Vainglory Forums

If you are casual player, you can play the game and have fun.
But if you are one of the serious players, who want to play fair and competitively, there has to be some improvements made to current match making system.

Current Match-making-system:

There is a most common issue which I heard very frequently from those of you who want to play fair and competitively:
1. You are assigned with players who play badly, who ruin the match for you.

Yes, it is true.
For no matter those of you old VG players or those of you new VG players, a match making system which assigns players who play badly to your team and ruin your match should not be considered a fair match making system.

So what is the Criteria for a fair match making system?

I believe many of you may agree that the first step of a fair match making system should have each player bear consequences for each of their own performance, as opposed to teamates bear consequences for them. This consequences involves gaining and losing Player Rank after each match, meaning that if a player play badly in your team and results in your team's defeat, your Player Rank should Not be affected if you have good performance in that match.

But is there any reliable way for the game to decide whether a player is bad or good as to decide whether their Player Rank should be affected after a match?

Yes, there is.

A. kill/death/assist ratio that independently(disregard performances of teammates) reflects part of the performance of each player.

1)How many of you have faced players that have (kill+assist)<death, such as 5/12/6,5/14/8,5/10/3?
I believe many of you have.
I believe those are players who lack skill in that match, who "play badly" in that match.
I believe those players should receive double amount of the normal loss of their Player Rank despite of victory and should be further punished such as losing currency instead of earning currency.

2) players that have death<(kill+assists)<1.5*death like 6/8/5, 7/11/8, 12/10/2?
I believe those are players who have less than decent performances in that match.
I believe those players should receive normal loss of their Player Rank after defeat.

3) players that have (kill+assist)>1.5*death like 9/9/7, 10/9/7, 14/10/4?
I believe those are players who have decent performances in that match.
I believe those players should not lose Player Rank after defeat.

4) players that have (kill+assist)>3*death like 12/4/2,15/6/4, 20/10/11?
I believe those are players who have excellent performance in that match.
I believe those players should receive normal amount of gain of Player Rank despite of defeat.

5) players that have (kill+assist)>5*death like 12/4/9,15/4/7,20/5/8?
I believe those are players who have more than excellent performance in that match.
I believe those players should receive double amount of the normal gain of Player Rank despite of defeat, and be rewarded with more currency.

6) players that have death>2*(kill+assist) like 2/10/2, 2/14/4 ?
I believe those are players who have extremely bad performance in that match, who literally "ruin the match" for their team.
I believe those players should drop to previous player rank, for example, if they are in player rank "Not Bad(silver)" while had such awful performance, they will drop to previous player rank "Getting there(silver)" instead of staying in same player rank "Not Bad".
Additionally, those players who had such awful performance should be set under probation for next 3 or 4 matches, where if they do it again, they will receive: a first ban within 30 days for 3 or 4 days; a second ban within 30 days for one week; a third ban within 30 days for two weeks.
(AFKer should receive same punishment)

7) Firstly, players' KDA history for all matches should be recorded as reference, whether the reference being indicator of performance or being a raw data for other indication or demonstration.
Secondly, players' player ranks (skill-tiers) should never reset in each season, where high player rank (skill-tier) players are assigned with low player rank(skill-tier) players to the same team every season. In my opinion, this certainly upsets the "skill-tier" system itself, whose purpose is to separate high skill players from low skill players. As a result, resetting player rank(skill-tier) defeats the whole purpose of "skill-tier" system itself.

B. In addition to each player's kill/death/assist ratio, each player's kill+assist in proportion to that of their team must also be taken into account.

For example, a team of 3 players who have kill/death/assist ratio of 12/10/5, 5/5/6, 15/9/9, their respective proportion of kill+assist to their team are 17/52, 11/52, 24/52, or 32.7%, 21.1%, 46.2%,

1) players that have contribution percentage < 25%?
I believe those are players who lack skill in that match, who "play badly" in that match.
I believe those players should receive double amount of the normal loss of their Player Rank despite of victory and should be further punished such as losing currency instead of earning currency.

C. Current definition of "assist-kill" needs to be adjusted and improve.

Many of you may be aware that current definition of "assist-kill" is that as long as one has dealt any amount of damage to enemy hero that is killed within engaging time(not sure how long exactly), they gain "assist-kill" count.
This certainly causes a problem where those who lack skill in that match, who "play badly", also gain a lot of "assist-kill" count.

However, here is a more fair definition of "assist-kill " after my consideration:

Must fulfill one of the five:
1. One must deal mitigated damage(actual damage) >25% engaging health of enemy hero whom ally then kills to be eligible for each assist-kill. (For DPS) [Read along D. current definition of "kill"]
2. One must deal mitigated damage(actual damage) <25% engaging health of enemy hero and the finishing blow to be eligible for each assist-kill.(For DPS) [Read along D. current definition of "kill"]
3.One must take unmitigated damage(not actual damage)>75% engaging health of ally hero from target whom ally hero then successfully kills or assist-kills to be eligible for each assist-kill. (For Tank)
4. One must heal health>50% maximum health of ally hero who then successfully kills or assist-kills to be eligible for each assist-kill. (For healer)
5. One must provide fortified health to save ally hero from death who then successfully kills or assist-kills to be eligible for each assist. (For Buffer)


D. Current definition of "kill" could be adjusted to be more fair.

Many of you may be aware that current definition of "kill" is that as long as one deals finishing blow, they are counted as the one who "kill".
Theoretically, this certainly causes a problem where those who deal barely any damage apart from finishing blow are counted as the ones who "kill" instead of the ones who deal most damage.
How many of you have encountered teammates "stealing" your "kill" of target? I believe many of you have.

However, here is a more fair definition of "kill" after my consideration:

Must fulfill one of the two:
1. One must deal damage>75% engaging health of target to be eligible for each kill.
2. One must deal damage>25% engaging health of target and finishing blow to be eligible for each kill.

However, because one must then deal damage of at least 25% of target health before finishing blow to acquire a "kill", this potential change would slightly increase difficulty in acquiring gold in "lane" in early game, which makes "pushing" mobs away from cannon in "lane" more rewarding, thus promote more engagement of battle in "lane", which I think is more epic than 2v1 or 2v2 in "jungle".

E. Players' absence in defending turrets and base should be an indicator of bad performance.

1) whenever a turret takes continuous damage for more than 75% of its health, players who was alive in that duration and did not engage enemy within range of that turret, should receive +1 absense point.

2) whenever base takes continuous damage until destroyed, players who was alive in that duration and did not engage enemy within range of base, should receive +3 absense points.

3) player who receives 4 or more absense points should be counted abandoning match and should receive same punishment to that of AFK (see A.6)

F. Improvement regarding hero selection along with that regarding balance between team synergies.

I heard many players experiencing two major problems in selecting hero in VG:

1) teammate selects a hero, which you are then unable to select. This limits the freedom of selecting any hero you want, thus potentially reduces your performance in match.
2) each hero selected is ideal for each player, but not necessarily ideal for the team as a whole, thus creates imbalance of synergies between opposing teams as well as fluctuation of synergies within team. As a result, two potential problems are created:
a. Your team has lower or higher synergy than that of opposing team, thus has disadvantage or advantage against opposing team rather than having equity of synergy against opposing team, for instance, one team may lack Support compare to that of opposing team, or one team may lack damage output compare to that of opposing team.
b. Lacking of team synergy impedes your performance of using the hero you selected, for instance, a team using three glass cannons being potentially awkward compare to a team using two glass cannons plus a tank in engaging opponent.

Solution 1(standard synergy):
1) heroes are cagegorized by their role: Damage dealer(dps) and Support(tank,buffer,healer).
One team must consist of 2 dps and 1 support.

2) player has the freedom of selecting any hero they want before being matched with teammates.

Solution 2(customized synergy):
1) heroes are cagegorized by their role: Damage dealer(dps) and Support(tank,buffer,healer).

2) player not only has the freedom of selecting any hero they want before being matched with teammates, but also has the freedom of selecting synergy of their own team, such as 2 dps + support, 1 dps+2 support, 2 dps + 1 tank, 1 dps + 1 healer + 1 tank, etc. before being matched with teammates.

G. Communication regarding agreement of strategy and regarding responsibility.

Issue 1 regarding agreement of strategy:
Sometimes teammates die because they are not warned when other teammate suddenly leave engagement area.

Disengagement warning(solution):
when other teammate leaves engagement area including starting teleporting back to base, everyone should be clearly warned by both sound and screen indication showing one or two big disengagement sign in the middle of screen of everyone(not in mini map, but in the middle of the screen) in order to clearly indicate that one or two teammates has disengaged during engagement.

This way, team will be properly warned when teammate disengage during engagement.

Issue 2: regarding agreement of strategy and regarding responsibility.
I believe every single human would agree that:
We need facility, not incompetence.

Clear communication is one facility, proper responsibility is another.

Clear Communication:
Command:
( only players with (kill+assist)/death > 150%, KA contribution > 30% can use command)

Follow me closely! - ask particular teammate or both teammates
(Including green arrow pointing toward commander on top of teammate acting as graphical reminder and mini-teammate portrait within green color perimeter indication, within which teammate of that portrait must stand in order to successfully follow the command.)
Follow me at distance! - ask particular teammate or both teammates
(Including green arrow pointing toward commander on top of teammate acting as graphical reminder and mini-teammate portrait at green color perimeter indication, at which teammate must stand in order to successfully follow the command.)
Don't follow me! - ask both teammates
(Including red perimeter indication, within which teammate must not stand in order to successfully follow the command.)

Engage enemy now! - ask particular teammate or both teammates
(Including sword symbol on top of teammate acting as graphical reminder and mini-teammate portrait within green color perimeter, within which teammate must engage enemy in order to successfully follow the command.)
Engage enemy with caution! - ask particular teammate or both teammates.
(Including perimeter indication, within which teammate must engage without being insta-killed(die within 3 second of taking continuous damage) in order to successfully follow the command.)

Don't engage enemy yet!- ask both teammates
(Including temporary prohibition sign on top of teammate acting as reminder, during which teammate must not engage enemy in order to successfully follow the command.)
Team, fall back! - ask both teammates
(Including prohibition sign on top of teammate acting as reminder, during which teammate must stop engaging enemy in order to successfully follow the command.)

Engage kraken! - ask particular teammate or both teammate to engage
(Including engaging kraken indication, during which teammate must engage kraken in order to successfully follow the command.)
Don't engage kraken!- ask particular teammate or both teammates.

Lead the way! - ask teammate to lead the way
Initiate - ask teammate to initiate battle
Cover me- going in alone and ask teammate to follow and engage

proper responsibility:
right and responsibility of communication regarding agreement of strategy:
When command is obeyed, all engaging teammates are guaranteed to gain kill or assist-kill.(privilege)
When more than one enemy is killed, commander gains extra 0.5 kill count for each enemy that is killed.(Privilege)
When more than one teammate is killed, commander gains extra 0.5 death count for each teammate that is killed(responsibility); teammates that is killed obeying command gains only 0.5 death count(privilege).

Response:
Affirmative - positive response to a command(only usable in response to a command):
1.respond with affirmative response within certain time, such as 4-7 seconds, before obeying the command.(responsibility)
2.failure to obey the command for the first time after affirmative response will receive warning, but for the second time, it leads to removal of communication including its privilege and responsibility for the rest of duration of the game.(irresponsibility)


Negative- negative response to a command (only usable in response to a command)
1. Must respond with negative response within certain time, such as 4-7 seconds, before disobeying a command.(responsibility)
2. failure to respond will lead to warning, but repeated failure to respond will lead to removal of communication including its privilege and responsibility for the rest of duration of the game.(irresponsibility)

---

Disclaimer

---

Above is my understanding of why current match-making system needs improvement and how it should be improved. If you have any constructive opinion and suggestion, please share so that we can have a better game for everyone, otherwise please don't bother.

yes, the matchmaking system is making me wanting to quit the game, before it was fine, its just getting worse.

*Content moved to original post

Before it was fine probably vain glory didn't have as bad of a player base or your match making skill tier was much higher then it is currently. My point; matchmaking will never be perfect and it's completely in your dreams. Good luck and good bye.

@Fedric Might be a good idea but suggest to the devs, they may have already implemented something similar to your surprise.

But what about roams? I find most competent roams go 2/5/19 or something like that with little kills but large amounts of assists

Also if matches last a short amount of time, everyonemigbt not have gotten enough gold to get "good" performance

Thanks for the question.
But if you read my post carefully,it says kill+assist.
Also, about gold count, I mentioned 6k for 25-30 min match, thus lower gold requirement for short match accordingly.

*Content moved to original post

What skill tier are you, Fedric? & what's the highest you've achieved?

My highest player-rank(skill-tier) was "The Hotness"(tier 7/9) sometime in last year, but since beginning of this year I have been at "Decent-ish"(tier 5/9)
1. Ask again later
2. Working on it
3. Getting there
4. Not bad
5. Decent-ish
6. Pretty good
7. The hotness
8. Simply amazing
9. Pinnacle of awesome

As I only play solo queue, it took quite a while for my player-rank(skill tier) to move up to tier 7 in last year, and has been taking forever for my player-rank(skill tier) to move up to next rank since beginning of this year.

Fedric you forgot rank 10, Vainglorious. Not that it matters much but just reminding you that the rank exists :P.