competitive games this is really not what you want. > > 2.)Extend the queue times to a length that's higher than an average pick/Ban + game. So around 35 minutes but only for non top/support players who now get to play 2 games for each 1 other roles play. This also massively hurts the experience for higher rank play. A 5 minute queue instead of 30 seconds is totally fine. A 35 minute one is completely excessive, especially for diamond. > > Now realistically you won't ever have ALL of diamond online, you might have 10% of them online at once and that's optimistic. But the ratio problem is still the same unless top and support players somehow spend more time online and looking for a game than everyone else. > > There is no magic bullet solution for this problem. Increased queue times help a bit when the matchmaker is limited by computational power, it can't look through and sort all the millions of players looking for a game in all elos and modes. But for higher elo this is much less of an issue so the matchmaker is much more limited by the pool of players currently in queue. So the matchmaker either autofills someone or expands the MMR bracket it's willing to pull from. Or literally does nothing productive and waits hoping that someone with the appropriate MMR and role selection will join the queue. > > > Now let's say you set a limit on "no autofill queues" at D2 and to fix role imbalance you just pull role-appropriate D3 and D4 players. Not ideal but hey, it happens all the time anyway. Now you've created another problem, D3 and D4 are now completely fucking starved of toplaners and supports since they're all in D2 games. You've now created the "ultra autofill bracket" that's even more cancerous to climb through. Add an option to select a third role, done. Role distribution at Diamond+ actually isn't bad. I get auto-filled to top, bottom, and jungle in roughly even proportions. The only thing I'm never auto-filled to is support.
Adding a third role would reduce the number of autofills considerably but it probably wouldn't help much with game quality. I see people say they got "autofilled" when they get their secondary role and just look at the number of "suggestions" to queue for only one role with """"slightly"""" increased queue times. I'm pretty sure that if a third role was added people would endlessly bitch and moan about it and how they're constantly not getting their primary etc. etc. Though there's pretty much no reason not to do it since it's strictly better than random autofill. At that point you could also just give people a full role preference list making sure that outside of really freak occurrences with extremely small player pools(like challenger) you never get your 4th/5th role. And role distribution is pretty bad, mid is heavily over-represented(which means midlaners get autofilled to other roles all the time) while top is definitely under-represented. I have, no joke, not been autofilled or even got my secondary(mid) once in like 100 games when I queue top and lane against autofilled players all the time. It's obvious that the system is starved for people queuing top.
Whiisp (NA)
: As much as Auto fill is a good concept on paper, it ruins too many games [Diamond 2+ (Diamond+)]
Ok, and how the fuck would you match Diamond players with other Diamond players when role distribution isn't a perfect 20% per role and autofill is disabled? Let's take EUW as an example. You've got roughly 100k players who are D4 or higher. Since master+ is around 2 thousand.... ish... they can be ignored since 100k is a nice and round number. Top and support are the least popular roles with ~10%~ of the playerbase picking those roles as primary or secondary. <- This is a guesstimate and might not reflect the actual numbers but it's useful to get the point across. So now you have 10k support players, 10k toplane players(primary OR secondary) and 80k ~other~ players. Let's for a moment assume that players willing to play toplane and support don't play any more games than other roles on average which I believe is reasonable. If suddenly every single diamond player was online and looking for a game which is your best-case scenario you can now make 5 thousand matched games with no autofill(since you need 2 toplaners and 2 supports per game). Now you still have 50k players looking for a game and still need 10 thousand toplane and support players but literally none are left in diamond. Your options are: 1.)Pull lower ranked players, they're plentiful. This will hurt the quality of the games and since you're pulling lower ranked players from only a few roles it will increase the autofill rate for platinum where it's still enabled. If your goal is more competitive games this is really not what you want. 2.)Extend the queue times to a length that's higher than an average pick/Ban + game. So around 35 minutes but only for non top/support players who now get to play 2 games for each 1 other roles play. This also massively hurts the experience for higher rank play. A 5 minute queue instead of 30 seconds is totally fine. A 35 minute one is completely excessive, especially for diamond. Now realistically you won't ever have ALL of diamond online, you might have 10% of them online at once and that's optimistic. But the ratio problem is still the same unless top and support players somehow spend more time online and looking for a game than everyone else. There is no magic bullet solution for this problem. Increased queue times help a bit when the matchmaker is limited by computational power, it can't look through and sort all the millions of players looking for a game in all elos and modes. But for higher elo this is much less of an issue so the matchmaker is much more limited by the pool of players currently in queue. So the matchmaker either autofills someone or expands the MMR bracket it's willing to pull from. Or literally does nothing productive and waits hoping that someone with the appropriate MMR and role selection will join the queue. Now let's say you set a limit on "no autofill queues" at D2 and to fix role imbalance you just pull role-appropriate D3 and D4 players. Not ideal but hey, it happens all the time anyway. Now you've created another problem, D3 and D4 are now completely fucking starved of toplaners and supports since they're all in D2 games. You've now created the "ultra autofill bracket" that's even more cancerous to climb through.
Tokishi (NA)
: Riot has done a few things over the years that pretty much ended up being dead end concepts that could have easily solved the massive spike in griefing and afks this past season or two. First off, the mastery system. The grading system could easily be done to adjust LP gains and losses on both sides with an S being like 15% increase and C or D being extra LP lost whether through a win or loss. That way players were being dead weight don't get the full value of the win and leech and are forced to climb while players who consistently show that they are doing well despite people tanking could climb easier. Another system could be the honor system which ended up failing for the most part. That easily could have acted as a way to get people removed the Ranked pool easier as say, Honor 5 reports someone for rage quit, that person will be flagged faster as they were reported from such a high Honor level. But both of those systems I believe ended up failing for the most part and Riot just put them on the back burner as no one really noticed so far.
This is such a terrible idea. No automatic system can properly judge game impact and avoid all the problems with "grade farming". Not to mention you'd still need the exact same amount of LP won and lost in total, if the entire team gets A and S you can't give them all extra winnings. For example if you only played carries, played for KDA and totally gave up on games when shit went south(preserving your KDA by being extremely passive) you might lose some "winnable" games and end up with a 52% winrate and you'd still climb faster than someone who plays more utility champions like tanks, stays in games even if it means getting killed in hopeless teamfights and once in a while his perserverence wins him an extra game for a total 54% winrate. Or if you know that if you're the only one with an S grade while the rest of your team gets B+s you'll get way more LP than if you're all S and A then you might start baiting them into deaths when you're certain you can win anyway and trying to farm solokills instead of going for objectives to actually win. Or if you're playing a "float" style splitpusher who draws pressure then escapes your stats might not look great. If you execute it well your deaths will be low but so will your damage to objectives and kill participation as unless the enemy team completely ignores you you'll just lead them on a wild goose chase so your team gets shit done cross-map which won't be reflected in your stats. High cs will definitely help your score but you can't tell the difference between an afk farmer who draws zero pressure and still doesn't take objective(instead just recalling when they get a wave to tower) and a succesful float splitpusher who is constantly drawing pressure and running away. It's just far too exploitable.
: Is it fair that if someone AFKs, everybody that is on the Losing team loses LP?
This can't be done because of extreme MMR inflation. The only way a system like this would ever work is if the MMR loss was still the same for the winning team and losing team BUT the MMR loss was placed on the single leaver or split amongst multiple leavers instead of being evenly spread across the entire losing team, leaver or no. Now this would mean that if you disconnect from a game for whatever reason you effectively just lost 5 games. This is extremely harsh punishment but it's the only way to implement such a system without inflation.
Czech InSec (EUNE)
: Ranked Games
In that game where you're 15/8/8 your Janna is 1/14/16. Okay, that's pretty bad but no worse than their Nasus who is 2/11/4. Janna has 3 more deaths but she's clearly doing something for the team with 16 assists and 17 KP compared to Nasus 6 KP. It doesn't look like you're being screwed over by matchmaking. Also remember that if you're completely average you'll feed once for every 4 games that someone on your team feeds. This is natural because with 5 people on your team the other players outnumber you 4:1. If you're above average and think you should climb then you should feed way less than that. In your history you have that 1/6/7 TF game, the 5/13/7 Lee game and the 3/11/4 Cait game as examples. So yeah, if you lose 4 games because someone on your team fed you'll probably lose a 5th because you fed. Don't expect more from your team than you expect from yourself.

SMURFF NAME HERE

Level 130 (EUW)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion