Let's talk about Champ Select

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

Unbeatabledeath

Senior Member

03-13-2013

can we also not get teammates that we ignored????????? i hate it when i keep getting toxic people again when i ignored them already specially since it makes me more toxic........


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Lyte

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

Lead Social Systems Designer

Follow RiotLyte on Twitter

03-13-2013
43 of 55 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by SwiftSwrd View Post
My largest concern here is I've witnessed and been victim to "I don't like that champion so I'm gonna ban them so you can't play them" a fair number of times. Even worse, if there was argument over say, who gets to jungle - and the 2 arguing banned each others desired jungler... I could see many such toxic scenarios popping up.

I was gonna post this exact suggestion.
There definitely have been cases where Captains have banned champions to spite a teammate; however, would this behavior really continue if they knew that every teammate in the lobby also had an opportunity to ban a champion he would play?

It's an interesting philosophical debate on what happens when 1 person has all the power versus when you distribute the power over 5 people.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

M Brozy

Junior Member

03-13-2013

Pros:
#1 Can work in solo queue as everyone besides the troll want him gone
#2 Easy navigation and less confliction with others when selecting a specific "role"
#3 Really good idea in its self

Cons:
#1 It can be abused by premades for example 4 people in a premade dont like the 1 not premade so they vote to kick him (unless these ideas r just going to be implemented in soloQ)

#2 What happens when the shifts of Meta changes probably, when there is no support or jungler anymore, would riot have to implement a new system to accommodate each meta change?

#3


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

YokoZar

Member

03-13-2013

What if players picked their champions before going into solo queue, were divided into groups of 10, then two team captains were randomly chosen to select their team from the existing champions middle-school-sports-style, one at a time?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Balatee

Senior Member

03-13-2013

@Lyte have you considered putting options in champ select for players to check like

next to each teammate:
[x] i would petition to votekick this summoner if i could

somewhere
[x] i would jump this queue if i could without penalty

store this somewhere with win/loss, endgame stats, and chat log

just to get more info, do it for like a day and take a sample


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Brenin Lieuwd

Junior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by davin View Post
It's a pretty drastic shift to how people currently think about the game, but it is a reflection of how the game mechanics influence behavior. Freelancer is a pretty dope name for a support However, I'm not sure how much people would accept a Freelancer who is rolling around as a double-jungle gold-absorber. It gets back to the issue of whatever you do, the team has to be ok with it too. Since it's not only about your choice, it's about the four other player's desires and expectations.
I LOVE the idea of the WOW jungle finder, and I also love idea of the freelancer. It helps keep creativity open by providing at least the expectation that whoever is in that could do more then one thing. As always, communication with your team is important, but if someone wants to play Roaming Taric, they should be able too without flaming. Finally, you should be able to select more then one role when you que. Say, on your summoner profile, you click what roles you want to play, and you get one of those roles at random. If you only play top, it may take a bit of time to match you then the person who plays mid or top. Jungle or support players will probably be able to find games faster, and nobody will find a game faster then the player who picks all 5 roles.

It may take a bit longer to find games, but I find this to be a positive - if someone wants to play faster, the best course is to up their skills in all roles and be flexible at champ select - which cuts down on the toxic problem anyway.

An additional point I'd like to mention is that teams are going to do what they want. If the entire team decides to just push mid all game, there isn't anyone stopping them - this is just in champ select. If a team decides in game to lane swap, that's fine. But the rolefinder at least gives you a basic framework that allows people to play the roles they want to play. If someone deviates drastically from the framework, and the rest of the team does not go along with the deviant, and as a result of said deviance loses the game, they'll probably report the player for trolling - which is fine.

Overall, I think it's a great solution. Having said that, I have NO IDEA how crunchy it would be, bandwidth/datawise...but the plusses outweigh the minuses, IMO.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Shosuko

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

Senior Member

03-13-2013

I'm glad you're looking into this Lyte. You and your team are an amazing set up of Reds that I can respect and trust.

My opinions on the context out side of work
- recently I've been playing another MOBA called Guardians of Middle Earth. This moba is console exclusive, and as such feeds much more to the casual crowd. This game offers a que type of 1 lane, and 3 lane. When I play this game I often que for the 1 lane as I'm typically looking for a more relaxed game.

What makes 1 lane relaxed is that there aren't jungle buffs or gank trails to watch for. Warding isn't needed, and I'm available for every team fight. There are a whole slew of new "op" champs, but there is also the flexibility to bring ANYTHING to the table and play well. While many players would pick up ap nid, many would go into a 1 lane ready to play with and against anything.

The forums have called for ARAM matchmaking, and I don't think I like that idea. I see this twisted perversion of ARAM where people have accounts specifically for ARAM with their champs basically pre-selected, with only free-week liabilities... However I do think there is a great amount of room for simple 1 lane que. This game play would obviously fill the back burner of the player base, attracting people who want to play a game without the stress (or time length) of a full game.

GoME also presents another play option geared towards casuals which is a time limited game. Your que options are for "battlegrounds" and "elite battlegrounds." Battlegrounds matches can include bots if there aren't enough players, and is capped at 20 minutes, win or lose. Every kill is worth 10 points, every tower worth 50, fb worth an extra 1. At 20 minutes if a team hasn't won, it's decided by points and everyone goes their separate ways. Elite battlegrounds is player only, no time limit.

Obviously LoL can't straight adapt these features into this game. The game play isn't based on 20 minutes of action the way GoME is... But I think some of these techniques to create a less competitive option for people who specifically do NOT want a competitive game at that time (such as your example, I just got home from work, I want to play annie) can be brought across.

Definitely I think creating 1 lane matchmaking LoL can do. Just relieving the stress of wards, ganks, jungle times, team fights ect would be enough. If everyone had every player in every fight things would at least seem more fair where a 3 lane is gank heavy, and a jungler could ignore a lane entirely creating the situations which feed these troll behaviors.

Further perhaps changing the blind pick normals to a time limit of 40 minutes would also help. Many times the biggest trolls are the 2 votes to not surrender in a game that is pretty much lost. I'm all for fighting till the bitter end, when I'm feeling competitive... But when the team comp is obviously wrong, or the players aren't getting along, allowing this troll game continue can be a great enforcement that next game I should be heavy handed in champ select before the game starts. Where a limit of time is in play I would think even if I'm stuck with a jungler that ignores me, at least I know the end is coming. This troll session will not suck away a minute of my life more than the game allows.

This is all geared towards the casual player and the context of "I just got home from work, I'm stressed, I wanna be Annie"
On a personal note, I often am just home from work, stressed out, and want to play Annie. I actually own every annie skin, but have only been able to play new goth annie and chinese new years annie once each. Annie isn't an easy champ to get as I've got to secure both the role of mid, and the team accepting my choice of annie (not the strongest mid) before I can enjoy. I won't play bot games because they are too simple, I'm not afraid of pvp, I just want the game toned down so I don't have to worry about team comp, wards, jungle paths, who's fed and who's starved, last hitting ect for when I want to play casual.

So far for this (and my match history shows) my options have been to play ARAM (where I'm still rarely annie, although the games are much lower stress) or play GoME (where I'm still not annie, but the game is casual) With 1 lane match making I could que up without going straight bots and enjoy a game of league.

For the competitive players -> the solutions have to differ. I think creating a vtk option isn't bad, especially for ranked. Have it be 100% of the players agree though, so if a person is vtk everyone who isn't them or their que partner will have to vote yes to drop the game. I feel this is fair as that many people believing 1 person is a problem likely means they are a problem. There is a certain amount of trolling which could come from this, but it would take more than 1 duo que to force the vtk to go through, so it would at least be spontaneous rather than re-conceived "if you don't sup I'll vtk"

Another option would be to give some relevant information to the players. Perhaps allow a players stats to be quickly viewable, such as their win rates with their best 3 champs (as the profile shows) so if someone really is an annie main with spectacular results the other players can at least get some verification for this without loading lolking and losing que time.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Trainridewithme

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

Junior Member

03-13-2013

What if, we use all the system together? hear me out, Lets have another point system on how well they do on the roles, for eg I have 26 points on adc and 100 points on AP Mid ( cap is 200 ) this shows how good I am at a particular lane. When the que is setup we are taken to a room with 2mins strategy discussion and role planning, during that players are allowed to switch role, imagine someone with 20 points picked adc with a different player who has picked AP mid but has 16 points but has 170 points on adc and the 20 points player has 120 on AP mid. During the discussion if everyone is alright with it or if someone QQ's the people in the room can votekick on him. If majority does'nt kick then well suck it up. you cant please yourself with everything. Players can switch roles in the game . THIS WILL REDUCE TOXICITYDHAFH ( cant spell) and everyone will be happy.



ALSO I DONT JUST MEAN THAT WE CAN SWITCH ROLE IN THE LOBBY, AS IN WE CAN VOTE TO SWITCH ROLE WHILE 'IN-GAME' AS my point system depicts. If the player does bad in mid he can switch with the person who has a good point system on mid champions. ( A vote on the team while ingame) Im sure thats no trouble for you ( also you can still switch during the lobby) ( also to switch while in game tthe player of the bad lane must also agree to switch) again I will tell you, I was explaining this to my friends and they took awhile to understand so I will explain again! In the game the player with 26 points on adc picks mid syndra and is feeding 0/2 in lets say 8mins of the game, he/she wans to switch role to the player with 120 points on mid ( im sure if he wants to win he will switch ) a vote will be casted to wether or not if he/she should switch champion.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Lyte

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

Lead Social Systems Designer

Follow RiotLyte on Twitter

03-13-2013
44 of 55 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Extra Pistol View Post
This is my largest concern- alleviating the time pressure. Two propositions that are not mutually exclusive-

Proposition One:
  • Players may optionally add up to three tags when queuing in ranked
  • Type A tags are "I would like to X". These tags are Blue.
  • Type B tags are "I cannot X". These tags are Red.
  • X= the relevant champion store tags (not stealth, melee, ranged, recommended) as well as lanes (Top, Mid, Bottom, Jungle)
  • These are shown next to a player in champion select (see mockup attachment)
  • These do not influence who you matchmake with

TL;DR:
Three tags allows you to express any preference combination as far as lanes go. Can do anything but support? Red tag support. Want to play an assassin mid? Blue Assassin Blue Mid. It's flexible but still clear- not necessarily adhering to any META. With preferences already made clear, role deduction can begin and encompass the majority of chat.

Proposition Two:
  • Non-captains may right-click champions on the ban panel, presented with two options: "request" and "ban".
  • Suggested bans are highlighed with a red border, requested champions are highlighted blue.
  • A small number shows the number of times a ban has been suggested to indicate bans that multiple players agree with.

TL;DR:
Removes ambiguity of players that just say champ names at the ban phase I.E. "shyvana" = shyvana ban or do you want shyvana picked? In either case the wrong choice causes breakdowns in communication.

While they don't necessary address the external issues at hand (players having a bad day) it does alleviate issues in game, hasten communication, and allow for players to clearly voice what they are and are not comfortable with.
Nice mock-up. I've talked about this idea in this thread, and believe this may streamline communications about role preferences immediately on entering the lobby. Would it reduce arguments between players who have the same "top" choice though?

Also, I noticed that you're mixing roles with lanes. Do players care about where they play, or what position on the team they fill?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

IS149080d6605e20d28653a

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
Let's say that we don't care about improving a player's behavior.

In this scenario, players are entering Prisoner's Island, getting frustrated and making smurf accounts and continue ruining thousands of games.

What have we solved?
Just limit smurfing.
And magically you already salved issue with people not caring about bans and tribunal. becouse while banned they cant smurf !