RiotAxes

RiotAxes



Yesterday

Comment

Originally posted by TheGingerNinga

I've been jamming it while waiting for ranked to go live and it's honestly really good. Match making is pretty terrible, but the games are fun and arguably not even that snowbally, or at least it feels that way. I've come back from some pretty absurd game states already, and I've only played 5 games.

Just a heads up that there is an actual bug with matchmaking - we're working to resolve it with a temporary fix in the next few hours, and then a more robust fix either some time next week or with the next patch.


12 Dec

Comment

Originally posted by AobaSona

Not exactly the same thing, but in a similar note: Is it likely that we'll get to have champions who are usually kept with low winrates due to pro play/very high elo allowed to be stronger in this mode?

I think champions who are kept low because they're too good in the coordinated team environment are allowed to be stronger in this queue.

It gets more complex for champions who have low average win rates because they are demanding, but who are extremely powerful when mastered - is the mode better if Akali and Leblanc mains stomp most of their games, as the cost of letting Akali and Leblanc feel good to play for players who haven't yet put the time in? That's less clear to me.

I'd predict balance ends up being more forgiving here, but not infinitely so. There will still be lower and higher win rate champions.

Comment

Originally posted by sidewayshorizon

you'd pick supports who could buy non-support items and continue to scale instead.

Is this not still the case? I think Vel'koz support feels extremely strong in this because I can use my increased support income to buy full damage mage items. It felt silly how much stronger I was than a support building support items.

If full damage mages end up being the best supports, would you consider nerfing support passive income and making actual support items a little cheaper to compensate? I get the goal was for supports to get their items faster, but that just doesn't feel right when the item is deathcap.

I think that those supports are likely very good in the mode, yes, and I think that's cool. If they're OP, we'd balance on an individual champion level, but for now we're leaning into supports being able to have a much better economy and buy 'real' items.

The goal for inflating Enchanter items is to make sure that they're viable, not guarantee that they dominate the position - had we not done anything, they wouldn't be viable.

The reason we're leaning into supports getting more gold is because the riskiest thing for the queue's health is if there's a position that demands players 'take one for the team' - and then players just don't sign up to do it. But yes it's possible we'd change support income if having supports with gold just ruins the game.

Comment

Originally posted by Happytoseeme

I would love to earn eternals in this mode. Makes me feel punished for wanting a quicker game mode!

We intend to support eternals, hopefully in the first patch but there's a chance it'd slip a bit, working through some technical setup stuff.

EDIT: We think we found the issue and expect to be testing a fix in the next day or two.

Comment

Originally posted by Top-Statistician1643

are there any plans to buff stacking champions (smolder, veigar, nasus, etc)? I tried some of them out and they seem quite a bit weaker. just a simple increase to the amount of stacks each last hit gives them maybe?

We plan to balance individual champions once we have good data, yes. Champion, Item, and Rune changes up to this point have mainly been for things that don't make sense from a game flow perspective - Dragon Soul coming up before Kayn transforms, lane phase ending before Magical Footwear pays off, that sort of thing.

Comment

Originally posted by AobaSona

Do we really need support items to be much more expensive? Kinda sucks that for once there would be an actual chance of supports closing their build more often than not and Riot just said "No, can't have that, we need to find a way to make it suck here too".

They should be both more expensive and give more stats. We expect that supports will be noticeably more powerful relative to the other 4 players on their team in this mode than in classic SR. If that's not the case, it probably means we missed on item efficiency and should buff something.

Before we made this change, we were seeing supports hit full build at like minute 15, which both felt quite bad and meant that Enchanters wouldn't even be viable with these rules - you'd pick supports who could buy non-support items and continue to scale instead.


22 May

Comment

Originally posted by LoL_is_pepega_BIA

This sounds like a fundamental disagreement (intentional or not, probably not.. edit. actually maybe? Based on below comments) between champ design goals and balance goals, which speaks to a larger problem that has been present for many many years in the LoL team

The designers created an untamable monster and now the balance team has to turn the dial waaay down to the point where most ppl don't enjoy playing the champ any more. How anyone did not see this coming during playtesting is beyond me.. and it's happened SO MANY TIMES

Now it's not a fun place for anyone to be, especially phreak for inheriting this hellscape

So framing it as a disagreement makes it sound like conflict, and while that happens every now and then (people are people), I don't think this is really about internal conflict, and will propose an alternate framing:

Your content strategy and your balance strategy must be in sync with each other.

As a dev team, you're creating all this content for a reason: you are creating moments, creating memories, inviting new players into the game, whatever the exact goals might be. For League of Legends, new champions are expected to make a mark on the ecosystem.

If League's balance strategy says that we're going to change and tune champions until they win the same number of games (it doesn't, but at times it hasn't been that far off from saying that), then I can guarantee you that no matter how well designed your next simple champion is, they're going to be forgotten 3 months later. If Naafiri and Sylas are winning the same percentage of games overall, Sylas...

Read more

26 Jul

Comment

Originally posted by GodlyPain

Is it anywhere near that threshold at the time?

The initial reception was awesome, but the important bit will be how players engage with it over time, so it's simply too early to assess that.

Comment

Originally posted by KindRavenn

Hello, do you have any plans in the future to add sub-modes to L'arena like 1v1v1v1 or even 3v3v3v3 ?

The 2v2v2v2 is very interesting, but I've been waiting a long time for a 1v1 mode, and this mode would be perfect for that.

Exploring a 3v3v3v3 mode is something we're interested in doing, as having an extra champion on each side goes a long way in spicing up combat, and a lot of champions are designed to be interesting with 3 (or more) champions on a side in fights - teamfighting is a big part of League of Legends after all. That said, there are a whole other set of difficulties, ranging from very different balance needs to concerns about setting up 2 players to blame the third random when the game goes badly, to needing to rethink how Augments are designed because fights are inherently a lot noisier. I expect we'll explore it internally, but we'll see how it actually plays out when we do, it might not be something we ever try to bring live.

For 1v1s, we don't believe this is likely to have enough replay value, and a huge portion of the champion roster is designed around being interesting with teammates - I won't rule out ever trying it, but I think it's pretty unlikely that we'd pursue that.

... Read more
Comment

Originally posted by Ducstin

can we get a arena with no rng. just regular SR champ stats fighting

Our initial prototypes were pretty close to this, but just heads-up combat in a field gets old very fast - we're pretty confident that it wouldn't hold an audience for long, so we opted to pursue a version that had a better chance of being replayable instead.


21 Jul

Comment

Originally posted by ToXic_Trader

i mean rn all the champions just have a aram buff/debuff with nothing in it so i assume they are just collecting data and will then tune accordingly

This is incorrect - 42 champions currently have targeted balance changes applied, vs only 5 with ARAM-style buff/debuffs.

Going forwards, we'll likely do a mix of both. Our ideal state is that we individually balance each champion, but there are a lot of champions and they're VERY differently powerful from SR, so we'll likely do at least some ARAM balancing in the name of efficiency. There may also be some cases where it's the ideal nerf or buff (do we want to change Kayle's abilities around in a way that makes her play differently, or just make her deal less damage while doing the same stuff?), so it's not guaranteed that we'll ever move completely away from that style of balancing.

We're prepping a balance hotfix right now - if all goes well it'll be out later today, obviously until it's ready there's risk of it slipping.


19 Jul

Comment

Originally posted by Spideraxe30

Hey Axes could I ask why cameos are exclusive to the SF event as opposed to a permanent fixture to the mode

It's not that we wouldn't leave cameos in for the mode forever, it's that they're one of a range of possible solutions once we get past the SF event, and we'll know so much more about what makes this mode tick in 6 weeks than we know today that it's not worth committing to any particular direction.

So if we do leave the mode on, they could stay, or we could look for a replacement, don't know yet.

Comment

Originally posted by Died_Last_Week

The PBE patch cycle ended so it's been taken off the PBE, it will be on live in 2 days.

It will also be back on PBE in 2 days, but yes, it's down until Thursday.


11 Jul

Comment

Originally posted by WeeklyAdri

Man I'm sorry but this comment does not give me much hope :(

I have hope, but not confidence yet, so tempering expectations.

This mode (or another like it - high variance, lowered competitive expectations, 15 minute run time) being a huge success with the legs to sustain a permanent population would probably be the single most valuable thing we could deliver in the gameplay space for League. And I'm personally hooked on it, having played 110 games and counting on PBE just for fun. If I had a magic wand to wave to guarantee that this would maintain a population so we could keep it online forever, I would 100% be waving it. But I don't, and at the end of the day it's going to be about how players vote with their behavior.

Comment

Originally posted by RossCoomSocks

Maybe it's been said before, sorry if it was, but is this targeted at being a permanent game mode?

Cause I'm not going to lie, as an old WoW Arena, Bloodline Champions, Battlerite player, and a guy that sucks at CS'ing this would be a great hobby to replace my ARAM addiction. :P

At this time, our goal is to make a great summer event mode.

In the longer term, I think there's a really good chance we would aim to bring back a significantly upgraded version - it's not a guarantee, we need to see what the player response would be like, but I think it's likely.

There's a world where this version of the mode is so successful that we never turn it off and immediately staff up live support for it, but I want to temper expectations - that would take a really huge player response that sustains over time.

So tldr we would love for it to be permanent, we will probably (but not definitely) aim for an upgraded version at some point (no timeline yet), and if the player response is strong enough we'd change our plans around that.

Comment

Originally posted by ExtraSluttyOliveOil

Definitely agree with the logic behind it but I will say that it feels like shit playing a champion that doesn't have easy access to plant consumption vs something like Lucian/Shyvana/Kayle/Teemo that can just devour the whole thing before you have a chance to touch it.

There are definitely pros and cons to choosing basic attacks as the input for activating plants. Our belief is the pros outweigh the cons for now, especially given how hard the 2v2 shape of matches and the ring of fire favor melees.

In the longer run, if this mode were permanent, I believe we would eventually build out a more robust and more diverse set of map hazards to play around, instead of leaning so hard on this one.

Comment

Originally posted by TPB_Robonyzer

No. I think the line for “too op” is arbitrary. Yes they’re very strong, but I think that’s intentional and a good thing. They’re something to fight for, promote movement around the map, and introduce some “comeback” mechanics in a way.

This is pretty much spot on. The game mode needs non-champion outputs that get players moving around the map, create ebb and flow to the action (it is desirable that sometimes teams fight for a bit, then break off the fight to trade plants, then get back to it), and create combat mini-objectives that can swing the tide of a battle that looks otherwise hopeless. Both the Plants system and the Cameos system are aimed at these goals.

If these things didn't exist, you'd see problems like: Their comp is better than ours, it's not worth playing out rounds... combat pacing is always max intensity all the time, so playing the mode is exhausting... 100% of combat power lives in champions, so the mode is excessively (i.e. beyond a dev team's ability to correct for) sensitive to balance... a swingy start to a round (e.g. one champion dies unexpectedly) removes all dramatic tension from the rest of the round... and more.

Are they too strong? They need to be strong enough to swi...

Read more

30 Jun

Comment

Originally posted by Spideraxe30

Hey Axes I recall you mentioning in the dev video that you experimented with Panth throwing his spear and using a short sword until he picked it up again, could you share why you cut that idea since it seemed like it could work his shield

That's a deep cut...

Ultimately a thematic thing. We wanted to capture a hoplite in a phalanx as much as possible given he's a single character. Swapping between weapons is a different fantasy.

The gameplay associated also didn't reaaallly pan out. There was some cool stuff like throwing the spear, having it stick in the ground, then shield bashing enemies onto the spear, but it was way too difficult in practice, much cooler in theory than it was in game.

Could definitely still be something there, but ultimately it wasn't Pantheon.

Comment

Originally posted by sabrio204

It really feels like Riot hates shields sometimes, since over the years we ended up having less sword-and-board characters.

Poppy was reworked to lose her shield, and same for Taric.

Pantheon was on my short list of champions I wanted to personally update specifically because I love shield fighters. But yeah we haven't done a lot with them.

Comment

Originally posted by BasicallyMogar

https://www.leagueoflegends.com/en-gb/news/dev/champion-insights-vex/

Vex’s original gameplay, designed by Nathan “Lutzburg” Lutz, created portals that extended the distance allied missiles traveled. You’d essentially have Miss Fortune ults that went double distance, Blitzcrank hooks from out of nowhere, and all these other really scary, but really cool experiences. Except there was one problem: It cost multiple years of VFX budget.

That’s not an exaggeration. Nearly every missile ability in League needed to be completely redone with updated VFX just to interact with Vex’s kit. And that just wasn’t feasible.

Y'all were close, but no the tech was not done.

Specifically, anything that increases how long a missile lives in the world requires us to redo all the VFX. So there's a lot of possible missile manipulation we can still do, but there are some strange limits that don't exist for any real player-facing reason but are actually hard limits we won't be able to bypass.