Just a question to gauge boards thinking. My thoughts so far is matchmaking. Considering I've played through most metas, I don't really have a problem with champions, items, damage nor defense. Just gotta play around it all, right? Problem is, I'm typically matched with people who can't. I'm matched with supports that can't ward and value themselves over their ADC, or Junglers that don't gank when they should, or laners who don't retreat and play safely when they should, or ADCs that have no situational awareness, or top laners that never leave top lane, or just teams who have no sense of teamwork whatsoever. Matchmaking has always been my biggest gripe and I hate how much of a tossup it is. Positional queuing is a fine idea, and I understand how much ELO has to factor into matchmaking in order to accommodate short queue times and the ability to match full teams (because if it were only about rank, not every rank would have enough players for everyone to be grouped in 1-4 minutes) but is it so difficult to include some sort of consideration for gameplay and stats when matching teams? As much as I can appreciate Riot's stance in allowing anyone to do anything, specific champs/specific roles/specific classes of champs have specific purposes which should be what's considered moreso than whether or not someone wins or loses.
If this gets enough attention and your thoughts reach a consensus, maybe Riot will see and make some decisions. So, what does everyone here think?