devtrackers.gg
I swear he already did this once. Any loremasters?
not my first rodeo
I swear he already did this once. Any loremasters?
not my first rodeo
When you said “normally we see a taper off of win rate growth over ~20 games”, is this about Hwei or about champions in general? Just need clarification as it can be read as it being “other champs usually but with Hwei it’s different past 20 games”.
Normally, champions have a winrate curve you can see starts its steepest and tapers off (you gain more winrate games 1-5 than games 10-15 playing the same champion).
Hwei's winrate doesn't taper off in the first 20 games. His first 1-3 games are abyssmally low winrate and then you just keep winning more the more you play. From the data slice we usually use (first 20 games) it looks like you just linearly get better game over game indefinitely. That's why we've requested a special data report.
Sorry to bother you but last roadmap in October the Freljord champ was called she but in this roadmap it was just neutral mage. Is it ok for me to expect a female mage this time? :(
Yes she’s still female
Security through obscurity? are you nuts? You're inviting trouble.
Those who can exploit Vanguard can now hide in the shadows because there's no accountability for Vanguard's codebase.If you want security, open-source the damn driver, security through obscurity invites nothing but trouble, not just on the security front, but the trust that users have in your driver as well.
As stated, we do not rely on obscurity. I agree open source is good for trust. Today, I believe exposing the code would invite more harm than good.
As an aside, the Spectre vulnerability is one of my "favorite" hacks, and worth the read if you are interested in that space
It's sounding a lot like this primarily affects ranked games, and considering the implications in alienating certain players (especially with how vanguard requires secure boot and TPM 2.0 if I understand correctly) wouldn't it make sense to make vanguard a requirement only for ranked games and not normals? Understandably this does complicate implementation, but likely not to an unreasonable extent. There are also a lot of unranked players, who barely ever encounter cheaters and even less often bots, so having vanguard mandatory there would only bring in the negatives with trust and such.
What I'm mostly wondering is if this is being considered at all? I think it would majorly reduce the friction here and also allow for limited accessibility for linux players.
I appreciate your considered response, its a lot more effective than other approaches. Linux options are a topic of conversation, queue limiting is an interesting idea but may have systemic knock on effects or vulnerabilities. It would be irresponsible for me to promise anything at this point.
We are going to communicate in more depth about the Vanguard rollout. Thankyou for your patience
Read moreWhen it feels like it’s making me play more than I want to. If I only want to play 1 or 2 games over the course of a few days and the thought “well if I just play x more even though I don’t want to then I can get y” happens, that’s too much.
Because sometimes I don’t want to play 5+ games a day in a limited time for something. Sometimes I want to take a break and play other stuff for a couple months and not come back and go “wow look at all this stuff I can’t get/ look how much extra I have to do for having the audacity to play other games.”
I’ve been playing league for 14 years. I already barely want to play, saying “you have to play x amount of games in this short period of time to achieve the thing that previously had no time limit” doesn’t make me want to play more, it makes my decision not to easier.
Edit: I very exclusively dont play games with battle passes and have hated the idea of ranked resets for that very reason. If you...
Gotcha, so any system that asks more of you than you want to give is grindy.
I would probably say that you will become less satisfied with League over time then.
We want to create systems that reward engagement with the game. Those are usually going to take the form of rewards that are released on some time period. We think they work pretty well and most folks seem to enjoy them.
They are always going to be optional and we will always strive to be as generous as possible to folks who choose to commit time > money, but if they aren’t for you they aren’t for you.
Oooh opening a can of worms with this one
f*ckin love worms tbh
The splashart is better then the 3d model we saw. But still not great but better.
We adjusted the in game art and will be making some more touchups to his splash!
Split component rewards the same things each split, which mostly are marks which upgrade your permanent mastery. The title is meant for folks who display strong dedication to a single champion.
We hope it doesn't inspire fomo because even if you miss on a split you will reliably be able to get those rewards next split.
"Its not FOMO, its just needlessly grindy for no reason" isnt exactly the greatest clarification imo.
Actually curious: How do you define grind?
That makes sense! I assume the story of Arcane 2 also played a role in her choice as a champion. Happy for her, sad for Sevika :')
Excited for all the new champs and updates!
I mean just because we are making Ambessa now doesnt mean we will never make Sevika. I think if characters from Arcane, who have clear combat abilities, end up really popular with players, then we would consider bringing them over to LoL as new champions
Read moreThank you for your response. Indeed I'm sure it's very effective at stopping bots and other methods of cheating and will improve game quality and those aspects are something I can look forward to, I don't get to play much these days but appreciate high quality games.
I think if you're going to ask the community to install a kernel level anti-cheat it would at least be good faith to open source the effort so it can be peer reviewed, you guys can offer all the reassurance under the sun in videos like these but Riot is still owned by a Chinese organization and anyone with any kind of technical background and familiarity with some of China's other practices are right to ask questions and be skeptical.
When it comes to macOS, I presume there probably isn't any cheating software out there to begin with since Windows is a much more accessible platform for that kind of thing but since kernel access level is restricted would I be correct to assume cheat detection can be done...
Appreciate the kind response.
I do like the idea of being able to open source to build trust we are doing what we say we are. Unfortunately, it also makes it much a lot easier for hackers to find new ways to circumvent. There are always new ways to circumvent anti-cheat solutions so the perpetual arms race will continue. As much as I dislike it "security through obscurity" is an extra tool we have to employ but not the only one.
Yes, there is a lot less macOS users and very few cheat solutions. The viability for things like bot farms falls off as well.
I call BS on that statement. Linux protects the user from invasive surveillance and elevated permissions from untrusted parties. This does not constitute a "security hole". If you require kernel level surveillance (like on Windows) just for anti-cheat, then I don't trust you either.
Supporting WINE on Linux is what I'm referring to. If there was player demand for supporting Linux I would rather do it as a 1st class OS.
You say that, and then you don't require Vanguard on Mac.
Is that 200 years of security experience in Riot?
To support Linux as a 1st class OS we would need to port the client. Supporting WINE on Linux is possible with work but would also open up a whole new vector of attack.
mac users are not required to have vanguard so they can keep playing
Correct
True, but it's still very annoying, like obviously they give no guarantees for making it work but purposefully breaking it with no chance of fixing it seems too hostile
This was a scenario where we didnt have any great options. We want anyone to be able to play League with whatever setup they have but Linux support leaves a large security hole
Are you able to elaborate what that is, seems a bit simplistic to go with strength again since darius already embodies that so well
I cant at this point no, want to keep some things a surprise. The fact that she is clearly a warrior that fights makes it a lot easier then Silco though. That why we gave Renata the robot, to kind of be like her "goon" since chembarons usually have goons fight for them. It would have been weird to suddenly give Silco a robot that was never in the show
And what about playing on Linux with WINE? Will there be any option for us?
No unfortunately not. From a security point of view supporting WINE would be like having a bank vault at the top of Nakatomi Tower then installing a doggy door in it.
I’m guessing skins and shit just won’t work at all and be blocked off until third parties figure out a way around it, but depending how sensitive vanguard is I’d be afraid of a hardware ban because it detected a skin editor or even cheat engine installed lol.
We tend to reserve hardware banning for more egregious or repeated violations. I can't share what our explicit policy is right now or guarantee we wont change it in the future
In regards to vanguard, now that hardware bans are a thing how much risk are players using custom skins, maps, lines, etc?
ATM I'm pretty sure riot just couldn't detect players using that stuff nor did riot care that much about it, but with the updated system should there be a warning for them?
Our goals for Vanguard are not to explicitly target customization like you mentioned but it is likely it will break many of those types of hacks.
We strongly discourage those tools mostly because of how unstable they tend to be. So our crash reporting fills up with false-positives that we spend time investigating rather than legitimate issues.
The day I have to install a closed source kernel level anticheat to play League is the day I never play it again.
I'd rather deal with a few cheaters here and there then deal with the security implications introduced by that in this day and age. If Vanguard was ever exploited it would have complete and total control of the system that's not only obviously bad for the users but will be devastating for the company if it happens and has the capability to spread.
You should reconsider kernel level anti cheat altogether. It's not worth it. There are excellent well researched reasons Apple doesn't allow it and hopefully Microsoft follows suit to shut these kernel level anti-cheats (and the cheats themselves that use them) down.
Its understandable some people will feel this way and is something we discussed at length. In some regions like Korea we had the opposite reaction where players did not trust the integrity of ranked unless we did Kernel level anti-cheat (we have been using a different solution there for some time).
The second part on top of cheating is that bot farm accounts have been increasingly turning up in ranked games. A de-ranked account with more essence sells for more. The match quality of lower ranked games in many countries has been hit pretty hard and this adds to our arsenal to fight that.