Valorant

Valorant Dev Tracker




16 Sep

Comment

Originally posted by EasiBreezi

Riot is ALWAYS patient when it comes to Viper for some reason. They greatly buff Omen right away when he seems weak. They greatly buff Breach right away when he seems weak. But nope, they gotta give Viper these small-ass changes and use the “wait and see” approach because they’re scared she will be OP.

Why the f**k weren’t they scared about other underpowered characters being too OP after buffs? It’s literally only Viper they give a shit about.

Is there a Viper main on their balance team? Or just other character mains playing Viper on their spare time like Altrombre so they can talk down to actual Viper mains about their main being ‘in a good spot’.

I do think that historically (as in, going into Closed Beta) we expected Viper to be stronger than she was due to a couple of prolific Viper players internally. However, since we've launched to live, Viper has underperformed for quite some time, despite a series of fairly substantial buffs. We don't balance off of gut feels like that, we balance off of data, and the data doesn't carry those same biases.

Personally, I'd argue that we gave Viper several sets of "greatly buff" changes with her wall going through walls, being able to maintain fuel on her Q and E at once with no penalty, applying fragile to her molotov, and stopping decay on allies... but she just hasn't seen the same success that Omen and Breach have.

We will continue to make changes to the agent to get her into a good spot, and while she is improving steadily, she's not there yet. We're actively playtesting further buffs to ship, but generally speaking, we prefer to make more measured, methodical chang...

Read more
Comment

Originally posted by ShadowDragon175

She's a support that was viable in the beta

Then riot realized people were using her, which wasn't their intention. After some 17 back-to-back nerfs she became useless.

Fun fact, she’s still one of the highest winrates in the game across all MMRs!

Comment

Originally posted by ddd4175

I use Raze a lot and I think totally removing the easy kill potential of satchels is totally fine. It's too unreactable to do that much damage, it contradicts Valorant's design principle which the devs are super adamant about paraphrasing that if the ability will kill, you probably have enough time to deal with it before it does.

Spot on!

Comment

This was great. You've done a really nice job of explaining your points succinctly and clearly, you had really great visual aids, and you also put a lot of thought into how you curated the game footage. A lot of video guides have a lot of solo queue footage as filler, but you really seem to have put thought and effort into finding clips that illustrate what you're currently talking about.

Being in low gold/high silver I always thought the reason we stack B is so we still have two players left to hold site after our hookah player runs out with zero utility and dies instantly /s

Comment

Originally posted by Puzzleheaded-Bake-77

Oh THANK YOU :) :) :) :)

Np! Sorry it took so long to fix. :'(


15 Sep

Comment

Originally posted by __Mr_F0X__

So is it possible that some day we will get a collection like this? :D

Its possible, but no commitment yet. We've sort of looked at it from 2 different angles. On one hand we have some sort of reactive features already like with the Sovereign skin line, where when you get a kill, the gems on the back glow and give off some little particles. We can continue doing things like that that are subtle but help emphasis that moment of getting a kill for the player.

When it comes to things evolving or changing, we'd probably treat it similar, keep it subtle and work progressively toward a final version. A lot of times we see this in games it involves things like color changes, glowing, etc, and we'd need to find the appropriate end cap. Do we reset your advances on death? Do we let you keep those advances round to round? What if someone picks your gun up and starts killing with it?
Variables like this are all things to take into consideration so we want to make sure we've gone over all of our options before going all in on an idea, but rest assu...

Read more
Comment

Originally posted by comeonguys11

still didnt get fixed :*( my first skin upgrade and i was excited for nting :*(

It'll be fixed with the new patch this week. I'm so sorry. :( I promise you we tried to get the fix out last patch but kept encountering an error.

After a heavy duty patch last time, this one will be a little light. Raze mains should study the Blast Pack changes, guardians of the Guardian might appreciate the buff, and you'll soon have a lower chance of going back to back on the same map in any queue.

This intro is brought to you by Orcane, with the big picture:

This patch is quite a bit lighter than the last but we want to take some time to better understand the impact of our changes. We have already seen some shifts to the meta: Sage and Killjoy are seeing a bit less play, Breach and Viper are making a strong showing, and the Vandal is performing more reliably (especially at close ranges).

While these major Agent changes settle, we have turned our eye on a more pressing issue: the Operator. We know that this weapon can feel very oppressive to play against, often leaving players feeling like there is no hope when attacking. We agree that the Operator is likely having an outsized impact on ...

Read more
Comment

Originally posted by NightALX

I have

It’s a bug. We have a fix that should be going out in the patch this week. Sorry about that. The Variants weren’t affected, just Levels 2-4.

Comment

Originally posted by EnVadeh

Too bad I'm experienced being rick rolled. You could not get me this time!

And I have another question

Do you think that adding low grade cheaters and match fixers from other games like CSGO will have an issue on the pro scene of valorant?

Like all the B tier cheaters and match fixers of CSGO are playing in Valorant which is making Valorant seem like this shit version of CSGO.

I would love to see Valorant have it's own original players rather than B grade players who failed in CSGO or got banned for cheating/match fixing

Purely my opinion: VALORANT has only been live for 12 weeks, so the esports scene is very early and will evolve over time. It's only natural that the first esports pros in VALORANT aren't players who were heavily incentivized in other scenes like CS:GO... If I were being paid 1.65 million dollars, I wouldn't be jumping ship to other games.

Over time, as the scene establishes itself, we (Riot Games and the VALORANT team) continue to invest in the game, and the amount of sponsorship etc grows, we'll also see more pros who are seen as primarily "home-grown" VALO...

Read more
Comment

Originally posted by getnutty

Supernova Networks in Chicago, Illinois. Not a big time player I don't believe in the ISP world. I e-mailed their support to ask for a tier 2 tech regarding nodes that I was receiving random packet loss and not response (obviously).

If you send me a traceroute to 192.207.0.1 I'll see what we can find for them.


14 Sep

Comment

Originally posted by getnutty

It's 10000% inconsistent. I came from CSGO, playing ESEA - was ranked A/A+ in ESEA, hit global in mm. Pugged numerous times against pro/semi pros like roca, rush, etc.

Yes - they would dump on me. But it was never a situation where I couldn't even get 1 shot off. They would hs me, but I'd usually AT LEAST be able to 1-2 shot them even when I die. In Valorant, play against some random diamond kid and I'll hold an angle with an awp and just get strafe 1 tapped. So many times I'm dead without even being able to get ONE shot off.

And this isn't even to mention their notorious routing problems - zero issues with csgo in Chicago, get 30-40+ ping, contact Riot, provide all logs, they basically tell me try VPN. Use NordVPN, literally pick a server 30 miles away from my house and get 10 ping in game.

Valorant is definitely inconsistent and glitchy.

Which ISP and what is your location?

Comment

Originally posted by aithosrds

Cool, that doesn’t change the fact I wasn’t making any claims at all I was just saying it was possible and I wouldn't have been surprised. Guess working for a big company doesn’t help you read or listen to what someone is saying any better.

And to all the people downvoting me: bleet more sheep no I didn’t see the little icon on my phone screen and frankly I don’t care if they work for Riot. He/she didn’t actually respond to most of what I said, and again I never made a single statement of fact I was just saying it wouldn’t surprise me if there was an explanation like that.

The reality is they probably just have more players than the servers can handle at high activity times and haven’t figured out a better solution yet. But go ahead and downvote me for expressing an opinion, god forbid I have one of those. Things like this are why this community is toxic AF and thanks mr/ms Riot employee for encouraging them.

I'm happy to answer questions. I was responding specifically to one of the claims there saying it wasn't the case. We also don't put players on less congested servers based on mmr. All players are prioritized matchmake to their closest game server and we balance load among all of them.

There are other factors outside of the servers that also have an impact for players. Peak times especially in times of covid have put a lot of strain on internet infrastructure all over the world. Some instances of pain are related to internet traffic and poor isp routing

There are times in incidents where our servers will get into a bad state, but those aren't necessarily peak related. We've provisioned servers to meet demand. We also review metrics on client frame time/server latency/cpu/memory usage across all of our infrastructure. There are definitely occasions where the servers cause issues for the player. Every single person in the game would be impacted for those. Where indiv...

Read more