League of Legends: Wild Rift Dev Tracker

It's largely due to how easy it is to get Quicksilver enchant. The power of having both so easily is a bit scary, and would slow the game down/drastically weaken champions who rely on CC at higher levels.

This also means that we tend to see more interesting spells taken in it's place.

You're right that different champions have different ratios and thus things that give AP, in this case, Brutal and Gathering Storm, values changes for each champion but that is going to be the case with any game where you have different characters. There isn't a lot of design space when everything is equally valuable to everyone.

I'm sorry that I used the word "fine" what I was saying is that the rune itself is not weak (it actually might be a tad strong for its slot), the problem is that people undervalue it because it isn't as feelable/noticeable as other runes. That is a problem for sure, but when talking in terms of "balance" it isn't a problem here. As for the meta changing, it does change different regions and elos within those regions all tend to have a different meta. We see this in LolPC all the time, and Worlds is often where these metas clash.

You mentioned that you believe funnel strategies are toxic and should be dealt with maybe we didn't deal with i...

One of our aspirations is to try and get brand new League players who are coming in from Arcane to try out Wild Rift, so I'm really glad y'all are enjoying it 🥺

...Looking into it a bit now I'd argue that it actually could be a bit more niche, while it isn't the most popular rune it is on the stronger side. I'd say this is an issue of satisfaction. Runes like Gathering Storm show you their scaling, and others are more feelable. But the issue here is that once you have this effect you just gain a small, unnoticeable, amount every 2 minutes. I'd bet it would see more play if we showed the values at X minutes (like you see on Gathering Storm) in the tooltip.

...It would also see a lot more play if we put it into more recommended builds. Player's don't deviate from that as much as I would have expected.

It's possible that it isn't the best rune if you are constantly trying to teamfight, but the meta can change and I wouldn't want to us to get in a habit of adjusting the philosophy of a rune (in this case, late-game scaling) to better fit a different meta.

Conditioning isn't the most popular defensive rune, though these runes have a better spread than other tiers. But aside from a lower pick rate, it's actually performing just fine.

Ok, so your issue with the rune is that you feel that the early game is too valuable to risk on a rune focused on the late game. That suggests an issue with the idea of having a late-game defensive rune.

I think that is a fair issue to have but we already have other early game runes and I don't think we would want to change this just to add another.

Though I don't agree that squishy champions need to take Bone Plating or Adaptive Carapace I think it really depends on the match-up. Bone Plating is great against burst or assassins, but if you are not worried about that it isn't worth taking. Whereas Adaptive Carapace is better if you can stay at low health for longer, something squishy champions tend to struggle with. Though it is a fine general defensive rune.

It's also worth noting that it's only the first 5 minutes of the game, generally, you aren't going to be dealing with a lot of burst damage or be at low health this early on.

I'm curious to know why you feel that Conditioning is a weak rune? Its slow stacking nature is definitely a bit harder to feel than other runes that have a clear on/off state. This would explain it feeling a bit weaker than other defensive runes.

Because this rune is something that all champions have access to it actually wouldn't help tanks more than other classes. It's actually a bit worse for tanks, vs other classes. This is because they end up buying extra Armor/MR so the bonus you gain from Conditioning ends up not being worth as much for tanks, because Armor and MR values have diminishing returns, when compared to other classes who don't purchase as much.

We chose to put most of our rewards in the in-game event instead!

I appreciate this post a lot, thanks for sharing your thoughts

Yeah, I think this was pretty solidly overlooked in terms of the impact it would have on loading screen tilt. Ultimately, an ideal matchmaking system - you shouldn't have to think about it at all; you should just trust that it works.

And I agree that certain exclusions should be put in place (which I believe we're now re-adding in the form of "acceptable" ranked bands at each skill level)

I helped write this post, and I wanted to be honest with the reasons on why we're changing it. The data we saw does look better, especially when it comes to finding games for lower ranked players (with very little impact on overall fairness). But the thing I wanted to get across is that even if data looks good, we have to weigh up the actual play experience against it. In this case, it was not at all worth the tradeoff.

This thread probably has the most up-to-date info: https://twitter.com/joshua\_menke/status/1453804648771424257?s=20

We're working on this, but it's taking more time than we hoped because it touches so many systems. We have to make sure we correctly handle all the things that happen at the end of a game: ranked updates, XP, blue motes, boosts, mission progress, wild pass progress, etc.

That looks like a great list. And I think you got most of them covered here.

My first thought for the jungle was Amumu because he is really easy to pick up and have an impact with. But jungle is also a complex role that isn't the most newb friendly anyway.

For support I'm inclined to say Soraka, but with a caveat. Her playstyle isn't the most exciting and isn't for everyone so while she is newb friendly in that she isn't very complex to play it likely won't be the best experience if you are trying to get a friend into the game. Obviously though if this is a playstyle they enjoy than Soraka might be good for them to check out.

Brand was way overpowered on his release. So much that literally all of his abilities received a nerf.

I agree Brand was released too strong, and am sorry about that, but it hardly points to a trend. Nunu as we'll was a bit stronger, but it took most players a little time to catch up to it and really get a feel for him.

These are the point I'm interested in here:

It just feels like whenever a champion is released, they're on the broken spectrum, in terms of damage mostly.....

And even after that, he's still on the strong side, picked or banned in nearly 70% of my games.

And the criteria you use to define this. Because I'd argue that he is in a fine spot now and have seen that (as the team has defined champions strength) the vast majority of our champion releases have been under power (in some cases critically). Funny enough this is part of what led to Brand's OP release. We had been ...

I'm speaking from my own opinions here, and not for the rest of my team.
1. I agree this is annoying and a pain point I have felt too. I don't know if we currently have any plans here in the short term but I'll bring it up to people to see how they feel.
2. I actually think the issue with Wit's End comes from it giving too much. At a glance, the item seems to be doing just fine, if not a little strong. But it isn't something you should be buying every game.
Exactly like you said certain aspects can be hard to feel, but adding some AD to that would just exacerbate the problem because we would need to reduce its other effects to compensate for it, or increase its cost.

1. I agree Maw feels a bit weak. Part of the issue here is that it is a very narrow item (MR items always will be). But also that it competes with Sterak's Gage, which has great synergy with Triforce.

2. I haven't personally noticed this as an issue, especially with IBG as its...

The changes in this twitter thread may fix this for you, they are partly to address that experience: https://twitter.com/draggles/status/1450955240413417475?s=20

Sorry I took so long to respond here.

If you've followed me across other games, you probably know that I have implemented solutions that do look at in-game performance, but always carefully.

Basically, looking at variables that the data show contribute meaningfully to winning a match, and only considering them at the level they actually contribute. Using data to determine how much performance mitigates a loss, not just taking a best guess at the value.

I also prefer to make sure winning is always the most important factor.

But, yeah, tdlr: there are definitely ways to do this correctly.

I don't know whether we would see them in Wild Rift anytime soon because we're currently still focused on skill and matchmaking over these next few patches. Once we finish our current pass on those features, we may look more closely at ranks.

It's also possible that some of our improvements to skill and matchmaking will soften issues you are experienci...

I highly recommend going FoN>Winter's Approach on Nasus for ARAMs. It's tricky to get stacked, but you provide a lot of utility.

Yeah, you are correct, losing will always hurt in the long run.

I believe we fixed one of the main factors that made players think it was worth doing. So now, when you drop back into Masters, your LP gains aren't actually more than they were in GM, given the same current overall LP. This should make it so there's no reason to drop back anymore, and best to just grind where you stand.