Let's talk about Champ Select

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

Giga Mode

Junior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by davin View Post
Well, there's people for whom the big deciding issue is "can I play the champ or role I want" and then there's people for whom the big deciding issue is "does my team comp work?"

The former are happy with any lane/champ/role queuing, I suspect. The latter would still need confidence that they are getting something they want to play with, team-wise.

Add the potential meta-reinforcing nature of a lane/role/gold stream/etc. queue system, and it's an interesting set of issues.
"Does my team comp work" is a completely separate issue from being able to play what lane you want. Frankly, team comp is out the window if you have two people fighting over mid lane and both of them locking in as mid champs anyway out of stubbornness.

Let's get people playing their best lanes first, before worrying about team comp issues.

As far as meta, that doesn't need to be enforced. Because it's already being followed religiously every day as we speak, anyway. Nothing would change. NOT following the current meta during champ select is part of why people dodge (ex. double jungle).

I don't know if maybe you're thinking of a different type of system, but when I say a lane queuing system I definitely am referring to one that follows the current meta (one top, one mid, one jungle, one bot, one support). I separate the two bot players because if you made it possible for two bot, you might get two adcs. So in bot's case, you would queue as either 'bot' or 'support'.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

The Fatalii

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
Just to clear things up, Bronze players are not more likely to be toxic or candidates for Prisoner's Island. Last I checked, toxic behavior has a pretty similar distribution across skill levels with some spikes here and there.
Bs Lyte. FUKN BS

People in bronze in silver will do whatever da fuk they want just cause everyone is to damn afriad of that baddie. So there going to play what they want regardless of whats be taken.

The only solution is a vote kick. Only option that's worth discussing


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

spshooter

Junior Member

03-13-2013

What ends up happening in most champ select screens is people calling out the roles they want to fill: Top, Mid, Jungle, ADC, and Support.

(1) What this boils down to is solo lane (long), solo lane (short), solo jungle, and duo lane (long). Perhaps one way to implement this team finder is to specify the gold/XP stream the player wants to take on and whether or not the player wants to share the lane. If in a non-solo gold/XP stream, allow the player to specify the relative amount of resources desired in the gold stream -- All, Some, None. This allows players to be flexible in their choices while at the same time allowing people to specify the gold stream they prefer.

(2) An additional option available could be for specifying team set-ups (1 solo long lane - all gold, 1 solo short lane - all gold, 1 duo long lane - all/none, 1 jungle - all) with the default being set to "Any" or "Do not care". Since the default does not specify a team set-up, it wouldn't be enforcing a meta. However, players that like to follow the meta can use this filter to help matchmaking.

I can see ways to abuse the system by coordinating very unconventional set-ups so you can be paired with your friends but I think these ideas have potential. (1) basically allows you to set up your preferences for the map rather than roles or champions so it can adapt as the meta changes. If the map changed drastically, it would have to be updated but I think the meta changes are the more primary concern at the moment. (2) allows players to define lane compositions so at least there can be some agreement on that aspect of the meta.

The area this idea fails in is team composition but I don't think there can be a way to do that without defining a meta, especially as new champions or strategies come out that blur the lines of what is considered "okay". Examples: elise support, nasus jungle, blitzcrank top.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

izt

Junior Member

03-13-2013

Now that I think about it, I actually think the champion select does not need changes, but a vote kick would be rather nice indeed.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Killrazor

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post

2) Let's put 10 toxic players together
- In this scenario, do any of the toxic players ever improve their behavior?

A core philosophy on the player behavior team is to make features that help toxic players reform. In many ways, a Prisoner's Island feature encourages the opposite of reform.

Prisoner's Island also creates some pretty weird scenarios for players. When players browse through the Tribunal Ban Inquiries forum, there are numerous players who use excessive verbal abuse and racial slurs in their matches; however, they lack the self-awareness or necessary feedback to understand how negative their behavior is. If these same players are on Prisoner's Island, how many of them would understand why they were there, or how to get out? If players don't believe they deserve to be on Prisoner's Island and every other player there is just a jerkwad, doesn't this encourage them to make new accounts to start over, off Prisoner's Island?

If this scenario happens, what was the point of creating Prisoner's Island?
This is the flaw with LoL... it is a free game, and people can just keep creating new accounts. With a free game that does not require a credit card or some other form of authentication upon account creation, there is really no way to control bad behavior. Maybe lessen it a bit, but it will always be there.

Since your LoL account is not linked to anything, people are free to troll etc all they want with no permanent punishment, as they can just create a new account.

Unlike other services, like Steam, Battle.net, Xbox Live etc, where you can be banned from all your services, banning in LoL is not nearly as affective.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Topagae

Junior Member

03-13-2013

I usually marvel at the emergent game-play/system solutions I find on these forums, but I must say I'm a bit disappointed. I laugh at the post earlier about how Game Designers that play LoL (So many of us do) should work for Riot! Well, time for more free work. I think the first step to this solution could be as easy as adding one line to a few documents, with tiers of more complex systems and enforcement after data collection.

Breaking down the situation:

Don't want to go into it TOO much but for my solution this synopsis should suffice:

We got a mode of game-play where a team captain on both sides bans champions. After banning these champions, players take turns picking champions while forming a strategy for the entire team, often in reaction to the enemy team's choices.

Why this is good: It's a pretty familiar system in many places (Games of course), so people are pretty familiar with the concept. It allows for great flexibility because in essence it's two groups of people formulating and strategizing together against another team in real time. If new champs, new strategies etc are added this system doesn't really care because players are smart enough to change how they pick to fit these new strategies/champs they/their enemies use.

Where it breaks down:
It was brought up earlier that there are differing idealogies in how these strategies are formed along with personal preference (I.E, who gets priority for perceived roles to play, and a whole can of worms on what people WANT to play regardless of what their team wants.) This leads to breakdowns, trolling, raging, and sub-optimal play for variety of reasons.

One line change to start solution:
Summoner's code/Top of Draft pick put the words: Pick order > Call Order, or Call Order > Pick Order. It honestly doesn't matter which, but since Call Order can be disputed, I'd go with Pick order since it can't be disputed (Pick Order is set in stone at the start of the match).

What this does: It removes the big kink in the system (Some folk follow call order, others pick order), that all these big systems are meant to address. It's self correcting because just like the draft system itself, if a new strategy arose that a "WoW Finder" would never handle, the players themselves would simply handle it, just like they have been.

Hypothetical consequences: I think if nothing else this would be great data to mine from because it is in effect, making a call about the one uncertain factor that players have with this system, from which all the conflict is really arising from. I think queue times would go up, and dodges would too, because people would dodge if they REALLY wanted something. But honestly, they're trolling and doing that anyway in many cases. It also has the advantage of being something trivially easy to implement so you could get data to make a better decision faster.

Possible follow-ups: In order to enforce this it is as simple as making it a part of the summoners code, thus if not followed you could be reported. If pre-game chat or just pick order info was able to summoners in the tribunal, this self correcting system (I.E, players in the tribunals could tell from pick order if it was not followed because they are aware of current and infinite # of possible new strategies in the future). Then you'd be teaching players, just like how you don't want them cursing, or you want to encourage teamwork, that you should follow pick order. I think even if this is a poor solution overall, getting everyone on board would definitely remove confusion and alleviate some of this conflict.

Aftermath: While probably not an optimal solution, I think tacking on a lot of patch systems instead of addressing the main problem (People want to follow a certain order of picking, or they want w/e regardless of pick order) can be directly addressed in this way. IT would allow for a greater data set to be mined because right now there is no official ruling in how players are supposed to pick, and it's something that can be implemented (With no enforcement unless put in the tribunal) by simply saying so in the summoner's code.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Lasac

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

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Status Kwoh View Post
I think there are definitely some things here that are interesting to think about that I like. And you're spot on with your cons of this mode. Question is, how bad are these cons? Are they the sort of trade-offs that players would be okay with?
The post you highlighted is interesting to have as it's own queue, it sounds like lots of fun.
But I do not see it as a suitable replacement for existing modes.
That mode could still be improved if team building was more of a focus.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Status Kwoh

Producer

03-13-2013
39 of 55 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Feints View Post
Okay I'm going to post and throw everything with ideas.

Before I'd like to state that I am absolutely loving what the Behavior Team is doing right now and after reading your posts I am convinced you guys are the best.

What I have come up with after reading many of these replies is more emphasis on positivism. The Baron Icon caused a flurry of OMGHOWDOIGETIT reactoins that made me feel special, and a public display of what being positive can bring, i personally say we need more of that in industrial amounts, make everyone see what being a good player can produce! Maximillian Robespierre partially succeeded with the Reign of terror because everyone knew their heads would roll for anything, DO THE OPPOSITE! Make the Reign of Marshmellows and Crotch-thrusting comradery! In all honesty, we've all had our shares of toxicity in games, we've had also bad days and then a single game with a role-playing Gangplank support made us laugh or intestines out and we wishes we could honor that player until he became Riot CEO. Rewarding more and more players for positivity while keeping those prizes exclusive will slowly tilt the scale until ragers and afkers have a rap sheet of sheer social inadequacy, turning them into pariahs.

This would of course change since my musings are rather utopian, but none the less I believe heartily that this is what we need. Same as Dota 2 showcases exceptionally talented players on a weekly basis, we could do that with cheery ones in league, and everyone would thrive for being the happiest ganker alive.

From this Maybe we could stem a Captain's mode that would assign the most honorable, noble and respectable player as the commander giving everyone their role, and only this person would have access to the stats of his team and he would know who is better at what, keeping privacy and aggro to a minimum (ideally). Also, if you want to go bonkers, decide positivity based on the most typed words in chat, you can't go wrong with that, in my eyes the one flaw would be invasion of privacy.

But Robespierre never had a problem with that...
We agree that focusing on positivity and less on punishment is what we should be doing. We've already begun making that shift focusing on features that work more specifically on reform and paths to sportsmanship/positivity for the playerbase.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Shiny Kadabra

Member

03-13-2013

Implementing the WoW dungeon finder queuing system into League would be beyond amazing. Nobody would get stuck with roles they cant play/don't have the runes for. Please put that feature in.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Josephmack

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
We want to take some time today to talk about Champion Select.

1) What are the problems?
2) What are some potential solutions?

The player behavior team has been running research on Champ Select and we agree that Champ Select is currently not a great environment and does not set teams up for success. We’ve all experienced Champ Selects that have erupted in arguments and had that sinking feeling that the game is lost before it even started. In saying this, there are plenty of Champ Select lobbies that are awesome and being positive and cooperative in every lobby does help; however, being positive by itself will not solve the problems in Champ Select and we don’t expect it to.

Solving player behavior problems in League of Legends requires collaboration between us and players and we haven’t done our part in Champ Select yet. As you can imagine, the problems (and any potential solutions) are complicated.

Something we’re seeing in our research is the influence of context.

But you know what?

This player's behavior isn’t toxic. He’s just like any one of us--we all have our bad days.

---

Let’s break down this scenario into some of the problems that we’d like to solve in Champ Select:

1) Real-Life Context | This scenario really illustrates how context outside the game can influence behavior inside the game. Traditionally, game studios don’t design or solve for context. Or can they?

2) In-Game Context | This scenario illustrates the conflict between Pick Order and Call Order. When there are literally no guidelines, at best, half of the players believe in Pick Order and half believe in Call Order—we’ve created a situation where conflicts are expected rather than rare.

3) Time Pressure | From psychology, we know that time pressure sometimes twists context in hostile ways. Players in Champ Select are effectively trying to negotiate with each other over individual goals (i.e, what role I want to play this game) that overlap with team goals (i.e, given this set of teammates, what’s the best strategy for us to win?). Studies suggest that throwing time pressure in there is like adding fuel to the fire—the end result is more disagreements and lower quality of negotiations.

4) Cognitive Biases | Hopefully davin will talk more about this, but people show cognitive bias in many ways. For example, many of us enter Champ Select thinking we are the best at whatever role we want to play—this is statistically impossible; however, there’s no reason to trust any of the strangers in the lobby. This really isn’t the players’ fault, it’s simply being human.

These are some major problems with Champ Select that we’ve identified in our research. So what’s next? A lot of players have suggested the following:

1) Vote Kick | Players want the ability to vote kick toxic players from Champ Select.
2) WoW Dungeon Finder | Players want the ability to queue up for a particular role like “Healer” and “DPS” and placed into a Champ Select with a team
3) Prisoner’s Island | Players want matchmaking to pair toxic players with toxic players, and positive players with positive players.

What are some pros and cons to these ideas? Would they work for League?
I think number 2 would be great (wow dungeon finder). It would be great because then I can play what role I feel like playing, and at the same time, the team I am placed on wouldn't have a problem with it, or less of a problem, should I say. However, let me add this, what might work better would be for the system, match making system, to look at a smi created team comp and say, you know what, a Vigor and a Karthus would really work great with what is already select, then go and find people who have queued up with these champs and place them on the team. It, the mm system, would in effect, based on what champs are already on a team, add to that team champs that would play best together with what has alread been selected. This imo would allow all champs to be played which has always been a problem for me. You see, there are some champs I would love to play, but won't because they are frowned upon, which limits me to playing only what people find acceptable and not what I really want to play, which is a sad thing to say the least.