Â Lead Champion designer Meddler continues his discussion on upcoming quality-of-life changes to Urgot from yesterdayÂ and evaluates some community suggestions regarding the fugly crab of the League.
Â After the recent popularity of AFK/Leaver system threads on Reddit,Â Lead Social System designer LyteÂ adresses the issue and explains what changes will be made in the future so 4v5 scenarios aren’t hopeless.
Â Following the recent forecast on better chat systems in League, Metasystem addresses feedback from a couple of chat room community managers.
Â Finally, an awesome community member project aimed at redesigning LoL and more sketches from IronStylus!
1. These haven’t been tested yet
2. This isn’t necessarily a final change list, odds are high that more will be added and/or something will get removed
3. We’re currently focusing on things that will go into the patch or patches that the upcoming regionals, and then worlds, will be played on. As a result our priority when it comes to game balance/champion updates right now is to work on champions that are either too dominant and played all the time or close, but not quite, effective enough and just need a small amount of help.
Allowing on hit effects on Acid Hunters would be a pretty sizeable power spike that I suspect would make Triforce or IBG mandatory, not just an option. As a result I’d like to investigate other ways of compensating for Muramana changes if needed.
I play the 5 Least Picked Champions in Ranked SoloQ NA.
I have experience playing Urgot Top, Mid, Jungle, Support, and Marksman at a Diamond 4/3 level with a 56% Win-Rate across 43 Games on this account.
The Q change is anÂ direct nerfÂ to Support and Jungle Urgot
The Q change is anÂ overall nerfÂ to Top Lane Urgot inÂ ideal yet realisticÂ situations.
The Q change is aÂ potential buffÂ to Mid Lane Urgot and Marksman Urgot when facing Lane Bullies, but Mana Costs are less of an issue on Mid Lane Urgot.
The missile speed change and R cooldown/mana buffs seem like safe changes which should help Urgot in all roles without giving him too much power.
The proposed W changes to scale with AD would be hard to balance as it would be a huge buff to Glass Cannon ~400 AD Mid and Marksman Urgot while being less useful on Top, Support, and Jungle Urgot which rarely build more than 200 bonus AD.
The proposed W changes to scale with MP would be a buff to Urgot in all lanes as he builds some form of mana (Manamune/Frozen Heart) as part of his Core Item Build.
Nice post, appreciate the rationale provided for each statement (just quoting the TLDR here since it’s a really long quote otherwise). To respond to a couple of specific things:
Q last hitting’s often not necessary, agreed. It is however something Urgot sometimes needs to fall back on against ranged opponents unless he’s really dominating the lane throughout and that’s one of the cases we’d like to add some power to him. It’s also possible the cost increase won’t be necessary and we’ll be able to get away with just offering the half refund on kill, my suspicion is it’ll probably be a needed change however hence the first version to go into testing’s going to try it out.
Range on the rank 1 ult does feel pretty poor, no argument, and the reduction to it made a while back was basically a band aid fix due to the problems the ult creates in lane in particular. Might be possible to at least synch it to his attack range, will give that a look, unfortunately this is a case where we need to rework the spell to really address the feel bad aspect of it.
Something I’d like to avoid is turning Urgot into a standard ADC and a substantial AA range buff, with other adjustments to compensate, would push him pretty far down that road. Base mana buffs on the other hand are a possibility, though current inclination is to give him ways to regain mana instead or be rewarded more for building mana/regen.
I admit I can’t see Urgot picking up AP really apart from the occasional bit from Baron, IBG/Triforce, buffs from allies etc. Don’t see any noticeable issues with leaving the AP ratio there as well if we do end up adding a mana ratio however, so inclined to do so, even if it’s only appreciated by those going for pretty unusual builds occasionally.
Urgot’s got some interesting build choices at the moment, based on how well you’re doing the enemy team and your own playstyle that I’d like to preserve. Making one item mandatory removes that to a substantial degree, especially if it’s a first build, expensive item. Additionally I’m also concerned about the about of extra damage that adds to his EQQQ combo which is not where we want to add power.
There’s been a lot of discussion recently about Leavers/AFKs, and I wanted to jump in and just dump some thoughts. We absolutely agree with players, games shouldn’t start when a player fails to connect. We also agree that 4v5s in general are pretty terrible experiences, but there’s starting to be a lot of misquoting and misunderstandings going around the forums.
Some players are saying that we wouldn’t do any of the proposed “obvious” solutions like restarting a match or some type of heavy penalty queue because of potential abuse. This is false. When we talk about “Prisoner’s Island” and separating playerbases or forcing players to play alternative queues with long queue times, we are specifically talking about Prisoner’s Island not working well with nuanced, subjective behaviors like whether a player was toxic; this is completely different than a binary behavior like whether a player left a game or not. We’re completely fine with some sort of solution that restarts the match or allows an early restart/surrender if there’s a player that fails to connect to the game, or DCs in the first few minutes. However, we’re not OK with allowing players to leave very late in games and still allow players to all abandon the match with no penalties. These are two very different scenarios. Most games (even DOTA2) still record stats/hand out harsh penalties if you leave after 5 minutes.Â
For awhile, there was a team (not Player Behavior) at Riot was working on this feature, but they were taken off to work on some other important issues.
To give you some more insight behind the scenes, the Player Behavior team has been working on Team Builder for awhile, and we still have a few things lined up; for example, we have finished designs that we need to implement for Honor to make the system feature complete, and we were also responsible for revamping the Tribunal to make it globally available while also improving some of the known flaws of the system. It’s a lot of stuff, and they aren’t trivial features so it takes awhile to implement systems that function at the scale League operates at.
However, we’ve known about Leavers/AFK issues in League for awhile, and have wanted to address it as soon as we can, in-between the larger projects above. Most teams have a big project they are focused on, but also work on “small scope” improvements to the game whenever they can; for example, the Player Behavior team recently worked on an improvement to matchmaking that will drop queue times for high MMR players to ~5 minutes instead of ~30-45 minutes or more–this feature is currently running in Team Builder so if you’re high MMR, test it out and give us feedback. If it works well, we’d love to bring it to other queues. We also took some time off Team Builder to look into map issues between Blue/Purple and did a few fixes there to get it into a better state. We worked on these problems ahead of Leavers/AFKs because at the end of the day, they affected a lot more players.
When we look at Leavers/AFKs, we have to look at a few things. As a baseline, how often do Leavers/AFKs happen in games? What about in different queues? What you see is that even with a 5% rate of Leavers/AFKs in games globally across the world, you’ll still have players who see up to 50, 60, 70, even 80% of their games have Leavers/AFKs. That’s simply statistics and unlucky streaks–with millions of players playing the game, you actually have thousands (even tens of thousands) of players with streaks of games with Leavers/AFKs in all of them. But, globally, the Leaver/AFK rates in League is acceptable (but could be better). In fact, if you look at other MOBAs, you generally find similar Leaver/AFK rates and their forums also have a large number of players complaining about Leavers/AFKs. Feel free to do a poll, or run statistics on the last 10 matches of every player on the forums or game and see what the leave rates are–they will probably surprise most players even though they probably could be better still.
What’s interesting is that if you look at Leaver/AFK data, you can see that a % of the Leaves/AFKs are due to hardware issues, ISP issues, or other issues outside of the game’s control. There’s nothing Riot (or designers in general at any studio) can do to solve those issues. For these types of “external” issues, we’d like to allow players to reconnect or restart matches if a player fails to connect at the start of a game. But, we won’t be allowing full resets or restarts if a player “fails to connect” 45 minutes into a match for example.
There’s also always room for improvement for Leavers/AFKs that are intentional (the rage quitter). We’d like to improve the LeaverBuster system to be a lot more harsh to these players; there’s a few ideas on the table (including forcing them to play with other leavers, reduced IP per game, and other strong penalties like that). Hopefully, this gives you more info on what’s going on at Riot regarding Leavers/AFKs, and why it’s work that we do want to do. At some point, I’d love to go over the Leaver/AFK data in-depth for League of Legends and talk about how each feature of LeaverBuster affected the numbers, but that’ll have to be when I’m not at home typing away.
(Apologies on the brain dump)
TL;DR – The reason Riot doesn’t just implement any system designed to solve AFK-ing / leaving matches is not because of abuse cases, but because many of the popular suggestions don’t really solve the issue. On the pipeline for the Player Behavior team are numerous updates to the Honor system that would make it feature-complete, a queue timer of only 5 minutes instead of 30-45 for dodging a match if you have high MMR, and fixing the Purple/Blue side imbalances.
Â Leavers/AFK-ers constitute about 5% of the community, but even that number leads to some players experiencing 4v5s 8 times out of 10. Globally, the rates of leavers/AFK-ers in League are acceptable (no they’re not, but it’s what Lyte claims). The majority of leaver/afk-scenarios occur due to hardware or ISP (internet-service-provider) issues, etc., things that are out of Riot’s area of control.
Â League’s Leaverbuster system will be a lot more strict to leavers in the future and will distribute harsher penalties.
This is where we have to figure out that tight line between what’s an intentional leave, versus what’s that occasional DC due to a hardware or ISP issue (or random hurricane). I think at the end of the day, our data is much better than when LeaverBuster was originally implemented, so we can better identify patterns. Rest assured, I don’t think you’ll be impacted.
That question is difficult because there’s no good answer. For example, players really wanted the Player Behavior team to work on Team Builder, matchmaking, penalty systems, Honor, Tribunal, Team Builder Ranked, Team Builder Co-op vs AI… lots of really cool, awesome features. At the end of the day, we can’t do everything at the same time. We have to prioritize, and try to figure out what’s the biggest impact feature at any given point in time.
Note: I assume Riot Metasystem is a group account for Rioters working on systems like Chat Rooms to reply to community questions. No fancy portraitino.
- Chatrooms need to be variable in size. While a chatroom with 50 people just chatting with each other is spammed with lots of text, a chatroom to find people to play with (like the one we use in the LdG) could easily stand 500 people. Especially at peak hours, a limit to 200 members is just not enough for bigger communities.
We can and will raise the channel caps over time, as requested here and by many others. We’ll just have to make sure that any new tools and improvements are there to improve the usability – both for being a participant and a moderator.
- Chatrooms need basic moderation tools. The owner (and chosen moderators) has to be able to kick and ban people temporarily and permanently from the chatroom. These bans have to be revoceable.
There’s a couple of different ways we can approach this but generally the ability to control who stays and goes (or control who is allowed to join in the first place) is a very basic necessity. This is also where we get started on the improvements. Ban lists might not be the best or the only solution as they’re easy enough to work around but the ease of community self-management is key.
- It would be good to be able to decide whether a chatroom is open for everyone or just for people you invite.
We quite agree. Having both in the end would be preferable.
Chat Room VisibilityÂ – In their current state, chat rooms are strictly word of mouth. Promote their use in various ways. A searchable list of chat rooms would be a good start, with one-click-buttons for joining or reading the chat room profile. You could also allow players to list their favorite chat rooms as part of their information on post game screens, as a sort of â€œguild tagâ€.
Being able to discover chatrooms, and be discovered if you so choose does sound pretty important! We have some ideas about how we’d like to approach this but as it’s not the first thing to be worked on we’ll talk about the specifics a bit later.
This is something that we quite want to get to as soon as we’ve first nailed the most essential functionality. Being able to discover, and be discovered
Chat Room LFGÂ – A LFG/private game creation tool. Allow users to create community games that are automatically broadcast in the chat room, with one-click-join functionality for other players.
This is quite high on our own list of things to get to as well.
Context: Summoner LMC Froyo has created a visual representation for a complete redesign of LoL, from client, to loading screens, even gameplay! Here’s a comprehensive infographic.
Thanks for your post! It is clear you put a lot of time and passion into your design. Since I’m on the Unlock team I’ll keep my comments focused to that area.
1) I like having a button on the main page that says “On Sale”. One of the first things many players do when they log-in is check the store to see what is on sale. I don’t want to be your face but can imagine this streamlining that process for those players interested with a summarized pop-up.
2) Gifting has some issues. While I’m a lonely summoner with only a few friends I know there are some with MANY. Having a list will help find that special someone.
3) I like the icons in step 2. In fact, we’ve been working on updating some of the icons in the store to make it easier for players to quickly identify a purchase. Have you seen those chevrons for battle boosts? Its a start.
Thanks for the ideas!
We’re working on an improvement of the forums from many different aspects! The Community Beta it is called I believe right now. We have it for PBE and a test version is up as well!
â€” Michael Maurino (@RiotIronStylus) July 7, 2014
If you have any questions, feel free to ask me atÂ @NoL_ChefoÂ or e-mail me at firstname.lastname@example.org.