|
GrandInquisitor
New York City13113 Posts
I don't think even the most salt-infested salt mine of saltworld would argue that New Role Select has got to go. New Role Select is probably the single best change to matchmaking that has ever taken place, as evidenced by how angry people are about "autofill". But I do think that it really exacerbates the extremely high-MMR matchmaking issue.
On June 03 2016 01:43 Alaric wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2016 01:06 JimmiC wrote:
4: Riot is not a Bond Villian, they have no super secret agenda. They are a company who makes it's money off in game purchases. Therefor they wanted as many committed people playing as they can. They make changes based on keeping the game popular and getting people more committed and spending more. They may not get it right every single time but that is the agenda. Which alienates part of their playerbase because it grew so large it's not as uniform as it was during s2. And most people here and on reddit don't represent the largest chunk of said playerbase which is targeted by these changes. Hence all the complaints. I've said it over and over again, but Riot's shitting on part of their playerbase because number-wise they can afford it, and because players are also weighted by how much income they can provide and not how "loyal" or competitive they are. This isn't season 2 or even season 3 LoL anymore, and I'm not talking about gameplay.
To be clear - Reddit will always shit on Riot. Every single change Riot has ever made to the game, according to Reddit, ruined it. This game died when Challenger Tier was introduced. It died when trinkets were introduced. It died when jungle timers were introduced. It died when Duskblade was introduced.
So is it fair to say that Riot is actually shitting on its playerbase? You're dealing with an entity of pure rage, where multiple top-voted posts called Riot literally Hitler because hextech crafting gave group players marginally enhanced key fragment drop rates. Dynamic Queue is just what 2016 reddit has chosen to be angry about.
|
On June 03 2016 01:10 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On June 02 2016 23:20 Jek wrote:
It's a bit interesting just how much of a succes dynamic queue's role picking was since people are throwing fits about autofill now.
. Isn't it like, "whats the point" of role-specific queue is a significant %of the time you don't get it? Why not just go back to pick order based on MMR ?
pick order based on mmr was god awful. the difference in mmr would literally be a single point in most cases
|
yes but you would be 1 point ahead the same amount of times you're one point behind..........
and higher elos the difference was significant
I liked it because it meant if you were good you got the role you wanted and if you didn't you got to support better players
|
On June 03 2016 03:15 GrandInquisitor wrote:
To be clear - Reddit will always shit on Riot. Every single change Riot has ever made to the game, according to Reddit, ruined it. This game died when Challenger Tier was introduced. It died when trinkets were introduced. It died when jungle timers were introduced. It died when Duskblade was introduced.
So is it fair to say that Riot is actually shitting on its playerbase? You're dealing with an entity of pure rage, where multiple top-voted posts called Riot literally Hitler because hextech crafting gave group players marginally enhanced key fragment drop rates. Dynamic Queue is just what 2016 reddit has chosen to be angry about.
Reddit has a (IMO) unhealthy investment in streamers, so I doubt they will every really get off the dynamic queue hate-train until queue times are lower for the Bjerson or nightblue, or whichever clown they like now.
On June 03 2016 03:15 Frolossus wrote:Show nested quote +On June 03 2016 01:10 cLutZ wrote:On June 02 2016 23:20 Jek wrote:
It's a bit interesting just how much of a succes dynamic queue's role picking was since people are throwing fits about autofill now.
. Isn't it like, "whats the point" of role-specific queue is a significant %of the time you don't get it? Why not just go back to pick order based on MMR ? pick order based on mmr was god awful. the difference in mmr would literally be a single point in most cases
Not really an issue. People would never know, so Riot could have just released numbers (and we know they can massage them to make a point) saying, "the average first pick is 100 MMR higher than lastpick! So make sure you respect pick order!" But they didn't, so the issue was it wasn't enforced enough by Riot (i.e. being non-compliant with pick order was never treated nearly as harshly as calling someone a n****** or c*** etc, even though it was the root cause of a bigger % of tilting and ingame trolling, than typed language ever was, from what I saw).
|
On June 03 2016 03:15 GrandInquisitor wrote:
To be clear - Reddit will always shit on Riot. Every single change Riot has ever made to the game, according to Reddit, ruined it. This game died when Challenger Tier was introduced. It died when trinkets were introduced. It died when jungle timers were introduced. It died when Duskblade was introduced.
So is it fair to say that Riot is actually shitting on its playerbase? You're dealing with an entity of pure rage, where multiple top-voted posts called Riot literally Hitler because hextech crafting gave group players marginally enhanced key fragment drop rates. Dynamic Queue is just what 2016 reddit has chosen to be angry about.
its not only reddit check their official forum besides 2 years ago reddit used to be in love of riot, any negative comments were downvoted into oblivion in matter of seconds its the recent changes which made their most loyal and long lasting player base angry
|
Lucian
Attack speed per level lowered to 1.5 from 3.3
Lightslinger (Passive) second shot can no longer critically strike
This is taking ADC hate too far.
|
tried out the MF variation of no crit build. Feels really good man, pretty sure I could one shot the enemy adc if I got a creep kill Q bounce after Duskblade, sadly the opportunity hasn't presented itself since the lane phase is usually over.
On June 03 2016 04:56 Ansibled wrote:
Lucian
Attack speed per level lowered to 1.5 from 3.3
Lightslinger (Passive) second shot can no longer critically strike
This is taking ADC hate too far.
Doesn't seem to matter that much Lucian players aren't building crit items as is, maybe they want him to buy new Trinity? I don't see it outperforming Ghostblade or BC but maybe if you have a BC top? Most likely just wishful thinking.
I think it's a really bad nerf if they want him to go back to essence.
|
Lucian's passive is still dumb just because of how it can decide a fight on a dice roll more often than already happens once he's got crit. aa-Q-aa or aa-E-aa with a double crit on any of the autos and you just 100-0'd any squishy late game (and shove him out of the fight if there's no Soraka in midgame).
|
That is just an issue with critical hits in general, although this change will reduce his effective crit chance.
This will be the last time I comment on Fizz changes until the next patch notes are released because I'll probably qq too much if so. But I think we all saw Fizz nerfs coming when the qss change happened. The problem with Fizz is Riot has gone so all in on wanting him to blow E offensively to do damage while ult is on cd, that his base damages are already pretty terrible.
Like if you want a poster boy for how overpowered mobility is in this game take a look at Fizz's base damage, there is a reason he see's play and base damage isn't it. Following that logic a nerf to E cd makes sense, the only base damage number that even has room to nerf is his missing health dot. Personally I really hope they don't do that, I feel like his missing health dot is the bridge to getting the items you need to be a threat when ult is on cd.
The nimble fighter nerf is so annoying, I just wish creep block wasn't a think in this game in general, nerfing a hero by saying "we're going to let poor pathfinding rng lead to some out trades" is frustrating.
|
On June 03 2016 03:17 Slayer91 wrote:
yes but you would be 1 point ahead the same amount of times you're one point behind..........
and higher elos the difference was significant
I liked it because it meant if you were good you got the role you wanted and if you didn't you got to support better players
it didn't mean that though. out of 5 players on your team mmr differences are small enough to be irrelevant at determining who is better.
you were literally a queue dodge away between first and last pick.
~150 mmr is pretty normal fluctuation for any person so having teammates within that range deciding pick order is dumb
it also made duo queues get pick advantage as they'd be given first or last pick every game
|
well if it's irrelevant it's fine as long as you get each slot roughly 20% of the time
but the higher you get the bigger the gaps get and the more it makes sense
i mean that was before dynamic queue
duos were usually double last or first/last yea, but the system punishes duos super hard
thus the classic case of the duo bot lane feeding because they were last picks and outclassed mmr wise
not sure what you consider pick advantage
is last pick good because you can counter or is first pick good because you get what you want?
|
On June 03 2016 07:03 Slayer91 wrote:
well if it's irrelevant it's fine as long as you get each slot roughly 20% of the time
but the higher you get the bigger the gaps get and the more it makes sense
i mean that was before dynamic queue
duos were usually double last or first/last yea, but the system punishes duos super hard
thus the classic case of the duo bot lane feeding because they were last picks and outclassed mmr wise
the only point where it would've had a noticeable effect was in challenger.
everything below that had a large number of players in small mmr range
the pick advantage is being given both every game just because you duo with someone higher or lower than you.
|
not sure what you're talking about
back in the old days anything higher than like 1800 you got your pick a sizeable amount of the time and when you didn't and got last pick you were playing with the guys in pro teams or that level
not sure why first/last is pick advantage
surely first/last is about as good as 2.5th pick on average?
|
On June 03 2016 07:06 Slayer91 wrote:
not sure what you're talking about
back in the old days anything higher than like 1800 you got your pick a noticeable amount of the time and when you didn't and got last pick you were playing with the guys in pro teams or that level
i mean that the mmr difference between master and challenger reaches multiple hundreds.
the difference between d2 and d1 or d1 and master is at most 200ish which is pretty close to fluctuating levels just from playing the game
|
20 mmr gaps could be like 100 from first to last it's significant
anyway i'm not sure what your argument is
either theres lots of ppl in the MMR range and you get distributed between pick slots and the skill is about the same
or there isn't and higher rated ppl get pick priority
right now the system is doing it randomly which works well in most cases but badly when a big mmr gap exists
except it doesn't matter now because of dyn q
|
On June 03 2016 07:08 Slayer91 wrote:
20 mmr gaps could be like 100 from first to last it's significant
anyway i'm not sure what your argument is
either theres lots of ppl in the MMR range and you get distributed between pick slots and the skill is about the same
or there isn't and higher rated ppl get pick priority
right now the system is doing it randomly which works well in most cases but badly when a big mmr gap exists
except it doesn't matter now because of dyn q
the point is that 100 mmr isn't a meaningful enough difference in skill to determine who should get first pick. this is why it was randomized.
you can go up or down 100+ mmr in a single day over the course of like 5 games. it's just not the case that you got better or worse over the course of those games and therefore 100 mmr should not determine what pick order is
|
the beauty of statistics is that on average it does matter
a pseudo random system like this makes more sense than a pure random one
the 100 mmr on average makes a difference, how much doesn't matter because once you decide you want to give pick priority to higher ranked players you should do so
i don't see why you want an arbitrary cut off point for when you should get first pick
we aren't stealing peoples first picks here, on average you'll still get the same amount of times first pick/last pick etc its just that in your games the higher ranked people get their roles more often
it was a good system I think. Not sure on their reasoning for removing it. Probably the toxicity of "last pick sucks".
like you're basically saying you shouldn't say a certain hand in poker is stronger than another because on a given day the "weaker hand" could win 9 times out of 10
yes it can but on average the stronger hand wins and on average the 100 mmr player is quite a bit better
|
On June 03 2016 07:17 Slayer91 wrote:
the beauty of statistics is that on average it does matter
a pseudo random system like this makes more sense than a pure random one
the 100 mmr on average makes a difference, how much doesn't matter because once you decide you want to give pick priority to higher ranked players you should do so
i don't see why you want an arbitrary cut off point for when you should get first pick
we aren't stealing peoples first picks here, on average you'll still get the same amount of times first pick/last pick etc its just that in your games the higher ranked people get their roles more often
it was a good system I think. Not sure on their reasoning for removing it. Probably the toxicity of "last pick sucks".
like you're basically saying you shouldn't say a certain hand in poker is stronger than another because on a given day the "weaker hand" could win 9 times out of 10
yes it can but on average the stronger hand wins and on average the 100 mmr player is quite a bit better
you know what statistically evens out over time and has less exploitability and edge cases?
random pick order. thus we have that instead now
|
wat
mmr pick order gives exactly the same results as random pick order for anything that isn't high elo or duos with big mmr differences
mmr pick order is better for high elo and they handled the duo thing by restricting it
like, frolossus, you know that for average player experience it doesnt matter at all right?
|
Frossie,
If you are arguing that MMR-based pick order is essentially random for all but higher MMR, that is not an argument against it. Pick order had to/has to be determined some way, and MMR is the best way given the tools the game has at its disposal. Random has no benefits to it, MMR gives the system a chance of giving the best player ban control and first role priority.
Given the new role-based queue an interesting thing would to assign pick order based on the relative probability that your assigned role is picked at that point in pro play. That would be kinda fun, for a day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
