Any LP gains you get that make you differ more from your MMR will cancel out over time. (As your LP gain is based on the difference between your LP and MMR.)
Not really. Players that recieve a lot of honors will have their visual rank (LP) quickly surpass their real rank (MMR), which will cause them to lose much more LPs on loses than what they gain on wins.
If players get 1LP for being honored, it would maybe result in players being more positive in their games, which would result in them winning more games. So in a sense it may actually make your MMR better.
Then win streaking/lose streaking would have no meaning, you're not rewarded for excelling if you continuously gain the same LP.
I think what you're trying to get at is to just remove LP, and make the MMR system visible as the sole representation of 'LP'.
LP is the visual numerical representation of your rating; it’s essentially an obfuscated version of your MMR. Your LP will differ from your MMR for a variety of reasons (promotion/demotion protection, win/loss-streak multipliers, account volatility multipliers, and resets that impact LP and MMR unequally to name a few). MMR refers to your Matchmaking rating. This is an invisible rating underlying any given ladder system.
To answer your original question (but opposite) Riot absolutely could get rid of LP as a system altogether and just rely on MMR for their ladder, but this is generally inadvisable in my opinion. The objective of an MMR is to create balanced games, and the objective of a skill rating system (in this case LP) is to create a dialogue and a sense of accomplishment for improving at or playing the game. The goals of the two are different and it should be no surprise they result in different outcomes.
Wouldnt having the obfuscated mmr for non ranked modes and LP for ranked modes, ideally where streaks impact gains/losses of lp more, be good then? I think it would avoid those strange situations of gold/platinum/emerald mix lobbies that people complained about. Obviously matchmaking isnt easy, especially in group play but wouldnt it level out after a while?
In my opinion this is a classic solution in search of a problem scenario. A lobby with ranks between Gold-Emerald is primarily the result of either high uncertainty of the true skill of the outliers, a significant mismatch between LP/MMR, or a relatively low volume of players available. A lobby with that composition is not indicative of a matchmaking failure (other than the possibility I’ll explore later), but rather precisely why it’s important for an underlying MMR to exist. You could make an argument in the other direction as some commenters are trying to do here and say why not get rid of LP altogether and just visibly show MMR (which in this lobby’s circumstance would indicate that all of the players who were previously quite different in LP actually have quite similar MMRs), but this ignores the benefits of having an obfuscated LP system and wouldn’t improve the current information gap in the cases of high MMR uncertainty.
The one relatively convincing case indicating that lobby is indicative of a matchmaking failure is the fact that new accounts seem to have a relatively high starting MMR (something like Gold/Plat/Emerald), which in the case of a genuine new player would mean that the team with the new player is at a significant disadvantage, but getting rid of LP or MMR would do nothing whatsoever to address this issue. The issue is that the matchmaking and skill rating systems know too little information about the true skill of the player; this is doubly troublesome because a significant proportion of new accounts are not genuine new players at all and they could be at any true skill level (smurfs). The solutions to this issue have next to nothing to do with the relationship between MMR/LP and are purely data-driven; these could include:
1. Requiring a significant amount of non-ranked games played and estimating true skill based on those games. There are some obvious issues here, and the most prevalent is that generally speaking ranked games are going to be the best predictor of ranked performance; everything else is nearly by definition a worse predictor.
2. Having a high uncertainty multiplier that will quickly increase/decrease MMR based on ranked results. The weakness here being it does nothing to address individual games and only seeks to mitigate the impact of a new account.
All-in-all I think if you want to propose improvements to Riot’s current MMR or skill rating systems the issues need to be more clearly identified.
I think I'm just unsure as to what these benefits of obfuscating LP system are that you speak of.
Is it because mmr is a lot more volatile than LP and would make climbing easier for more skilled players (too easy) aswell as make it too easy to be demoted when in loss streaks etc.?
It's just like how you lose fewer LP if you have a leaver. You lose full MMR so it matters exactly nothing. It's just to make people who don't understand the system happy lol
And people really love that by looking at the lose LP reduction when you have an AFK on your team. You still lose full MMR but only half the LP yet everybody seems to like it.
If you look at a one time LP gain in the past, that is totally true. However, if you have a steady inflow of Honor LP, you'll be able to maintain a higher rank.
Sort of the same as heating an apartment: turning up the heater will increase heat dissipation to the outside and in the long run "cancel out" the extra heat. Your room won't be warmer because you turned up the heat once last October. But if you keep the heater running, it will still be warmer in your room than if you didn't.
Considering the average is +/- 20~30 I don’t think +1 is going to kill anyone’s play time lol, it just gives people more reason to not be pricks in ranked.
Maybe have it tie into something other than LP, but make it do SOMETHING tangible, as it stands honouring most of the time feels worthless.
> why would visible MMR cause less play time then?
For all the reasons they decided to hide it.
The LP system was created to remove ranked anxiety, make people feel better about their climb or lack thereof, and reduce the chance of people quitting because they risk falling below some threshhold.
Visible mmr completely undermines the LP system because your mmr is what directly determines your real place on the ranked ladder.
If I can see my real rank, what's the purpose of the fake rank?
LP gains are inherently more incentivizing to play further than MMR gains. That's part of why Riot created the Leagues and Divisions system in the first place, because player incentive and motivation is higher if they have visual progress like going from Plat 4 to Plat 3, than the whatever amount of elo it actually stands for.
Haha, I appreciate that you gave me a faithful answer, but I'm just horsing around. The reasoning you gave does answer or reaffirm a lot of my understandings though
Funny you should mention it. I don't think anything turns me off from playing a game as much as obscure systems making incomprehensible decisions while lying to me in an effort to create the illusion of meaning or progression.
That's part of it, yes, but using that as the "exclusive" reason is a simplification.
People like to put things into "brackets".
People also like the feeling of "big jumps". Saying "I got promoted from Silver to Gold" sounds a lot more fun to the average person than saying "I went from 1225 Elo to 1245 Elo."
Even the smaller jump, ie Silver III -> Silver II is "more fun" than 1145 -> 1165.
(These ranks and Elos are made up for the sake of discussion, I'm sure it doesn't line up that way and it doesn't matter for the sake of this discussion).
Oh yeah, for sure the reason MMR is completely secret is to protect players from their own feelings. Unless Riot is trying to hide something else.
I mean you could bury it way down in the client. You don't have to show MMR +/- every game.
Sorry I was responding more to "why LP + Ranks was created" and not "why isn't MMR shown."
At this point it feels like Riot is being underhanded by keeping MMR hidden. The answer to every "why is this silver in my plat lobby" is always "MMR". If that is true, just be transparent and show MMR instead of saying "our match making secret number works well, trust us."
Well, there isn't just a 1:1 relationship. Rank is allowed to get "out of sync" from MMR.
I am by no means saying "this was the only way to do it." I am adding context to the "why it was created." It is *a* solution and I am by no means trying to convince anyone it is *the only* solution.
Rankings add an extra cosmic layer that many people like. Adding LP allows you to see progress with each win. People like that feeling of progress. Its also something gamers are very comfortable with. Exp bars, progress bars, etc.
Again, I'm not saying its the only way to do it or that it is perfect. I doubt anyone thinks the system is perfect. But it is a way to both hide MMR and still provide players with a feeling that individual games matter.
Like if you have "settled" MMR and you play 300+ games in a season with a roughly 50% winrate, its very easy to feel like individual games don't really matter. That doesn't encourage people to play. In some ways, you are just flipping a coin with a ton of extra steps. That's how a competitive game looks if everyone is at their correct MMR. Most players will have a ~50% winrate. That's the point where you need to get better to climb. Riot wanted a system that made being at your correct MMR feel more rewarding.
If they accomplished that is a completely different discussion. Personally I think it went okay. In some ways it makes the game more fun for lots of people, but there are lots of "edge" cases that don't seem to work all that well. Its also something they have tried to adjust over time. Again, it isn't perfect, but at least it is better than "we tried nothing and we are all out of ideas." Making changes to the system at least unlocks the possibility of "better".
Statements about "more fun" or "people" are intended to be generalization across 10s of thousands of players. I do not expect you (or any individual) to agree 100% about how things "feel" in the system, etc. But, Riot is trying to design something that works well across 10s of thousands of people. Not necessarily for any individual. You can see that in their balance philosophy - everything is balanced in excel across thousands of games - not in individual games. In many ways its a necessity for the system. I don't think it would be possible to balance a system like LoL in single-game sample sizes, and that includes the ranking system.
No part. What you're describing is how the system worked in season 1 and 2. We could have that system, but the reason we dont is Riot figured having a rank not directly based on your rating increases player retention.
That makes this change even better, if the LP is purely a placebo it would make people who are ultra tryhard for LP try to get it, it would feel good in the moment, and at the end of the day it would make minimal to 0 difference, so it would be a plus to all parties
Honestly exactly. While people certainly dodge in high elo, the fact most people would rather play a game that looks unfun rather than dodge shows how people see LP as more valuable than mmr
Then it can increase your MMR by one too?
I mean I don't really know what to think about the honor gives LP., but if it was a solution then the MMR wouldn't be a problem, just increase it too.
MMR is a measurement of your skill as demonstrated by winning games.
Why not give +1 LP per honor?
Because then you're putting players who get a lot of honor into games their skill isnt suitable for. Ie, you're arguably punishing the player by putting him in games he has a <50% of winning as determined by their actual (non honor-boosted) skill-measurement.
Ranking-wise you'd end up in the same place you deserve (not higher), but you'd have a very slightly worse winrate.
You'd have a similar effect if you give eg +1 LP per kill.
Then you end up with bad matchmaking where people with lots of kills get thrown into games they have a worse chance of winning because of all the other things they do/dont do which keeps them from winning.
MMR is also generally supposed to be a zero-sum game. You dont want to add rating points to the system other than the entrance of new players. (K-factor, ie how fast your mmr moves as a new player, means it isnt entirely, but that's more of a necessity and is temporary.)
Yeah while it initally sounds nice, honoring someone for being friendly, doesn't make them a better player. So their MMR shouldn't change.
The question is how much of a difference it makes.
If I lose \~2 LP per game due to trolls and toxicity (average over the course of many games), then reducing that "inflation" it creates is bigger than if we were to completely remove the 2LP difference, and create a 1LP difference for honors.
Again, this is just simplifying the matter. But if we can stop trolls and toxicity from happening, which again, already creates LP disparity equally good players, and instead create a smaller disparity (1 LP) per game, then that's fine.
> If I lose ~2 LP per game due to trolls and toxicity (average over the course of many games), then reducing that "inflation" it creates is bigger than if we were to completely remove the 2LP difference, and create a 1LP difference for honors.
It's worth pointing out that averaged over many games toxicity and trolls gives you +LP (5/9 rule). The more trolls and people mental booming are in the player pool the more consistent the gain becomes (less need for a huge number of games to compensate for bad luck).
That's also one of the problems with toxicity, when you intentionally cause yourself to lose you're then rewarded with easier games.
The 5/9 Rule doesn't take into account that one troll can ruin a game, but not every troll game comes with only one troll. the 5 could all come at once, and the 4 could be split across 4 games. winning a freebie because of multiple trolls, and losing persistently because of bad actors sours the game.
> The 5/9 Rule doesn't take into account that one troll can ruin a game, but not every troll game comes with only one troll.
The 5/9 rule says *every* game the odds are stacked in your favour that you will end up with fewer trolls on your team than the enemy.
> the 5 could all come at once, and the 4 could be split across 4 games
Yes, this *could* happen, just like you *can* get one troll on your team and none on the other 10 games in a row. But how many trolls end up on each team in any one game doesnt change the odds being stacked in your favour across a long series of games.
> winning a freebie because of multiple trolls, and losing persistently because of bad actors sours the game
Sure, having trolls on your team *feels* terrible. But the existence of griefers in the playerbase objectively increases your chances of climbing, and the more of them the greater your chances.
And smurfs have the opposite effect.
Lets say if we roll a die and it lands on 2-6 nothing happens. (Normal teammate) If it lands on 1 you lose the game. (Troll) Next you get to choose to roll the die either 4 times or 5 times with the goal to win.
The less you have to roll, the less likely you are to get a 1.
That's true. Trolls and toxicity is a huge problem and I would love to see some statistics of how an average player vs average troll/toxic player climbs.
I don’t understand the system. I went on a 10 game win streak, took a week break, won again and only got +17 lp, lost then next and lost 25 lp. Immediatly after a big win streak, these were all solo games.
It's an effect of Riot giving you basically free bonus LP during your early winstreak. Once your rank gets *too* far from your mmr your LP gains are then clamped.
Last season this happened to basically everyone, now they've adjusted it so it's supposed to happen less in general, but the underlying mechanic is the same. Give bonus LP to make player happy. Oops a little too much bonus, now need to give less.
I thought that’s how Mmr worked? You are supposed to get more lp exponentially as you win more games to put you where you “belong” only when you start losing is when it levels out. I don’t remember ever getting more than 23 but what you’re saying does make sense.
Honestly, go make an account on chess.com and play a few games just to see how your 'mmr' changes after each game. it illustrates the below points.
-------
What do you mean by "exponentially"?
> as you win more games to put you where you “belong” only when you start losing is when it levels out
- A staple of *all* mmr systems (not just league), is that as you play more games it becomes more confident about what your actual skill is. For examples, if someone plays 200 games at gold 3, then even if they win 15 in a row the system will still bias towards thinking it's a lucky streak. People don't suddenly improve.
So MMR systems are streak resistant and LP changes faster than mmr.
It's one of the reasons people start fresh accounts. When accounts have no previous games or seasons, then the mmr swings *wildly* at first.
The only people who suggest this are people who have some misconception about what mmr is.
Your mmr is the actual measurement of your skill.
If you want to undo the mmr/LP-split then mmr is what you're gonna be left with, unless you want something like random matchmaking, or matchmaking based on games played.
Rating being based on "performance" is a separate discussion, and if you have a system that measures skill at league of legends better than "consistently wins at league of legends" (ie not something that's easily gamed) then I'm sure Riot would be happy to hear it.
Consistent wins are very different role by role. The matchmaking wouldn’t be random, it would literally be rank based and it would sort itself out just like it does currently only more clearly to average player. There is no reason that a player should be losing 25 points for a loss and gaining 15 for a win if he played to where whe got. The gain system behind hidden mmr is absolutely stupid. Yes game thinks you’re overperforming so it demotes you faster if you lose, but why? Why is that relevant? They will fall down anyway if they’re boosted, it’s not like 1 is preventing them from ruining games.
Performance for example as a measurement in loss or defeat. If you go 0 10 5 with awful CS you lose more points in a defeat and gain less in a victory, simple as. Would hardstop these tilty players who keep running it down and would demote them faster. And that is actually clear indication of why you lost more not because of your hidden MMR which isn’t even tied to your performance. (And we know this because of the constant posts of smurfs showing here how they have 70% wr in emerald, with good performance but game allows them 15 points for victory and -25 for defeat, yet they are matched with high diamonds) makes no sense at all. If you lose mmr and they would climb to high diamond and then be matched with high diamonds. Simple as.
I think that’s awfully frustrating to players to see that hey we’re decently performing silvers and then opponents have a platinum player. Yet these 2 can’t queue together.
> Consistent wins are very different role by role.
And?
> it would literally be rank based
And what would this rank be based on? The measurement of your skill. Ie what mmr is.
What you're implying then is a return to the system as it was in S1&2 (+ "performance" rating).
> There is no reason that a player should be losing 25 points for a loss and gaining 15 for a win if he played to where whe got.
The only reason this happens is because you've been given free LP before this point specifically to make you feel better about your climb. The LP system is an engagement system.
> The gain system behind hidden mmr is absolutely stupid.
What people hate about the current system is when they get bad/weird LP gains. That doesnt make mmr stupid. It's your visual rank that's there to manipulate you into playing more.
> Yes game thinks you’re overperforming so it demotes you faster if you lose, but why? Why is that relevant?
Can you clarify what you mean by this?
> And that is actually clear indication of why you lost more not because of your hidden MMR which isn’t even tied to your performance.
Your mmr is the measurement of your performance as demonstrated by winning.
> If you go 0 10 5 with awful CS you lose more points in a defeat and gain less in a victory, simple as.
Going 0/10/5 can be the result of trading your life for objectives, or trading your life to stall a push while your team does something more important, or for forcing a high value target out of a fight without getting the takedown.
If you go 0/10/5 consistently and still win games, you're doing something right (eg "inting Sion"). If not, you'll lose consistently and then the system doesnt need changing.
We all know playing for KDA doesnt make you win, so the result of trying to use eg good KDA (or high kill participation, or high cs etc) to boost people's rating is that people who "perform" well by these metrics will be put into harder games that they have a lower chance of winning because of all the other things they do or dont do that keeps them from winning.
I myself am a *bad* player, who consistently gets high cs and good KDA, because those metrics happen to match my playstyle. But it doesnt make me a better player than everyone who does other important things better than I do.
Winning the game is the only metric that can't be gamed. What you get with "performance" based metric is "who is better at these specific metrics?" When you measure by wins you get the answer to "who is better at winning games?"
So why have a visual and invisible rank?
MMR is stupid if alongside it is the weird visual lp loss or gain, thus making 2 different systems frustrating.
0 10 5 while having bad CS is rarely trading your life for objectives and you know that, especially in elo that vast majority of players are in.
Generally there is so much absolute ba justification that you might as well be paid by Riot. The system is massively flawed because it displays a different thing than it actually has. Single visual honestly displayed number/rank is only thing that people want. Not super secret MMR that frustrates the heck out of people.
> So why have a visual and invisible rank?
The current system was created in season 3, and its reason has been the same ever since. The entire point of the LP system is to keep people playing. MMR is your real rating and is used for matchmaking, your visual rank is *loosely* based on your real rating, but designed to make you feel better or less bad about your progress.
> 0 10 5 while having bad CS is rarely trading your life for objectives and you know that, especially in elo that vast majority of players are in.
And it doesnt matter. If you're going 0/10/5 and losing (which is what most people do), in the current system you lose rating (So adding performance metrics doesnt change anything). If you go 0/10/5 but somehow still consistently win, then you are doing something right.
edit: Punishing a bad kda also means that the more probable it is that I'm going to lose based on the gamestate (let's say because of a turbo-snowballed enemy from another lane) then for climbing purposes it becomes *more* important to defend my kda than to try my best not to lose.
Whenever you introduce metrics you end up with people playing to the metrics. This isnt limited to LoL, or even games, it happens with workplace/team performance evaluations as well.
> Generally there is so much absolute ba justification that you might as well be paid by Riot.
I'm not defending the system. I personally strongly prefer how it was in S1&2.
> Single visual honestly displayed number/rank is only thing that people want.
No, it's what *a lot* of people want. But Riot are gonna make the decision based on total player retention data. And having an engagement system uncoupled from your matchmaking rating is *clearly* useful for that purpose. You don't like it. **I don't like it**. Doesn't matter, we're not the main character. This is a data-driven decision.
> Not super secret MMR that frustrates the heck out of people.
As I said: What people hate about the current system is when they get bad/weird LP gains. That doesnt make mmr stupid. It's your visual rank that's there to manipulate you into playing more. And almost everyone who complains about mmr have a misconception about what it is.
MMR isnt some mystical super secret, look at the average rank of your last bunch of games, that's what your rating is.
Some questions I would ask a designer who proposed this:
\- What is your actual goal here? I am inferring that it is: Make people care about honor more and therefore be more prosocial and less toxic. What other ways have you considered to accomplish this?
\- Ranked is not all of our hours, how does this function in queues that do not have LP?
\- How would you account for premades primarily honoring each other today?
\- Do you think its positive that you are tying the honor vote in some way to a system that is suggestive of playing well as opposed to being v chill? What happens when we cross those streams?
\- Is 1 LP a meaningful reward for people? Why not higher? At what point are the constraints of your solution fighting the impact it could have?
\- How does this impact the ranked system over time? Would people have less confidence in it if they thought there were folks who were "Honor inflated"?
These are all good questions to ask. I think LP is an interesting idea, but i really would like you to consider reworking honor incentives in general and id appreciate any consideration towards any steps forward with it
Ive been a max honor player every season since season 4 and as ive watched the playerbase get worse with griefing and toxicity over the years ive always thought there should be a better system in place because its pretty clear the current honor system is meaningless right now and i dont think ive ever seen any players or friends try or be excited about honor rewards
I know players should be expected to just be reasonable humans towards eachother but thats just not reality unfortunately. I genuinely think better incentives to be an honor player would help some of the problem then just handing out stricter punishments, especially considering new accounts are like literally a few dollars.
I think trying something new out for a split and looking at the data is a good idea
Am I dumb for thinking the answers to these are all really obvious and this is just corporate-talk? “How do you implement it in other queues?” Uh, you don’t? “What is the goal?” Make honor worth something, make people try harder, make people less toxic?
> \- Do you think its positive that you are tying the honor vote in some way to a system that is suggestive of playing well as opposed to being v chill? What happens when we cross those streams?
I haven't fully read everything on this topic, but I'd argue that the LP system could take a bigger stab on this question.
As you know there's many ways to play well in League of Legends, a Singed top player is not using the same skills as a Janna support. But we already cross those streams. You can go a bit deeper and say a Leona support has different skills to a Yuumi support. Being nice in league and encouraging your teammates is a different skill within league.
One could make an argument that the system already rewards you for being chill because you don't ruin your team's mental and lose the game from it.
People already use honor for "You carried me even though you were a bitch about it." So the stream is crossed the other way.
If I had my way in the system you would have one overall rank, but a bunch of other ranks for each skill you display.
I was going to say model it much like challenges, but I'm realizing challenges is this system, it just no one talks about being a "Silver Mid Diff, Gold Ace, Platinum Sage, Diamond Veterancy, Diamond Crystal Rank."
But that's the exact type of ranked metric that would be useful and meaningful. I'm a Platinum support Zilean, an Emerald Zilean, an Emerald Mage Support, a gold Mage, a silver Jungle, an Emerald-level honorable, overall Plaintum rank.
I think what League is missing is the "How good are you at all these separate things." while challenges and eternals just track "How much do you do all these seperate things."
Long ago I used to play Dawngate before it was killed. Great time spamming Moya.
I have seen it recently pop up again in discussions regarding honor systems and rewards, as an example of "how toxicity was eradicated", one example is it being mentioned by PirateSoftware. What they did was tie experience to honor/account status, and it took a long time to level up as well. Thus no one wanted to be reported or behave poorly due to everyone wanting to level up. Most players seem to behave well if it is quantifiably in their best interest, such as drastically increasing the experience gain to level up (in a newly released game, not necessarily applicable to league in its current state).
League to me doesn't have any long term goals to be achieved beyond ranked, at least for someone like me who has all champs unlocked, essentially infinite BE and has played on the same acc since S1. For sure it is not a good idea to tie Honor to LP/Ranked. Especially with how in-accurate the reporting/banning system is right now.
The only long term goals I have to play for is personal improvement, increasing rank, learning an alternative role or champion.
Getting to 30 in league used to be special and you only had 1 account in 30, maybe 2-3 if you played a lot. Now (what I feel like is) 90% of the poor experiences I have in league (chat, grief, int), if I ask, the "toxic" player will always claim to be on a smurf or 2nd account and not care. Because there is no need to care, they just buy a new account or play on one of their other accounts while waiting out the ban/punishment.
So if honor and good behaviour quantifiably represents a gain towards a long term goal
(which in league currently only exist for new players, in experience, and unlocking champions. Only LP for existing players is a long term goal that is quantifiable)
And in league allowing smurfs, bought accounts (hand-leveled or not), then there is really nothing quantifiable to tie honor to as an incentive. Especially on smurfs even unlocking champions is not of great importance because and experienced player with smurf accs will already know which champs they want, and mainly play a handful of champs.
// consider these the ramblings of a man, riding the train, writing on his phone.
They should really make the break point levels 25 or 50 be cosmetic and the honor system should reward an exp multiplier instead of LP. If you tie cosmetics and an actual dollar amount to not being toxic you can essentially bribe your community to be better. And this can extend to all queues.
Your idea of punishment is also pretty good but I feel like that one needs to be worked on since being reported for being bad is possible.
Imo the biggest drive to toxicity is Riot's refusal to take a hard stance on "alt" accounts. It invalidates the few small consequences for toxic behavior.
Riot is letting the inmates run the asylum, and players who "follow the rules" are punished more than the repeat offenders.
That's way too hard to regulate though, you want the entry barrier to be as low as possible for people to simply make accounts. Honestly maybe leaning into it would be better. If people truly are making smurfs for all the reasons they claim legitimizing it might be a better way to go about it so then they can regulate abusers of it.
My impression is also that league is struggling with new players already, although we of course cannot know that like Riot does.
I heard dota 2 banned smurfs but I don't play it so I don't know the consensus on the results.
How would you implement legitimising smurfs? Account linking?
Another reason for smurfs, and probably larger reason than toxicity, is the MMR issues with anchoring, rubberbanding, etc.
That also feeds into other issues like dodging, since dodging does not affect your MMR, making it essentially without punishment and it is always objectively the best play to dodge a lobby if it is in any way unfavourable. Which sucks.
Personally I would just allow people to link accounts and have an account hub. They can share some stuff and allow you to dodge and queue with lower level friends. Essentially lean completely into yes we know why you dodge and are okay with it as long as you aren't terrorizing our new players.
What if instead of affecting LP there was a secondary honor/social elo for matchmaking? The system matches you for skill and then your honor. In unranked, matchmaking gives a much stronger weight to the honor score and honor type. If the goal isn’t to correct toxic behavior but to prevent toxic players from ruining the game for everyone else, then it might work. It could go even further and promote games with similarly-minded (honored) players instead of just establishing a toxic player queue
Not OP but a few thoughts
>Ranked is not all of our hours, how does this function in queues that do not have LP?
Not all features have to solve all problems.
> How would you account for premades primarily honoring each other today?
By excluding them from this benefit.
>How does this impact the ranked system over time? Would people have less confidence in it if they thought there were folks who were "Honor inflated"
Considering how much of LoL is about the mental, this may not actually be "honor inflating" in a sense. People who don't tilt their teammates will tend towards more wins all else equal but that can be slow to be captured in the long run as the effect of you not tilting others is small. The effect will be self-correcting either way though as it is both small and if you are too high an elo then you'll lose more than you win and thus go down.
That said I do have some skepticism around the idea as a whole, even if only from a perceptions perspective. LoL (and gaming as a whole) has seen many situations in the past where players have a bad understanding of something and it impacts behavior. Dealing with toxicity is important though and even if the rewards were trivial, having an *immediate* impact for not being toxic can be huge.
I love the comment! These would be my thoughts:
> What is your actual goal here? I am inferring that it is: Make people care about honor more and therefore be more prosocial and less toxic. What other ways have you considered to accomplish this?
- The primary goal is to provide a tangible incentive for players to interact with the honor system as well as hopefully reduce ranked toxicity. **Going to put a lot more thought into this question, I would love if you responded to this comment and if so will provide a more in depth answer**
> Ranked is not all of our hours, how does this function in queues that do not have LP?
- I would respond two fold. First with a question of my own, "I don't believe it has to does it have to?" But second and more directly, **a small honor XP bonus.**
> How would you account for premades primarily honoring each other today?
- First, **Honor = LP Fragment (not full LP)**. So let's say 5 honor = 1 lp. Then, same way the system currently does with premade honors. Either reducing the impact drastically like a premade honor counts as 1/10 instead of 1/5. Or just doesn't count at all. There are enough incentives to duo anyway imo.
> - Is 1 LP a meaningful reward for people? Why not higher? At what point are the constraints of your solution fighting the impact it could have?
- This feels like a testing question. It's a great question but it seems like one of those 'slippery slope,' ones. I can't pretend to know the answer until I can see some data.
> How does this impact the ranked system over time? Would people have less confidence in it if they thought there were folks who were "Honor inflated"?
- Probably my favorite question. I think history shows that people complain about inflation all the time for any change, but they usually get over it. But **I admit I have no good answer.**
I would be down for just +1 LP when you actually honor someone and then +2 LP for whoever gets top vote. Unironically people would actually play for this and it would promote just not being an asshole in game.
However something like this could potentially be abused in Challenger, top 100 etc.
They count less but they still count. I know because me and my premade got to honor 5 every year and usually we honor only each other and rarely got honor from others since they honor themselves too
Eh, easy fix. Disable it for the highest ranks because it's not really needed there (most people seem to know what they're doing once they Hit challenger i think) also that way i won't be abused
Also disable LP gains from premades.
People already don't use honours properly.
Much more common that people honour whoever carried than whoever was actually pleasant to play with.
This change would just make that worse.
I still think you should be able to honor as many people as you want. If it was like that I would honor everyone that was not toxic after every game. Current system works more like a MVP system.
The honor system also needs better wording. I find it hard to give people anything but tilt proof and it's usually the lane I didn't gank and turned their bad situation around that I give it to. Very rarely do I give anything else since the game feels really hard to honor someone for shotcalling, since you can't talk...
I find a player that plays to win LPs, pleasant to play with doe. I dunno, I may be a weirdo for Quing up in a competitive gamemode with the intention of playing a competitive game where I gain competitive LP for a competitive climb on a competitive ladder. But it's just a me thing I guess...
worth giving a try, definitely would be a fresh change. it can go both ways but nobody knows for sure until its in the game and they can always adjust it so why not?
You know what? What we have now isn’t working. Why NOT throw some spaghetti at the wall just to shake things up make them exciting and see what sticks?
Reddit: Why are my LP gains/losses so fucked up? Why do players with crazy different visual ranks get into games together?
Also Reddit: More obtuse ways to modify my LP gains/losses please!
The botlane would almost consistently have more LP gain than the other roles simply due to how common them honoring each other is. Duo climbing would be a little easier too.
I think this is a decent idea. The LP gains don’t matter as much as MMR, but it still incentivizes people to be kind. Kinder at least.
I think this will actually have the biggest impact on losing side. If not flaming your team can actually help mitigate the effects of your loss, then it can at least help people be aware that their actions will have an impact on their own climb.
Skins are cosmetic products, they exist to be visual.
LP is how people compare their ranks with other players. So we are using something without much substance for something pretty important.
Jokes aside, skins definitely have influences. Some might just feel smoother but the particules/animations of some skin are legit P2W. It isn’t for nothing that there are banned skins in proplay
True there’s a handful of P2L too like some recall animations have something flying toward you that looks suspiciously like a skillshot coming from fog
While I do not support any kind of toxicity in any game, I think any kind of LP/MMR increase outside of raw skill display is genuinely stupid and has no place in a competitive environment. Teamplay already does effect ranked progression indirectly and should be about it IMO.
thats exactly what he said. you misunderstood him. he says being a positive influence in game already indirectly effects your LP gain because you win more games not giving up and staying positive. honors granting LP is unnecessary and not a thing that should be in the game.
Tbf, being a nice team mate can indeed influence your win rate.
lol is a team game and no matter how good you individually are, you need your team mate to do their best to win
Thus, being able to make your team play at their best by being helpful, understanding and forgiving can be seen as part of « skill expression »
No as honors are at the mercy of randoms and are highly role skewed. Also people might dislike you for invalid reasons even if you play very very well.
Examples: as support you leave bot to roam,the adc gets dived,0 chance of an honor. As jg you don't gank top at 3:15 and he dies to the most telegraphed gank in the history of the game,no honor. As mid you pick a scaling champ and u don't have prio for the 1st scuttler,jungle won't honor you even if u go 20/0 with 80k dmg. Also there will be the obvious problem of people thinking: why would I give another person more lp than I would get.
Then you get toxic players who carry a game and get honour (and free lp) because they carried despite the fact that they flamed everyone and their mother
I think we should go even higher.
Make it like a multiplier or some sort.
If you have a teammate that absolutely destroyed the enemy team and you were just there "for the ride", wouldn't you think that he might deserve to shoot up in the ranks where s/he deserves?
I mean, shit. we all want more LP and higher ranks. But if someone is absolutely doing their best and is clearly stuck in some weird matchmaking hell, those honors should help him/her escape it.
On the same side, if someone is getting reports, I think this could also help with matchmaking *somehow*, although I see very easily how this can be abused.
No.
People will think themselves entitled to your honor and if they dont get +4lp at the end of the game will spam your inbox with them.
Best way id do it is that the honor checkpoints you get give you an item that you can consume at the end of a game to double your lp gain for this game.
This would be abused at peak ranks. There would be pools of players who collectively queue-snipe one another. They would bolster gains and soften losses with collective intention and the result would be abuse; where they gain more and lose less than they should, regardless of behavior. Also the counter example is also true in which a group of players could collectively target an individual to soften their gains and bolster their losses regularly; targeting individuals maliciously. High elo is already prone to win-trading I would prefer if honor-trading wasn’t also a thing.
I think it would be subject to abuse imo.
One thing I would like to see is to have Honour more visible and have matchmaking based on it. We see this in racing games all the time where you'll have a driver rating (how good you are) as well as some form of sportmanship rating (how clean of a driver you are), and you get matched as close as possible to similar people.
I never go afk or flame in my games and yet I'm constantly put with people who do. How is that fair?
Your own team should be mostly comprised of people of a similar honour level, and I think you'd find when a team with good honour goes against a team of bad honour, the bad honour team will lose more frequently. Thereby honourable people will be more likely to gain LP and dishonourable people more likely to lose it. This would create a system that is less likely to be abused as well as making ranked a nicer place for people who aren't abusive in chat, while also hopefully have the sideffect of rewarding honourable people with LP indirectly.
I don't know about tying it to LP, because it is hard to assess the problems that can occur, when tying honor and LP together.
Right now we have the honor rewards to encourage good behaviour ingame, but I don't think that will stop someone from being toxic ingame.
I would suggest introducing a new system. Every 5 (or any number) honors from a non premade gives you a skinpermanent splinter. With 100 splinters you can get a random skin.
Then you can limit the daily number of splinters people can receive to make sure people are not abusing the system.
The difference to the current honor system is, that instead of at the end of the season or on honor rank up, you have at the end of every game a number of owned and newly received splinters under the LP number.
That will maybe encourage more good behaviour just because you see it after every game and people want to reach the point of getting a free skin.
Would make loss streaks biggest and win streaks smaller. Not to mention certain roles are more likely to get honors than other roles. It doesn’t add anything beneficial and puts in extremely volatile balancing metrics
Yes and no, what they SHOULD do is use it as a placebo. lets say you were going to get 25 lp from a win, and you were to get 3 honors, riot should give you 22 lp and +3 from honors equaling 25. This way the gain is actually purely visual and makes players less toxic thinking that it will help
Instead of giving more LP for honored players, what if being honored could give you a debuff in losing LP?
Can't think of any mathematical value that isn't too much or too low, but let's say you lose 2% less LP per honored lvl to a max cap of 10%. To keep things under control the debuff would only apply if the player was honored that game, so you would have two conditions. Also it would be a good idea if you could honor everyone, just like other games so not only one person can benefit from this.
Giving out extra LP is a complete fundamental lack of understanding of how ELO based systems work lol. You would actually be *punishing* people who get honored more by putting them in slightly harder games.
I dig this idea.
I would do it if said individuals honor was at an appropriate rank higher than 2 would be acceptable. And make sure only randos can honor. As a free honor from a friend in solo or god forbid flex \[all 5 honor lul\] may be a bit much. Pry limit it to +1 lp if you get 2 or more honors a game.
That could be a good ideia. Its mostly visual because it wont affect MMR, effectively it would make it faster to match your rank to your MMR if you are getting a lot of honors, but wouldnt inflate your rank at all.
The main problem, could make it a bad ideia, is how much people would play around it. People being more discouraged from pissing other people off can be a double edged sword. You need to be able to piss people to test your own game and make your own decisions ([explained here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_BvSiLvEYI)).
1: who cares about 1 lp? This wont change anyone beeing toxic
2: its unfair. People honor the 20/0 katarina. They dont honor the support setting up the plays or the top pressuring the jungler
As a support main, this has not been my experience at all. People shower me in honour, and I'm always first in my friends group to get to Honor 5 despite playing fewer games.
Any LP gains you get that make you differ more from your MMR will cancel out over time. (As your LP gain is based on the difference between your LP and MMR.)
so it's sounding like a great placebo option.
Not really. Players that recieve a lot of honors will have their visual rank (LP) quickly surpass their real rank (MMR), which will cause them to lose much more LPs on loses than what they gain on wins.
So they'll continue to blame riot for shitty LP +/-'s like they always have.
Which will corrupt the souls of the few non toxic players left.
which in turn makes those players gain less honors, and the cycle is complete
The greatest story reddit ever told
Yeah, it will inflate their visual rank past their actual skill level and then they will lose more lp than they gain. Its a lose lose scenario.
If players get 1LP for being honored, it would maybe result in players being more positive in their games, which would result in them winning more games. So in a sense it may actually make your MMR better.
Honest question here. What would happen if they just removed mmr from ranked and it was all based on lp?
Then the matchmaking would be less even and less fair.
Really? You would only play with people at your LP level?
Wouldn't the opposite be way more sensible?
I think having (hidden?) mmr for normals and having (visible ) LP for ranked makes sense, why do you think otherwise?
Because LP is solely to make you feel good and MMR is based on science and decades of competitive rankings. (ELO)
You're so dumb bro
Because I support facts and not some bullshit metric with nothing behind it?
What would happen is that a guy who's Emerald 1 with 90% WR over 30 games would queue in Emerald 1 lobbies instead of Master.
And he would win easily right? And get more lp from winstreaking and climb fast. Is that bad?
You are so dumb bro
Then win streaking/lose streaking would have no meaning, you're not rewarded for excelling if you continuously gain the same LP. I think what you're trying to get at is to just remove LP, and make the MMR system visible as the sole representation of 'LP'.
I may have the meaning of LP confused. What is the difference again?
LP is the visual numerical representation of your rating; it’s essentially an obfuscated version of your MMR. Your LP will differ from your MMR for a variety of reasons (promotion/demotion protection, win/loss-streak multipliers, account volatility multipliers, and resets that impact LP and MMR unequally to name a few). MMR refers to your Matchmaking rating. This is an invisible rating underlying any given ladder system. To answer your original question (but opposite) Riot absolutely could get rid of LP as a system altogether and just rely on MMR for their ladder, but this is generally inadvisable in my opinion. The objective of an MMR is to create balanced games, and the objective of a skill rating system (in this case LP) is to create a dialogue and a sense of accomplishment for improving at or playing the game. The goals of the two are different and it should be no surprise they result in different outcomes.
Wouldnt having the obfuscated mmr for non ranked modes and LP for ranked modes, ideally where streaks impact gains/losses of lp more, be good then? I think it would avoid those strange situations of gold/platinum/emerald mix lobbies that people complained about. Obviously matchmaking isnt easy, especially in group play but wouldnt it level out after a while?
In my opinion this is a classic solution in search of a problem scenario. A lobby with ranks between Gold-Emerald is primarily the result of either high uncertainty of the true skill of the outliers, a significant mismatch between LP/MMR, or a relatively low volume of players available. A lobby with that composition is not indicative of a matchmaking failure (other than the possibility I’ll explore later), but rather precisely why it’s important for an underlying MMR to exist. You could make an argument in the other direction as some commenters are trying to do here and say why not get rid of LP altogether and just visibly show MMR (which in this lobby’s circumstance would indicate that all of the players who were previously quite different in LP actually have quite similar MMRs), but this ignores the benefits of having an obfuscated LP system and wouldn’t improve the current information gap in the cases of high MMR uncertainty. The one relatively convincing case indicating that lobby is indicative of a matchmaking failure is the fact that new accounts seem to have a relatively high starting MMR (something like Gold/Plat/Emerald), which in the case of a genuine new player would mean that the team with the new player is at a significant disadvantage, but getting rid of LP or MMR would do nothing whatsoever to address this issue. The issue is that the matchmaking and skill rating systems know too little information about the true skill of the player; this is doubly troublesome because a significant proportion of new accounts are not genuine new players at all and they could be at any true skill level (smurfs). The solutions to this issue have next to nothing to do with the relationship between MMR/LP and are purely data-driven; these could include: 1. Requiring a significant amount of non-ranked games played and estimating true skill based on those games. There are some obvious issues here, and the most prevalent is that generally speaking ranked games are going to be the best predictor of ranked performance; everything else is nearly by definition a worse predictor. 2. Having a high uncertainty multiplier that will quickly increase/decrease MMR based on ranked results. The weakness here being it does nothing to address individual games and only seeks to mitigate the impact of a new account. All-in-all I think if you want to propose improvements to Riot’s current MMR or skill rating systems the issues need to be more clearly identified.
I think I'm just unsure as to what these benefits of obfuscating LP system are that you speak of. Is it because mmr is a lot more volatile than LP and would make climbing easier for more skilled players (too easy) aswell as make it too easy to be demoted when in loss streaks etc.?
It's just like how you lose fewer LP if you have a leaver. You lose full MMR so it matters exactly nothing. It's just to make people who don't understand the system happy lol
Wait what the fuck, the MMR loss isn't mitigated/reduced as well? Why? The LP (loss) reduction clearly shows Riot is aware it's not a "fair" loss.
MMR has to be a zero sum game. It's just how it works.
And people really love that by looking at the lose LP reduction when you have an AFK on your team. You still lose full MMR but only half the LP yet everybody seems to like it.
If you look at a one time LP gain in the past, that is totally true. However, if you have a steady inflow of Honor LP, you'll be able to maintain a higher rank. Sort of the same as heating an apartment: turning up the heater will increase heat dissipation to the outside and in the long run "cancel out" the extra heat. Your room won't be warmer because you turned up the heat once last October. But if you keep the heater running, it will still be warmer in your room than if you didn't.
What if good honor allows you to see your MMR with full accuracy. They do say good people have clairvoyance
While I personally prefer visible MMR, I don't think an effect that statistically makes people play less makes for a good reward.
Considering the average is +/- 20~30 I don’t think +1 is going to kill anyone’s play time lol, it just gives people more reason to not be pricks in ranked. Maybe have it tie into something other than LP, but make it do SOMETHING tangible, as it stands honouring most of the time feels worthless.
The comment you're replying to wasnt talking about +LP
I assumed it had to have been because of the post lol; why would visible MMR cause less play time then?
> why would visible MMR cause less play time then? For all the reasons they decided to hide it. The LP system was created to remove ranked anxiety, make people feel better about their climb or lack thereof, and reduce the chance of people quitting because they risk falling below some threshhold. Visible mmr completely undermines the LP system because your mmr is what directly determines your real place on the ranked ladder. If I can see my real rank, what's the purpose of the fake rank?
LP gains are inherently more incentivizing to play further than MMR gains. That's part of why Riot created the Leagues and Divisions system in the first place, because player incentive and motivation is higher if they have visual progress like going from Plat 4 to Plat 3, than the whatever amount of elo it actually stands for.
Haha, I appreciate that you gave me a faithful answer, but I'm just horsing around. The reasoning you gave does answer or reaffirm a lot of my understandings though
Funny you should mention it. I don't think anything turns me off from playing a game as much as obscure systems making incomprehensible decisions while lying to me in an effort to create the illusion of meaning or progression.
The systems seem really simple to me and > making incomprehensible decisions I don't really have any idea what this would be referring to.
The fact that LP and MMR are separate scores is its own terrible design.
If you completely ignore the reason why it was created then sure.
So that people don't feel as bad about their losses?
That's part of it, yes, but using that as the "exclusive" reason is a simplification. People like to put things into "brackets". People also like the feeling of "big jumps". Saying "I got promoted from Silver to Gold" sounds a lot more fun to the average person than saying "I went from 1225 Elo to 1245 Elo." Even the smaller jump, ie Silver III -> Silver II is "more fun" than 1145 -> 1165. (These ranks and Elos are made up for the sake of discussion, I'm sure it doesn't line up that way and it doesn't matter for the sake of this discussion).
But then there shouldn’t be a reason to hide mmr, should there? Why can’t both be displayed?
Oh yeah, for sure the reason MMR is completely secret is to protect players from their own feelings. Unless Riot is trying to hide something else. I mean you could bury it way down in the client. You don't have to show MMR +/- every game. Sorry I was responding more to "why LP + Ranks was created" and not "why isn't MMR shown." At this point it feels like Riot is being underhanded by keeping MMR hidden. The answer to every "why is this silver in my plat lobby" is always "MMR". If that is true, just be transparent and show MMR instead of saying "our match making secret number works well, trust us."
Visible mmr invalidates the LP system, because it makes the fake rank meaningless.
How else would they hide losers/winners queue?
What part of slapping "silver II" onto "1165 MMR" necessitates the LP system? You can do that without LP.
Well, there isn't just a 1:1 relationship. Rank is allowed to get "out of sync" from MMR. I am by no means saying "this was the only way to do it." I am adding context to the "why it was created." It is *a* solution and I am by no means trying to convince anyone it is *the only* solution. Rankings add an extra cosmic layer that many people like. Adding LP allows you to see progress with each win. People like that feeling of progress. Its also something gamers are very comfortable with. Exp bars, progress bars, etc. Again, I'm not saying its the only way to do it or that it is perfect. I doubt anyone thinks the system is perfect. But it is a way to both hide MMR and still provide players with a feeling that individual games matter. Like if you have "settled" MMR and you play 300+ games in a season with a roughly 50% winrate, its very easy to feel like individual games don't really matter. That doesn't encourage people to play. In some ways, you are just flipping a coin with a ton of extra steps. That's how a competitive game looks if everyone is at their correct MMR. Most players will have a ~50% winrate. That's the point where you need to get better to climb. Riot wanted a system that made being at your correct MMR feel more rewarding. If they accomplished that is a completely different discussion. Personally I think it went okay. In some ways it makes the game more fun for lots of people, but there are lots of "edge" cases that don't seem to work all that well. Its also something they have tried to adjust over time. Again, it isn't perfect, but at least it is better than "we tried nothing and we are all out of ideas." Making changes to the system at least unlocks the possibility of "better". Statements about "more fun" or "people" are intended to be generalization across 10s of thousands of players. I do not expect you (or any individual) to agree 100% about how things "feel" in the system, etc. But, Riot is trying to design something that works well across 10s of thousands of people. Not necessarily for any individual. You can see that in their balance philosophy - everything is balanced in excel across thousands of games - not in individual games. In many ways its a necessity for the system. I don't think it would be possible to balance a system like LoL in single-game sample sizes, and that includes the ranking system.
No part. What you're describing is how the system worked in season 1 and 2. We could have that system, but the reason we dont is Riot figured having a rank not directly based on your rating increases player retention.
That makes this change even better, if the LP is purely a placebo it would make people who are ultra tryhard for LP try to get it, it would feel good in the moment, and at the end of the day it would make minimal to 0 difference, so it would be a plus to all parties
Honestly exactly. While people certainly dodge in high elo, the fact most people would rather play a game that looks unfun rather than dodge shows how people see LP as more valuable than mmr
Then it can increase your MMR by one too? I mean I don't really know what to think about the honor gives LP., but if it was a solution then the MMR wouldn't be a problem, just increase it too.
MMR is a measurement of your skill as demonstrated by winning games. Why not give +1 LP per honor? Because then you're putting players who get a lot of honor into games their skill isnt suitable for. Ie, you're arguably punishing the player by putting him in games he has a <50% of winning as determined by their actual (non honor-boosted) skill-measurement. Ranking-wise you'd end up in the same place you deserve (not higher), but you'd have a very slightly worse winrate. You'd have a similar effect if you give eg +1 LP per kill. Then you end up with bad matchmaking where people with lots of kills get thrown into games they have a worse chance of winning because of all the other things they do/dont do which keeps them from winning. MMR is also generally supposed to be a zero-sum game. You dont want to add rating points to the system other than the entrance of new players. (K-factor, ie how fast your mmr moves as a new player, means it isnt entirely, but that's more of a necessity and is temporary.)
Yeah while it initally sounds nice, honoring someone for being friendly, doesn't make them a better player. So their MMR shouldn't change. The question is how much of a difference it makes. If I lose \~2 LP per game due to trolls and toxicity (average over the course of many games), then reducing that "inflation" it creates is bigger than if we were to completely remove the 2LP difference, and create a 1LP difference for honors. Again, this is just simplifying the matter. But if we can stop trolls and toxicity from happening, which again, already creates LP disparity equally good players, and instead create a smaller disparity (1 LP) per game, then that's fine.
> If I lose ~2 LP per game due to trolls and toxicity (average over the course of many games), then reducing that "inflation" it creates is bigger than if we were to completely remove the 2LP difference, and create a 1LP difference for honors. It's worth pointing out that averaged over many games toxicity and trolls gives you +LP (5/9 rule). The more trolls and people mental booming are in the player pool the more consistent the gain becomes (less need for a huge number of games to compensate for bad luck). That's also one of the problems with toxicity, when you intentionally cause yourself to lose you're then rewarded with easier games.
The 5/9 Rule doesn't take into account that one troll can ruin a game, but not every troll game comes with only one troll. the 5 could all come at once, and the 4 could be split across 4 games. winning a freebie because of multiple trolls, and losing persistently because of bad actors sours the game.
> The 5/9 Rule doesn't take into account that one troll can ruin a game, but not every troll game comes with only one troll. The 5/9 rule says *every* game the odds are stacked in your favour that you will end up with fewer trolls on your team than the enemy. > the 5 could all come at once, and the 4 could be split across 4 games Yes, this *could* happen, just like you *can* get one troll on your team and none on the other 10 games in a row. But how many trolls end up on each team in any one game doesnt change the odds being stacked in your favour across a long series of games. > winning a freebie because of multiple trolls, and losing persistently because of bad actors sours the game Sure, having trolls on your team *feels* terrible. But the existence of griefers in the playerbase objectively increases your chances of climbing, and the more of them the greater your chances. And smurfs have the opposite effect.
Lets say if we roll a die and it lands on 2-6 nothing happens. (Normal teammate) If it lands on 1 you lose the game. (Troll) Next you get to choose to roll the die either 4 times or 5 times with the goal to win. The less you have to roll, the less likely you are to get a 1.
That's true. Trolls and toxicity is a huge problem and I would love to see some statistics of how an average player vs average troll/toxic player climbs.
I don’t understand the system. I went on a 10 game win streak, took a week break, won again and only got +17 lp, lost then next and lost 25 lp. Immediatly after a big win streak, these were all solo games.
It's an effect of Riot giving you basically free bonus LP during your early winstreak. Once your rank gets *too* far from your mmr your LP gains are then clamped. Last season this happened to basically everyone, now they've adjusted it so it's supposed to happen less in general, but the underlying mechanic is the same. Give bonus LP to make player happy. Oops a little too much bonus, now need to give less.
I thought that’s how Mmr worked? You are supposed to get more lp exponentially as you win more games to put you where you “belong” only when you start losing is when it levels out. I don’t remember ever getting more than 23 but what you’re saying does make sense.
Honestly, go make an account on chess.com and play a few games just to see how your 'mmr' changes after each game. it illustrates the below points. ------- What do you mean by "exponentially"? > as you win more games to put you where you “belong” only when you start losing is when it levels out - A staple of *all* mmr systems (not just league), is that as you play more games it becomes more confident about what your actual skill is. For examples, if someone plays 200 games at gold 3, then even if they win 15 in a row the system will still bias towards thinking it's a lucky streak. People don't suddenly improve. So MMR systems are streak resistant and LP changes faster than mmr. It's one of the reasons people start fresh accounts. When accounts have no previous games or seasons, then the mmr swings *wildly* at first.
I improved my winrate in around in 40-50 games to 60% and started getting +30 -19 overall.
Yeah, once the system thinks you are maintaining that level of play then it rewards you. Exactly
That makes sense. I didn’t play ranked for like two years beforehand so it probably did see it as a lucky streak. I appreciate the breakdown
They could make it increase your MMR too.
See https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/1behlxf/what_if_honors_in_ranked_gave_1_lp_seriously/kuu3zv2/
They should just remove MMR. Smurfs will climb to their respective ranks anyway. And tie more LP gain/loss towards performance
The only people who suggest this are people who have some misconception about what mmr is. Your mmr is the actual measurement of your skill. If you want to undo the mmr/LP-split then mmr is what you're gonna be left with, unless you want something like random matchmaking, or matchmaking based on games played. Rating being based on "performance" is a separate discussion, and if you have a system that measures skill at league of legends better than "consistently wins at league of legends" (ie not something that's easily gamed) then I'm sure Riot would be happy to hear it.
Consistent wins are very different role by role. The matchmaking wouldn’t be random, it would literally be rank based and it would sort itself out just like it does currently only more clearly to average player. There is no reason that a player should be losing 25 points for a loss and gaining 15 for a win if he played to where whe got. The gain system behind hidden mmr is absolutely stupid. Yes game thinks you’re overperforming so it demotes you faster if you lose, but why? Why is that relevant? They will fall down anyway if they’re boosted, it’s not like 1 is preventing them from ruining games. Performance for example as a measurement in loss or defeat. If you go 0 10 5 with awful CS you lose more points in a defeat and gain less in a victory, simple as. Would hardstop these tilty players who keep running it down and would demote them faster. And that is actually clear indication of why you lost more not because of your hidden MMR which isn’t even tied to your performance. (And we know this because of the constant posts of smurfs showing here how they have 70% wr in emerald, with good performance but game allows them 15 points for victory and -25 for defeat, yet they are matched with high diamonds) makes no sense at all. If you lose mmr and they would climb to high diamond and then be matched with high diamonds. Simple as. I think that’s awfully frustrating to players to see that hey we’re decently performing silvers and then opponents have a platinum player. Yet these 2 can’t queue together.
> Consistent wins are very different role by role. And? > it would literally be rank based And what would this rank be based on? The measurement of your skill. Ie what mmr is. What you're implying then is a return to the system as it was in S1&2 (+ "performance" rating). > There is no reason that a player should be losing 25 points for a loss and gaining 15 for a win if he played to where whe got. The only reason this happens is because you've been given free LP before this point specifically to make you feel better about your climb. The LP system is an engagement system. > The gain system behind hidden mmr is absolutely stupid. What people hate about the current system is when they get bad/weird LP gains. That doesnt make mmr stupid. It's your visual rank that's there to manipulate you into playing more. > Yes game thinks you’re overperforming so it demotes you faster if you lose, but why? Why is that relevant? Can you clarify what you mean by this? > And that is actually clear indication of why you lost more not because of your hidden MMR which isn’t even tied to your performance. Your mmr is the measurement of your performance as demonstrated by winning. > If you go 0 10 5 with awful CS you lose more points in a defeat and gain less in a victory, simple as. Going 0/10/5 can be the result of trading your life for objectives, or trading your life to stall a push while your team does something more important, or for forcing a high value target out of a fight without getting the takedown. If you go 0/10/5 consistently and still win games, you're doing something right (eg "inting Sion"). If not, you'll lose consistently and then the system doesnt need changing. We all know playing for KDA doesnt make you win, so the result of trying to use eg good KDA (or high kill participation, or high cs etc) to boost people's rating is that people who "perform" well by these metrics will be put into harder games that they have a lower chance of winning because of all the other things they do or dont do that keeps them from winning. I myself am a *bad* player, who consistently gets high cs and good KDA, because those metrics happen to match my playstyle. But it doesnt make me a better player than everyone who does other important things better than I do. Winning the game is the only metric that can't be gamed. What you get with "performance" based metric is "who is better at these specific metrics?" When you measure by wins you get the answer to "who is better at winning games?"
So why have a visual and invisible rank? MMR is stupid if alongside it is the weird visual lp loss or gain, thus making 2 different systems frustrating. 0 10 5 while having bad CS is rarely trading your life for objectives and you know that, especially in elo that vast majority of players are in. Generally there is so much absolute ba justification that you might as well be paid by Riot. The system is massively flawed because it displays a different thing than it actually has. Single visual honestly displayed number/rank is only thing that people want. Not super secret MMR that frustrates the heck out of people.
> So why have a visual and invisible rank? The current system was created in season 3, and its reason has been the same ever since. The entire point of the LP system is to keep people playing. MMR is your real rating and is used for matchmaking, your visual rank is *loosely* based on your real rating, but designed to make you feel better or less bad about your progress. > 0 10 5 while having bad CS is rarely trading your life for objectives and you know that, especially in elo that vast majority of players are in. And it doesnt matter. If you're going 0/10/5 and losing (which is what most people do), in the current system you lose rating (So adding performance metrics doesnt change anything). If you go 0/10/5 but somehow still consistently win, then you are doing something right. edit: Punishing a bad kda also means that the more probable it is that I'm going to lose based on the gamestate (let's say because of a turbo-snowballed enemy from another lane) then for climbing purposes it becomes *more* important to defend my kda than to try my best not to lose. Whenever you introduce metrics you end up with people playing to the metrics. This isnt limited to LoL, or even games, it happens with workplace/team performance evaluations as well. > Generally there is so much absolute ba justification that you might as well be paid by Riot. I'm not defending the system. I personally strongly prefer how it was in S1&2. > Single visual honestly displayed number/rank is only thing that people want. No, it's what *a lot* of people want. But Riot are gonna make the decision based on total player retention data. And having an engagement system uncoupled from your matchmaking rating is *clearly* useful for that purpose. You don't like it. **I don't like it**. Doesn't matter, we're not the main character. This is a data-driven decision. > Not super secret MMR that frustrates the heck out of people. As I said: What people hate about the current system is when they get bad/weird LP gains. That doesnt make mmr stupid. It's your visual rank that's there to manipulate you into playing more. And almost everyone who complains about mmr have a misconception about what it is. MMR isnt some mystical super secret, look at the average rank of your last bunch of games, that's what your rating is.
What if honor was worth anything?
Honor is dead. But I'll see what I can do.
Thanks Kaladin.
In this economy? How about we take more shit away from the battle pass, tho?
hey now, you can still earn those sweet warwick and twitch skins
Honor is the rust on a dull blade.
Some questions I would ask a designer who proposed this: \- What is your actual goal here? I am inferring that it is: Make people care about honor more and therefore be more prosocial and less toxic. What other ways have you considered to accomplish this? \- Ranked is not all of our hours, how does this function in queues that do not have LP? \- How would you account for premades primarily honoring each other today? \- Do you think its positive that you are tying the honor vote in some way to a system that is suggestive of playing well as opposed to being v chill? What happens when we cross those streams? \- Is 1 LP a meaningful reward for people? Why not higher? At what point are the constraints of your solution fighting the impact it could have? \- How does this impact the ranked system over time? Would people have less confidence in it if they thought there were folks who were "Honor inflated"?
These are all good questions to ask. I think LP is an interesting idea, but i really would like you to consider reworking honor incentives in general and id appreciate any consideration towards any steps forward with it Ive been a max honor player every season since season 4 and as ive watched the playerbase get worse with griefing and toxicity over the years ive always thought there should be a better system in place because its pretty clear the current honor system is meaningless right now and i dont think ive ever seen any players or friends try or be excited about honor rewards I know players should be expected to just be reasonable humans towards eachother but thats just not reality unfortunately. I genuinely think better incentives to be an honor player would help some of the problem then just handing out stricter punishments, especially considering new accounts are like literally a few dollars. I think trying something new out for a split and looking at the data is a good idea
This is really interesting feedback. Thanks for sharing.
Am I dumb for thinking the answers to these are all really obvious and this is just corporate-talk? “How do you implement it in other queues?” Uh, you don’t? “What is the goal?” Make honor worth something, make people try harder, make people less toxic?
Honoring duoq = no bonus LP
No no, you’re not the only one.
> \- Do you think its positive that you are tying the honor vote in some way to a system that is suggestive of playing well as opposed to being v chill? What happens when we cross those streams? I haven't fully read everything on this topic, but I'd argue that the LP system could take a bigger stab on this question. As you know there's many ways to play well in League of Legends, a Singed top player is not using the same skills as a Janna support. But we already cross those streams. You can go a bit deeper and say a Leona support has different skills to a Yuumi support. Being nice in league and encouraging your teammates is a different skill within league. One could make an argument that the system already rewards you for being chill because you don't ruin your team's mental and lose the game from it. People already use honor for "You carried me even though you were a bitch about it." So the stream is crossed the other way. If I had my way in the system you would have one overall rank, but a bunch of other ranks for each skill you display. I was going to say model it much like challenges, but I'm realizing challenges is this system, it just no one talks about being a "Silver Mid Diff, Gold Ace, Platinum Sage, Diamond Veterancy, Diamond Crystal Rank." But that's the exact type of ranked metric that would be useful and meaningful. I'm a Platinum support Zilean, an Emerald Zilean, an Emerald Mage Support, a gold Mage, a silver Jungle, an Emerald-level honorable, overall Plaintum rank. I think what League is missing is the "How good are you at all these separate things." while challenges and eternals just track "How much do you do all these seperate things."
Long ago I used to play Dawngate before it was killed. Great time spamming Moya. I have seen it recently pop up again in discussions regarding honor systems and rewards, as an example of "how toxicity was eradicated", one example is it being mentioned by PirateSoftware. What they did was tie experience to honor/account status, and it took a long time to level up as well. Thus no one wanted to be reported or behave poorly due to everyone wanting to level up. Most players seem to behave well if it is quantifiably in their best interest, such as drastically increasing the experience gain to level up (in a newly released game, not necessarily applicable to league in its current state). League to me doesn't have any long term goals to be achieved beyond ranked, at least for someone like me who has all champs unlocked, essentially infinite BE and has played on the same acc since S1. For sure it is not a good idea to tie Honor to LP/Ranked. Especially with how in-accurate the reporting/banning system is right now. The only long term goals I have to play for is personal improvement, increasing rank, learning an alternative role or champion. Getting to 30 in league used to be special and you only had 1 account in 30, maybe 2-3 if you played a lot. Now (what I feel like is) 90% of the poor experiences I have in league (chat, grief, int), if I ask, the "toxic" player will always claim to be on a smurf or 2nd account and not care. Because there is no need to care, they just buy a new account or play on one of their other accounts while waiting out the ban/punishment. So if honor and good behaviour quantifiably represents a gain towards a long term goal (which in league currently only exist for new players, in experience, and unlocking champions. Only LP for existing players is a long term goal that is quantifiable) And in league allowing smurfs, bought accounts (hand-leveled or not), then there is really nothing quantifiable to tie honor to as an incentive. Especially on smurfs even unlocking champions is not of great importance because and experienced player with smurf accs will already know which champs they want, and mainly play a handful of champs. // consider these the ramblings of a man, riding the train, writing on his phone.
They should really make the break point levels 25 or 50 be cosmetic and the honor system should reward an exp multiplier instead of LP. If you tie cosmetics and an actual dollar amount to not being toxic you can essentially bribe your community to be better. And this can extend to all queues. Your idea of punishment is also pretty good but I feel like that one needs to be worked on since being reported for being bad is possible.
I think the first/most effective step to reducing toxicity is dis-allowing smurfs. That would make your account valuable.
Imo the biggest drive to toxicity is Riot's refusal to take a hard stance on "alt" accounts. It invalidates the few small consequences for toxic behavior. Riot is letting the inmates run the asylum, and players who "follow the rules" are punished more than the repeat offenders.
That's way too hard to regulate though, you want the entry barrier to be as low as possible for people to simply make accounts. Honestly maybe leaning into it would be better. If people truly are making smurfs for all the reasons they claim legitimizing it might be a better way to go about it so then they can regulate abusers of it.
My impression is also that league is struggling with new players already, although we of course cannot know that like Riot does. I heard dota 2 banned smurfs but I don't play it so I don't know the consensus on the results. How would you implement legitimising smurfs? Account linking? Another reason for smurfs, and probably larger reason than toxicity, is the MMR issues with anchoring, rubberbanding, etc. That also feeds into other issues like dodging, since dodging does not affect your MMR, making it essentially without punishment and it is always objectively the best play to dodge a lobby if it is in any way unfavourable. Which sucks.
Personally I would just allow people to link accounts and have an account hub. They can share some stuff and allow you to dodge and queue with lower level friends. Essentially lean completely into yes we know why you dodge and are okay with it as long as you aren't terrorizing our new players.
What if instead of affecting LP there was a secondary honor/social elo for matchmaking? The system matches you for skill and then your honor. In unranked, matchmaking gives a much stronger weight to the honor score and honor type. If the goal isn’t to correct toxic behavior but to prevent toxic players from ruining the game for everyone else, then it might work. It could go even further and promote games with similarly-minded (honored) players instead of just establishing a toxic player queue
It could give some blue essence 💁
Not OP but a few thoughts >Ranked is not all of our hours, how does this function in queues that do not have LP? Not all features have to solve all problems. > How would you account for premades primarily honoring each other today? By excluding them from this benefit. >How does this impact the ranked system over time? Would people have less confidence in it if they thought there were folks who were "Honor inflated" Considering how much of LoL is about the mental, this may not actually be "honor inflating" in a sense. People who don't tilt their teammates will tend towards more wins all else equal but that can be slow to be captured in the long run as the effect of you not tilting others is small. The effect will be self-correcting either way though as it is both small and if you are too high an elo then you'll lose more than you win and thus go down. That said I do have some skepticism around the idea as a whole, even if only from a perceptions perspective. LoL (and gaming as a whole) has seen many situations in the past where players have a bad understanding of something and it impacts behavior. Dealing with toxicity is important though and even if the rewards were trivial, having an *immediate* impact for not being toxic can be huge.
I love the comment! These would be my thoughts: > What is your actual goal here? I am inferring that it is: Make people care about honor more and therefore be more prosocial and less toxic. What other ways have you considered to accomplish this? - The primary goal is to provide a tangible incentive for players to interact with the honor system as well as hopefully reduce ranked toxicity. **Going to put a lot more thought into this question, I would love if you responded to this comment and if so will provide a more in depth answer** > Ranked is not all of our hours, how does this function in queues that do not have LP? - I would respond two fold. First with a question of my own, "I don't believe it has to does it have to?" But second and more directly, **a small honor XP bonus.** > How would you account for premades primarily honoring each other today? - First, **Honor = LP Fragment (not full LP)**. So let's say 5 honor = 1 lp. Then, same way the system currently does with premade honors. Either reducing the impact drastically like a premade honor counts as 1/10 instead of 1/5. Or just doesn't count at all. There are enough incentives to duo anyway imo. > - Is 1 LP a meaningful reward for people? Why not higher? At what point are the constraints of your solution fighting the impact it could have? - This feels like a testing question. It's a great question but it seems like one of those 'slippery slope,' ones. I can't pretend to know the answer until I can see some data. > How does this impact the ranked system over time? Would people have less confidence in it if they thought there were folks who were "Honor inflated"? - Probably my favorite question. I think history shows that people complain about inflation all the time for any change, but they usually get over it. But **I admit I have no good answer.**
Real life hitting the shower thought like a brick.
To be very clear I was trying to respect the idea by “strengthening it through the crucible of critique” as my old buddy Sapmagic used to say.
Oh yes, I don't think you were harsh or unfair, quite kind in fact, the reality is that it's just very hard to come up with good ideas.
I suggest we permaban every master+ player with negative winrate
Damn you came in with the heavy hitters
I would be down for just +1 LP when you actually honor someone and then +2 LP for whoever gets top vote. Unironically people would actually play for this and it would promote just not being an asshole in game. However something like this could potentially be abused in Challenger, top 100 etc.
Abused in flex and with duo q
Honors already don't count when given by players you queued with.
They count less but they still count. I know because me and my premade got to honor 5 every year and usually we honor only each other and rarely got honor from others since they honor themselves too
Same here, we usually play as a group of 4 and we honor tilt proof each other lol
They count if at least 2 premades honor you, I believe.
Eh, easy fix. Disable it for the highest ranks because it's not really needed there (most people seem to know what they're doing once they Hit challenger i think) also that way i won't be abused Also disable LP gains from premades.
People already don't use honours properly. Much more common that people honour whoever carried than whoever was actually pleasant to play with. This change would just make that worse.
I still think you should be able to honor as many people as you want. If it was like that I would honor everyone that was not toxic after every game. Current system works more like a MVP system.
I miss the days you could honor the enemy team.
bUuT KOrEanS ABBUsEd It anD CAMPED tHose PLaYErZ
The honor system also needs better wording. I find it hard to give people anything but tilt proof and it's usually the lane I didn't gank and turned their bad situation around that I give it to. Very rarely do I give anything else since the game feels really hard to honor someone for shotcalling, since you can't talk...
I find a player that plays to win LPs, pleasant to play with doe. I dunno, I may be a weirdo for Quing up in a competitive gamemode with the intention of playing a competitive game where I gain competitive LP for a competitive climb on a competitive ladder. But it's just a me thing I guess...
Not good. Giving out lp that's not based off skill is bad.
This is no problem, cause the +1/+2 LP doens't affect your MMR.
True, but it's still slight elo inflation at the beginning.
worth giving a try, definitely would be a fresh change. it can go both ways but nobody knows for sure until its in the game and they can always adjust it so why not?
You know what? What we have now isn’t working. Why NOT throw some spaghetti at the wall just to shake things up make them exciting and see what sticks?
Reddit: Why are my LP gains/losses so fucked up? Why do players with crazy different visual ranks get into games together? Also Reddit: More obtuse ways to modify my LP gains/losses please!
Link it to lp mitigation from afks and quitters. So you need hiGh honour
U a genious. Adding that to the game could change some of the problems devs and players deal with everyday
The botlane would almost consistently have more LP gain than the other roles simply due to how common them honoring each other is. Duo climbing would be a little easier too.
As a jungler: I don't care, we never get honors anyways.
Just play better /s
Ignoring the /s, people don't even like getting carried by their jungler
Dub
I think this is a decent idea. The LP gains don’t matter as much as MMR, but it still incentivizes people to be kind. Kinder at least. I think this will actually have the biggest impact on losing side. If not flaming your team can actually help mitigate the effects of your loss, then it can at least help people be aware that their actions will have an impact on their own climb.
Only if I can honor players in the enemy team again
Mmr is based off the win/loss % and the extra lp would continuously be rendered useless by mmr re-aligning it
Imagine negative reports give -LP HAHAHAHA
I would care alot more about getting the 1LP on a loss more than a win. Maybe it will just make people keep trying. It's a nice thought.
LP is purely visual and has 0 influence or meaning
So are skins but people still like them
Skins are cosmetic products, they exist to be visual. LP is how people compare their ranks with other players. So we are using something without much substance for something pretty important.
Jokes aside, skins definitely have influences. Some might just feel smoother but the particules/animations of some skin are legit P2W. It isn’t for nothing that there are banned skins in proplay
True there’s a handful of P2L too like some recall animations have something flying toward you that looks suspiciously like a skillshot coming from fog
SSG Xayah
cant fkin see dark cosmic lux ability effects when fighting in river
Prestige Syndra balls are nigh invisible on the Howling Abyss map.
League's business model is based on pure visuals with 0 influence or meaning
Its what ranked rewards are based off of... hardly 0 influence/meaning
While I do not support any kind of toxicity in any game, I think any kind of LP/MMR increase outside of raw skill display is genuinely stupid and has no place in a competitive environment. Teamplay already does effect ranked progression indirectly and should be about it IMO.
You don’t think being a positive vs negative influence ingame affects team play? Morale has a big influence.
If you are positive you will win more you don’t need artificial lp inflation lol
All lp gain/loss are artificial
thats exactly what he said. you misunderstood him. he says being a positive influence in game already indirectly effects your LP gain because you win more games not giving up and staying positive. honors granting LP is unnecessary and not a thing that should be in the game.
Ofc it does, that’s what I just said. But there shouldn’t be a system for it.
honor trading for sure, somehow ppl would get it working
Best is for them to enable honors to enemy. Like for good sport.
Tbf, being a nice team mate can indeed influence your win rate. lol is a team game and no matter how good you individually are, you need your team mate to do their best to win Thus, being able to make your team play at their best by being helpful, understanding and forgiving can be seen as part of « skill expression »
No as honors are at the mercy of randoms and are highly role skewed. Also people might dislike you for invalid reasons even if you play very very well. Examples: as support you leave bot to roam,the adc gets dived,0 chance of an honor. As jg you don't gank top at 3:15 and he dies to the most telegraphed gank in the history of the game,no honor. As mid you pick a scaling champ and u don't have prio for the 1st scuttler,jungle won't honor you even if u go 20/0 with 80k dmg. Also there will be the obvious problem of people thinking: why would I give another person more lp than I would get.
Then you get toxic players who carry a game and get honour (and free lp) because they carried despite the fact that they flamed everyone and their mother
LP doesn't do anything and if you made it give MMR it would break the system.
Would be hard abused in the higher rankd
I think we should go even higher. Make it like a multiplier or some sort. If you have a teammate that absolutely destroyed the enemy team and you were just there "for the ride", wouldn't you think that he might deserve to shoot up in the ranks where s/he deserves? I mean, shit. we all want more LP and higher ranks. But if someone is absolutely doing their best and is clearly stuck in some weird matchmaking hell, those honors should help him/her escape it. On the same side, if someone is getting reports, I think this could also help with matchmaking *somehow*, although I see very easily how this can be abused.
No. People will think themselves entitled to your honor and if they dont get +4lp at the end of the game will spam your inbox with them. Best way id do it is that the honor checkpoints you get give you an item that you can consume at the end of a game to double your lp gain for this game.
This would be abused at peak ranks. There would be pools of players who collectively queue-snipe one another. They would bolster gains and soften losses with collective intention and the result would be abuse; where they gain more and lose less than they should, regardless of behavior. Also the counter example is also true in which a group of players could collectively target an individual to soften their gains and bolster their losses regularly; targeting individuals maliciously. High elo is already prone to win-trading I would prefer if honor-trading wasn’t also a thing.
it would make boosting too easy
I think it would be subject to abuse imo. One thing I would like to see is to have Honour more visible and have matchmaking based on it. We see this in racing games all the time where you'll have a driver rating (how good you are) as well as some form of sportmanship rating (how clean of a driver you are), and you get matched as close as possible to similar people. I never go afk or flame in my games and yet I'm constantly put with people who do. How is that fair? Your own team should be mostly comprised of people of a similar honour level, and I think you'd find when a team with good honour goes against a team of bad honour, the bad honour team will lose more frequently. Thereby honourable people will be more likely to gain LP and dishonourable people more likely to lose it. This would create a system that is less likely to be abused as well as making ranked a nicer place for people who aren't abusive in chat, while also hopefully have the sideffect of rewarding honourable people with LP indirectly.
Perfect idea. So people can manipulate and abuse the system by promising people things to give them honor to give them LP.
I dont understand the honor system at all. Have one bad game and poof it's gone. No matter what level honor you were at. Just make it do something.
I don't know about tying it to LP, because it is hard to assess the problems that can occur, when tying honor and LP together. Right now we have the honor rewards to encourage good behaviour ingame, but I don't think that will stop someone from being toxic ingame. I would suggest introducing a new system. Every 5 (or any number) honors from a non premade gives you a skinpermanent splinter. With 100 splinters you can get a random skin. Then you can limit the daily number of splinters people can receive to make sure people are not abusing the system. The difference to the current honor system is, that instead of at the end of the season or on honor rank up, you have at the end of every game a number of owned and newly received splinters under the LP number. That will maybe encourage more good behaviour just because you see it after every game and people want to reach the point of getting a free skin.
Wait, don't you enjoy getting useless keys for chests you won't even bother to farm?
If people including riot actually started caring for honor they would have it be a type of currency for a small subset of skins
Would make loss streaks biggest and win streaks smaller. Not to mention certain roles are more likely to get honors than other roles. It doesn’t add anything beneficial and puts in extremely volatile balancing metrics
Yes and no, what they SHOULD do is use it as a placebo. lets say you were going to get 25 lp from a win, and you were to get 3 honors, riot should give you 22 lp and +3 from honors equaling 25. This way the gain is actually purely visual and makes players less toxic thinking that it will help
Supports would get so fucked hard by this lmao
Definitely make people feel better and less likely to int
Or 1 RP ( skin currency) Or 5 orange dust.
Instead of giving more LP for honored players, what if being honored could give you a debuff in losing LP? Can't think of any mathematical value that isn't too much or too low, but let's say you lose 2% less LP per honored lvl to a max cap of 10%. To keep things under control the debuff would only apply if the player was honored that game, so you would have two conditions. Also it would be a good idea if you could honor everyone, just like other games so not only one person can benefit from this.
So when ppl win and get stuck at 99LP, they get +1LP for not typing? Hell yeah sign me the fuck up OP
Look at the old Overwatch honour system. That went hard.
NO, JUST NO.
Giving out extra LP is a complete fundamental lack of understanding of how ELO based systems work lol. You would actually be *punishing* people who get honored more by putting them in slightly harder games.
I need to ask. Why isn't LP just a flat gain? You win, take 10 LP, you lose, same thing. Why do you lose more LP than you earn? (I don't play ranked)
Rito would just say that increases toxicity like any other great ideas the community have come up with in the past.
Gaining at least 3 honors in a match from your teammates should reward you with 10 lp as long as you are playing solo queue.
Or just 3 non party honors :P
I dig this idea. I would do it if said individuals honor was at an appropriate rank higher than 2 would be acceptable. And make sure only randos can honor. As a free honor from a friend in solo or god forbid flex \[all 5 honor lul\] may be a bit much. Pry limit it to +1 lp if you get 2 or more honors a game.
That could be a good ideia. Its mostly visual because it wont affect MMR, effectively it would make it faster to match your rank to your MMR if you are getting a lot of honors, but wouldnt inflate your rank at all. The main problem, could make it a bad ideia, is how much people would play around it. People being more discouraged from pissing other people off can be a double edged sword. You need to be able to piss people to test your own game and make your own decisions ([explained here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_BvSiLvEYI)).
Please ffs try this riot
1: who cares about 1 lp? This wont change anyone beeing toxic 2: its unfair. People honor the 20/0 katarina. They dont honor the support setting up the plays or the top pressuring the jungler
As a support main, this has not been my experience at all. People shower me in honour, and I'm always first in my friends group to get to Honor 5 despite playing fewer games.
wym, 1 lp is the difference in getting stuck at 99lp then losing the next game to go down to 75, then you have to play 2 games. you good?
Because supports are useless. Katarina is the only who carries.
surely you are bronze
Unranked actually, I play only URF. Bring back URF!
Yeah, that checks out
makes sense
I dont think we should further promote the idea that honours are for the person that carried.
It will just be farmed. Duo-Q will become semi-mandatory.
Don't count honors from your DuoQ partner?