ITS SKILLED RANKED PLAYERS IN NORMAL MM ****ING A..

Please make normal games use its own elo UNTIL U Get ranked elo [ 10 games ]

THEN LET IT USE ur RANKED Elo to best find u a game SRSLY.


games would be more balanced I can't carry the noobs in my solo q normal games when they throw so hard and dont give me ap carry OR Mid solo lane

or countergank

I am doing more analyses on this, but so far we have not seen that "number of wins" is a super strong factor when doing matchmaking. I've mentioned this before, but you probably do not notice all the times you beat players who have 1000+ wins.

To approach this problem from a different angle, if Elo was more accurate, than it wouldn't matter if you were 1200 Elo with 25 wins, or 1200 Elo with 200 wins because both are accurately judged to be 1200 Elo. The interaction here is that the more games you play, the more 'confident' we are that Elo represents your current skill. To solve the core of this problem, we have to make Elo more accurate and improve the system so that fewer games are required to have higher confidence in your Elo.

What you are suggesting here is changing the K-factors and how they change over time which will directly influence what Elo you gain/lose in a game. Yegg and I have been talking about this and right now we are figuring out what the right K-factors should be.

Yegg is design lead of a team that is working on the competitive modes and figuring out the best ways to improve them. We talk a lot about the transition to Ranked and work on solutions together, but his team will be the one that implements the changes.

The actual work is not too difficult, but whatever we decide to put in becomes the 'official' stance so we have to take extra care in how we explain the game mode and whether we want to improve the experiences of playing Ranked first, or change the messaging first. This is where the complexity comes in as we try to model and predict the order effects of doing one before the other, or whether we must do both at once.

Streaks aren't inherently a problem with matchamking like I originally thought they were. I made a post not too long ago asking Lyte if there was anything planned for them... but a friend reminded me of what a graph of coin flips actually looks like and that's just how statistics work. It's totally possible to go 3-15 heads-tails, just like it's possible to randomly go 3-15 wins-losses. It's incredibly demoralizing, but knowing that it really is just bad luck sometimes is more helpful than blaming matchmaking.

The real issue is that these streaks are hugely emotionally draining (if they're losing streaks), which influence the players to rage more and lose even more. So you might have gotten a statistically unlucky streak of eight losses (totally possible, even in coin flips), but the negative emotions you had from that (if you happen to keep playing) might influence you to lose games that you'd normally win in a clearer state of mind.

The best advice is just to stop playing ranked for a while (maybe an hour or something; get some homework done or relax) and get back to it after you calm down. The bottom line is, if you are truly much better than the people you play with/against on a regular basis, you will not stay at a particular Elo for long.

The Dunning-Kruger effect is strong in this community...

Hey Lyte,
I posted this earlier but it got buried.

Enemy que dodging isn't listed. Building up an awesome team just to scare someone on the other team to dodge (always at the last second) is a huge bummer. The worst is when matchmaker puts you on the other side and you must suffer losing to the other 4 players you were previously matched up with, an even bigger bummer ;(.

My solution would be to distribute the dodgers lost elo to the other team. My intuition tells me that this would be extremely hard to abuse since a dummy account would have to be around the same elo as the abusers account and would have to be matched up on the opposing team. Maybe you get a few people who would be extra lucky in this department but they deserve it for knowing how to set up a good team.

Being ignored suxx.
Cry-cry.

Well, at least I got +2 there!..

EDIT: Okay, thinking about it a bit more, I see that the silence is okay, since the response may look like would take an immense amount of time, or wouldn't befit for a rioter or somethign else... I'm just afraid that it is nice idea indeed and it gets forgotten. It's would be ok if it is not a good one, but I haven't seen a single counter to it, nor a -1...

Just curious Lyte, what are your thoughts on Elo hell? I know a lot of people don't believe it exists, but they tend to be 1) high Elo players who 2) primarily play carries. In my mind, Elo hell exists and is a problem for a couple of reasons. The first is that some roles, like supports, are much harder to "carry out of" low Elo than, say, AP mids. The second problem is that players who enjoy that support role get screwed over because if they are at an Elo where supports are not viable (trust me, that place exists), so their choices are to play a role they are not good with/ enjoy less or continue to not be able to play their role. Hell, sometimes just knowing who to pick or what lane to play to benefit your team is impossible, since low Elo team comps make no sense to begin with. Finally, people who are at a low Elo are there for a variety of reasons, some of which are irritating and unfun to deal with. Forcing a player who is low skill to share their Elo with leavers and trolls is essentially punishing them for not being good at the game. As a side note, I believe that a lot of people's perceptions of Elo hell are inaccurate. Statements like "my other lanes feed no matter how well I do" are inaccurate because you are just as likely to be matched against feeders as with feeders.

In summary, Elo hell isn't a problem because "everyone is a noob" (that's the point of low Elo in the first place), it's a problem because it can be unfun dealing with people who are at low Elo who are there for reasons other than low skill, and because it screws over certain roles.What are your thoughts?

Too much opportunity for abuse. How would you feel if one guy on your team dodges and therefore you lose, say, 5 Elo? I'd be irate to lose Elo for something I never did (I didn't dodge and I didn't play a game). Even if it is a small amount, and if it is weighted so the dodger has a bigger penalty than the rest of the team.

~~~~~~

Lyte, I wanted to throw this out there as well, on the topic of smurfing and matchmaking. It's kind of a question/complaint/compliment all rolled into one, actually.

The last couple days, my friends and I played on some brand new accounts we made, because one of the guys needed just a few more referrals to reach a reward. Well, it's safe to say we pretty easily won our first several games. And we definitely were detected very early as smurfs, because it became pretty obvious pretty fast that we were playing against other smurf accounts. So kudos to you guys for finding that quickly and keeping the smurfs away from the true new players.

Anyhow, when we were ranging from levels 2-7, we queued up and hit a 6 minute queue. Matchmaking was clearly rather confused about what to do with us. We ended up paired against a full team of 30's. And not just any 30's, but one was ranked about 1750, and a couple were around 1400-1500. Suffice it to say, I missed my runes :'(
And flash.

Not going to complain too much about it though. We had it coming. And also, based on the ratings of that team, they were actually on par with our group's ratings on our main accounts. I could have easily seen us facing off with that same team on our mains. Not sure if this was just dumb luck, or if matchmaking was able to figure out our approximate true levels based off that fairly low number of games. But at any rate, I was kinda impressed by this, especially with the speed we were picked up by the system. Well played.

My only real concern though, is the fact that a group without even having access to flash yet could get thrown against a group of 30's. But my guess is that if this happens, it'll be in a similar smurf situation.

Like usual, only the dodger would lose the points and the total points he lost would be evenly distributed to the other team. It would end up being something like +2 or +4 rating per person depending on what an individual loses when they que dodge.