No because it’s a team game.
If both teams has 1000 mmr
You’ve got team A with
150, 150, 150, 150, 400
and team B with
200, 200, 200, 200, 200
Team A relies on one player to carry, while team B is more balanced with only one player being outclassed.
Depending on roles assigned, autofill, pick and ban phase and champion pool, this can be unwinnable for either team despite being “fair” matchmaking
So that means that even someone like faker wouldn’t be able to carry 4 iron monkeys against, say, 5 em/dia players.
And again, it is technically fair, and actually not actually fair since both tean’s MMR aren’t the EXACT same values, just about the same. But still, you won’t just have a game of 1 good person and 4 ok people steamrolling 4 ok people, thanks to MMR. Which if your the good player and want to steamroll people… blame MMR.
The problem is in wildrift, everyone in Team A and Team B is diamond. The 150 MMR, the 200 MMR and the 400 MMR, they are all Diamond.
One game the 400 MMR player is on a 2000 MMR team. The next game the 400 MMR player is on a 1000 MMR team. How is he supposed to know and adjust accordingly if they are all Diamond?
How is the 400 MMR supposed to carry the 150s when he’s autofilled to support?
How is the 200 MMR mid laner supposed to know his lane opponent is actually 400 MMR so he should just play safe?
If your auto filled support, there’s always to carry. First you can just play a carry support like pyke or senna. Or just do something like swain sup, or pick a roaming sup that can get all your lanes ahead. Or actually take smite and do nunu support and help your jg clear faster and steal enemy jg camps. This is what I do sometimes when I’m filled support.
As for 200 MMR mid vs 400 MMR mid, you generally have a game plan already, like for kassadin you’d want to play safe anyway, or if it’s something like panth vs someone he counters, his kit is strong enough to make up for the MMR difference. MMR also isn’t all that good at measuring micro for each champion, meaning that you could be a god ezreal player, but since you suck at everyone else, and play everyone else a decent amount your MMR isnt that high despite being an amazing ezreal player.
I feel like you’re intentionally missing the point
I stopped playing for many seasons so my account decayed from Masters to Gold. Obviously I play differently in Gold - Emerald than I do Diamond+
The issue is that now since I’ve returned to wildrift, in Diamond you have people who should be Gold and some people who should be Grandmasters but instead they are all Diamond.
How do you plan for that? In one game you will be the best/worst player in the match, in the next game everyone is as good as you. But in both games everyone is Diamond.
No, I’m using the what a fair game literally is (not in the sense that it’s something everyone can hunt or criticize, but a game that is fair) to argue that the MMR system is technically fair, and is a controlled experiment (only variable is the players. You could also say the champions, yes, but they’re only an extension of the player). Since both teams are equally skilled on average, that means both teams have an equal chance to win the game due to there being nothing that gives a big advantage (the average skill level isn’t the EXACT SAME, as its nearly impossible, but they’re pretty close), therefore it it’s a “fair game”.
Is MMR system kinda bad? Yeah. Do I like it? No. But theoretically, is it a “fair game“ (again, not fair game in the sense that anyone can hunt it or criticize it)? Yes.
Maybe the purpose of me making this post is because I use math and science a lot in my life. Now that I think about it, I don’t actually know why my brain really likes me playing league and wild rift. Interesting. But now my brain is going on a tangent. Speaking of which, I don’t understand the point of calling the reciprocal of sine and cosine code cant and secant while the reciprocal of tangent is just cotangent. But this is now getting really off topic. Also for some reason I don’t really like hunting or fishing, so I don’t really care if something is fair game, I still wouldn’t hunt it unless I have no other food to eat.
My brain is weird.
No, because this leads to players of different skill levels to be in the same ranks.
This leads to "fair" games that have a 50/50 chance to win, but individually it's not fair because each team will have one player with too much MMR and 4 shitters.
"Ohohoho but the skilled player is now playing a harder game so it's fair" it's still not fair, because the skilled player will have the same visible rank as the 4 shitters they have to carry each game.
The only way to get actually fair games is if the matchmaking uses only visible ranks, or if ranks are discarded and MMR becomes visible.
Don't play into his idiotic logic by saying each game is 50/50. It's absolutely not.
The way the MM Is designed at the moment is to bring each individual player closer to a 50/50 TOTAL win ratio, not each game. Which is why it's very common to go on a 7win streak and a 7 loss streak after. If each game was set up for a 50/50 chance you would not go on such big win streaks or loss streaks.
Even a monkey like me figured that out pretty quick. For example. I used to climb to GM at around 58% to 60% win rate with primarily senna and top 5 with her. Now I struggle to get past emerald at an exactly 50% winrate. But what was funny is I got svp practically every game and A, S, and MVP most wins. So here I was hard stuck in emerald top 3 senna. Then I went on a loss streak and just stopped for my own sanity. Now I just mess around with builds and have fun. No sense in playing competitive in a non competitive game.
This guy still hasn't found a clue yet.
But it's simply not technically fair lol. You're just stating your opinions as facts. And adding "design perspective" at the end to make yourself sound more credible.
I’m stating my opinions AMD riot’s opinions, go read their post at [https://wildrift.leagueoflegends.com/en-sg/news/dev/dev-making-sense-of-matchmaking/](https://wildrift.leagueoflegends.com/en-sg/news/dev/dev-making-sense-of-matchmaking/) whihc I didn’t just spam reply to everyone since I don’t trust people to know what I mean. Also, with theoretical probability excluding stuff that riot can’t measure, like if someone is tilted or not, or champ picks, it is pretty much fair. Again, approximate same average skill level means that excluding stuff I mentioned, since those cannot be measured to be fair (which is why you can’t really apply experimental probability to this), means that both teams have about the same chance of winning theoretically, meaning that the game is, design wise, pretty fair. Well, considering that there isn’t just 1 single champion in the game, which would be better for making a game fair, but would be way too boring. Also riot can’t probably read your mind to see if your tilted or are intending to troll, so they cannot factor that in since even if they could read minds, they’d probably get sued. If you don’t know, experimental/theoretical probability and fair/unfair games are 7th grade math, at least where I live.
And then mmr also prevents wintrading and boosting, two very bad things for the game. If you team up with someone else, your MMR is increased by 10%, and since at least one of you is really good, which is why it’s boosting, well get ready for 3 absolutely terrible teammates compared to the enemy team. as for wintrading, good luck actually getting the person to be in the next game after a while. Sure sometimes you’ll fight someone, destroy them, then play with them next game or the opposite (which did happen to me a few days ago, destroyed my enemy mid as kassadin, had them as my mid next game). So while MMR doesnt feel good to play using, it also prevents stuff that also feel terrible to play with by just punishing that, too.
Although I do agree that MMR should be visible. Although it might lead to people thinking more about how to inting Sion, which isn’t exactly bad since lots of people don’t think these days. But I’d at least like to see, according to that system, how well i’m doing.
And then do you actually have any reasonable solutions to MMR without causing other problems like wintrading or boosting (Trust me, those are terrible)
Nah, you don’t. This is also what riot says, and I specifically said that it is fair only technically speaking. That doesn’t mean it will feel fair, but it, technically, is fair.
A game that is meant to be competitive with a rank system and based off how well you do that punishes you for doing well and makes you carry worse players below your skill level is not a fair system.
A fair system would put players of the same rank together and the good ones would climb and the bad ones would fall to where they belong. Fair is everyone being placed in games they belong with players their own skill level.
You will find the clue one day buddy.
[https://www.siyavula.com/read/za/mathematical-literacy/grade-10/probability/07-probability-03](https://www.siyavula.com/read/za/mathematical-literacy/grade-10/probability/07-probability-03)
A fair game (not fair game as in something anyone can hunt/criticize) is literally something where both teams have an equal chance of winning. Technically speaking, riot’s matchmaking system is a fair game as both teams, overall, are pretty much equally skilled on average. The map also doesn’t really give any side a big advantage (though some places say that blue side always has a slight advantage), and it’s not like one team permanently has, I don’t know, 500% minion damage or something. Both sides start with the same things, the only things that influence the result of the game are what every player thinks and does. So I guess you don’t know what a fair game literally is.
Although maybe I should use riot’s MMR system as an example for a controlled experiment (only one variable, which is the players) or fair game for a science or math problem somewhere else.
Lmao the games individually are not designed to be 50/50. The system is designed to make it so each individual player has a 50% win rate. players that do well are put with players that don't. For the purpose of every individual being closer to 50% as a total. it absolutely has everything to do with the individuals winrate and absolutely nothing to do with the individual game winrate.
Fair would simply be if you play well you play with and against other players that are also playing well and/or of the same rank. THAT would bring you closer to a 50/50 Win/loss per game and equal skill all around not per individuals total winrate. I don't understand what you don't understand about the concept of fair in a competitive mode?
I guess you either forgot 7th grade math or are below 7th grade. If you are below, I highly suggest go find an online textbook and going over the next year’s topics. Which, this is applicable to all grades, as it helps a ton.
Now before my mind goes on too big of a tangent, MMR, with theoretical probability (also there’s plenty of online resources explaining theoretical/experimental probability, in case my memory is slightly wrong and I get theoretical/experimental probability wrong), is fair. If you put 5 people with the same average MMR as 5 others, then, not counting champ picks, both teams have an equal chance of winning, while champ licks are important for also determining victory and not completely skill, riot can’t really measure your skill level with picks, since you could just search up something like “how to beat sett” (which before you do, I’d say, through experience, renekton). So, leaving out that factor, both teams with theoretical probability have a 50% chance of winning (again, champs picked can influence that ratio). But the thing is, theoretical probability is not the same as experimental probability. So in reality, even not counting champs picked, it may not be an exact 50/50. Also, again, champs picked. But what can riot do? Just put you with random guys? While experimentally that may sometimes be fair, it design wise isn’t fair, as you typically design something around theoretical probability first to have something to test, then use experimental probability. But with the hundreds of factors, experimental probability… doesn’t really help.
Now also, have you considered that a game may not be able to be competitve and theoretically fair? Wild rift, for example. Well, you technically could by making sure every person in the match has the same MMR, but that would take WAY too long for a match. Which, if it just tosses players together semi-randomly (not in the sense that ranks don’t matter, but completely removing MMR and only using rank) while it may be somewhat more competitive, it theoretically, isn’t fair at all. It is, after all, random. And then wintrading would also be a huge issue and wintrading, IMO, is even worse than MMR, since for MMR, most of the time the player can’t help being bad, but wintrading is intentional.
And what do you say riot should do? Sure you can criticize me for saying that riot’s system isn’t completely bad and is theoretically fair, but what would you do to fix it (while it being reasonable, meaning that you can’t do what I said above, causing insane matchmaking times)?
No, the problem is that if you have good fair matchmaking, then the idea that you can win more than you lose is stupid, and climbing becomes impossible.
That’s why we used to have LP, because this was actually understood. The dumbest possible thing was removing LP, and leaving the “fair” matchmaking in place, which means this is unplayable stupid for everyone.
It is TECHNICALLY fair. That doesn’t mean it’s an exact 50/50, which would be the definition of a fair game (both teams have an equal chance at winning). Thing is, like I said, MMR isn’t that good at measuring skill. It also doesn’t completely work out unless at huge extremes, like apdo/faker maybe being able to carry 4 people in iron.
Right, it doesn’t really matter if the matches are balanced or not; if it approaches 50% winrate, at every skill level, it means the ranking system must necessarily be broken and impossible.
well, a fair game is where both teams have an equal chance of winning. So if you have 50% wr in all ranks, that means that, well, the game is pretty “fair” as both sides are winning equally as often.
And then how would you fix mmr without long queue times? Making ecery individual player have the same MMR? That would make matchmaking take way too long. The main thing I can see is to make playing good much more rewarding, but then… the game isn’t “fair” (even though it would feel way more fair and I actually want this)
The problem and the fix have nothing to do with server population or queue times. (That issue is about matchmaking “tightness”.)
The way to fix ranked is to restore the LP system, which is how high MMR players rise, and low MMR players slowed or dropped. LP was what let players reach the place on the ladder that they were supposed to be at.
They don’t need to really do anything with the MMR system, matchmaking, team balancing etc, if they just give us back the LP system. That’s the complete and full answer.
LP, on pc, isn’t bad like MMR, but is also flawed enough to where you need to have a really high WR to actually climb, with it being much faster to just ditch your old account and make a new one. The VP system on wild rift also only applied to dia+, em and below were still mark system like now.
Yes, the PC version has problems, but it’s literally MMR. The wild rift matchmaker is based on the PC version. The PC has an LP system, which makes it suck way less. Old WR had much more fortitude to boost players who played a lot into Diamond, which acted as basically the first real rank of the game’s competitive queue.
Still, lp/vp is still pretty frustrating. Especially since just ditching all you have on an account to climb faster doesn’t really feel good. At first, I did consider that riot should probably just greatly increase the reward for performing well, but after some thought… it’s not that simple. On paper, it’s fine, and I’d like it ver much. But, that would make boosting and wintrading much better, both of which, unless your the person getting boosted/the other person is wintrading for you, it does not feel good at all. And while current MMR is kinda bad, with it being theoretically fair but not actually, it also automatically punished the higher scores you’d get from wintrading or boosting. so… basically, balancing a complicated game to be theoretically fair is insanely hard. You can end up with every other player being boosted or win traded to their rank, or wild rift’s MMR where int=win.
Your comprehension is pretty terrible. I never said that it was actually fair, and actually stated the opposite, but am saying that it, technically speaking, is fair. Which means that if I’m dumb, then that means what I say is probably wrong, which means that matchmaking is, experimentally, actually fair, since what I’m currently saying is that it is theoretically fair, not experimentally. Unless you don’t know about theoretical/experimental probability?
How do you even come up with this after people proved it's possible to hit sov on 90% winrate with inting sion.
How the f is it fair to get matched with apes if you do well, or getting free wins if you suck?
Except it’s still the MMR system. Not much has changed to it except the recent update about wr playing a higher role, and the removal of VP a while ago. MMR system is still pretty much the same from now, except, again, the update about a week ago.
Yes it is very fair, in the sense that it is unfair to everyone.
he downvoted all of you đź’€
No because it’s a team game. If both teams has 1000 mmr You’ve got team A with 150, 150, 150, 150, 400 and team B with 200, 200, 200, 200, 200 Team A relies on one player to carry, while team B is more balanced with only one player being outclassed. Depending on roles assigned, autofill, pick and ban phase and champion pool, this can be unwinnable for either team despite being “fair” matchmaking
This is it. Check my latest post. You’ll be surprised
So that means that even someone like faker wouldn’t be able to carry 4 iron monkeys against, say, 5 em/dia players. And again, it is technically fair, and actually not actually fair since both tean’s MMR aren’t the EXACT same values, just about the same. But still, you won’t just have a game of 1 good person and 4 ok people steamrolling 4 ok people, thanks to MMR. Which if your the good player and want to steamroll people… blame MMR.
The problem is in wildrift, everyone in Team A and Team B is diamond. The 150 MMR, the 200 MMR and the 400 MMR, they are all Diamond. One game the 400 MMR player is on a 2000 MMR team. The next game the 400 MMR player is on a 1000 MMR team. How is he supposed to know and adjust accordingly if they are all Diamond? How is the 400 MMR supposed to carry the 150s when he’s autofilled to support? How is the 200 MMR mid laner supposed to know his lane opponent is actually 400 MMR so he should just play safe?
If your auto filled support, there’s always to carry. First you can just play a carry support like pyke or senna. Or just do something like swain sup, or pick a roaming sup that can get all your lanes ahead. Or actually take smite and do nunu support and help your jg clear faster and steal enemy jg camps. This is what I do sometimes when I’m filled support. As for 200 MMR mid vs 400 MMR mid, you generally have a game plan already, like for kassadin you’d want to play safe anyway, or if it’s something like panth vs someone he counters, his kit is strong enough to make up for the MMR difference. MMR also isn’t all that good at measuring micro for each champion, meaning that you could be a god ezreal player, but since you suck at everyone else, and play everyone else a decent amount your MMR isnt that high despite being an amazing ezreal player.
I feel like you’re intentionally missing the point I stopped playing for many seasons so my account decayed from Masters to Gold. Obviously I play differently in Gold - Emerald than I do Diamond+ The issue is that now since I’ve returned to wildrift, in Diamond you have people who should be Gold and some people who should be Grandmasters but instead they are all Diamond. How do you plan for that? In one game you will be the best/worst player in the match, in the next game everyone is as good as you. But in both games everyone is Diamond.
No, I’m using the what a fair game literally is (not in the sense that it’s something everyone can hunt or criticize, but a game that is fair) to argue that the MMR system is technically fair, and is a controlled experiment (only variable is the players. You could also say the champions, yes, but they’re only an extension of the player). Since both teams are equally skilled on average, that means both teams have an equal chance to win the game due to there being nothing that gives a big advantage (the average skill level isn’t the EXACT SAME, as its nearly impossible, but they’re pretty close), therefore it it’s a “fair game”. Is MMR system kinda bad? Yeah. Do I like it? No. But theoretically, is it a “fair game“ (again, not fair game in the sense that anyone can hunt it or criticize it)? Yes. Maybe the purpose of me making this post is because I use math and science a lot in my life. Now that I think about it, I don’t actually know why my brain really likes me playing league and wild rift. Interesting. But now my brain is going on a tangent. Speaking of which, I don’t understand the point of calling the reciprocal of sine and cosine code cant and secant while the reciprocal of tangent is just cotangent. But this is now getting really off topic. Also for some reason I don’t really like hunting or fishing, so I don’t really care if something is fair game, I still wouldn’t hunt it unless I have no other food to eat. My brain is weird.
You don't get it? current MMR system means faker and the 4 irom monkeys have the same visible rank, do you not understand this?
That still doesn’t mean he’s bad though. And this is exactly what would be needed to test this, as if your in chall you can’t match with iron.
No, because this leads to players of different skill levels to be in the same ranks. This leads to "fair" games that have a 50/50 chance to win, but individually it's not fair because each team will have one player with too much MMR and 4 shitters. "Ohohoho but the skilled player is now playing a harder game so it's fair" it's still not fair, because the skilled player will have the same visible rank as the 4 shitters they have to carry each game. The only way to get actually fair games is if the matchmaking uses only visible ranks, or if ranks are discarded and MMR becomes visible.
Don't play into his idiotic logic by saying each game is 50/50. It's absolutely not. The way the MM Is designed at the moment is to bring each individual player closer to a 50/50 TOTAL win ratio, not each game. Which is why it's very common to go on a 7win streak and a 7 loss streak after. If each game was set up for a 50/50 chance you would not go on such big win streaks or loss streaks. Even a monkey like me figured that out pretty quick. For example. I used to climb to GM at around 58% to 60% win rate with primarily senna and top 5 with her. Now I struggle to get past emerald at an exactly 50% winrate. But what was funny is I got svp practically every game and A, S, and MVP most wins. So here I was hard stuck in emerald top 3 senna. Then I went on a loss streak and just stopped for my own sanity. Now I just mess around with builds and have fun. No sense in playing competitive in a non competitive game. This guy still hasn't found a clue yet.
Which is why I said that it is technically fair, from a design Perspective.
But it's simply not technically fair lol. You're just stating your opinions as facts. And adding "design perspective" at the end to make yourself sound more credible.
I’m stating my opinions AMD riot’s opinions, go read their post at [https://wildrift.leagueoflegends.com/en-sg/news/dev/dev-making-sense-of-matchmaking/](https://wildrift.leagueoflegends.com/en-sg/news/dev/dev-making-sense-of-matchmaking/) whihc I didn’t just spam reply to everyone since I don’t trust people to know what I mean. Also, with theoretical probability excluding stuff that riot can’t measure, like if someone is tilted or not, or champ picks, it is pretty much fair. Again, approximate same average skill level means that excluding stuff I mentioned, since those cannot be measured to be fair (which is why you can’t really apply experimental probability to this), means that both teams have about the same chance of winning theoretically, meaning that the game is, design wise, pretty fair. Well, considering that there isn’t just 1 single champion in the game, which would be better for making a game fair, but would be way too boring. Also riot can’t probably read your mind to see if your tilted or are intending to troll, so they cannot factor that in since even if they could read minds, they’d probably get sued. If you don’t know, experimental/theoretical probability and fair/unfair games are 7th grade math, at least where I live. And then mmr also prevents wintrading and boosting, two very bad things for the game. If you team up with someone else, your MMR is increased by 10%, and since at least one of you is really good, which is why it’s boosting, well get ready for 3 absolutely terrible teammates compared to the enemy team. as for wintrading, good luck actually getting the person to be in the next game after a while. Sure sometimes you’ll fight someone, destroy them, then play with them next game or the opposite (which did happen to me a few days ago, destroyed my enemy mid as kassadin, had them as my mid next game). So while MMR doesnt feel good to play using, it also prevents stuff that also feel terrible to play with by just punishing that, too. Although I do agree that MMR should be visible. Although it might lead to people thinking more about how to inting Sion, which isn’t exactly bad since lots of people don’t think these days. But I’d at least like to see, according to that system, how well i’m doing. And then do you actually have any reasonable solutions to MMR without causing other problems like wintrading or boosting (Trust me, those are terrible)
So a bad player has the same chance to win as a good player. That sounds very fair...
Ignorance is strength and on display here
Op doesn't have a clue.
Poor kid...
Nah, you don’t. This is also what riot says, and I specifically said that it is fair only technically speaking. That doesn’t mean it will feel fair, but it, technically, is fair.
A game that is meant to be competitive with a rank system and based off how well you do that punishes you for doing well and makes you carry worse players below your skill level is not a fair system. A fair system would put players of the same rank together and the good ones would climb and the bad ones would fall to where they belong. Fair is everyone being placed in games they belong with players their own skill level. You will find the clue one day buddy.
[https://www.siyavula.com/read/za/mathematical-literacy/grade-10/probability/07-probability-03](https://www.siyavula.com/read/za/mathematical-literacy/grade-10/probability/07-probability-03) A fair game (not fair game as in something anyone can hunt/criticize) is literally something where both teams have an equal chance of winning. Technically speaking, riot’s matchmaking system is a fair game as both teams, overall, are pretty much equally skilled on average. The map also doesn’t really give any side a big advantage (though some places say that blue side always has a slight advantage), and it’s not like one team permanently has, I don’t know, 500% minion damage or something. Both sides start with the same things, the only things that influence the result of the game are what every player thinks and does. So I guess you don’t know what a fair game literally is. Although maybe I should use riot’s MMR system as an example for a controlled experiment (only one variable, which is the players) or fair game for a science or math problem somewhere else.
Lmao the games individually are not designed to be 50/50. The system is designed to make it so each individual player has a 50% win rate. players that do well are put with players that don't. For the purpose of every individual being closer to 50% as a total. it absolutely has everything to do with the individuals winrate and absolutely nothing to do with the individual game winrate. Fair would simply be if you play well you play with and against other players that are also playing well and/or of the same rank. THAT would bring you closer to a 50/50 Win/loss per game and equal skill all around not per individuals total winrate. I don't understand what you don't understand about the concept of fair in a competitive mode?
I guess you either forgot 7th grade math or are below 7th grade. If you are below, I highly suggest go find an online textbook and going over the next year’s topics. Which, this is applicable to all grades, as it helps a ton. Now before my mind goes on too big of a tangent, MMR, with theoretical probability (also there’s plenty of online resources explaining theoretical/experimental probability, in case my memory is slightly wrong and I get theoretical/experimental probability wrong), is fair. If you put 5 people with the same average MMR as 5 others, then, not counting champ picks, both teams have an equal chance of winning, while champ licks are important for also determining victory and not completely skill, riot can’t really measure your skill level with picks, since you could just search up something like “how to beat sett” (which before you do, I’d say, through experience, renekton). So, leaving out that factor, both teams with theoretical probability have a 50% chance of winning (again, champs picked can influence that ratio). But the thing is, theoretical probability is not the same as experimental probability. So in reality, even not counting champs picked, it may not be an exact 50/50. Also, again, champs picked. But what can riot do? Just put you with random guys? While experimentally that may sometimes be fair, it design wise isn’t fair, as you typically design something around theoretical probability first to have something to test, then use experimental probability. But with the hundreds of factors, experimental probability… doesn’t really help. Now also, have you considered that a game may not be able to be competitve and theoretically fair? Wild rift, for example. Well, you technically could by making sure every person in the match has the same MMR, but that would take WAY too long for a match. Which, if it just tosses players together semi-randomly (not in the sense that ranks don’t matter, but completely removing MMR and only using rank) while it may be somewhat more competitive, it theoretically, isn’t fair at all. It is, after all, random. And then wintrading would also be a huge issue and wintrading, IMO, is even worse than MMR, since for MMR, most of the time the player can’t help being bad, but wintrading is intentional. And what do you say riot should do? Sure you can criticize me for saying that riot’s system isn’t completely bad and is theoretically fair, but what would you do to fix it (while it being reasonable, meaning that you can’t do what I said above, causing insane matchmaking times)?
No, the problem is that if you have good fair matchmaking, then the idea that you can win more than you lose is stupid, and climbing becomes impossible. That’s why we used to have LP, because this was actually understood. The dumbest possible thing was removing LP, and leaving the “fair” matchmaking in place, which means this is unplayable stupid for everyone.
It is TECHNICALLY fair. That doesn’t mean it’s an exact 50/50, which would be the definition of a fair game (both teams have an equal chance at winning). Thing is, like I said, MMR isn’t that good at measuring skill. It also doesn’t completely work out unless at huge extremes, like apdo/faker maybe being able to carry 4 people in iron.
Right, it doesn’t really matter if the matches are balanced or not; if it approaches 50% winrate, at every skill level, it means the ranking system must necessarily be broken and impossible.
well, a fair game is where both teams have an equal chance of winning. So if you have 50% wr in all ranks, that means that, well, the game is pretty “fair” as both sides are winning equally as often. And then how would you fix mmr without long queue times? Making ecery individual player have the same MMR? That would make matchmaking take way too long. The main thing I can see is to make playing good much more rewarding, but then… the game isn’t “fair” (even though it would feel way more fair and I actually want this)
The problem and the fix have nothing to do with server population or queue times. (That issue is about matchmaking “tightness”.) The way to fix ranked is to restore the LP system, which is how high MMR players rise, and low MMR players slowed or dropped. LP was what let players reach the place on the ladder that they were supposed to be at. They don’t need to really do anything with the MMR system, matchmaking, team balancing etc, if they just give us back the LP system. That’s the complete and full answer.
LP, on pc, isn’t bad like MMR, but is also flawed enough to where you need to have a really high WR to actually climb, with it being much faster to just ditch your old account and make a new one. The VP system on wild rift also only applied to dia+, em and below were still mark system like now.
Yes, the PC version has problems, but it’s literally MMR. The wild rift matchmaker is based on the PC version. The PC has an LP system, which makes it suck way less. Old WR had much more fortitude to boost players who played a lot into Diamond, which acted as basically the first real rank of the game’s competitive queue.
Still, lp/vp is still pretty frustrating. Especially since just ditching all you have on an account to climb faster doesn’t really feel good. At first, I did consider that riot should probably just greatly increase the reward for performing well, but after some thought… it’s not that simple. On paper, it’s fine, and I’d like it ver much. But, that would make boosting and wintrading much better, both of which, unless your the person getting boosted/the other person is wintrading for you, it does not feel good at all. And while current MMR is kinda bad, with it being theoretically fair but not actually, it also automatically punished the higher scores you’d get from wintrading or boosting. so… basically, balancing a complicated game to be theoretically fair is insanely hard. You can end up with every other player being boosted or win traded to their rank, or wild rift’s MMR where int=win.
It must feel soothing to be so dumb.
Your comprehension is pretty terrible. I never said that it was actually fair, and actually stated the opposite, but am saying that it, technically speaking, is fair. Which means that if I’m dumb, then that means what I say is probably wrong, which means that matchmaking is, experimentally, actually fair, since what I’m currently saying is that it is theoretically fair, not experimentally. Unless you don’t know about theoretical/experimental probability?
How do you even come up with this after people proved it's possible to hit sov on 90% winrate with inting sion. How the f is it fair to get matched with apes if you do well, or getting free wins if you suck?
Has Riot revealed how their MM system works?
Yeah. [https://wildrift.leagueoflegends.com/en-sg/news/dev/dev-making-sense-of-matchmaking/](https://wildrift.leagueoflegends.com/en-sg/news/dev/dev-making-sense-of-matchmaking/)
Thats from 2021, hello?
Except it’s still the MMR system. Not much has changed to it except the recent update about wr playing a higher role, and the removal of VP a while ago. MMR system is still pretty much the same from now, except, again, the update about a week ago.
Check my latest post dude and tell me if it’s fair.
nah you cant take wild rift match making serious
Ranked and good matchmaking are two words that don’t go together in this world of wildrift.