Let's talk about Champ Select

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

BeelzeBuff

Senior Member

03-13-2013

A few things:

#1: Glad to see so many Rioters talking with the community on this.

#2: The "vote-kick" system is a great idea, and as long as it takes 4 votes and takes away a small amount of LP (3 or so, like dodging) from the "toxic" player, then I'm fine with it. Why do we need the LP penalty? So people don't use vote-kick as an alternative to dodging.

Scary thing is though, people will still use vote-kick as an alternative to dodging, now that I think about it. Someone will get scared, pick a scapegoat, and start a vote. And if the lobby is bad enough, others will follow. So maybe vote-kick is a bad idea. If I had to choose, I'd say leave that out.

#3: Queuing for roles is a GREAT idea, but cements the meta.

Unless, of course, you make the "roles" more abstract than "ADC, support, etc"

Solo Lane #1 (top)
Solo Lane #2 (mid)
Solo Lane #3 (adc)
Jungle (duh)
Freelance (duo lane, roamer, double jungle, etc)

This is basically just a list of roles that call the 4 sources of gold income. Top, mid, bot, and the jungle. The last pick, Freelance, gets his gold passively or shares with someone. Those are the facts. There are only 4 gold inputs, and 5 roles.

#4: Find out which roles people queue for most.
If 90% of people queue for Solo lane 1 and 1% queue for Freelance (exaggerated, but hey) then make people in Solo Lane 1 get a 50% reduction in IP gained, and people in Freelance get a 200% increase in IP gained.

People need an incentive to play the less queued roles (support comes to mind). This would be something. Other ideas/input appreciated.

ON A PERSONAL NOTE: The scenario you detailed in your first post really hit home Lyte. I'm a support main, but I have a ton of fun in mid and top. And I do very well (one notable exception this season...). Sometimes I want to play in another lane, just one place gets boring. But it is VERY RARE (1/20 or so) that I get to go into another lane without being a jerk in champ select. I'd rather just sit back, not say anything, and support. (Thank god for Thresh, or I'd be pretty sick of LoL by now)


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

RadiantLuna

Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by davin View Post
Splitting the queues based on that point of order probably isn't the best solution, as you'd be splitting playerbases. More likely we just want to find a set of solutions that eases the race-condition burden and allows players to build confidence in the team they're forming. Right now champ select is a bit stressful, as you're trying to get information from four people in order to form something that will allow you to succeed. Within a very small time-frame.

That's further complicated by people thinking they're better than the other players in the queue. Dunning-Kruger manifests relatively consistently. For example, we've been doing player behavior perception surveys for some time now. On those surveys, players are much more likely to suggest they very rarely make mistakes that cost the game while other players are doing so much more frequently. On a five-point frequency scale, "my mistakes cost the game" clocks in at a full point above "another player's mistakes cost the game". It can't really be the case that every respondent only rarely costs the game while a given other player frequently does.

That's not an unexpected result, and doesn't mean people are bad or dumb for thinking it. It's just a common bias that humans experience (myself included!). But it does point at one reason why, regardless of the ruleset imposed for picking champions, there will be tensions resulting from a lack of knowledge about what is about to happen (and a lack of clarity around your teammates).
This is a little confusing, isn't it more likely that in almost everyone's cases their teammates will make more game costing mistakes than they will? This is because there is only 1 of the player in question and 4 teammates (usually) each game- your teammates are also far more likely to make plays that win the game.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

The Grav3mind

Junior Member

03-13-2013

Select one role you DON'T want to play, and get queued up with at least 3 other summoners who DO have that role (or rather dont share the same unwanted role) E.G.

Sum1: Support
Sum2: Jungle
Sum3: Support
Sum4: Mid
Sum5: Jungle

This team would then be:

Sum1: Top
Sum2: Mid
Sum3: Jungle
Sum4: Support
Sum5: Carry

Essentially by choosing one role you don't want you are ensured that you don't have to play it, but you will have to play one of the other 4. This makes the most sense to me....and could probably be tweaked to work even better.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Whist

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

Senior Member

03-13-2013

The only problem with the dungeon finder system is it makes it very hard for new metas to emerge.

If there's ALWAYS a support/tank role that everybody can tack the "hey you buy us all wards" job then how could we ever end up with a double bruiser bottom meta where you just kick the **** out of their ADC and support and then everybody else in the game just mans up and buys wards when needed?

Obviously, premade games will make this possible, but we'll never have more acceptable play styles as teams if you're always forced to have certain roles.

One of the things that is becomming more and more of a problem is that it feels there is no more "**** well let's make this weird comp work" games where you find out awesome combinations.

It's always "NO YOU ARE SUPPORT WE NEED A SUPPORT. NO WE NEED JUNGLE" there's no room for finding out new strategies.

We need a way to promote playing more than just bruiser top, ap mid, jungle, support, adc structured teams. We need to promote the idea that it's okay to run double bruiser bottom, adc mid, ect.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

wtvdd

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

Senior Member

03-13-2013

What about entering champion select message? Something you want to say like 'I enjoy playing mid and jungle' so your teammates can know from the start?
Or something like 20 seconds before you can pick any champions?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Asguardlol

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

Junior Member

03-13-2013

1) Being able to kick a player who is toxic in the lobby is probably the most effective way to deal with a toxic player in the lobby. This is purely based on the fact in how you are meeting other players since you have very little control over who you decide to interact with since you are forced into playing with them. (Do not let this be a normal queue feature otherwise pre-mades can easily abuse this)

2) As a solution to normal ranked queue, I don't see this as a good solution. You would run into the issues that WoW has were many people want to queue for specific roles which would cause long queue times for some roles and shorter ones for others. People would abuse this by queuing for support or a short time roles just to play another role. So it would not solve anything.

A better solution than this would to make it easier for players to find others to play with in a ranked 5s team. To solve many of these issues, I think putting more focus into people playing ranked 5s rather than single queuing would be the best way to cause fewer problems. The problem that arises in solo queue is that you have conflicting personalities and although the same issues arise in ranked 5s, people have much more control over who they play with.

Giving more rewards in ranked 5s as well as making it easier to find people to play with would make it more popular and cause fewer problems with randoms but allow people to work out problems with their team and go to a new one if necessary much like how arena works in WoW. For rewards, you would need to get people to play as well as get them to continue playing ranked 5s. To accomplish this, introducing a currency that can only be obtained from ranked 5s that would be able to buy certain skins would be the best solution. I'll call the currency Legend Points or LP. There would be a cap per week on LP and the higher your rating the larger the cap would be, much like how arena points work in WoW. This would keep people playing as well as introducing skins at the end of the season for certain ratings in ranked 5s.

The main issue that I see restricting more people from playing 5s is the social aspect that games like WoW have where you can easily find people to play with since people taking the initiative to play arena or ranked 5s are much less likely to troll or be negative and can be easily replaced if you feel they are not performing or they are too negative to fit in with your team. Increasing the popularity in ranked 5s would go a long way in improving how much of the player base enjoys the game and hopefully would encourage people to try their best in ranked games in order to find people who would want them on a team.

3) Making a Prisoner’s Island would not solve many issues. It would not help in the short team such as in champion select and it would not help in the long term since you are putting that person in a negative environment and not allowing them to improve but rather encouraging them to continue their negative attitude. Another problem that arises that even if a player is positive in this terrible environment, getting out of it would be a rather difficult task.

TL;DR: Allowing players to kick someone from the lobby would provide the best way to solve the issues due to how champion select is currently set up. Making ranked 5s more popular by giving rewards based on rank or some other incentive and making it easier for people to find a team for ranked 5s would be the best overall solution.

Although increasing the popularity of ranked 5s does not directly solve the solution of solo queue, it would increase the overall fun from the game and decrease much of the negative attitude that arises from people playing with randoms.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Jtylerg

Member

03-13-2013

Perhaps instead of draft pick in ranked games being the way that it is, each team has a minute (or two, depending on what you guys think is best) where everyone picks their champs and locks them in. Then, in the next stage of champ select, If a player picked something that you would consider "trolling" each team can vote to kick that player. If all four teammates vote to pick, that person is forced to "dodge" without loss of LP, but a short 1 minute or so time penalty. (so they cant queue with the same players)


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

InertBlowfish

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by InertBlowfish View Post
Okay, let's break this down like some ghetto rapper.

Option 1)
Pros: Avoid angry players, avoid blatant trolls, will encourage a lot of communication
Cons: Easily abused to 'dodge' a game by picking on one player and kicking them. It will be hard to play a non-standard team comp.

Conclusion: I think this system should be coupled with another system to make it viable (such as option 2) or else you will be taking from Peter, and giving to Paul (the power to troll, that is). Also, you're only avoiding the problem by kicking them and not destroying the roots.

Option 2)
Pros: Get the role you desire 99% of the time. Never have to be forced to play something you're bad at. Could, potentially give a more accurate reading of skill level.
Cons: System can easily be trolled by picking support as your role and getting insta queue, only to lock any other champ. Longer queues if you only were to pick a combo of ADC/APC or similar.

Conclusion: I think this could work if coupled with option 1 to get rid of the blatant trolls who queue and then don't pick to match their role. If you were to only play your desired role that you're good at, you could see an inflation of elo; I'm not sure if that's a pro or a con but I thought I should include it.

Option 3) I'm not going to make a comment on this, as I am completely bias against the Tribunal. I haven't been banned, but I just don't like the system. I'm a hippie like that.

I honestly think for normal queues, these systems aren't necessary as it's a more casual environment; putting in so many measures just to start a casual game is going to severely affect accessibility.

Having a couple of extra steps for people who play ranked and are playing seriously is not a problem.
I hate to quote myself, but I would like to add to this.

What about a way to stay with the same team you just had for a game or two after your first game? That'd be a fun feature. It'd be similar to Halo matchmaking in the lower tiers of play (bronze through to gold).

I'm sure everyone's had a game where you have just synergised with your team and it is hella fun and you just want to play on.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

SlightlySuicidal

Member

03-13-2013

Quote:
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?
1) That's reasonable as long as there's the following stipulations:
Limit the number of votes that a player is allowed to initiate per number of lobbies (or day)
Only a 4 out of 5 vote (or 3 out of 4 with a duo queue vote counting as 1) are enough to kick the player

A /roll 1-100 function can be implemented in the lobby to solve any disputes beyond that.

2) No, please no. Look, the MOBA game genre is fun despite only having 1 map because at least in theory no two games are the same. There's different matchups, different things that come up in game, etc. If you want to run a kill lane bot then go for it. If you want to double jungle or send 2 top vs a notoriously bad 1v2 laner (garen anyone?) then you can do it. Whoever queues up for support will automatically be expected to 0 cs. You'll get even more of the same bland matchups game in and game out. You WILL lose players. A lot of them.

3) Would be funny but wouldn't solve anything.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

davin

Senior User Researcher

03-13-2013
13 of 55 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zivstatic View Post
I get what you are saying. But why couldn't we simplify it a bit and just go with queue for a lane. Example I queue for mid, I can play whatever champ I want mage, bruiser, assassin but everyone knows that I am taking that champ mid. You guys don't want to force a meta. I get that. But I think for the lower tiers this will solve a lot of problems.
How do you ensure that the people you are teamed with are fine with what you're taking? Not everyone may want an assassin mid, and could get annoyed if the "Lane Chooser" queue gives them a "bad" result.

Though, the counterpoint is that from research we actually know that in general players just want a viable team, period, and that the standard meta isn't really the only thing that determines if they're happy with a lineup. And that's especially true at less intense tiers of play, as you suggest.