League of Designs

{{champion:13}} Q

I read through everything again (I read most of this thread last week but wanted to talk to some designers to get more context), and don't have a lot to say that Novalas already said but here's the major points from myself/some designers I talked to:

Nasus can't scale into the lategame with his current kit because ranged champions that can kite him have access to more multipliers than him (IE, DCap, Void, Last Whisper, etc.) and his target access (Wither) is too slow/ineffective to make up for those multipliers. Unlike mobile fighters like Camille that can use their burst tools and target access to delete champions with more multiplier items before they get to use them, Nasus almost always has to enter real sustained combat with enemies to beat them - so to change that, Nasus would need more burst or better target access.

One of the things you've pointed out here (flat armor pen on E) would boost Nasus' burst quite a bit, particularly against squishy targets, but the point of shifting the E armor pen from flat to % was that at the time, Nasus was actually much better at fighting squishy targets than tanky ones, which doesn't make sense for the character's strength/weakness profile. Nasus should be relatively target-agnostic in terms of damage to be fair, as when he's better at killing squishier targets he's very binary in gameplay (he gets to the squishy and they die, or he never touches them and Nasus dies), whereas target-agnostic damage allows him to have more actual (sustained) combat against squishy targets while giving him a strategic niche against tanky targets (who he can generally lane against well and handle later in the game if he has %damage/%shred).

Live Gameplay does currently have Nasus on their list of champions that could use a buff, and we had some discussion about what he could get - some thoughts about extra sustain (either lifesteal on passive or health regen) to give him a bit more breathing room in the early lane, or increased Q stacks for cannon/large monster/champion kills (to reward him more when he's doing well or going even, plus give him a bit of a comeback mechanic). No current plans to ship any of this stuff, but it's being talked about and might make it in one of the next few patches if one of the Live designers decides to put time into a changelist.

Cryotron said () :

{{champion:136}} - Because he's a Space Dragon. That's why.

This is exactly what Aurelion Sol expects you to say.

After Akali

There should also be a base model update on the PBE as well today

Not quite what I said. The matchups are more skill-dependent against bruisers but he still can win them. He also handles ranged matchups well, partially due to his sustain but also because of his mid-range damage output.

There are more than a few potential pairs for a future event, but I actually hadn't considered this one until just now. It's darkly poetic and I really like that.

sixdogman said () :

Feel free to disagree with me on this one but isn't that what we are trying to measure? People who regularly have good/bad days is the problem we are here to discuss. The cause of that personal variance isn't necessarily the problem but the effect that variance in performance has on other players is the root cause of the frustration.

You're recording which champs they play so how many games logged on a champion is a variable in your arsenal. Tolerances for variance in gameplay could be broadened. One reasonable approach is to assume high variance gameplay at first and lean harder into measured outcomes on that champion with number of games played. Interestingly this information could be used to give champion specific MMR for each player to help tighten matchmaking and/or calculated LP gains/losses, even if it isn't used to detect tilters.

You're also measuring which roles are assigned/played in champ select with the ranked updates scheduled for the upcoming preseason, so role specific performance is also in your arsenal.

Bad games/teams tend to not come in regular streaks. If this is a big enough problem and not a factor in individual performance then that's a failure in matchmaking, which is what the person you responded to was commenting on. We've come full circle back to highlighting the need to shore up the matchmaking algorithm.

---

Now, whether or not you should queue tilters against each other is another question entirely, but it could be detected.

Makes a lot of sense. As I mention a lot I'm definitely not an expert in these areas. Rather I want to encourage us to think about the problem holistically and understand the root causes of things. Your call out of "whether or not we should queue tilters against each other" is a great call out and one of the root problems I think. Nice job

GigglesO said () :

I mean We could just send out a one question survey (multiple choice) to all players and compile the response. It wouldn't devalue any other survey, and would give you guys the exact answer of the whole community. You could also then publish the results of these short questions so that players know if they are in the minority. That way we know if its worth complaining, because as a company you try to appeal to the Majority.

We could easily ask something like: Do you like one shotting and getting one shot for game balance? Yes No Sometimes

Or

Do you feel armor is impatful Yes No

I want to avoid this spiraling cause we aren't disagreeing x). My suggestion is simply in the execution of the plan, less of the "what to do"

sixdogman said () :

Then you've given up on the problem. You can't change the individuals so if you're not willing to change the game systems that handle them then there is no recourse left. You've resigned yourself to accepting this problem forever until you're willing to change the punishment system to deal with these people.

I don't blame a system when, ultimately, the responsibility is on people and society to shepherd change. That may be overly optimistic or sheltered of me I will admit, but I never expect a system to singularly create behavior or societal change. Rather its a combination of my small individual efforts combined with systemic change that creates sustainable positive growth. Its my responsibility as a person to do what ever small or little act I can to fix the root problem, in this case by showing kindness and empathy towards the people I'm playing with & against.

To bring it to a really personal place, when I was younger one could have argued it was the "school system" that caused me to battle depression & suicidal thoughts. However, it was a small group of people (couple teachers and a new friend) who took the responsibility upon themselves to combat the root causes of that depression (in my case loneliness and lack of self worth). It was them, not the system, that helped me stabilize.

Again, I'm not saying the system can't be changed to make this work easier. That absolutely needs to and is being done (honor, reporting tool, matchmaking, etc). However, recusing yourself from the responsibility of combating the negative symptoms of life that manifest in toxicity by blaming the "system" is a bs move to me.

Sorry for being so inflamed by this (and taking it to a very personal story), but I feel very strongly about topics like these. We all have to step up and take responsibility for our own part of the solution, whether it be in a game or in life.

“If you are not a part of the solution, you are a part of the problem.” ― Eldridge Cleaver

All will be made clear in the next Roadmap

;)

sixdogman said () :

Tilter - one who exhibits high variance in gameplay whose performance runs in streaks. Sounds like a metric for that behaviour would be reasonable to derive.

Very "Black Mirror-esq" lol. How would you account for variance with good / bad days, new champ learning, other qued roles, or simply bad games / teams? All of those in a "high variance" variable would look the same, and I don't think people would appreciate being punished for simply having a bad day (or streak of bad days). I'm not saying this isn't a possibility, nor should it never be considered. Rather I want the scope and nuance of the problem space to be appreciated.

EROTIC RAID BOSS said () :

So if I understand right, this update is heavy on lore/art but light on gameplay changes? I'm pretty interested to see what exactly it is, given this is a first and there's a lot of champions I can think of that could use nicer art/vo etc.

Aye. It's a long list. One of the reasons we're doing it is to test the viability of minor VGUs. How much will it resonate with players en masse, etc. We're all hoping it does. :)

Sun God Leona said () :

you know what i love, designers who dont sit around and not listen to their community and come up with dumbshit ideas cause their word is final so they dont bother to get involved. but hey, at least narrative writer gets involved with its community, doubtful you relay how unsatisfied leagues community is tho.

must be nice working for a gaming studio that only has one game too

Let me go deeper. Threads like this reinforce to us devs how players view champions, what resonates, what the takeaway is (etc), plus it's full of passion and love.

I'm not sure if your post was salty or complimentary... but it is nice working for Riot. I enjoy talking with players who like and who don't like my champs. Also, this thread is larger devoid of salt, which is REALLY AWESOME.

Personally, I LOVE Vel'Koz. Giant eyeball with a thirst for knowledge... unfortunately he only learns by vaporizing his subject which destroys chances for further study. Irony.

Ziggs -- I'm a fan of mad bomber archetypes. Bomb Voyage is my favorite part of the first Incredibles film and I'll sloppily main Junkrat in Overwatch all day.

DwarvenGiant said () :

Man. The teasing business sounds like a rough one to manage, but you make it seem like a piece of cake. Frosted with whipped cream and chocolate crumbles...

What were we talking about again? Cakes business, wasn't it?

Mmmm. Cakes. Quick: red velvet -- yay or nay?