Well, most of these unfair aspects in the ranked mode apply to a lot of competitive games. But I'm delving deeper and looking into how these specifically affect us Valorant players and whether Riot could make things better.
We all have that one friend, who constantly complains about a 'losers queue' and their teammates (okay, I admit I am that friend). Not to mention the lucky run-and-gun headshots, the smurfs and other things that make it seemingly impossible to rank up. Others label it as a skill-issue. Could Riot potentially make our lives easier, but they choose not to? And do we have to live with the frustration?
Most Unfair Systems In Valorant Ranked - Are They Fixable?
Teammates Going AFK
Instalock Phoenix going AFK in the second round ... who hasn't experienced it before? Sometimes you even have to fight 3v5. I'm starting with this point because it's genuinely unfair! Especially when you consider the duration of Valorant matches. In games like Overwatch 2, players going AFK is also annoying, but you can overlook it, because games usually don't go over the 30-minute mark.
However, Valorant matches can go on for 40 minutes or more and even in a 4v5 situation, it can be close. While the game might still be winnable, you're more likely to lose, and what hurts the most? Losing the same amount of RR as you would have if you were in a full team. Pain.
We should lose fewer RR points if we decide to go through the struggle instead of simply pressing F5. Criteria could be considered, such as them not being in your premade and the round at which they left the match.
There has been criticism that this could be abused; players might intentionally leave the match to minimize RR losses for the team. But let's be honest, if the system is set up so that the one going AFK loses more than the others and receives a penalty, who would volunteer to sacrifice themselves for random teammates? I've been playing Valorant for a while and the solidarity among random teammates is not very strong. In fact, sometimes you have to beg, just to get them to buy you a weapon.
The Matchmaking
Unfortunately, the red carpet in Valorant has nothing to do with glamour, instead it looks more like a series of loss streaks. These can be compared to gambling, but instead of losing money you lose time and your sanity. Many people wonder if such a thing like a "losers queue" exists. Sometimes it seems like your own teammates have never touched a mouse or a keyboard before, while the enemies are aim demons.
Always remember ur Valorant rank doesnt define you as a person!! It is just a game in the end of the day, winning or losing, doesnt matter as long as ur having fun!!!! pic.twitter.com/iBfQNZammT
— ikyoo (@ikyooVAL) October 11, 2023
Nevertheless, to this day, there is not a single piece of evidence that something like a losers queue actually exists. Often, it's just bad luck, especially in solo queue, as you never know who you'll be teamed up with and against. Sometimes you end up in a 13-0 match because the skill levels of both teams are so different and sometimes the matchup is pretty even.
However, we can't deny that losing streaks often lead players to jump into the next match. You can't end on a loss, right? Others choose to take a break from the game. The latter option is definitely the more reasonable one, but you and I both know what really happens.
In Valorant, we can queue for ranked matches as a duo, trio, or a full team of five. I prefer queuing as a duo or trio over queuing solo since it reduces the chances of having random teammates going AFK and in 5-stacks, I encounter too many smurfs.
5-stacks in Valorant don't have any rank restrictions. Anyone can queue with anyone. This is occasionally exploited by high elo players who queue up with four low-rank players. Often these low elo players will just be smurfs who recently purchased Iron accounts for cheap to boost their friend's higher ranked account.
Now, one could say it doesn't happen often and you do get decent matchups as 5-stacks most of the time. Nevertheless, it's frustrating when it does happen. Riot has already taken precautions if the ranks vary significantly within a 5-stack group:
If one or more members of your 5-stack group are Immortal 1 to Immortal 3, the team will receive a 25% RR reduction penalty. If one or more of your 5-stack group are Radiant, the team will receive a 75% RR reduction. Having any players in your group that are below Radiant automatically reduces your potential RR by 90%.
You can find this information in the FAQ section of the Competitive mode. For Immortal players, the strategy is still worthwhile to reach Radiant, especially since they would most likely have a 100% win rate. This is unfair to both the enemy 5-stacks and the other Radiant players in the ranking. But in this case, Riot decided that it's more important to let friends of different ranks play together.
Teammates Abusing Voice Chat And Abilities
It's unavoidable to encounter toxicity in competitive games. Especially as a woman, I've had my fair share of experiences in Valorant voice chat. Thankfully, there's the report option, the mute button and additionally, the clutch mute button for annoying backseat gaming. At this point, I can say that nowadays, I come across less toxicity than a year and a half ago. So I have to give Riot some credit for that.
Players abusing voice chat and text chat can be easily muted, but how do you deal with teammates who intentionally use their abilities against you? They flash or throw their mollies at you. Now, one might wonder if Riot should adjust abilities to affect only enemies. But that would undermine Valorant's game concept because it makes the game more complex when abilities also affect teammates and is a selling point of the game.
So, in such cases, there's no other choice but to stay calm and ignore it. If you don't care about the outcome of the match, you can stand in your teammate's molly, though. The more damage you receive from your teammate, the higher is the chance for them to receive a warning.
Smurfing
This is something very common and it's likely to continue. Oftentimes, smurfs are players who struggle in their own ranks and create lower-ranked accounts to boost their egos or help their friends to rank up. While it can be frustrating to lose to smurfs, winning against them is pretty satisfying.
What options does Riot have to tackle this problem and are they realistic? To make it more challenging for smurfs, Riot has already increased the level requirement to access the ranked mode to level 20. Additionally, smurfs can earn more than 30 RR if they deliver an excellent performance, which can lead to double rank-ups. However, it still feels like you encounter a smurf in roughly every third game in lower ranks.
One option could be a Riot account verification using a phone number to limit the creation of endless accounts. Alternatively, Riot could add more barriers for smurfs. The goal isn't to eliminate smurfs but to reduce their numbers.
However, there are concerns within the community. Such an approach could potentially lead to gatekeeping. When we look at other games, like Dota 2, the phone number verification can work. On the other hand, Overwatch is a negative example where it didn't work. This suggests that the success depends on how it's implemented, since there needs to be rules to address specific cases.
However, we must be aware that Riot generates profits through smurfs. Many content creators smurf. This means that Valorant gains promotion through smurfing and also skins are purchased on alt accounts. While it would improve our ranked experience, we can't expect a company to give up some of its profits for it.
To Be Fair...
Compared to other competitive games, Valorant's matchmaking is pretty decent and that is one of the reasons why it still has a thriving player base. Of course there are some issues, but there are many good things too, like the anti-cheat. We know how games can suffer from cheaters. I personally hope that the competitive experience will continue to improve over time. Plus, they plan to add a replay feature in 2024, which should be a great addition for us in that regard.