Toxic Behavior is RIOT's Fault

First Riot Post
Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Zan Vorez

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Senior Member

02-28-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morello View Post
I don't work on the team, so my opinion is less important on this front, but I don't think I'm up for role-calling. It enforces staleness of compositions (a quality of human behavior instead of actual optimization), and reduces the ability to actually have cooperation and form strategies. Maybe Lyte has different ideas here, but I think it should be possible to enact things, in champion select, that discourage people from being dicks.

Let's say you call and lock mid. Someone else does too. You're both acting in a selfish manner in a team game - either of these people could make a decision to be cooperative two people chose to have a conflict. No one is "entitled" - just don't be a dick. I don't think this should be that hard for anyone who actually believes in cooperating (as opposed to "I'm more important than the other guy and am entitled to play what I want). A person who holds themselves over others will cause conflict. I tend to sidestep this in a vast majority of my games, (on smurfs), by fostering some cooperation.

I'm not saying there's no problem of course, but what of the costs of role-calling? You think people don't want to see off-builds now, imagine when you have to pre-determine your comp. Can you counter-comp or strategize at all now? Just costs to think about.
I'm sorry, but this is a pretty terrible rationalization. Look at all the pro teams and tell me that roll calling is not essential to a functional team. We see loads of creative and adaptive builds from them in order to counter the enemy team. If people were able to safely acquire a role they felt most comfortable in before a game started, it would negate potential conflict. It's not about acting selfish while you should be thinking of your team; quite the opposite actually. Playing your best role is beneficial to the team, and players shouldn't be punished for wanting to do it and being too slow to pick it or lower in the picking order in draft. What do you think would happen if pro players were forced out of their optimal roles in a tournament because one of their teammates felt they could do a better job at it? Chaos would ensue, and it's not because one player is being a dick, but rather because they are trying to do what they feel is best for them individually and for the team as a whole. This is the plight of any game mode where you do NOT have a full pre-made team ready to go in- and let's face it, it's usually pretty hard to get a full team on at the same time, let alone finding one where each member fits into every role. In a game where there tend to be 5 different positions (Top, Mid, Jungle, and 2 Bot) and 5 different players, it just seems entirely irrational to say that each player needs to cooperate with a group of complete strangers to determine who is well suited towards an individual role. Why should a person be forced to play a role they are less geared towards because of poor matchmaking design? The answer to this is obvious; they shouldn't. Plain and simple. I can speak from experience when I say if I don't get top or mid lane the game tends to go sour, and no matter how much I "cooperated" with my teammates to help them get the roles they desired I can't help the team if I'm playing support or jungle (two roles I admittedly suck at spectacularly). In the end, I actually have a better result when I am unyielding in my call and don't cooperate with the team during select to help them get whatever they want. Yes, the game itself is a team game by design but the only person you can really rely on to fulfill a particular role is yourself, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Edit: On thinking about the original post in comparison to Call of Duty, he has a VERY strong point in that a lost game can still be extremely satisfying if you in particular do very well. However, in league, there seems to be absolutely no reward for doing well as an individual. In COD, your KD ratio is a very strong identifier of personal skill, and even if you haven't been winning a majority of games you still feel accomplished for maintaining a very positive ratio. In league, EVERYTHING is reliant on the other 2-4 players on your team, depending on if you're in 3v3 or 5v5. This is unsatisfying by nature, because despite how well you do on your own, your fate in being determined as a skilled player is left up to a majority of strangers. You are the minority on your own and this is inherently frustrating. You can go 20/0/7 and still be incredibly irate when you lose because in the end, that score doesn't matter. Apparently, it matters more that your adc goes 1/10/3, your jungler was 1/0/0, and your support was 4/15/2. When one person is weighted down by the flaws of other players and gets NOTHING as a reward for being exceptional despite this additional difficulty added to the game, the experience becomes negative. Even if a pre-game role caller is not implemented, I feel the game could definitely benefit from making use of that UNTOUCHED achievement section. If you lose a number of games but still do very well on a personal level, there SHOULD be a reward of some sort. A match history of red loss banners makes you feel insignificant and unskilled, while this may not be the case at all. However, if you managed to get an achievement (an icon, a boost, a flat IP reward... whatever is deemed appropriate) in the process, there is likely not going to be a feeling that you just wasted 4 hours of your life for nothing.

Yes, I know achievements are risky because people will attempt to go for them... but it's not hard to create a number of achievements that just happen naturally over the course of many games, regardless of win or loss. Example of a bad achievement: GET A PENTAKILL. Well, everyone wants a pentakill but actively trying to get one is usually a bad thing and can lead to greed throws and the like because it can only be done in one game, rather than over a period of games. However, here's a simple example of a good achievement: Have a positive KDA X# of games. This achievement can be done over time without really thinking about it, and it would STILL feel good to get a notification about it after a loss.

Edit 2: I wholeheartedly agree with this post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Needles K View Post
This is a point that's been made before, but I'm going to try to make it more civilly than most people have:

The trouble with this is that it means dicks get to enjoy the game and considerate players do not. Unless you literally do not care about your role (which is not the case for most people), you are sacrificing your fun for the sake of team cohesion while the more insistent player sacrifices nothing. After a while, it kind of raises the question of why you're playing the game a game where you spend most your time enabling ugly people to have fun instead of having fun yourself. It might indeed be true that you maximize your chances of winning by filling a role, but is that worth it if you don't like what you're doing to win?

So in the end, you create a sort of Prisoner's Dilemma, where you can cooperate by offering to take a role you do not enjoy or betray by trying to force a role you prefer. And just like in the one-round form of the Prisoner's Dilemma, betraying is the dominant strategy (because cooperating opens you up to getting screwed over a lot more than betraying does).

(For the record, I don't have this problem, as I have some champion I enjoy in pretty much any role, so I can almost always fill whatever's needed. But I understand that not everybody is so easy to please, and they're not wrong for having more discriminating tastes.)


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

SC0TT

This user has referred a friend to League of Legends, click for more information

Recruiter

02-28-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Needles K View Post
This is a point that's been made before, but I'm going to try to make it more civilly than most people have:

The trouble with this is that it means dicks get to enjoy the game and considerate players do not. Unless you literally do not care about your role (which is not the case for most people), you are sacrificing your fun for the sake of team cohesion while the more insistent player sacrifices nothing. After a while, it kind of raises the question of why you're playing the game a game where you spend most your time enabling ugly people to have fun instead of having fun yourself. It might indeed be true that you maximize your chances of winning by filling a role, but is that worth it if you don't like what you're doing to win?

So in the end, you create a sort of Prisoner's Dilemma, where you can cooperate by offering to take a role you do not enjoy or betray by trying to force a role you prefer. And just like in the one-round form of the Prisoner's Dilemma, betraying is the dominant strategy (because cooperating opens you up to getting screwed over a lot more than betraying does).

(For the record, I don't have this problem, as I have some champion I enjoy in pretty much any role, so I can almost always fill whatever's needed. But I understand that not everybody is so easy to please, and they're not wrong for having more discriminating tastes.)
Dude. Fukin this. Seriously fukin this. There is no debate.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Morello

Lead Designer

02-28-2013
20 of 25 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesThuy View Post
Morello who is higher up in hierarchy, you or lyte?
Adjacent - he leads behavior, I lead content.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Morello

Lead Designer

02-28-2013
21 of 25 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Calrula View Post
The problem is the mirror image stale map and non static terrain, in my opinion. Talk strategy? Then the playing field should be built in a way that strategy can really matter. Champions should have affinities, where parts of terrain they might have an advantage or disadvantage.

Basically the map is the problem. The map created the "meta" and limits our options and makes the game stale.
I flatly disagree with this. One, the stale meta argument is a red herring from a number of perspectives - current tournaments show a lot of alternate possibilities, lane assignment is like 10% of "meta," but the term has been commandeered to entirely mean lane assignments, and plenty of games have a lot of strategic depth with a single map, like American football.

Additionally, where and how you fight is massively important in League, indicating to me the map has features that effect strategy. I just can't see the correlation you're drawing with the map thing here.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Zergyo

Junior Member

02-28-2013

OP deserves an award, This man makes more sense then any riot employee ever has.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Morello

Lead Designer

02-28-2013
22 of 25 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimieh View Post
No Morello, players already know you always use that argument

When you nerfed tryndamere to the ground when he was arguably strong with the changes to masteries in S2 you used to say: "No, tryndamere is still good because there's a 2600 elo dude that succeeds with him as a jungler" I think it was h4ckerv2 the name

now you do the same to xerath, what about you give factual evidence instead of relying on what pro players pick, because that's all you do.
Factual evidence is that he has a niche pick place at least. I'm not saying "this champion will not need changes," (I think his W still feels klunky) I'm saying the assumption of balance of how many champions they cannot use when they can be used and be successful is off, and players rarely have a broad and complete view.

Just like everyone thinks they're an expert on public policy and business, a lot of people think they're experts on game balance.

A few champions are in a really bad spot, but it's so much a smaller subset than people think. The human behavior factor of "people think this is bad, so it's bad" effects what people use in solo queue far more than balance actually does.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

InertBlowfish

Senior Member

02-28-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morello View Post
Adjacent - he leads behavior, I lead content.
But we all know behavior is a joke, therefore you are senior. :3


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Sajjin

Member

02-28-2013

Champion select still causes more friction than anything else.

Last champion select I got forced into jungle which is not my best role and while I filled it I did not perform well and got yelled at all game.

Its frustrating. Especially when I even said I don't play jungle.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

InertBlowfish

Senior Member

02-28-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Morello View Post
Factual evidence is that he has a niche pick place at least. I'm not saying "this champion will not need changes," (I think his W still feels klunky) I'm saying the assumption of balance of how many champions they cannot use when they can be used and be successful is off, and players rarely have a broad and complete view.

Just like everyone thinks they're an expert on public policy and business, a lot of people think they're experts on game balance.

A few champions are in a really bad spot, but it's so much a smaller subset than people think. The human behavior factor of "people think this is bad, so it's bad" effects what people use in solo queue far more than balance actually does.
Sooo, when are the Akali nerfs?

I've been thinking she's a pain in the ass since S2, but now that you made her passive a given instead of requiring any thought in runing she is running rampant.

It's not so much that she is "op", because she is counter-able, but the fact that she will one rotation most champions at level six feels ridiculous.

Do you know how I think you could make us all feel better about Akali?

Halve the range on her ult.

It is ridiculously massive at the moment considering she can use it three times.

Comparable to, say, Diana's jump or Kha'Zix ult range - those feel balanced.

EDIT: I know Diana's is bigger, but she can only use it once with moonlight.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

atheimetal

Senior Member

02-28-2013

I lol'd at this original post.

"Everything is everyone else's fault"

This is the mindset that everyone has that causes all these problems, now apparently we're going to blame Riot instead of other people though. I bet if everyone took personal responsibility for their decisions and actions in game, we'd see a lot less of everything being described in this thread.

But.... nah, just blame Riot of course.