Let's talk about Champ Select

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

Faemles

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Ok im getting the feeling that Riot doesn't like any of these ideas as you guys have had reasons they are not a good thing to implement. All I know is something needs to change. What other or variations of these ideas have you guys been throwing around.

I personally like the idea for queing for certain rolls as long as i can pick multiple rolls/all of them. I do think if you go in this direction you will need to also add the kick option as it opens a whole new way tp troll in matchmaking like queing up for adc and picking evelynn or something like that.

About the meta being cemented I dont think thats such a big problem in solo/duo que as i cant remember the last time anyone seriously broke the meta in a laneing sense (beside adc/support top)you could also offer the option to que up normally.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Proto Waffles

Senior Member

03-13-2013

just wanna say
if you queue up for a specific role, you will extend queue times at lower elo's quite a bit. nobody at the lower elos wants to play support, and rarely do you see junglers at the lower elos either.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Elliot

Senior Member

03-13-2013

Suggestion:

Similar to the Runepages and masteries, could we have a Pre-Queue interface where teammates select and choose the bans/picks they would choose beforehand, and an interface during queue which would show your teammates top picks, and bans? This would help show who would like to go where, and suggested bans which would benefit each player. If the team captain sees this page, he can deduce that 4/5 players want a specific ban. This would also eliminate the need of the team captain from asking his/her teammates what bans they would like (takes a long time to ask and react).


Will probably edit


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

8carpileup

Junior Member

03-13-2013

I find when i queue one of the biggest problems is theres always 1 or 2 people who say nothing until the last second about what they want to play.
What if before you queue you could chose your prefered role(s) and champion(s) so that when you enter champ-select you can see at a glance roughly what your team looks like right off the bat.
I dont mind playing support, I enjoy it very much. But some days I just wanna go mid and blow people up or gank like a mad man from the jungle.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Arcane Ezreal

Senior Member

03-13-2013

I think you should have the Vote kick plus an extra stage before banning "In draft" called Discussion, it's where we get 3minutes or 4 to discuss what roles we do and what our team comp should be like, once everyone locks in to what they decided they go to the banning stage, Also during the Discussion stage let the team look at the enemies available to ban.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Stingers135

Junior Member

03-13-2013

So I'm gonna try and work with you. The key note here is co-operation, right? So let's look at the differences between offline cooperation and online cooperation.

Offline, there are consequences to your actions. People will recognize and remember you for behaving badly.

Online, there are no consequences for your actions. There are millions of people on League, and odds are slim that you'll be matched up with very many people that you've played with again. And even when it happens, odds are slimmer that you even remember you've played with that person before (I pretty much only remember people with weird usernames lol).

This leads to a divide in perceived risk - "Oh, well if I act like a jerk to these guys in champ select, nothing bad can happen to me. Nobody can punch me in the face for acting like a jerk. Nobody can decide they don't want to be around me anymore, we're stuck together until the end where we'll then part ways forever anyway."

If we think of champ select as just another part of the game, during that stage the 4 other members on your team are really your enemies - they are potentially standing in the way of stopping you from getting the role you really want to get. This leads to the evolutionary stable strategy of being an *******. There's no counterplay for it. More often then not, being an ******* leads to increased rewards for the *******. As long as the environment is set up to facilitate this risk/reward imbalance, toxicity in champ select will continue to exist.

So we've identified the problem - imbalanced risk/reward in favor of toxic players getting what they want. To identify the solution, we need to find a task that balanced risk/reward back in favor of non-toxic players, while not giving these toxic players any more tools to avoid having to cooperate.

As has been stated, vote kicking gives power to toxic players as well as normal players. However, the vote kicking system still only gives power to the majority - whether they are "toxic" or "normal" matters not to the system. In this regard, you can consider the vote kicking system a scalar increase in "power" (ability to get the role they desire) for both sides of the spectrum. This does not balance it, however. Being an ******* will still get you what you want if the majority of players will not ally against you. And you can be a normal player and get punished by a majority of toxic players.

The way I see it, in order to give power back to the normals and take some away from the toxics, I would suggest a combination of two things:
1) A tribunal rating system where players more oft reported have a higher tribunal score
2) A FULL switch to a pick-order dominated system. Call order will no longer matter at all. Make it official. And then pick order will be organized by the people with the lowest tribunal score (least reports) on top, and going down from there.

This accomplishes two things.
1) Players who knowingly act in a toxic matter will steadily see themselves fall down in the pick order ladder, meaning they get to play what they want less and less. This will, over time, balance the "power" in selecting your desired role more towards players that get reported less. This seems, to me, to be the desired goal.

I'd love to hear feedback on this, as I think its a somewhat original idea and I can't think of any negatives to this system off the top of my head, other then that people can still choose to ignore the pick order standard and troll and say MID OR FEED and all that. However, over a period of time, as pick order settles into the collective consciousness of the "correct" way to play, and people realize that being an ******* will get them lower on the totem pole, people will adjust their behaviors accordingly.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Fox P McCloud

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

Senior Member

03-13-2013

I personally favor the prisoner island and dungeon finder approach.

While vote-kick can be perfectly legitimate, it can just as easily be abused, especially the if you end up queuing up with the same individuals a lot...plus (more so for normals), it'll be abused by pre-formed teams who will kick you if they don't think you're up to their standards or if you happen to call a role that one of them wanted or you pick someone they wanted to play (but you weren't being disruptive about it).


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

davin

Senior User Researcher

03-13-2013
26 of 55 Riot Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Giga Mode View Post
Davin, I think you're over thinking this.

Assuming a lane-queue system is in place, why would someone be any more unhappy with what champ you select than they would be now?

And if a vote-kick system doesn't exist, and I think this is a good reason why it shouldn't, those unhappy players can't do anything about it to disrupt the game that they can't already do now.

From what I've seen, what specific champ people select isn't even an issue. The issue is people just want to play the lane they're best at. A simple lane queuing system is all we need IMO.
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.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Vertexon

Senior Member

03-13-2013

As a newer player, one of the frustrating things is how to practice to get better at a particular role. In Normals, it's generally a race to see who can copy-paste "mid" or "top" into chat the fastest.

I generally go with the flow and pick whichever lane doesn't get called (usually support or jungle). I enjoy support and don't mind that most of the time. But it's tough to get better at mid or top when someone jams on CTRL+V for those roles during the first millisecond of champion select 75%+ of the time. It would be nice if I could somehow choose an option when I queue up that says "I'm willing to wait an extra five minutes for a lobby where no one is interested in playing mid."


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Harib

Member

03-13-2013

Is inforcing a single meta in soloq actaully a bad thing?

If you're going to do something unorthodox it would probably require quite a bit of coordination and your whole team built around your choise. Which standart solo or duoq cannot pull off. There is a reason why even simple poke-compositions VERY rarely manage to play properly.

If you want new meta strategies there are team battles, aren't there?

If you want a simple "get into the game, play, done and happy" following one meta is the simplest solution. Why reinvent the wheel?

The only problem with dungeon finder would be if the meta actaully started shifting, because during that shift which meta you support "officially"?