Let's talk about Champ Select

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

Noraver

Senior Member

03-13-2013

I feel like we should get one free dodge, without an LP loss.
I've had to lose LP recently due to one person (For example) being last pick, and letting it random for them.
"I did it on purpose, I don't want to play support" he said.

The AFK/random boot is a start.
However, I believe a vote/kick should be implemented (3 votes to kick, or duo's can abuse this by not having their friend being booted as the fourth), or something similar to the current game acceptance.

What I mean by that is, a confirmation of if you're there before the game starts.
Just like before we enter Champion Select, we must confirm we're there. If not, we're kicked out of the queue and forced to wait again.

This should happen before the game starts.
It would prevent those AFKers and d/c's to start. I can't tell you how many times someone's just disconnected in champion select, and then never showed up to the game (Or fifteen minutes in) and lost it for us.

People may say they use this time (After picking their champion) to go to the bathroom, get a snack, etc. But I think it's a small price to pay to keep trolls, AFKs, and d/c's out of the games.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

HiddenSpikeTrap

Senior Member

03-13-2013

I think the dungeon finder would be nice, but in turn would result in longer queue times (which people complain about already at times) and would enforce some kind of meta, which I didn't think Riot wanted.

I almost wonder it we could combine these things, not even just do one, although I'm sure they'd want to add only one at a time in order to test how things work.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Fate000

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zalera View Post
Definite potential for abuse in normals with 4man premades, but honestly I think the benefits outweigh the cons. I'd support it.
I'd say disable votekick for 4-man premades in Normals (just 4-man premades) if they are voting to votekick the fifth player. If you have 4 people on your premade, it's likely there's someone willing to take a 5-minute dodge penalty. You lose no LP or promotional series for dodging normals anyways...


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

TheUnburned

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Of all 3 of those methods listed, I think that a vote-kick is the most needed right now. I understand that people don't want vote kick to be used to kick players going against the meta or something like that, but the fact is that if it's UNANIMOUS that the other 4 players on the team don't want to be subjected to playing with that person, they shouldn't have to spend 20 minutes in a game that's not enjoyable or face a dodge penalty.

The fact is this: If there's a dodge penalty, there needs to be a vote kick option. Otherwise you're forcing players to suffer consequences for trolls and non-team-players. They either have to face the dodge penalty, or take up a "don't let the trolls win" mentality and play out the game anyway.

I think role queuing will always be a problem for a game like this, because it's very hard to avoid supporting one team comp over another. Queueing needs to be as vague as possible to allow for unique team compositions.

Although there are some decent ideas on that subject in my thread on the topic here.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Gypsy Hyena

Member

03-13-2013

Solution 2 is horrible, I don't want to see it happen because it enforces the current meta which pushes out uncommon strategies like running tanks in botlane, not to mention most low level players can't jungle (players become more powerful as they gain masteries and runes, but the jungle is just as hard on level 1 players as it is in challanger tier)

Solution 3 I don't see working at all. It'll just make a ghetto of bad players who don't have any incentive to improve, and their attitudes will probably rub off on other players (especially if they're using the same LoL-related news and fan sites). Dota2 has this and their community is a lot worse than LoL's, which is no small feat.

Solution 1 looks like the best of the bunch, I don't have any major problem with it assuming it's implemented correctly. If it's implemented badly it can be horrible, but that's what PBE is for i guess.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

vitalityx3

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
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?
1) Vote Kick
Pros: Will be able to eliminate that one toxic player from the game
Cons: In reality, i think this won't help a lot because toxic players will now be aware that there is a vote kick option thus will stay quiet or pretend to agree w/ other players in pre-game lobby but troll in-game. Another problem is that this might not solve the conflict problem because it's usually two people fighting over a role so the other three players are left to either 1) make a judgment call 2) leave them alone which might instill bitterness inside both players during in-game

EDIT: oh and 4 players might kick a player for choosing an unconventional champion because it doesn't seem favorable with the current team composition or b/c of the fact that their picked champ is not "strong"

2) WoW Dungeon Finder
Pros: People get to play what role they want
Cons: What defines are particular role? Some champions when released, are being played totally different from what they were supposed to be. Also, this system discourages invention of new team comps / lane swaps. so it's basically an unchanging meta.

3) Prisoners Island
Pros: players are not forced to play w/ toxic players
Cons: Where do you draw the line? Some players can have a bad day. How will players who truly want to reform themselves get back to playing with positive players when they are w/ 9 other toxic players every game? How do you expect them to be positive in that scenario?


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
7 of 55 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cether View Post
First idea is how about if we have a good win ration as a certain lane type we can check that. For example if you scroll over a persons name and they have a win % above 60% for certain role, a message besides their name will appear like "Star Jungler" or something. I don't know exactly how you'll determine what role they were playing but lolking does it pretty well so I'm sure you guys can figure out a pretty good system. This would make it so people who call roles that are actually good at them are more inclined to have their team give them to them, provided their team is trying to win (unfortunately a lot of the people who play ranked aren't really trying to win as much as possible).

I support the idea of if you are considered a positive player you are more likely to be grouped with other positive players. I'm not a fan of the "prisoner island" concept, because of what happens when you constantly surround people with other negative people, but making a haven of positive people to play with creates kind of a reward system, where if you're a good guy you're more likely to play with other good guys, and thus you have incentive to be even more of a good guy.

My last idea kind of is an expansion on the first. It would be awesome to be able to click on an icon next to a summoners name and see what their most played champs are. Like top 5. I'm not asking for win %'s because that can create a negative reaction, however, being able to see what a person plays most can give you an idea of what they're good at.
You raise a few interesting points. What's more important to players? Their role (Tank! Support!), their champion (Ashe! Xerath!), or their position (Top! Mid!)?

Regarding showing the top 5 champions stat to players in Champ Select, we're very intentional and deliberate when deciding what stats to show players. If we showed players the top 5 champions, doesn't it create a perception that if the players are not playing one of their most experienced champions that the team is at a disadvantage?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

jordank

Junior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
Vote kick is an interesting idea that has been suggested by players for quite awhile; however, what are some of the goals we'd like to accomplish for Champ Select?

One, we want to encourage cooperation in Champ Select. Two, we want players to have an ability to opt-out if they are 'stuck' with players they perceive are toxic or extremely negative. Vote-kick systems tend to give players an opt-out mechanism; however, they do not encourage cooperation.

In fact, in some scenarios vote-kick systems encourage premade groups to bully the strangers in the lobby into specific roles or champions. Given a scenario with 5 strangers, if 4 strangers happen to agree on roles and the 5th doesn't, the 4 strangers are highly likely to collaborate to kick the 5th. Given a vote-kick system, we are likely to see more disagreements than before, and greatly increase the time it takes to get into a game.
The real problem lies within the game itself, reduce tension in the games. LoL in season 3 is so much more snowbally that ever... I'm in Diamond and literally out of the last 20 games maybe 2 have even been close matches... It gets really stale and frustrating your team steamrolls or gets steamrolled. Players get frustrated and snap because of this problem and it begins a never ending cycle that effects the entire player base and banning players from playing the game is the worse thing you can do. Its not going to change them ever.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Acanthus

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyte View Post
One, we want to encourage cooperation in Champ Select. Two, we want players to have an ability to opt-out if they are 'stuck' with players they perceive are toxic or extremely negative.
Would directly offering an opt-out feature (that would flag the pregame chat for review) be a poor idea? It's the most direct option, and abuse should be able to be caught in "audits" the way false reporting was, right?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Rodbamil

Junior Member

03-13-2013

if you pick #3 you are matching people who have a history of raging (be it once or more) with like minded people. what you would end up with is a downward spiral of hate and rage that would end up getting those players most likely banned. while this might seem a good thing to most people, surely it would serve the comunity better to try correct these people or control them (with options 1 and 2) than just giving up on them. equally if someone had a bad day and ended up in what we can call the 'toxic pool' it would be supprisingly hard to get out of. additionally being stuck in a game for 30 mins or more with 9 people who are very toxic would subtract a lot of the fun that can be had in this game

Edit:
a further idea would be based off of the honour system, there is a large potential for abuse and negative environments for these options but you could have a team captain based on positive play, (leadership honour i guess) who could be in control of the vote kicking.
oh and adding pregame chat to tribunal reports. and some sort of notification if one has been reported so they can be a little more aware of their actions.