... yay 30 minutes wait time....
League of Replays
League of Replays is primarily supported by these ads. Please consider disabling the AdBlock for our site so we can continue to add new features and improve the site. Thank you.
Category: All |
Announcements |
General Discussion |
New Player Forum |
Dominion |
Public Beta Environment |
Wrenchmen |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Riot just forced me to dodge a ranked queue
10 months ago
Well, sadly we are between a rock and a hard place here.
Option 1: Allow elo tanking, which causes more lopsided games by people queue dodging (and ultimately helps increase the feelings of 'elo hell' -- since you hardly can beat a 1400 player who tanked his rating to 1000 when you are rated 1050 or whatever). It also causes a lot of 'wow, I didn't know I lost elo that way" support tickets. We can handle those, but it's pretty disappointing to people when they first figure it out. (granted, that aspect can be solved)
Option 2: Add a sharp time penalty so that if it's really going bad, people can take a time out.
Option 3: Make it blind pick, which is less interesting, but removes a lot of the issues.
Option 4: Do nothing. Let people dodge endlessly until they get a draft they think they can win. (probably meaning 10+ dodges before you get a ranked match to start)
We went with option 2 as the 'least worst' solution.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kurogano
... yay 30 minutes wait time....
|
Option 1: Allow elo tanking, which causes more lopsided games by people queue dodging (and ultimately helps increase the feelings of 'elo hell' -- since you hardly can beat a 1400 player who tanked his rating to 1000 when you are rated 1050 or whatever). It also causes a lot of 'wow, I didn't know I lost elo that way" support tickets. We can handle those, but it's pretty disappointing to people when they first figure it out. (granted, that aspect can be solved)
Option 2: Add a sharp time penalty so that if it's really going bad, people can take a time out.
Option 3: Make it blind pick, which is less interesting, but removes a lot of the issues.
Option 4: Do nothing. Let people dodge endlessly until they get a draft they think they can win. (probably meaning 10+ dodges before you get a ranked match to start)
We went with option 2 as the 'least worst' solution.
10 months ago
10 players, 1 dodge per 'few' hours. Still 3-5 games of dodging before you start. I for one hate the idea that the only draft that will start is the one in which I'm probably disadvantaged because we picked 3 ADs or something.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by SSSilhouette
Allow one free dodge per every few hours and penalty for dodge spamming?
|
10 months ago
Those are pretty poor for resolving the basic issues around dodging and why people feel a need to dodge honestly, but I'm with you that it would be good to find a better way -- we just don't know that we can without large changes that might have worse side-effects.
1 -- Most of the dodging people want to do is around 'I didn't get the role or champion I ideally wanted' or 'my teammates don't seem to be responding to me'. Neither of these line up to a clear report reason that concludes with 'this guy on my team is a jerk'. Reporting because someone went AP as first pick and you wanted it as 5th pick hardly going to improve player behavior. It will help on obnoxious behavior in pre-game behavior, but that's not the primary thing dodging is about. So, happy to do this at some point, but it's not the primary issue that leads to dodging.
2 -- Vote kicks allow you to reap what you sow, and what you sow with vote kicks is a LOT of vitriol. We won't be going this direction in a highly visible way ever for this reason.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Borigrad
Option 5: Allow us to report based on Pre-game Lobby and Post-game Lobby.
Option 6: Allow Vote-kicks in Solo queue only. |
1 -- Most of the dodging people want to do is around 'I didn't get the role or champion I ideally wanted' or 'my teammates don't seem to be responding to me'. Neither of these line up to a clear report reason that concludes with 'this guy on my team is a jerk'. Reporting because someone went AP as first pick and you wanted it as 5th pick hardly going to improve player behavior. It will help on obnoxious behavior in pre-game behavior, but that's not the primary thing dodging is about. So, happy to do this at some point, but it's not the primary issue that leads to dodging.
2 -- Vote kicks allow you to reap what you sow, and what you sow with vote kicks is a LOT of vitriol. We won't be going this direction in a highly visible way ever for this reason.
10 months ago
We had a lot of elo tanking smurfs along with confused players not understanding that they were losing rating (sure people learn, but it's a pretty bad feeling until you do, and we get a decent # of support tickets about this issue. Naturally, we can just tooltip this or add a popup and solve it... But... Even with that, we'd still have a lot of elo tanking smurfs, which are the real issue.
Having a 1400 player crash a 1000 game is not fun for anyone. While not the primary reason, it was a significant contributing factor to so-called 'elo hell'. When there's a 55% chance the other team will get the 1400 smurfing as a lower elo if he is in your game, you can imagine how this goes for helping people get to their rating...
You guys want us to crush 'elo hell', we've made a lot of steps behind the scenes, and this is one that subtly improves things quite a bit honestly. You asked, we listened ;p
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by airhighslash
I like Riot's old dodge system for ranked better but w/e.
|
Having a 1400 player crash a 1000 game is not fun for anyone. While not the primary reason, it was a significant contributing factor to so-called 'elo hell'. When there's a 55% chance the other team will get the 1400 smurfing as a lower elo if he is in your game, you can imagine how this goes for helping people get to their rating...
You guys want us to crush 'elo hell', we've made a lot of steps behind the scenes, and this is one that subtly improves things quite a bit honestly. You asked, we listened ;p
10 months ago
The guy who decides to irrationally kill his chances of winning probably acts like a tool in the game too... then gets reported... then gets banned. Just saying -- most people in ranked play to win, and the people who play to troll make it pretty clear. Please do report them.
If they do it enough and get perma-banned, getting a new level 30 account to resume trolling takes some time, and with any luck, they go play some other game in the meanwhile and don't come back ;p
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ScubaDivingPoop
So what about the people who want a "Certain Role" but don't get it, and instead decides i don't want to wait 30 minutes so I'm going to random and troll someone else into dodging since you don't lose Elo?
You have no way of knowing that most of the dodging is from people who want a specific roll. And from my experience most of the dodging is done by people who don't want to get trolled by either people who say "No mid i feed" and lockin with some absurd champ, Or the AFK random lockins. So now the person who doesnt want their experience runes for 30 minutes is punished while the idiots get a free pass by forcing a dodge? Strong Logic.... |
If they do it enough and get perma-banned, getting a new level 30 account to resume trolling takes some time, and with any luck, they go play some other game in the meanwhile and don't come back ;p
10 months ago
Sure, the AFK problem is on our short list. There's a lot of things we can gradually do to improve how ranked plays out -- this feature, changes to free to play + ranked, some behind the scenes rating changes, etc. All of this adds up to more reliable results, and less frustrating scenarios.
But all of this stuff has pros and cons, and we are trying to pick the rule sets that have the fewest cons and give the most benefit. Even no free to play in ranked isn't strictly positive as it slightly reduced the # of 30s who could play, and some of them WERE perfectly qualified to play ranked.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by zyklonbread
Still a solution that prevents the majority abuse here is a timer from the last dodge on a premade team (to prevent multiples on a team from dodging, can do something similar to a session for duo que), or from your last game which has a dodger.
Implementing this along with something like free dodges when someone gets randomed would take care of probably a vast majority of cases without obvious abuse potential. Also don't auto-requeue people who just got randomed (AFKers?). |
But all of this stuff has pros and cons, and we are trying to pick the rule sets that have the fewest cons and give the most benefit. Even no free to play in ranked isn't strictly positive as it slightly reduced the # of 30s who could play, and some of them WERE perfectly qualified to play ranked.
10 months ago
Fair enough. It's the least worst solution, for now, as I said. We have some other stuff we are working on that will continue to improve ranked.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kurogano
I didn't mean the option was bad. I actually prefer it that way. Was just bored and kind of ticked that the game forced me to dodge when I hadn't through some bug in the system.
|
10 months ago
on it
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Tuesti7c
I say we remove armored bears from ranked. Would at least make it more enjoyable.
|
10 months ago
It depends. I'd say within a month usually.If you applied to design, you would definitely know within a couple weeks.
That being said, we are trying to standardize our HR processes so people get a reply, even if it is 'no', reliably. Right now, apps get reviewed, but sometimes don't get 'no' answers if they dont make the transition from the HR team to the hiring manager. That's a gap we want to fix so people know status if we close the position, don't see the fit, etc.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cae vida loka
hey zileas how long does it take until you guys respond to an application?
|
That being said, we are trying to standardize our HR processes so people get a reply, even if it is 'no', reliably. Right now, apps get reviewed, but sometimes don't get 'no' answers if they dont make the transition from the HR team to the hiring manager. That's a gap we want to fix so people know status if we close the position, don't see the fit, etc.