Elemental rift changing very interesting, cant wait to try it out, and the patch over all is very good.
As a reminder, we are testing Elemental Rift and looking to gather as much feedback about these changes as we can. These changes come from everyone's feedback on the previous version, so keep the feedback coming!
you are all very kind. thank you for how eloquent and honest you all are with feedback, but mostly i'll remember all your sick plays. some of you are way too good at this game.
i'll still be playing (and trolling the main WR accounts) in the future, so looking forward to seeing you in emerald DIAMOND NEXT SEASON BABY LET'S GO
The proposal you have here could be an interesting one, but it is a different item with a very different goal in mind than we had for Hextech Megadrive. Mages already have a few starting items (RoA, Archangels, Luden's, and Soulstealer) and it can be tricky knowing what the right choice is in a given situation (hint: players are sleeping on Soulstealer).
Megadrive has started to see play on Rakan after the bug fix in 3.1, and we have a buff planned for the next patch. We expect the item to have a more narrow user base than some items, but we still like the shape of the item. Generally, new items have a slow adoption, and this is doubly so for more niche items.
We have just been cautious about over buffing it, but plenty of levers already exist that we can tune around if it doesn't hit the support goals long term.
If match making is going to concern itself with player experience at all, can you explain why you would not default to giving a duo queue with adc/support as their top picks the duo lane over all other combinations except for another duo with the same preference?
Why on earth would there not be an extremely high priority on giving a duo queue that prefers the duo lane the duo lane? The only thing that would make sense is if neither of us got the duo lane because another duo also wanted it, but most often we get split up. Sometimes this causes my friends to ragequit the match or even the game entirely.
Most of the time you will get your positions, but there are exceptions that happen due to the random nature of all the factors matchmaking has to balance: wait time, ping, rank, MMR, team balance, and position. Sometimes you get another player in there who just hasn't been able to play their position recently, whereas you have, and it's just their turn so to speak.
While I understand that, taking potential players out of the pool of options, still I think that when my average queue time is like. 20s or so it's not that big of a deal to wait a bit when regular league I'm waiting a few minutes. Maybe it's a regional difference.
And I'm plat 1 soloqueue. Saw it last for sure in Plat 2 so...
If you saw it solo queue in Plat 2, that means the Gold was in a party with significantly higher-ranked teammate, pulling their party average into high-plat.
Since their party was considered Plat, the feature you are talking about wouldn't make a difference for you.
So out of curiosity why not allow an option to let myself have longer queue times and match with my rank?
Like I still get in with mid golds in plat1
Mostly because that type of choice doesn't happen in a vacuum. One player waiting longer makes other players wait longer because now they can't match with that player. This can cascade into everyone waiting longer, even those who don't want or need to.
Seeing some Golds as a Plat is pretty normal though. If you are both solo queue, that means you are low Plat. Once your party average (or solo) is farther into Plat, you won't see parties that average below Plat in rank.
Hey I'm just wondering with the new elemental ocean basically give Garen's passive to everyone, don't you think he should have his passive buffed ? Not to mention that there are literally better version of his passive like sett's
Sett's passive is similar but I wouldn't call it better. And it is fine for champions to have similar abilities, what really matters is their kit as a whole.
We wouldn't want to buff Garen just because something is coming out that is similar, if it turns out he is weak after Elemental Rift's release then we can look at buffing him, but we don't expect that to be the case, and he has been in a fine-strong spot most of the time anyway.
if i had money for reddit gold sir you would be getting it. Riot really needs to consider bringing Garen more in line with his PC version. Literally the only bruiser/AD item that suits him is black cleaver.
Garen has the single highest Armor+MR of any champion, without items. He basically has the W passive you are talking about it just isn't tied to an ability and is instead part of his base stats.
We did this to help clean up his tooltips, and highly what is interesting, while keeping the same power that he would gain passively.
To compensate for this, we try and make sure higher MMR players get extra Ranked Fortitude or LP to help them climb even if their win% stays near 50%.
This is an elegant system when taking all you've said into context. I would say for LP it should reward it based on the disparity each game rather than on their general MMR.
So let's say a 3000 MMR was paired with other 3000 MMR Players. They should not get the same high +15 LP gains compared to a 3000 MMR players that were paired with 2500 MMR players if that makes sense.
So the same system could be more dynamic and reflect the variation each game and would help people to be more motivated knowing they won a game where they were the carry.
But im sure there's been lots of testing on designs which work best but the LP principle makes a lot of sense.
Yes, I agree, and that's how the same system works on, e.g. League PC. A combination of what the teams looked like and where everyone should be going.
Wild Rift currently assumes every match is fair, which means in some cases the LP gains/losses don't seem to line up with what happened in the match. In the long run, it gets folks to the right place since most matches are fair, but it can result in some awkwardness. We are aware of this and are evaluating potentially changing it to be closer to PC in that sense at some point.
It's basically a simplifying assumption that carries some baggage but still works.
Read moreFirstly thank you for the detailed response to the above poster.
- Grabs 10 players whose rank and MMR are close enough to each other.
This in principle is good but I do find it hard to believe that's its a tight criteria. There are games where I've seen such huge disparity in skill level. This must be a lot looser than the 2nd point.
- Makes sure it can assign each player to a team and role such that the total MMR between the two teams is within an allowed MMR gap and role preferences work.
This is far easier to achieve and what I suspect is creating the 50/50 games which is obviously the aim. This is fair for a fun gaming experience but not fair from a ranked progression system.
You are basically saying that regardless of your skill/MMR level you will find it the same difficulty to win games and rank up.
I think the more point 1 works the more point 2 fe...
Yeah, you've pretty much hit on the major tricky design pivots when it comes to matchmaking and ranking.
If we focus on matchmaking, then players get closer to 50/50 games when some feel like they deserve a higher win rate. To compensate for this, we try and make sure higher MMR players get extra Ranked Fortitude or LP to help them climb even if their win% stays near 50%.
If we don't focus on matchmaking, then it's possible to just let people climb, but then you run into the problem you brought up which is it results in a lot more players getting into matches they can't win or into matches where they feel like they aren't good enough to even play the game. In my experience, this type of experience leads to a larger negative impact than when good players have to lose half their matches.
But, yeah, you have touched on exactly the types of topics we have to balance.
EDIT: To your comment about tight criteria, you are right. Rank is the only hard thres...
Read moreI ask because last season I hit diamond with a 55% win rate and have subsequently been 38% this season in Emerald/Plat. I haven’t changed my play patterns in any way and the champ I main hasn’t been impacted by the balance team recently. I also have a 77% WR in normals.
This is the second time that I have had seasons with opposite results which results in some serious negativity from a play perspective. Perhaps I’ll rebound sometime in the near term, but the feelings remain.
Outside of just random luck, there's also when you play. If you got excited to play early this season because of how well last season went, you may have run into higher MMR players before they worked their way up to where they wouldn't match you. Sometimes this can result in less fair matches early on, though it's a bit rare and still likely just random luck.
Another factor is the time of day you play. If you play closer to prime time in your region, you're more likely to get teammates closer to your own MMR just because there are more players around to match with.
What about situations that result in accounts having net 40% WR over a season or 60%? Are you viewing the goal for 50 as a lifetime for an account?
If so, while that is mathematically 50, I’d worry about significant retention issues as player perception of the system.
If not, how do you account for those accounts? After a certain time, shouldn’t the MMR adjust?
That can happen for a number of reasons, and is not ideal. We don't currently look at a 40% account and try to fix it with extra wins, nor at a 60% account and try to fix it with extra losses.
Most common reasons I've seen in real data:
Awesome, thanks for the detailed reply. If you can answer, how do you feel about the fairness of matches?
The devs on PC League published an article recently about how the matches in Ranked Solo Queue were extremely close in MMR except when duos were involved, which makes me believe that a lot of the unfairness in matchmaking that people in this community perceive might be caused by the ability to duo and even trio queue which increases the randomness compared to PC League. In that same article they mention that 99% of matches had all players within 2 divisions of one another, what would be the equivalent range for Wild Rift?
Do you think there might be any evidence to confirm or deny that the ranked queue in this game mode feels more random than PC League?
I can't really speak to how we compare with PC since I don't have their raw data in front of me.
But as far as what can lead to increased MMR gap, in WR it's more likely to be trying to get everyone their position. duo/trio doesn't have a huge impact there (average duos and trios still only win 50% of their matches). 50/50 matches are still the most common, but it can push up to 60/40 in some worse cases.
As for a feeling of randomness, that can also come from the actual skill gap within your team, which doesn't have as strict of a control. The team vs. team MMR gap has a value above which the matchmaker will never allow. The within-team gap, however, resizes based on real-time population.
Basically, it will find the closest MMRs possible within the allowed Rank gap. The rank gap also can't be loosened. But it is possible during slower times of the day to get players whose MMR is much lower than your own despite having the same Rank as you. When that happens...
Read moreRead moreTbh, there's no proof either way but I've ranked up to Diamond+ in League, Wild Rift, and TFT, and at least for the other two games I can personally attest that the matchmaking and ranking systems have been very fair and accurate over a decently large number of games, like 150-250 per season.
That really wants to make me give Riot the benefit of the doubt for Wild Rift, although even then I have to admit that the fortitude system is really sus to me and leaves a bad taste in my mouth because it's the only system in the 3 games that rewards you for playing selfishly rather than playing to win the game. And on top of that, somewhat minor but there's even a daily bonus to fortitude (according to the wiki at least) which I think is really bad if true. It makes it so that ranked only really starts at Diamond when you lose the fortitude system but even then it makes me kinda paranoid like what if a similar metric system exists to control your VP gains.
Just personally, ...
Thanks for giving us the benefit of the doubt!
You are correct. We try our best to give each team the same MMR to lead to a fair match. We don't look at your win% at all, nor your recent Win/Loss pattern.
When putting a match together, all the matchmaker does is:
If that all goes through, the match fires up.
That's about it.
This leads to matches being winnable by both teams. It doesn't mean there aren't outliers, or matches that can snowball, and there are a lot of other factors that can show up between team assignment and actual match play. But that's how it works.
Hey I was just curious on how much yall on the wild rift team intend to make the game similar to pc league? Elemental rift changes feels like a push to be more like pc. Will we eventually have mythic items?
We plan on doing what is best for Wild Rift, sometimes that'll mean working alongside LoLPC, or mirroring something they do, and other times doing our own thing, and maybe they mirror that (if they feel it works for LoLPC).
This version of Elemental Rift is very similar to LoLPC, and we think that is a great starting point for us, but we will be testing other versions to find what works best.
We currently don't have plans to introduce the Mythic system to Wild Rift, we think it works great for what the LoLPC team was trying to do, but each game is different and we don't think it would be a great fit for Wild Rift. Mythic actives would be particularly tricky.
Rito had an excuse for this like 9 months back, game was new and there were more pressing stuff.
Not really anymore. Wonder what’s the technical difficulties to add basic navigation for replays
This is because it isn't saved as a video file, and instead a series of actions that the game replays. This makes the file MUCH smaller, but it also means you can't rewind/skip around.
To be clear, we do not expect or want Elder Dragon to be a frequent occurrence and it should not be an expected way to end games. It is there as a tool to close out games that go long.
If the game is long and teams are even, then Elder Dragon can be used to close it out. Or as a comeback/close out if a team has taken Dragon Soul and still not been able to close out the game.
We still have more Elemental Rift testing to do, and versions to try out. So keep the feedback coming!
I asked about this too - those skins are intended to be permanent, and the "legacy" clock symbol is not meant to be there D:
Thanks for the Warmog's nerf!! Also edited the post to include the link to the thread.
Unrelated question but Will the old Solari Chargeblade ever come back? On-hit item which applies on crit and gives extra crit chance seems so much interesting to me than the current version (which is just a glorified sheen item which has 3 stack and can crit). The extra crit chance helps a lot when I want to go lethality-crit but still want that sweet 100% crit chance.
The current Chargeblade seems to benefit crit builders more than caster adcs.
I wouldn't expect it to come back. We changed it because of the problems that came out of being able to rush 50% crit. I haven't looked at its performance since the changes, but I haven't heard of anything being out of line or casters needing some love.
I don’t believe the major issue regarding all this confusion is about the home guard MS. It’s about the respawn timer changes.
1) Some players believe the winning team had shorter respawn timers and this was a built in snowballing mechanic. With the 3.1a changes the winning team will have even shorter respawns.
2) Others believe the winning team had shorter respawn timers (snowballing mechanic), but with the 3.1a changes that will be slightly less than before.
3) Others believe the losing team had shorter respawn timers (comeback mechanic), but with the 3.1a changes that will be slightly less than before.
4) Finally, others believe the losing team had shorter respawn timers (comeback mechanic), but with the 3.1a changes that will be slightly more than before.
So please clarify this once and for all, I’m begging you! u/Endstep u/R0gueFool
Right those 2 changes, Homeguard + Respawn Timers, are very interconnected. We would not do one without the other. Base respawn needed to go up to account for the Homeguard change.
As for the details of the respawn modifier changes.
Respawn Modifier
Realistically this is not a change you would be able to notice, you would need to be +/-2 levels from the average instead of 3 for this to kick in. All it really means is that if you are far ahead or behind (in the early-mid game) your respawn will be more in line with everyone else.
devtrackers.gg