Originally posted by
Tormentula
stuff like the recent surrender work you can look forward to seeing come through more consistently in the coming months.
This is what urks people though, cause why is the surrender changes higher priority than X? Could we elaborate where something like that falls on the inner tier list of priorities?
Don't get me wrong, it makes perfect sense what you said and these still are features debately important at some point, but we're kinda leaving best judgement in your hands here and I wouldn't call surrender vote's changes top of anyone's list compared to various client issues, egregious hextech/event systems, UI clarity, spectator, etc.
There's lots of stuff to consider when prioritizing but a simple framework is value vs. cost. How valuable is it to do a thing (there's a lot to unpack there) vs. how expensive is it and what else could we be doing with those people/resources at any time. This was a lower value (not low, value is all relative) lower cost type of change, which often sit under higher value / medium cost types of changes, but then the game gets dusty if we don't make an intentional effort to sweep the floor every once and a while with stuff like this.
For the examples you mentioned, one factor is what people with what specialties are actually available at any given time. On my team (Summoner's Rift Team, we do the balance / preseason changes) we had capacity from a gameplay engineer and a game designer. The game designer is very familiar with the gameplay experience and provided better rules for the surrender system, and the gameplay engineer was able to implement them. That game designer isn't a systems designer, so isn't the best person suited to do work on the hextech/event systems, and the gameplay engineer isn't a league client engineer so can't fix league client issues. The extreme example is something like "why are you updating ability icons when the client has X bug" - we can't reallocate artists to start doing software engineering, they can only do art stuff.