devtrackers.gg
Lmao at the dude that posted his complaint like an hour before they released the update
Lmao at the dude that posted his complaint like an hour before they released the update
RIOT HQ - INT.
A man sits at his desk. He sees a Reddit post with 300 upvotes
REDDIT: gib clash blog
The man’s eyes bulge out of his head. He begins smashing objects off his desk, then rapidly writes a 1,000 word Nexus post.
RIOTER: ez ggs
I’m sure they’ve thought of this, but why don’t they do graduated start times for each tier?
We had the same idea so the different tiers will start at slightly different times. :D
How completely f**ked is the back end of the new client? Like they said they built it to make new additions to the client easier. What the f**k is going on? A "simple" bracket based tournament shouldn't take a multi-billion dollar company over 3 years to develop.Edit: it's not the client, pitchforks down
It has less to do with the client and much more to do with that many many systems that are connected to make Clash the experience we want it to be. Unfortunately there isn't one silver bullet to fix the whole thing (we looked really hard for a silver bullet) so we had to make lots and lots and lots of little changes.
Once locked in, your team will get placed into a bracket as soon as one is available, and the games will begin.
Ranked 5's back confirmed? lol
Confirmed, windowed, tiered, one-day Ranked 5's is back. We did it.
are there actually people who thinks clash will happen? LOL
I am a firm believer.
At this point wouldnt it be better to program a new client that is only for clash and dedicated servers for the mode only?
Dedicated servers doesn't really fix the problem either. This is why we have decided to alter the design in a way that allows for a more consistent starting of games. Even with dedicated servers, if we try and start too many games at once, it just doesn't work. With this new approach the amount of game starts is much smoother over a longer period and the hope is that makes it much more reliable.
It doesn’t really matter at this point. It’s too stripped down to even be considered unique. No progressing through different tier brackets and that feeling of needing the win to progress through tiers and earn your spot is gone as well. Might as well play flex 😂😂
So the progression through an 8 team bracket doesn't feel competitive/rewarding enough? Would larger brackets make it feel better or is it strictly the sense of winning one day and progressing to the next that is missing for you? This is only are current approach but we are always opening to hearing about what might be missing.
If clash is only happening once a month has there been any talk of splitting the games between 2 different weekends? Could help some players with scheduling and you could so small rewards like if one weekend is less desirable small bonuses for playing on the later weekend.
We are currently looking at running it two weekends a month (so 4 single day tournaments in a month).
It’s a mixture of both. I know that’s not the answer yall can accommodate given the tech but here’s my take. The reward scheme that you guys debued hinged on risk (the tickets and maybe bracket size? I don’t remember). One bracket size diminshes that. On the other hand if you’re guaranteed a spot in “next” tourney then that’s the other risk gone as well. Clash was unique you had set environments that push you and highlight your progression as a team. With the risk gone it will have a domino effect towards competition, and as it stands in my opinion it will just be a glorified time gated flex queue.
Okay that makes sense. We are hoping we can add some more of the "risk" back to the system so it feels more like "this is our opportunity to win something now" kind of feel, but our current approach is just to make sure we can run it consistently. Definitely would love to hear some ideas about what makes something feel competitive/risky/rewarding to you. Maybe like winning one of these small day tournaments qualifies you for larger, more exclusive tournaments?
honestly getting banned out feels so good for the ego. I am the support for my team and when we played clash they banned Blitzcrank every game. I felt warm and fuzzy.
This is me whenever there is a Lulu ban. VALIDATED
Can someone explain to me, why clash starting many games at the same time crashes the servers while thousands of soloQ games/other game modes run smoothly all the time?
Where is the technical difference?
I mean I can understand that maybe the starting process for games doesn't happen simultaniously in soloQ and other game modes compared to clash - but the amount of games running at the same time should not be higher, no?
The difference is like trying to not overfill a bucket from a faucet that is slowing dripping or a faucet turned on full blast. The bucket holds the same amount of water but when the faucet is dripping you can take water out the bucket to stop it from overflowing. When it's on full blast it full up immediately and then you spill water everywhere.
Winning smaller tourneys to earn a spot in larger bracketed (exclusive) ones is definitely hype. But then we are back to square one as 2 day 1 tournament structure wont work. Risk and time investment scale together in my opinion, it needs to feel like a journey. Another thing that can be done is adding RP as rewards. I know rewards are far from the agenda at this moment but RNG skins wont cut it. Time gated flex queue mixed with a loot box MAYBE a couple? Not that exciting. Supplementary RP would be sexy af. That feeling of progressing through different sized brackets is essential. It highlights features of your team, are we clutch under pressure (when the stakes are higher/the road is longer), are we durable? etc etc..
I come from a Sports background and I love competing and obviously I want Clash to work but if it's gonna be stripped down of what actually made it the mode that everyone raved about when actually given the chance to try then it's just not worth the resources.
So RP as a reward feels good because you can spend it how you like?
The sports background makes sense, like watching a team roll through a 64 teak bracket is hype for sure. It's hard to balance that with the time investment expected to participate. There is definitely room for us to make changes to bracket sizes if the demand is there
The person you are replying to raised that the total number of games starting over, say, a 10 minute period is the same, so a drip and blast analogy isn't really fair. Maybe it's like a constant stream vs a choppy series of blasts.
Edit: but it's odd that you need it to be so choppy. Technically, it wouldn't be difficult to match teams against each other way in advance and tell them to play a custom game between 5pm and 6pm and report back. You'd keep the constant stream of random game times - all the clash tech needs to do on top of that is officiate. I realize that I know nothing, but it doesn't sound like this bucket issue should really exist. Why does clash try to start all the games at the same time?
We agree the bucket problem shouldn't exist and we tried to spread out game times as much as we could in our original approach but in the end it just degraded the experience to much (i.e. the bucket just wasn't big enough and we couldn't get new bigger buckets). So what we decided was to change the design so we could do more of a dripping flow than we could previously
I'm really disappointing they gave up on the larger brackets. i want to feel like im actually progressing and facing better and better teams as the bracket goes on instead of getting 2 different 8 team brackets
There's a lot we loved about the larger brackets, and we're working on ways to bring more of what we liked about them back to Clash. We definitely haven't given up on them, they're just not where we're going for the start of Clash :)
I understand that this would be highly speculative, but what do you think are the fundamental differences between clash and Dota 2's battlecup system that made clash fail? Worse server design? More players? Something else entirely?
RiotIamWalrus answered a similar question over on the dev blog
"Definitely! DOTA2's Battle Cup system is really cool, but we do a few things slightly differently (based on my understanding as an interested party but not a DOTA2 player):
DOTA2 doesn't use a set bracket - they match teams of similar skill and record together, but your next match isn't set until you enter queue.
Scouting is more formalized in Clash (I think it's possible in DOTA2, but we have a specific phase for it)
Our matchmaking is pretty different - DOTA2 will match you with anyone in your Tier, while Clash still considers MMRs when making matches.
Clash has a consolation bracket for teams that lose in Round 1, while DOTA2 is traditional single elimination.
DOTA2's rewards are a bit more winner focused (Though the Battle Pass stuff makes it harder to make an apples to apples comparison)
DOTA2 has a Champion's Cup at the end of the season for teams who do well in the weekend cups. We're focusing on single-weekend Clash tournaments for now, but it sounds like a pretty cool idea..."
Couldn’t you potentially do clash days or weekends based off of average team mmr? So a Friday could be iron/bronze tourneys, Saturday silver/gold tourneys, and the rest of the mmr tourneys on Sunday since it’s a lot lower % of player base.
We could. We might still but we are hoping that we don't have too because we want players of all skill levels to be able to participate when they can make time.
for you
edit: f**kIforgottoputintheclashlogobutwhateverartisbeautifulimperfection-Jhin2019regardingthisimage
This is quite something. Wow