Honor System decay prevention. IP gains bonus or small % increase per round.

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Nomsumer

Senior Member

11-17-2012

^

Badges are a good start for incentive. People like to collect things and or attaint a level of exclusivity. However that alone only appeals to one part of the players mind. Add some nominal ip gains bonus as I'm sure you are already considering to provide a financially low loss additional incentive to players to make the game more enjoyable. Therin making you far more money than you potentially would lose over time as your game to game average customer enjoyment increases.

I'm talking relatively small because people play tons of games and there are huge numbers of champions to attain to become competitively viable in LoL. This will not only incentivise good behavior but also make it easier for people to become emotionally and financially invested in your product because they can gain champions and runes at a slightly faster rate. Massive gains for low loss.

Update: I guess I could see the possibility that you're already near the max average IP gain rate for casual players and by adding even the couple % potential "honor bonus" could tip you over. Further the worry that people throw honor around so that everyone gets it. Odds are however that the people who are ruining games will aggrivate the others more than enough to prevent them being honored. Its just whether or not the mass in the middle throw it around like candy. One could always attach a frequency of use diminisher as you already have with frequency of honoring and friends. If it is over used and first, dial it back a little more. Or you could change it so that one accumulates honor points over time to then give to others at game end. ie like Corki's ult. Set a rate and then have a more standardized value per point as they are regulated, therin prevent rampant exploitation and has enough exlusivity to promote a little thought when giving them out.

Plan B in case you don't want to use IP. 1 single RP per round that exceeds X game duration? This is obviously a little more out there, however as you can't trade them and the per count accumulation would be slow. Oh nvm that wouldn't blend with the point per purchase numbers, becauase people could potentially make use of those odd numbers of rp remaining based on costs/point packages. I would say it would have an impressive reaction within the community, however it would depend on how much that rp costing is drawing in, and its likely a lot. Obviously you've got the people with the knowhow and the numbers tho so odds are this has already been tossed as no good.

Plan C: Heres an idea that could work. Forget Ip and Rp. Give honorable players however much higher odds of playing with other honorable players on their team. Or slightly sort the match making pools. Would be a little more work for the matchmaker but attaching one more filter to screen before selection.. well I dunno how feasable that is. I think most people would rather play with people who have at least a slightly higher trend of being positively mentioned in games.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Nomsumer

Senior Member

11-17-2012

Couple it with the refinement of the system for optimum effectiveness.

http://na.leagueoflegends.com/board/...9#post31519369


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Nomsumer

Senior Member

11-17-2012

And thanks again for working to make the game even more enjoyable on average. It is appreciated.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Tenshinmon

Member

11-17-2012



I didn't understand a word of what he said but basically:

Give people with honor more ip and people start acting like decent human beings more.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Nomsumer

Senior Member

11-17-2012

Sorry about that, the disclaimer for my speech tendencies is in the other link


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Nomsumer

Senior Member

11-17-2012

Would be interested in feedback or either thread. I think the potential rewards to not just the community but also for Riot are huge in making the Honor System a stong motivational force within League of Legends. I believe the business gains for Riot would be massive and the implimentation can't be any more difficult than modifications they make quite regularely.

Additionally the only potential financial risk to Riot is for people who spend money on IP boosts, pages and or outright RP champion purchases. I would contend that the people who make these purchases (having been one in the past) will still make them even if they are receiving additional Honor IP per round or however implimented. IP boosts are % based, now when coupled with good behavior one can gain IP faster than ever which is good in a game with so much to collect. Champion purchases with RP will still occur because the same scenario that people are in when they do so now will exist afterwards. Additionally its the simple contemplation "I don't have enough IP to buy and I want Champ now." The fact that the time it would take them to grind out the needed IP is shorter by X (whatever the bonus speeds up IP gains by) will not hinder sales in any noteworthy way. This is proven easily by the fundamental success of F2P models and the psychological triggers that make F2P so powerful.

Yes you could reward in other ways and still increase the Honor Systems influence within the communities minds'. You could also add rewards As Well as this suggestion as one potential flaw is that long time players need less IP compared to players who haven't got all the rune sets and most or all of the champions. Either way it is a comparitively easy thing to code into the game and I give the odds of it not providing the company with FAR greater financial gains than loss over time extremely unlikely.

This idea makes so much sense to your companies sustainability and profit that I will be quite surprised if it is not applied. I don't mean this as some silly threat but if you don't use it I'm sure eventual potential competition will. All that is required is a community size and enough overhead capital to not be intimidated by the minimal "loss".

I could be wrong absolutely, I would love to hear the critical flaw in this. Excluding the obvious "They don't Have to do it." Please spare me that one.