First I'd like to say that i think your effort in this thread has amazed me. Since the 'new jungle' changes when Riot completely ignored the opinion of the large majority of players (using the "you are just players, you know nothing about the game" argument) i had lost most of the faith i still had on Riot. Now i sincerely wish you and the rest of the fresh meat good luck on your quest for improving the community.
And while this may seem a huge post, i have read all your 171 posts in this thread, so im pretty sure i wont be pointing anything that was already referred to.

Why not just make everyone start at the top?

I know that dropping 400 doesnt feel as good as climbing 1600, but it would solve a lot of issues.
This way to get to your deserved station all you have to do is not to lose (as soon as you lave the "stomp zone" where the top players crush you for a couple games).

Maybe a simple way to do this would be to give the player the ability to turn his normal-ranked interaction on and off.
Lets say i just turned 30 and want to play ranked, i'd start ranked at my current normal rank and go from there. And if i am at a high ELO and wanted to test something on normals i turn it off and go do my crazy stuff.
I know this might be hard to implement, but i just cant see the downside (although im sure you will find a very obvious one i failed to see).

What if you made it so everyone can select a champion the moment they enter a lobby, but cant lock in until its their turn? That way everyone can see each others intentions and start discussing from the first moments, saving their valuable time and keeping the allies from banning your main.

(this was about "silencing" players as a form of punishment while not influencing their ability to contribute to the team with their skill)
If a player is just quiet, the moment someone mentions "he didnt say anything, he must be silenced" he would just answer "nope" and the problem would be over.
And if this could be a worse punishment than intended, maybe the answer is to just think twice about when to use it, instead of just not using it.

Also, i'd like to propose and idea i've seen on another thread: what about a "never match me with this piece of **** ever again" button? It would be very satisfying after a trolled match to know you will never see that guy again, and if someone would troll too much, eventually they would run out of people to play with (because everyone would have used it on him). The only problem i see would be people using this on poor unskilled people, but even then the ranked system would never match them anyway.

Unfortunately, starting at the top doesn't do anything either. Basically, starting position doesn't actually solve any problems, it just shifts the Elo distribution.

There's several downsides, some of which you mention. One, we can add toggles and switches for everything but how do you educate the player on what the toggle does? This actually is not a trivial problem for such an arbitrary toggle. What happens to players who toggle it one direction, then forget about it then complain that they screwed up their chances in Ranked seeding?

How do you separate the players who will abuse the toggle? For example, some Level 30s will intentionally premade 5s, use competitive strategies, and just stomp their way through Normal games until their Normal Elo is high, then switch to Ranked. They faced completely different competition in the process and actually relied on 4 other people to up their Normal Elo when this would be impossible in Ranked Mode. In fact, our data suggests that 1800 Elo in Normals is actually far off from 1800 Elo in Ranked.

Then you have a subset of players who don't really understand the system and play Normals for several hundred games. They don't realize there is a toggle, but when they finally start playing Ranked they are confused why they are seeded lower than everyone else. Basically, toggles for Normal Mode just means you might as well have two modes because the intention of the players are completely different.


We are talking about something like this for Champ Select Lobby. Basically, a way for players to show their desired Champion choice before it is their turn.

This, unfortunately, is not as simple as that! Many players tend to miss text a lot, and the lower level you go, the more common this is.

This would not be feasible in Ranked at all; players perceive other players as 'below the skill level' or 'unskilled' all the time when it is not necessarily accurate. What if players use this on GOOD players, to guarantee that they will not play against them?

In Normal Modes, playing the same player twice is actually very rare unless you immediately re-queue after every game. However, we are considering some ways to avoid players you perceive as toxic from re-appearing in your game in Normal Modes.

You're advocating that Riot makes it so 90% or more of the players starting ranked get _crushed_ for "a few" games before they reach their proper ELO? I have no idea how you thought this would be smart.

-You're purposely injecting players into a situation where they a 0% chance of winning (which is about as anti-fun as saying the other team is made up of all Evelynn and Twitches, and you can't get Oracles or pinks)
-You're making the highest-rated games completely uneven; imagine watching Dyrus's stream and he has to deal with someone playing AD Annie because he stomps bots with them

How about the downside of someone who plays their way up to level 30 using stupid builds like AD Annie or AS Nautilus. They have a terrible Normal ELO, and then they realize they have to start Ranked so low because they were never told that their non-competitive games effect their ranking? That's going to draw a lot of ire, and make Normals a lot less fun than they are now because people are going to be as worried about their Normal ELO as they are their Ranked ELO.

But even if a player just chooses to stay silent, his teammates will automatically assume his being "silenced", even if they ask and find out he's not. First impressions are very powerful, and they go a long way toward group chemistry. If one player stays silent for the first few minutes of a game, and his teammates start thinking he's being punished, that will negatively color their view of an otherwise innocent player - a view that can't simply change in 30 seconds.

This is something I'd like to see, but the Report options are essentially Riot's version of this. I think maybe if they tied in this idea to the Report options it would be better - for instance, if I report a player for any reason, matchmaking flags that person to not be put in the same game as me for 3 days or so. It's a temporary fix that will hopefully get solved more permanently by Tribunal.

what if to combat afk bans each player could vote for a ban and the champ with the most votes gets banned?

Top player votes would count as two and a half so he still significantly effects the decision.

Omg so many pages of this thread since i read last (read them all). As for points #1 and #2 This is information that players beg for regularly on the forums. I'm sure every LoL player would love to be able to see the stats regarding how often they've won with each champion in normal games. It would go in the profile page, like it is is for ranked games. Of course, this doesn't take into account the expense, but if you have the stats available, this is info that would benefit all LoL players. Even those that don't play ranked games.
Then again you guys might not feel the same way, I remember that we used to get stats of our 3 most played champs in normal play, but you guys removed that. I never understood that. In the forums I always saw people asking for more access to stats, and we got what little we had taken away for normal games.

Since I don't know why this was done I thought I'd add this thought. Even if normal games are just practice, stats are useful to learn something from your practice. They don't necessarily make the game mode more serious. Especially if those stats aren't publicly available to people just searching your profile.

Points #3 - #9 seem to be asking for stats we don't have access to. Since we can't look at that data we can only use logic or personal experience to bring up these points. Such as, players may want to use a champion that they haven't bought because it has specific counters, and the opportunity to use that champ doesn't come up all that often so they didn't think the champ was worth buying compared to a more versatile champ. However come last pic if the champion is useful, f2p, and they have practiced with it they may want to use it. This can improve champion diversity in Ranked games which adds fun to the game in general I think. If the problem is merely inexperience with the champ, then "Play X times" to unlock a champ for ranked play seems to be the fix that best treats the problem.

I'm interested in how this will turn out. Players who pick F2P champs all have different intentions. Some of them are genuinely trying to make a good champ composition but do not own it. Others because their roles or the champion they wanted to play was picked so they decided to troll, picking a champ they are not good with to experiment and dont care about w/l (This is probably why the leave% and the reported% is that high). Is banning people from choosing F2P stop them from trolling their teammates?

Thank you for changing the "Free Champion" usability in ranked games.

Can you also make this change with Random picks?

When the timer counts down to 0 without a player picking a champion, that player could be automatically dodged as if AFK, instead of being given a random champion, in RANKED only.

Do you really not see how easy it is to automate getting that data? They already have a system in place showing if you own a hero and they already have a system in place checking if you pick a hero for a match. They also have a system in place to determine if you leave the game or not. They need only compare these three things to determine those statistics. But it's likely they determined it from even more.

I don't think you're using the analytical portion of your brain here >.>

Also this.


Thinking more about this: There is one unaccountable thing (or at least something no one here has brought up). Removing new champions from ranked. If a person ONLY plays Ranked (and no normals), that change seems unlikely to really change their experience with new champions on a whole. I mean, to them it'll still be a new champ release, just later.

But I imagine most people would play normals more than ranked for new champions when they do come out so it'll prolly be a moot point. Which means the best way to tell if this would work is to implement it >.> heh.

Though I can see why this won't be implemented for a while if so. It's bad to do the current change on top of this change (or some others) all at once. Do need a good time period to gather new data and compare :P

On the flipside of what I just said (where it might not make a difference), it will at least improve it for some. Even if it's a marginal improvement, an improvement is still an improvement and should be done :P there are SOME that don't try new champions first in normals or co-op vs AI. They go STRAIGHT into ranked. Ruining other people's games one way or the other. That just seems wrong. Even if it's a few that are negatively impacted, if a change can eliminate that negative impact without causing any of its own significant negative impacts, why not do it?:P

Btw, thank you for continuing to discuss things in the thread with us. It's very nice to get this kinda discussion going with Riot employees about things I just wish the balance teams or champion design teams could do the same (at least more than they do). I understand why they don't, but ya.

100% don't play ranked, but those who don't play ranked don't matter in this decision as it doesn't effect them. Free to play champs are still in every other mode. Just not solo queue ranked. As it should be. Might seem harsh I say they don't matter, but they really don't as it's a mode they aren't playing and it's not effected them. If they play it in the future, I could see that argument, but that's an "if" and rather deal in the "facts." And even if they do play it in the future, it can be argued that they'll deal with that fine as they have nothing to really compare it to.

http://eune.leagueoflegends.com/boar...d.php?t=380714


its realy long time when i post some solution how ranked games should be fixed, i put a lot screens and information, and in reward i get ban on east server, and now u just applay some of this changes. Some people from riot stuff should be replace, how u can ignore all information from community, and now say ok we have small problem, but we working on this ??

I feel this would work, and I think that good metrics would be the tower difference and kill difference. That way if I do finally get good players in solo queue, and we put up a good fight but lose, we won't get punished too much.

I think there should be a 10 kill margin and a 2 tower margin to qualify.