Can you please do something about experienced rank players stomping all over normal players for "fun" or to be trolls? My friends and I have had several experiences where we get matched up with a 5-premade of high-elo ranked players who came to play a normals game simply to rofl-stomp some "noobs" and basically troll win.

I would like to see some kind of ingame debuff for fed players on lower level (newbie island).
When I started the game the greatest problems I had was that I was several times matched with pubstompers who picked Yi, jungle nocturne or Ryze and just get 50/3 stats in the end of the game.

If you put some kind of decreasing reward to champions on killing sprees and strong self-debuff aura for legendary players on lvl 1-10 players maybe smurfs will get discouraged to pubstomp. I know that at earlier levels newbies and smurfs have the same potential as both have the same tier 1 rune slots, but smurfs know how to build, lane, junglem last hit and get easy kills.
I saw a stream once of a lvl 2 master yi who duo qeued with other smurf guy and the Yi had 3 PD while many of the newbie enemies where just getting 'newbie builds' (like buying basic AD on mages or stacking boots to run away from Yi more easily). the other smurf was a jungle WW. I was feeling frustrated just for watching that, and feel happy that I've kept playing lol after I suffered the same situations as them.

Now I enjoy every time I manage to get fed, but on lvl10 players this is absoultely not necessary to have fun or learn the game. It's just fun for the sadistic smurf.
downvotes now.

Hi Lyte i'd like to bring something to your attention,

First off I would like to say thank you for your hard work. Most of the problems I wanted to address were already mentioned. Now the suggestion I wanted to address to you is to be weary of rating / voting systems at the end of games. The reason why is because some unskilled player will down vote a player due to inexperience.

For example, a top lanner who is super aggressive and has been pushing his lane for 7/8 minutes. Dies the first time and continues to be aggressive. Dies once again and complains to jungler that he never ganks top lane. In this case the top lanner will downvote the jungler because he didn't gank. BUT, in fact the top lanner should not have down voted the jungler because junglers are "technically" not suppose to gank lanes that are already pushed.

Second situation is bottom lane, AD's get A LOT of heat when doing bad, and at times it IS partially due to the support. For example a soraka support who constantly harasses with her "e" rather than giving mana. The AD dies a couple times and gets all the heat for the team losing when the AD fed bottom lane when actually the support could have helped often but just let his/ her AD die. Therefore the AD would get a downvote at the end of the game when they shouldn't have received a down vote.

I've noticed this often enough as I hover between the 900-1200 elo where people just don't understand how to play their character / role or just don't understand the concept of the game.

So just a warning with the voting system with unskilled / unknowledgeable players down voting at times when they shouldn't be.

Thanks again for all your hard work ^_^

TL;DR:
if a voting system is implemented, unskilled / unknowledgeable players would down vote others due to wrong reasoning

In ranked: How about, if someone leaves before a certain time threshold players on the team can vote what sort of role he was playing, and then people outside the game can opt to substitute into the game to replace them.

Ofcourse people subbing in should be able to see the deaths and overall score of the game

Would getting team mates who obviously don't have 2 hands count as a level disparity?

Cause if so, that one.

I'm not sure if what I am about to say can be corrected through Matchmaking, but lords of Riot - please help!

Quick background - newer player, didn't enter ranked until I had 300 normal wins. Started off 10-3 in ranked and climed to 1430 - I was lucky and was carried through a lot of those. Then went on a 1-11 streak, and settled in around 1200 ELO. I was always just under even, and the longest time, -5 wins compared to losses. I felt the games were pretty close and that is where I belonged.

Then, things got real bad - real fast. Huge losing streaks, seems like mostly AFK'ers, trolls, and intentional feeders (on the WINS as well as LOSSES) so I started tracking my games in a spreadsheet.

Objectively, after every game, I chose what the determining factor was in describing that game (for BOTH wins and losses). My categories are:

INTENTIONAL FEEDER (WIN/LOSS) - I only click this if the person is obviously feeding intentionally (running into towers, saying they are going to feed, etc. NOT when someone is just getting beat bad, but trying. So, if we win and the other team has a feeder, it's WIN - Intentional Feeder. Opposite if we lose for the same reason.

TROLL PICK (WIN/LOSS) - Now, If someone picks Eve but is actually good with them and trying to play on the team, and build correctly for the game, I don't pick troll. But, if two people are arguing over mid and both take an AP mid (last game - Ryze support and Veigar mid) and we get destroyed (or destroy the other team) because of it, I click this category. Also, if they build all boots, TROLL PICK.

AFK (WIN/LOSS) - if anyone on either time AFK's for 10 minutes or more, it's categorized.

GOOD (WIN/LOS) - this is a good game - where either team actually has a chance to win, no one trolls, no one AFK's, no one feeds - a close game that could go either way.

LOPSIDED (WIN/LOSS) - none of the bad categories present, but your team just gets completely destroyed for one reason or another.

Since I play 10 games a week, I group them in clumps of 10. Here are the results of my last 10 games. (it also makes for nice % rounding =) - While 10 games is a small sample size, I am going to track multiple 10s. Without further ADO:

3 wins (2 AFK on other team wins, 1 GOOD win)
7 losses (1 Intentional Feed on our team loss, 1 Troll Pick loss, 4 AFK losses, 1 Lopsided loss).

-60% of my last 10 games were decided by someone AFK'ing for 10 minutes or more
-including the AFK above - 80% of my last 10 games were decided by nothing to do with gameplay
-10% of my games were 'good' - fun games that either side could have won
-10% of my games were blowouts

How can you make matchmaking fix that? 80% of games ruined through trolls, intentional feeders, and afk'ers. Makes matchmaking pointless if you can't correct that problem.

Reiterating - yes, 10 games is a small sample size, but my last 30 felt about the same breakdown (which is why I decided to start tracking) - and I'll update my next 10 after I play them. I have a feeling when I get to 100 games tracked, it won't be too far off from that.

It should take atleast 300 normal wins before being able to Q for ranked