What should Riot do about Free Champion Week

Keep the Free Week Champion count at 10 2,455 26.89%
Change the Free Week Champion count to 15 3,160 34.61%
Change the Free Week Champion count to 20 953 10.44%
Change the Free Week Champion count to something 20+ 398 4.36%
Make all 450s free permanently, in addition to the current Free Champion Week System 3,729 40.84%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 9131. You may not vote on this poll

Revising the Free Champion Week Concept

Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

alsowikk

Senior Member

06-05-2012

I'm personally an advocate for the hybrid 450 option(actually proposed it before, but never this eloquently). At this point we've breached 100 champions. We can only have 10% of the roster for free down from the original 25%. Along with that we have seen a steady increase in the champion ip price over time(so we're more reliant on free weeks). This...isn't such a good combo.

The current free system also puts in alot of repeats so it's much more common to see champions like ashe and yi free then someone like corki or fiora. Certain champions are almost free every other week(ashe and yi). So what better way to free up current slots and get some player goodwill then riot granting us the 450 ip champions for free?

(ok here's when I get crazy and ask for more then riot will ever give me to be honest) :However, this is not enough. It will free up only a small part of the free week roster and it won't fix how long it will still take to get to all champions(ten weeks before repeats). So I'd either recommend adding two more champions to the rotation or five more. The reason I"m going with the relatively small number is so that we could "reserve" a few slotts for more challenging champions or champions who have been locked out of the schedule for longer amounts of time.

Lastly riot, yes I'm adressing you guys directly, you still owe us for the 2 million likes on facebook. Why not kill two birds with one stone and give us a nice kickback for being loyal fans?

Last thing, sorry for the overuse of (). I just use them for sidenoting stuff(feel free to upvote this comment, you know you want to).


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dorryza

Senior Member

06-05-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by alsowikk View Post
I'm personally an advocate for the hybrid 450 option(actually proposed it to him ). At this point we've breached 100 champions. We can only have 10% of the roster for free down from the original 25%. Along with that we have seen a steady increase in the champion ip price over time(so we're more reliant on free weeks). This...isn't such a good combo.

The current free system also puts in alot of repeats so it's much more common to see champions like ashe and yi free then someone like corki or fiora. Certain champions are almost free every other week(ashe and yi). So what better way to free up current slots and get some player goodwill then riot granting us the 450 ip champions for free?

However, this is not enough. It will free up only a small part of the free week roster and it won't fix how long it will still take to get to all champions(ten weeks before repeats). So I'd either recommend adding two more champions to the rotation or five more. The reason I"m going with the relatively small number is so that we could "reserve" a few slotts for more challenging champions or champions who have been locked out of the schedule for longer amounts of time.

Lastly riot, yes I'm adressing you guys directly, you still owe us for the 2 million likes on facebook. Why not kill two birds with one stone and give us a nice kickback for being loyal fans?

Last thing, sorry for the overuse of (). I just use them for sidenoting stuff(feel free to upvote this comment, you know you want to).
^- this

Just make sure you don't get too greedy though. We should stick with one step at a time, before asking for another, you know?


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

alsowikk

Senior Member

06-05-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dorryza View Post
^- this
Agreed...


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

alsowikk

Senior Member

06-05-2012

I'm not the TC so I don't really have much say, but all of the guys voting for keeping it the way it is. Can any of you guys actually post in the thread? It'd be nice to hear why you're all voting this way.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Teraxe

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

Senior Member

06-05-2012

I would like to see a 5 + 5 done... they do 5 free week champs, then they do 5 unowned champs, meaning the game will randomly select 5 champs that you don't own that you can play. I am sick of getting only champs I already own for free.


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dorryza

Senior Member

06-05-2012

I believe the argument is that there will be so much variety, that people won't buy champions anymore period. Now, that's a perfectly valid opinion. I might not agree with it, but it's valid, and they're welcome to say that. I mean, what kind of a discussion would this be if the opposing side wasn't able to express their views?

Won't stop me from still trying to convince you though =P

Even if we raise the bar to only 15 champs per week, it would take 7 weeks to play them all. That means that at every given time, you only have a 1/7 chance of playing a specific person. That means that if you really want to play a specific type, such as AD carry, you will need to master 7 different carries in order to get the same results as playing just one. And that's not including the 4 other main positions that have to be filled. If you multiply them all up, you will need to have to master 35 different champions in order to fill in any given position at any given time due to only the free week. That's not very viable is it? It's much simpler to just buy some champions. The expanded Free Week is only so you can decide easier what champions you want to buy.

And may I go back to my samples metaphor here? The Free Week is just like samples- you taste each sample to decide which one you like the best, then you buy the full thing. Except here, you try the champion, realize you enjoy playing him/her/it, then buy him/her/it. And by saying that there is too much variation, and people won't buy anyone, firstly you can't use Free Champs in ranked games, shutting out a massive amount of potential play for you if you don't buy anyone. Also, you don't see people getting full meals off of grocery store samples, do you? In the same way, no one will get the full enjoyment out of this game without buying anyone and really getting good at them.

Actually, because more people are trying more champions and are therefore there are more people happening to try out champions they will like and buy, in the end, there will actually be more champion sales for Riot, I believe.

This, again, is simply my opinion.

-Dorryza


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

alsowikk

Senior Member

06-05-2012

Quote:
Originally Posted by Teraxe View Post
I would like to see a 5 + 5 done... they do 5 free week champs, then they do 5 unowned champs, meaning the game will randomly select 5 champs that you don't own that you can play. I am sick of getting only champs I already own for free.
Ok just saying that it still slows down the process even more. Since riot wants to gurantee a champion for each role is available to us(jungle, solo top, ap mid, support bottom, ranged carry) it means that now they have to be absolutely tyranical on the five champions they choose to implement.

That and the "random champions" besides possibly turning up poor combo's of champions to fill roles(redundant playstyles), would be fustrating for everyone to have different pick potential and would have to include champions who riot tends to keep out of the rotation due to difficulty to play or counter or due to being recently released(twitch and eve for instance)


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Dorryza

Senior Member

06-05-2012

@Teraxe: All that does is make it so you don't need to buy all the champs, just 5 less than the total. Plus the fact that the logistics of that would be next to impossible.
The Free Champion Week system has several goals. Yes, your method would allow us to try new champions more frequently, but Riot also has other goals- to allow New Players 'easy' champions to play around with to learn the game. Therefore, the 5 that Riot selects will always be the 'easy' ones- which I'm assuming you already have. This would only compound the problem, because then Riot would get massive amounts of q.q for choosing only 'easy' champions, rather than choosing half of the roster to be 'easy' champions.

Plus, it wouldn't be fair- everyone needs to have the same free week. It's just not fair otherwise to people who get 'bad' champions.

-Dorryza


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

alsowikk

Senior Member

06-05-2012

Can't let this die sooooooo bump


Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.

Crownface

Senior Member

06-05-2012

The current free week system works just fine.

The problem isn't the number of champions that are free, it's the constant recurrence of some champions (Graves, Ashe, Cait, Alistar, etc.), while others only show up once or twice a year.

There just needs to be a coherent system that ensures variety; the same champion should never show up a week after their free week ends.