Talk:Matchmaking/@comment-201.10.145.180-20130319014320/@comment-11485803-20130702160617

This is where the problem lies.

According to the description, we are being matched with 9 people with skill levels generally around our own; According to most posts here, we are being matched by the average of my team versus the average of the other team (somewhat).

If it is the former case, 201.10 could either be at the same level as his teammates or alternatively be beter than they are, made possible with a short streak of unlucky losses (perhaps due to him unluckily getting the dumber 4 in the 9), he will be placed with increasingly dumber players, untill he drops to a player-quality-level scum so low that he can shine alone as a torchlight among the most hopeless of times and rely on himself to win all of his games, untill he's lucky enough to be back at the "9 people of actually equal skill" section of town.

If it is the latter case, as the system works on averages, 200.10 could possibly be one of the 4 dumb people in the team united by the one good player, or alternatively he could legitimately the best one in the team, as his high abilities will make the system attempt to team him up with bad players to "even the two teams out."

The problem here is 3 fold: 1) There is no way to tell which system one Riot uses unless they publish the equations. 2) There is no way to tell, even knowing the system, whether 201.10 is part of the problem (for the loss) or the single solution that couldn't turn the tides of the inevitable, unless the actual replays are given. 3) All the above is argued under to the assumption that the match making system is actually "grouping 10 players of generally the same actual skill level" or actually "grouping 10 players of average skill level." Judging from all the posts, it's likely doing decently with neither.

As to the people who reply to all criticisms of the system with "please come up with a better one," here is my two cents. Match people using the first system mentioned above. However, actually make it happen. I need to play more games to give a precise method to achieving that, but here are a few that I can think of based on logical speculations:

- Instead of averages, use mediums in the calculations/equations/whatever to match the teams.

- Forget about the 50-50 coin-toss ideal of match-making - warconomy and the invisible hand will do that on its own. Focus on have 10 players of generally the same skill AND LEVEL playing together, with equal emphasis on both.

- Increase the XP reward of wining and decrease the XP reward of losing. That way, a player's level will scale better with his skill, and supports both successes by talen and success by hardwork - The naturally talented people will be flying faster through the levels untill they get to their level; The more normal people will be playing significantly more games than the talented people in their same level range - they would see more champions, more tactics, more tricks, more sweat, and more blood than the talented, hopefully evening the scale.

- Have the third objective of "finding a game that doesn't work for me becausing waiting is bad" to trigger much later. If we can clearly see the levels of our teammates and the levels of our enemies, I'm sure currently many people will be patient enough to take that 5-minute penalty and gamble that the next game will be matched better - why not make it part of the system itself by focusing more on getting into a good game than getting into a game quick? (Actually this just reminds me that I can either leave the queue or decline matches of more than a certain amount of waiting time, as "the longer the queue goes, the shittier the matches will be" is what the third objective is saying basically).

- Change the word "report" into "judgement" or something of similar nature, as currently "being an unskilled player" is in the list of reportable behaviors yet it is on a completely different level of deserved punishment than the other ones such as "flaming," "intentionally feeding," or "being a jackass," which (initially, untill I read about it on my own in the wikia) results in me not wanting to report people for being an unskilled player in fear of them getting banned or something. I guess the "unskilled player" option is there to let players manually help the system correct its match-making, but that is not made clear to the players in any way, shape, or form in the game itself. Changing the name will enable people like me to not be afraid and to actually help improve gameplay for everybody.

- Finally, on top of the "unskilled player" and "refusal to communicate with teammates" in the report function, add in "too-skilled player," which should be made to affect the targeted player instead of the reporting player to avoid people abusing the function to get into easy games. It should be encouraged and promoted to have no bias and limit in regards to reporting teammates or opponents for being unskilled players or too-skilled players, as the system matches the 10 players equally, instead of this team against that team; If you feel that someone is in a game below them, mark them so they can go up AND so you will have less chance of unfortunately meeting him again in the other team; If you feel that some is in a game above them, mark them so they can go down AND so you will be less chance of unfortunately meeting again in your own team.

You for all, all for you.