I personally don't like the idea of forcing highly ranked players to play with each other in normal games. I'm a 1900 Elo player in ranked, but that doesn't mean that I'm a great normal game player -- meaning, I'm more likely to try a new champ for the first time or build something obscure just for fun in a normal game. I enjoy the fact that I can go AD jungle Twisted Fate and still contribute to my team winning. I don't want to be forced to play with all the same people I play ranked with in blind pick normals.

The biggest problem has got to be afk in champ ban / champ select, which assigns you a random. Not the "dc" blue / yellow caution sign. I mean just straight afk. Here is why i think it is the number 1 reason.

1. AFK @ champ ban = less bans, team gets upset, environment becomes toxic, someone queue dodges, OR no-one dodges and goes into the game with an already negative attitudes.

2. AFK @ champ ban = less bans, many "op" champs left unbanned, enemy team ends up with a champ your team feels is hard to beat, someone queue dodges or goes into game with negative attitude.

3. Bans champs but afks at champ select = random champ select, team gets upset because random champ doesn't fit team needs, someones gets upset and queue dodges or goes into games with negative attitude.

4. Bans champs but afks at champ select = random champ select, player is bad with the champ selected, feeds, or fails to contribute, causes negative attitude, increased reports in tribunal etc.

What i'm trying to point out is afk in the champ ban / select, leads to other issues that have been mentioned in this thread. If issues b, c, and d, can all be traced to issue a, then maybe we should start at the source, and work our way out. Instead of starting at the wide spot and working backwards.

I see numbers 5 and 6 as the main priority, because I think players should have a preparation before their first ranked games and only choose champs they own. Its all related.

I see as the Second Priority the problem with the lobby. (1 and 7).

Third Priority the player balance of the matchmake. (2, 4, 9 and 10)

And finally the rest, very important but no as much as the other ones (11, 8 , 3)


Q: Will we get any improvement of at least one of this issues on the next patch? Pleasee..

1 is the most important to me, but honestly I'd like to see all of them fixed, since these are all huge issues.

since a game consist of teams and a team consist of 5 players... i find it highly doubful to believe that a 50% win rate really reflects much... since a player is only around 10% of a match...
Personal Elo's should take into account Personal data,perfomance and behavior... not just the "win x lose" end result...

Also, im prety sure #1 will win kuz everyone (ranked or not), at most elo's, lvl 30 or not, suffers from it and as such its the most obvious problem...

I would say #1 and #7 are the worst problems for ranked. #4 is the worst problem for normals. Everything else is fine. I don't think #11 is a problem at all. A win is a win and a loss is a loss. Adjusting how much elo is gained/lost based on in-game factors would lead to abuse. There shouldn't be an award for "almost winning" and people shouldn't be punished or awarded for "almost losing". You should earn/lose less ELO if the game is a 3v5 though with the leavers suffering normal or greater elo loss.

Why is normal draft still broken?

4 months not enough time to fix it?

I am now less peeved about AFK in champ select because I just won a ranked game with one. Double AD new meta :P

lyte id just like to say keep up the good work

but lets be real, you know you want to make a system that rewards CORRECT play but you keep saying ppl will game the system.

i think that anyone who knows how to game the system in the first place probably deserves to be a in a higher elo anyway. that said if ppl know the system can be gamed then others will do their best to stop it, i dont think you need to as a developer address this first hand, let the community sort itself out. let ppl who know how to play CORRECTLY differentiate themselves already.

i think the goal of predicting win outcomes is misguided you need to be targeting predicting good players so that those players in turn can interact with other good players. which in turn will foster healthier games and you wont need to predict win outcomes anymore.