Don't get me wrong, but I personally think you compare apples and oranges. The only major common point between these games is that they are competitive games. Besides that... there is no real tangent.
I will go through each point and analyse them.
**Btr Lk Nxt Time \(EUW\) said:**
1) LoL is a game designed with no respect for people's time. a) A match at the moment takes on average anywhere 25-35 minutes depending on elo. Add to that a queue of 2 minutes, and 3 minute champ select = 30-40 minutes per match. Assume you are a decent player, at 60% winrate => 2 net (6wins-4losses) wins every 10 games = 2 wins every 300-400 minutes = 2 wins every 5-6.6 hours, at let's say 20 LP per win that's about 40 LP gain every 6 hours. And that progress only decreases as you climb and your winrate decreases.
Point is? All competitive games demand a good amount of time to climb.
b) And there is something else, due to the match lengths and the hidden MMR and the obscure way matchmaking works, I've gone on loss streaks many times, sometimes even 10 game loss streaks. Statistically speaking, 10 game loss streak, assuming 50% winrate, has a 0.5 to the power of 10 = 0.0009765625 chance of happening, let's round that up to 0.001 = 1 in 1000. I've gone on way more than 1 in 1000 10 loss streaks. This is partly because of tilt, partly because of the way matchmaking works behind the scenes, bottom line is it's outside what statistics predict. The simple fact that it happens and can ruin your MMR, only adds to the amount of time it takes to climb. Doesn't even matter why it happens, really, just that it happens. Ideally, the game should follow statistics and players shouldn't go on huge loss streaks that defy statistics. If your playerbase can tilt like that, that's a design issue.
I agree with you that the Hidden MMR shouldn't be a thing. However, just because you personally went on multiple lose streaks it doesn't mean you have actual data to support your claim. Plenty of times I heard the very same argument in HS forums. And it matters why it happens because most of the times it's the result of being tilted, tilting allies or simply giving up.
c) And the third subpoint illustrating the lack of respect for player's time: if a match becomes unfun for whatever reasons (seems like a lost cause/unwinnable, or the player got flamed, or the team composition matchup is simply unfun), a player is forced to sit through the entire half an hour, not enjoying it. This of course also adds to tilt/frustration.
Few games are truly lost to the point of no comeback. Pro players never give up. Heck, even in HS, the top players play till they know they are dead, even when they face the most unfun decks and have the lowest expectations to win.
Compare that to Hearthstone, where the matches are short, 6 minutes on average according to my tracking. Simple math would say that's 5 times faster than league(30/6). Not only that, but there's no hidden MMR algorithm dictating how quickly you climb. It's always 1 win = 1 star. Even if you go on a loss streak, there's no MMR that will say: "ok, now after your 10 loss streak, even if you win, you only gain 15 LP". No, 1 win is 1 star, always. The system doesn't add insult to injury, it doesn't kick you while you're already down on the floor. Not only that, but you just don't go on 10 game loss streaks, both because you don't tilt, the matches are 6 minutes long average, and if you want to concede, you concede and move on if you think it's unwinnable. So climbing is even faster than just "5 times faster than league". And you're enjoying the experience 100% of the way, even if you lose 40% of the time.
Here the apples and oranges appear. HS compared to LoL has a MONTHLY reset, meaning that while you do climb faster than in LoL, you have to climb it multiple times to achieve the same result. And people do go 10 lose streaks in HS too.
Again, many people accuse Blizzard of rigged matchmaking just because they happened to face their counter decks multiple times in a row. And if you enjoy 100% the experience, good for you. I've never ever seen a person enjoy all the expansions of HS, so hope the future won't get grim for you.
And the 6 min average argument isn't really working, since it totally depends on the players' preferences. If the player favours Aggro decks, yes, they tend to have way lower play time. But if they prefer Control or Combo decks, the duration of match-ups increases dramatically. Moreover, the average tends to be brought down because a vast majority of players prefer the Aggro decks. So either go aggressive or play the long game.
d) how you do in lane has a huge impact on the outcome of the game. If your laner gets 4 kills ahead of you at 10 minutes, they have an 80% chance of winning the game, according to leagueofgraphs.com. This isn't apparently obvious, and your team will not ff at 15 or even 20, which would be the right thing to do if we are to follow logic/math/statistics. That saved time can be spent playing the next game, and reducing the frustration. The fact that the first third of a game length can have such crucial impact on the outcome of the game (weak comback mechanics in the game design, high snowballing potential) drastically adds to the issue, making the rest 2 thirds of the game a waste of time many times.
Dieing 4 times in 10 mins... is a huge mistake. But it is manageable, the only issue being that the guy who went 0/4 will probably keep feeding. Still, it is a 5v5 game and you can't tell me that one player decides the whole outcome of the game most of the time.
If people purely followed statistics, they would surrender at min 10 in LoL and concede in HS immediately after the opponent countered a major Win Condition. People play to win, not to climb ASAP. Even when they have to choose between 20% Win Rate and go to next game, chances are they would keep playing. If you don't like this mentality, then Team games in general may not be your favourite.
e) I feel like the forfeiting algorithm should allow forfeiting easier if the team gold deficit/difference is bigger. For example, require 4 yes votes for under 3k gold deficit. Require 3 yes votes for 3k+, Require 2 yes votes for 7k gold deficit, as obviously the 3 people voting no don't know what they're talking about. Also, be able to forfeit much sooner based on gold deficit. Of course, these are suggestions, the point is, the way voting works now, wastes a lot of time. Riot has millions of matches from which to derive data that tells how pointless it is to continue a match, past certain gold deficits, while also taking into consideration champ scalings and whatnot. A better system than this is certainly doable, the current system is completely disrespectful towards players' time.
I completely agree with this point, Riot could definitely improve the surrender system. I would say after a difference in % of gold, 3 votes could be enough.
2) LoL is a game that, despite its best efforts, actually indirectly encourages toxic behaviour due to the way it is designed. a) Due to its long match times, being "stuck" in a game that is no longer of interest to you (unwinnable, unfun etc like mentioned in my point 1), it becomes very frustrating. No amount of policing (bans and other punishments) will change that. The game itself is frustrating its playerbase and putting everyone in a bad mood at one point or another. Doesn't matter how "not toxic" you are, nobody enjoys wasting 30 minutes of their life, and more than that, lose LP/ranking at the end of those 30 minutes.
This is more a players' mentality issue. If you see the games as being unwinnable, then ofc the experience will be awful. Trying your best and accepting that you simply lost after the game has been finished is the best approach. Otherwise, you will keep feeling frustrated.
Oh, and another big difference between HS and LoL is that your game length in HS completely depends on your opponent's turns as well. Many people intentionally rope you in order to make you stay as much time as possible to earn your victory. This can easily double or prolong even longer your game length. And lets nit discuss about the people who add you on friend list only to send death threats (something which you can't even report properly).
b) Many of the emotes that have been added in the game and the mastery emotes are designed to taunt and infuriate the opponent. For this reason I have them turned off, but they shouldn't even be part of the game. From Riot themselves, one of the tips in the loading screen: "Competitive BSing is fine. Hate speech? Not so much." Competitive BSing? Really? That's meant to make the game more enjoyable?
You've never met true Priest players, have you? Jokes aside, HS has emotes too that you will see many players spamming them 24/7. Heck, Blizzard replaced the "Sorry" emote since they deemed it too toxic. As you said tho, these elements can be ignored/removed, so there shouldn't be a problem in having them in the first place. You may not like it, but some people actually like them.
c) Riot has now added Eternals, which offer no real gameplay value, and only serve to frustrate more, because who doesn't want to be reminded how much better your opponent is than you, right after they killed you. Yet another source of toxicity (or as they call it "Competitive BSing"), from Riot themselves.
Eternals is a normal achievement system. Do you really care avout X having 30 Takedowns with Y champion? I don't and no one should.
Overall, all I want to tell you is that HS isn't a saint either. All I wish is that you have fun playing it and good luck. If League really is frustrating for you, then just take a pause from it and come arpund only when you feel like playing it.