Welcome to the Forum Archive!

Years of conversation fill a tonne of digital pages, and we've kept all of it accessible to browse or copy over. Whether you're looking for reveal articles for older champions, or the first time that Rammus rolled into an "OK" thread, or anything in between, you can find it here. When you're finished, check out Boards to join in the latest League of Legends discussions.

GO TO BOARDS


@Riot - changes that realy are needed about this game

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Onizuka

Senior Member

02-05-2015

Im sorry, but I dont believe you can simulate this. Way too many factors in play here.

There were X streamers doing bronze to dia marathons to disprove this myth. So while you may look to your theoretical numbers, I prefer the practical side of things.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Adrenalotr

Senior Member

02-06-2015

Onizuka, i don't think the point of the simulations is to prove that something is wrong with the system, but is instead a nice vehicle for discovering attributes of the system. The system includes a lot of variables, but many of them aren't necessarily relevant to the problem, so they can be ignored for simplicity's sake.

The practical reality is much better, in my experience anyway, than Lamcho's numbers, so I assume the program is inaccurate, and I like trying to find what's wrong.

--

Lamcho, you said Elo. Elo isn't what Riot uses, although the MMR system has some similarities. From what I understand, the MMR system is slower. Can you average the win/lose from 5 games and use that instead of the result of individual games?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Onizuka

Senior Member

02-06-2015

I may be cynical, but what I see is Lamcho trying to look for the fault in the system instead of in himself.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Adrenalotr

Senior Member

02-06-2015

Quote:
Onizuka:
I may be cynical, but what I see is Lamcho trying to look for the fault in the system instead of in himself.


Well I'm trying to find the fault in his numbers, because once his simulator is more in tune with our experience in the game, it can be useful, eg in suggesting a number of games required to reach your skill level, as well as proving my ad-nauseam-repeated point of the distribution of problematic players benefitting players who aren't problematic themselves.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Lamcho

Junior Member

02-06-2015

Quote:
Lamcho, you said Elo. Elo isn't what Riot uses, although the MMR system has some similarities. From what I understand, the MMR system is slower. Can you average the win/lose from 5 games and use that instead of the result of individual games?

ELO and MMR are all names describing a numerical rating system, we can measure them using apples or tomatoes too, but that doesn't sound so fancy. As far as i know the LoL system places you secretly in certain decision/tier, but show you and the rest of the world that you are in different division/tier, just to make sure you are not on a winning/losing steak so the system considers you as a gold player even when you start to jump trough silver tiers but doesn't promote you to gold right away, it is just helping you to get there a match or two faster. This makes it harder to progress/fall, but when you do its even harder to come back.

Quote:
There were X streamers doing bronze to dia marathons to disprove this myth. So while you may look to your theoretical numbers, I prefer the practical side of things.

Those streamers are manly Masters and above which make it easy for them to bump their smurfs from bronze to diamond in a matter of hours.

Quote:
Im sorry, but I dont believe you can simulate this. Way too many factors in play here.

If you assume that every factor is the best as possible or even better you can simplify them and be sure that your system will always output better results than the real system. In our case we assume that a player have always the same skill in all possible situations, there fore it will be infinitely easier to evaluate his skill correctly, however even this system outputs huge errors. Based on that you can imagine how bad is the LoL system, where you are challenged to evaluate players skills based on criteria that even a human can not always assess correctly and do it only based on WIN or LOSE.
Quote:
I may be cynical, but what I see is Lamcho trying to look for the fault in the system instead of in himself.

I actually don't mind the system because of itself, i do because of its secondary effects - hate, frustration, rage, etc.
I don't think the player should be told - you should just do better, i think a good system should show you what you did wrong and how to be better step by step.

Imagine (just for the sake of the experiment) that in this moment you are cloned, all your memories are copied, all your skills every tiny detail of your unique personality. You and your clone are on opposite teams, matched with random players with a mirrored champions. Now if you insist on "every player can carry his game" philosophy you are presented with only two viable outcomes:
1. The game can't end in a draw, so it will drag for eternity. Unfortunately this is not possible, at some point someone is bound to win, so you really have only one exit:
2. One of you loses, which means that somehow the other has become better player and because we are not factoring in any other influence one of you have become better and the other worse out of nothing.
How do you explain that?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Adrenalotr

Senior Member

02-06-2015

Quote:
Lamcho:
ELO and MMR are all names describing a numerical rating system, we can measure them using apples or tomatoes too, but that doesn't sound so fancy. As far as i know the LoL system places you secretly in certain decision/tier, but show you and the rest of the world that you are in different division/tier, just to make sure you are not on a winning/losing steak so the system considers you as a gold player even when you start to jump trough silver tiers but doesn't promote you to gold right away, it is just helping you to get there a match or two faster. This makes it harder to progress/fall, but when you do its even harder to come back.


Promo series do make the climb a little tougher, but that's the LP system, the visible ranks, and they're not the same as the MMR. The LP system is immediate, and grants you LP based on the average MMR in the game, the average MMR in your division, and your MMR, so that the LP and rank will reflect your MMR... so it rubberbands towards the MMR around the promo series, and then can swing far in either direction, depending on wins and losses. And the system tries to figure out your skill and adjusts your MMR accordingly.

But the MMR system was iirc designed to counter the effect of individual games, so that leavers and trolls wouldn't mess up the other players' ranking. That's why I'm suggesting checking a number of games before adjusting the players' rank in your system, rather than adjusting the matchmaking rating right after the game.

Also, I'm wondering how your matchmaking works. If it just groups players into groups of 10, you might be repeating some matchups, some teams, thus clamping their progress up or down the ladder. I don't know, is this a possible issue in yoru simulation?

Quote:
Imagine (just for the sake of the experiment) that in this moment you are cloned, all your memories are copied, all your skills every tiny detail of your unique personality. You and your clone are on opposite teams, matched with random players with a mirrored champions. Now if you insist on "every player can carry his game" philosophy you are presented with only two viable outcomes:
1. The game can't end in a draw, so it will drag for eternity. Unfortunately this is not possible, at some point someone is bound to win, so you really have only one exit:
2. One of you loses, which means that somehow the other has become better player and because we are not factoring in any other influence one of you have become better and the other worse out of nothing.
How do you explain that?


Not every game is winnable, and I don't think any reasonable player has ever claimed that it was. Hence MMR. Hence considering whether the player wins a lot of games in the MMR range he's in, or if he sits at about 50/50.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Onizuka

Senior Member

02-07-2015

Quote:
I actually don't mind the system because of itself, i do because of its secondary effects - hate, frustration, rage, etc.
I don't think the player should be told - you should just do better, i think a good system should show you what you did wrong and how to be better step by step.

I dont agree at all. The system is neutral. It should not spoonfeed you.Teaching you what are you doing right or wrong is not the responsibility of the ladder or the MMR. Looking for mistakes in your game and eliminating them is your responsibility.

Quote:
Imagine (just for the sake of the experiment) that in this moment you are cloned, all your memories are copied, all your skills every tiny detail of your unique personality. You and your clone are on opposite teams, matched with random players with a mirrored champions. Now if you insist on "every player can carry his game" philosophy you are presented with only two viable outcomes:
1. The game can't end in a draw, so it will drag for eternity. Unfortunately this is not possible, at some point someone is bound to win, so you really have only one exit:
2. One of you loses, which means that somehow the other has become better player and because we are not factoring in any other influence one of you have become better and the other worse out of nothing.
How do you explain that?

There is one fault in your argument. I dont believe "every player can carry his game", what I believe is that some loses are simply inevitable, you cant win every single one, but in the long run what matters is how many you win over how many you lose, which is directly influenced by your skill.
So yes, in a way "every player can carry his game(If certain conditions are met)", but not "Every player can carry EVERY game".


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Lamcho

Junior Member

02-09-2015

Quote:
There is one fault in your argument. I dont believe "every player can carry his game", what I believe is that some loses are simply inevitable, you cant win every single one, but in the long run what matters is how many you win over how many you lose, which is directly influenced by your skill.
So yes, in a way "every player can carry his game(If certain conditions are met)", but not "Every player can carry EVERY game".


The statistic shows that Bronze to Gold players are not good enough to carry themselves and most of their games are decided according to the general team skill, sadly general team skill as not correctly assumed by the system and you are matched with players that do not reflect your skill level, players get annoyed by this and start unleashing their inner rage out on their teammates who don't hesitate to do the same afterwards, is the problem so hard to see?

Overall i'm tired of writing same post over and over again it seems that nobody agrees, but no one is giving any suggestions, when i have enough free time i'll port my "lol statistics" project for web and publish it in http://jsfiddle.net/ so everybody can play with it, test it, edit it, and your favorite - point the errors in it, because everybody knows that 1 + 1 is in fact 3, not 2 as one may foolishly suggest.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Onizuka

Senior Member

02-09-2015

Quote:
The statistic shows that Bronze to Gold players are not good enough to carry themselves and most of their games are decided according to the general team skill, sadly general team skill as not correctly assumed by the system and you are matched with players that do not reflect your skill level, players get annoyed by this and start unleashing their inner rage out on their teammates who don't hesitate to do the same afterwards, is the problem so hard to see?

Of course that if a player belongs into certain tier he wont be able to carry himself. I dont see any problem with that.
Which is not a problem if player realizes this and instead focuses on improving, therefore becoming able to carry himself.
What do you mean by "sadly general team skill is not correctly assumed by the system" ? If you are trying to hint that system matches you with players below you, you have to remind yourself that your enemies are chosen from the exact same player pool as your teammates. So if your teammate are below you, so are your enemies, therefore you should carry without a problem.
Quote:

Players get annoyed by this and start unleashing their inner rage out on their teammates who don't hesitate to do the same afterwards, is the problem so hard to see?

No, players get annoyed by what is called dunning kruger effect, when they believe they are better than their teammates and it is their teammates holding them down, which was disproven countless times. Anyone who still believes that is only lying to themselves instead of focusing on the REAL problem, which is their own gameplay.

It is no surprise no one agrees with you, because what you are saying is basically "I cant carry myself, because my teammates hold me down".


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Adrenalotr

Senior Member

02-09-2015

Quote:
Lamcho:
The statistic shows that Bronze to Gold players are not good enough to carry themselves and most of their games are decided according to the general team skill, sadly general team skill as not correctly assumed by the system and you are matched with players that do not reflect your skill level, players get annoyed by this and start unleashing their inner rage out on their teammates who don't hesitate to do the same afterwards, is the problem so hard to see?

Overall i'm tired of writing same post over and over again it seems that nobody agrees, but no one is giving any suggestions, when i have enough free time i'll port my "lol statistics" project for web and publish it in http://jsfiddle.net/ so everybody can play with it, test it, edit it, and your favorite - point the errors in it, because everybody knows that 1 + 1 is in fact 3, not 2 as one may foolishly suggest.


I'm pointing out errors because I suggest something is wrong in the code, because it doesn't match what I've seen in the game. I don't get matched with players of Bronze skill, nor Diamond skill. The players I'm matched with tend to be around my skill level. Sometimes there's someone who seems to have bought their account, and they usually lose the game. Sometimes there's someone who admits to boosting someone's account or smurfing, and they usually win the game (unless they just claim so in champ select because they want mid/top/whatever). Sometimes there's a player who doesn't know how to play when behind. Sometimes the team falls apart because we can't work together and just flame each other instead. But even with boosted accounts, I don't see players blatantly out of place. The skill gaps are very small, and most games I play are winnable, and we lose because the other team just played better together than we did.

Taking criticism is a skill too. Don't take our criticism as something negative (even if it sometimes might sound like it is), but as someone being interested in what you're doing and trying to understand it. You needn't agree with the criticism, but try to understand what they're saying and why, in order to find some value in it. It's something I've learned when sharing my music, and it's just as important for other things we make.