CytheGuy (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Wilk Rycerz,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=29JdQyIg,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2019-08-08T22:53:32.577+0000) > > An answer to this question has already been posted almost a week ago now: > - >Cost of maintaining it's low and value seems pretty meaningful. This doesn't really line up with what he's saying. He's mostly talking about removing old stuff to make room for new stuff to improve efficiency and whatnot, as well as reducing test load to maintain old stuff. Then he comes around and says that the cost of keeping it is low, while the value of it is "pretty meaningful." So all-in-all we really don't have an answer to the question.
> [{quoted}](name=CytheGuy,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=29JdQyIg,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2019-08-08T23:05:24.212+0000) > > - > > This doesn't really line up with what he's saying. He's mostly talking about removing old stuff to make room for new stuff to improve efficiency and whatnot, as well as reducing test load to maintain old stuff. Then he comes around and says that the cost of keeping it is low, while the value of it is "pretty meaningful." > > So all-in-all we really don't have an answer to the question. Generally when designing things, the toughest part is figuring out which features to leave out or remove rather than what to actually add. This is because you want things to be as streamlined and efficient as possible. If you're not streamlined enough, then the thing you're designing becomes confusing, bloated, and players will have trouble finding or discovering things. If you've ever looking through in-game settings and found something you didn't even realize existed before, that's bad. So in this case, since they made a new cursor, ideally you'd want to remove the old one because it's unnecessary bloat. ...except that a huge portion of players still opt into it, 10%. So then, it's not actually bloat. It's a useful feature that a lot of people use and there's no sense in removing it. In a year they might have another pass over all the settings and see if it's still getting used, but for now enough people use it that it's worth keeping. It's also not using a lot of resources to maintain. Another reason you want to remove unnecessary features is that you're wasting developer time maintaining things nobody is going to use anyway. In this case they can basically just let it sit there and don't need to work on it almost ever, so again it's not a big deal to just keep it.
: "Community feedback really means something to us, we swear"
If you want a practical response to why, it's because large scale changes would mean they'd need to push back the entire arcade event they had scheduled on very short notice. You might be able to get it updated possibly but I wouldnt expect too much. The fact that it went to pbe means that it already passed through some other tests or got good feedback elsewhere and that feedback probably did not match up to the larger community. Jinx is internally considered one of their most iconic champs so there's a realistic chance something could get done if the feedback is loud enough. Odds are probably that Riot can see and understand the feedback, but realistically speaking there's only so much they can do given that it's a skin for a major event and has a lot of other things such as event passes and such tied to it that they can't delay. It's also possible that they have another set of data we don't that shows a different story than what we see, it's hard to know for sure.
: Am I the only one that has no interest or desire to play Team Fight Tactics?
I've been enjoying it quite a bit more than regular league since it came out. I think it's satisfying in the same way that poker or a tcg is. It's also fun to both theorycraft comps or create new ones on the fly from the pieces you're given. Plus it's more chill and I can talk to my friends or watch stuff while I play.
: [OFF TOPIC] Sony announced the Gaymer system is going on the open market next year...
In addition to what everyone else has said, you can tell this is old since the shape is of the old model ps4 and not the pro or slim.
: State of Play: Lessons Learned from Solo Q and Pro Play
That was really interesting to read the more in-depth article. If it were ever feasible id love to see a future study run as an experiment to account for Mobalytics users likely being more dedicated to improving in general. Without that it's interesting but doesn't make any real definitive conclusions for me. Would have also liked to see a comparison by number of games played instead of by rank.
: Yordle vs Moogle
Ivalice moogles > yordles > other moogles Imo
Critty92 (EUNE)
: Dont call Yuumi trash if you dont feel like cooperating
The funny part is that if anything she's potentially overtuned and people are still believing shes weak. Those hotfix buffs were huge.
Bazerka (NA)
: Thank you everyone
{{sticker:sg-ahri-2}}
: Which job is harder? Design or Balance Team
Both are hard in their own ways. Design is freaking hard. Games are insanely complex with tons of rules and attributes to think about that you wouldn't even realize are there until you try designing something yourself. You're potentially dealing with hundreds or thousands of decisions that you have to make, and if you ever change something it can throw half of those past decisions completely off. Balance is also deceptively difficult. You would think that there's an objectively right answer that you're working towards, but that's just flat out untrue. You have plenty of stats to work with that can help, except the majority of them aren't relevant, lie to you, or are just misleading in what they actually mean. And even if you somehow figure out what to do with the numbers, it turns out that player experience doesn't align with what the stats say anyway.
41noob (NA)
: i know who the voter bot is
I bet they main support
nelogis (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=Fisherman Fizz,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Ziuyjdwz,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-04-15T09:36:23.050+0000) > > I wanted to try no Kuro charm next run, it sounds fun. I also still have 3 bosses I didn't get to fight yet with the ending I got and I'm excited for all 3. I'm ready to get my ass handed to me for spamming L1 lol You mean the shura ending and Purification? Im on Purification, you better get ready for that boss. It‘s the hardest one IMO
> [{quoted}](name=nelogis,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Ziuyjdwz,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-04-15T10:13:38.373+0000) > > You mean the shura ending and Purification? > > Im on Purification, you better get ready for that boss. It‘s the hardest one IMO Yep, those two. I've been hearing purification ending boss is harder than final boss, which sounds awesome! > [{quoted}](name=Sukishoo,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Ziuyjdwz,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-04-15T14:54:14.319+0000) > > Ive been playing it since it released. Really great game :D at the end of my first playthrough now as Ive been taking it a bit slower My first playthrough took me a while, tbh you'll be happy you took longer, you only get one 1st playthrough :P
nelogis (EUW)
: I‘m on NG+4 right now and the game gets incredibly more difficult with each playtrough The difficulty caps at NG+6 So if you want an even bigger challenge start those NG+‘s You can even make the game harder by giving Kuros charm to Kuro at the tutorial of an NG+. When you do that you get damaged even trough blocks, you have to perfectly parry to avoid full damage (or dodge) I‘m now doing every ending and getting all achievements, such a great game
> [{quoted}](name=nelogis,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Ziuyjdwz,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-15T09:28:09.947+0000) > > I‘m on NG+4 right now and the game gets incredibly more difficult with each playtrough > > The difficulty caps at NG+6 > > So if you want an even bigger challenge start those NG+‘s > You can even make the game harder by giving Kuros charm to Kuro at the tutorial of an NG+. When you do that you get damaged even trough blocks, you have to perfectly parry to avoid full damage (or dodge) > > I‘m now doing every ending and getting all achievements, such a great game I wanted to try no Kuro charm next run, it sounds fun. I also still have 3 bosses I didn't get to fight yet with the ending I got and I'm excited for all 3. I'm ready to get my ass handed to me for spamming L1 lol
: > [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=eMpKAyJg,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-04-15T06:55:02.941+0000) > > My favorite one PvP wise. It also has the best advancement curve, you can be quite powerful in a very short period of time. Game hands out levels and titanite early on like they're candy on Halloween. In that sense, it makes your intended requirement stats very quickly available. But my god the PvE is so bad. I was late to the game with Bloodborne due to not having bought a console in upwards of 10 years, but its PvE is very satisfying so far. And everything about Sekiro was amazing.
> [{quoted}](name=ZerglingOne,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=eMpKAyJg,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2019-04-15T09:20:37.141+0000) > > It also has the best advancement curve, you can be quite powerful in a very short period of time. Game hands out levels early on like they're candy on Halloween. In that sense, it makes your intended requirement stats very quickly available. > > But my god the PvE is so bad. > > I was late to the game with Bloodborne due to not having bought a console in upwards of 10 years, but its PvE is very satisfying so far. I was in a similar spot with not buying consoles until recently, but Bloodborne is sick. That game alone could justify buying a console tbh
Rioter Comments
: I've held off creating this thread for too long... The Day Riot invited me to Playtest Mordekaiser
Forgot to mention it in reddit comment, but that playlist is awesome btw!
CLG ear (NA)
: I finished watching Fate/Apocrypha
Fate Zero and Kara no Kyoukai are both really good if you haven't watched those. They have a lot less weeb bs to deal with
Bazerka (NA)
: Happy Thursday everyone!
My week's been pretty chill so far! Going to try to start KH3 over the weekend soon :D
: Do you believe that Riot is enfocing a 50% winrate by intentionally matching you with bad teams?
It leads you towards a 50% win rate by putting you with better players when you win and worse players when you lose. That's fundamentally how a matchmaking system is supposed to work though.
halla555 (NA)
: Any OG GDers remember your boy?
CLG ear (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Fisherman Fizz,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=2Ks8kF51,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2019-01-29T02:08:09.112+0000) > > I'm about 2/3 through my 2 straight weeks of work. This last stretch is gonna be pretty chill though and looking forward to the overtime what do u do for work https://i.imgur.com/op1u46v.jpg[]
> [{quoted}](name=CLG ear,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=2Ks8kF51,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-01-29T02:10:36.391+0000) > > what do u do for work > > https://i.imgur.com/op1u46v.jpg[] I do user research for video games :D
CLG ear (NA)
: Got a day off after working two weeks straight
I'm about 2/3 through my 2 straight weeks of work. This last stretch is gonna be pretty chill though and looking forward to the overtime
: Uh, Riot? Is that just a tooltip error, or...?
The attack speed increases by 5 per rank. For whatever reason it seems to be buggy and showing that rather than 25 like it should. There's also no % sign which is pretty unclear.
AIIan (EUW)
: > [{quoted}](name=MrFluffyPuffy,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Omyvt8YG,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2019-01-17T16:46:15.481+0000) > > I think visuals are way easier to notice then audios (except the audio is way louder than the average sound). Actually you're demonstrably wrong - it's well documented that humans react faster to audio stimuli rather than visual. With a significiant margin too - 25% faster ? 30% ? I can't be arsed to search for the exact datas myself...
> [{quoted}](name=AIIan,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=Omyvt8YG,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2019-01-18T10:12:31.007+0000) > > Actually you're demonstrably wrong - it's well documented that humans react faster to audio stimuli rather than visual. With a significiant margin too - 25% faster ? 30% ? I can't be arsed to search for the exact datas myself... He's talking about how hard it is to notice them though, which is more about sensory thresholds and detection than reaction time. However, for reaction time it actually is beneficial to have both stimuli together because redundant stimuli improve reaction time. This also means that it'd be beneficial to everyone to have a visual to go with the ult sounds, not just deaf players.
: > [{quoted}](name=Fisherman Fizz,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=wGoNOgE9,comment-id=0006000400000000,timestamp=2019-01-07T21:01:07.138+0000) > > It seems really hard to balance both types of champs in general. If mechanical skill is important then how do you keep the simpler champs strong? And if mechanical skill isn't supposed to be that important then what's the point of playing a complex character if an easier one can do the same things with less effort? > > Plus with that big disparity, it causes this frustration where some champs feel like they just have way more options than you and the game is all about whether they mess up or not, and what you do isn't as important. You're also forced to think about 1000 different things when playing against those more complex champs that you don't have to otherwise, which can be really annoying if you just wanted to play a simpler champ and focus on more strategic/tactical things, and now you can't because you have to constantly keep track of wtf this Irelia is doing to be able to play against it. Generally, you'd have to do it like dota: A simple champion can be absolutely amazing but they generally do one thing very well. Plus they end up being pubstompers but nobody cares because as you get better, you learn to deal with it. Conversely, a difficult character will take a way higher skill to use effectively but once you do know how to use them, the tools at your disposal will blow simple champions out of the water. Skill, in this case, is rewarded and players are encouraged to either get better to use these characters or get so good at your simple champs that you can figure out everything you need to do. As much as Riot is faulted for this, it's also our fault as a playerbase: Nobody sees a champ and goes "I hope one day I'm good enough to play them" except maybe Akali or Irelia, as you said. Everyone wants to use these characters and if you're not good enough, it's Riot fault not yours for making such a dumb, complex champ. If Irelia was harder to play, you'd avoid this problem because she wouldn't be nearly as common because you're better off playing a diver like Diana who just does her job in a simple but effective manner. If we, collectively as a playerbase, said "It's ok that I can't play every champion because I'm not good enough", we'd be in a better spot balancewise and Riot wouldn't have to cater to these problems. But Riot made their choice clear: Appeal to the lower tier of players and let everyone play everything while trying to hamfistedly balance around ELOs higher than Plat.
> [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=wGoNOgE9,comment-id=00060004000000000000,timestamp=2019-01-07T21:21:09.842+0000) > > Generally, you'd have to do it like dota: A simple champion can be absolutely amazing but they generally do one thing very well. Plus they end up being pubstompers but nobody cares because as you get better, you learn to deal with it. Conversely, a difficult character will take a way higher skill to use effectively but once you do know how to use them, the tools at your disposal will blow simple champions out of the water. Skill, in this case, is rewarded and players are encouraged to either get better to use these characters or get so good at your simple champs that you can figure out everything you need to do. > > As much as Riot is faulted for this, it's also our fault as a playerbase: Nobody sees a champ and goes "I hope one day I'm good enough to play them" except maybe Akali or Irelia, as you said. Everyone wants to use these characters and if you're not good enough, it's Riot fault not yours for making such a dumb, complex champ. If Irelia was harder to play, you'd avoid this problem because she wouldn't be nearly as common because you're better off playing a diver like Diana who just does her job in a simple but effective manner. If we, collectively as a playerbase, said "It's ok that I can't play every champion because I'm not good enough", we'd be in a better spot balancewise and Riot wouldn't have to cater to these problems. > > But Riot made their choice clear: Appeal to the lower tier of players and let everyone play everything while trying to hamfistedly balance around ELOs higher than Plat. I'd argue you can't really fault the player base, but I usually never try to do that just because my background is largely UX based. Usually I think it's better to think of the player base as its own force that you have to account for. It's easy to look at another game like DotA and say "We should be more like that," but really our player base is largely the result of how Riots designed and balanced the game long-term. The heavy-handed approach Riot takes means that players learn to rely on patches a lot, and players that don't think that way will either quit to play other games or learn to adapt to Riot's method. Basically when you look at a huge group of people, you have to consider them like any other external factor. People as a group have a pretty consistent set of rules and behaviors and it's up to the designers to build something that accounts for them. If the designers don't do that, it's generally on them if the player base isn't the way they want it to be.
: > [{quoted}](name=Fisherman Fizz,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=wGoNOgE9,comment-id=00060004,timestamp=2019-01-07T19:51:40.562+0000) > > I would argue that league is moving towards MORE complicated inputs a lot of the time with a higher emphasis on mechanical skill than before. Irelia and Akali reworks are examples of that, but a lot of people seem to actually dislike that direction. Well yeah. Problem with that is that Riot still wants this mentality that "anyone can play anything at any level" (Barring newbie picks like Garen or Yorick who get beat down if their strong), which leads to these super complex picks either getting hamstrung so they can be played at all levels, such as Azir or Kalista, or become too powerful in pro play so they're viable in scrub ELOs, like Aatrox or the Juggernaut patch in general.
> [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=wGoNOgE9,comment-id=000600040000,timestamp=2019-01-07T20:07:19.947+0000) > > Well yeah. Problem with that is that Riot still wants this mentality that "anyone can play anything at any level" (Barring newbie picks like Garen or Yorick who get beat down if their strong), which leads to these super complex picks either getting hamstrung so they can be played at all levels, such as Azir or Kalista, or become too powerful in pro play so they're viable in scrub ELOs, like Aatrox or the Juggernaut patch in general. It seems really hard to balance both types of champs in general. If mechanical skill is important then how do you keep the simpler champs strong? And if mechanical skill isn't supposed to be that important then what's the point of playing a complex character if an easier one can do the same things with less effort? Plus with that big disparity, it causes this frustration where some champs feel like they just have way more options than you and the game is all about whether they mess up or not, and what you do isn't as important. You're also forced to think about 1000 different things when playing against those more complex champs that you don't have to otherwise, which can be really annoying if you just wanted to play a simpler champ and focus on more strategic/tactical things, and now you can't because you have to constantly keep track of wtf this Irelia is doing to be able to play against it.
: Yeah, not really. In fact, you've kind of misunderstood the whole video. Core-A gaming's video about lowering the skill gap is about the lack of skill required in _inputs_. Not the lack of skill required because numbers are high/low. This misunderstanding might seem small but it shapes the entire video. The funny thing is Riot _has_ been guilty of this, but not in the case of the current meta. Namely the Alistar headbutt combo being reduced/allowed to be buffer so everyone can do it. The current meta, as much as people meme, still does require skill. An apt comparison would be if Zed, a champion most players hated, had his Q removed for homing shurikens that always hit the player and his E was replaced with a point-and-click shadow stab nuke. The _ability_ to perform the outplay is what matters, not _if the person lives or dies_. BONUS EDITS: Had to rewatch the vid because last time I watched it was when it came out. It highlights a clear point where pros want a system where comebacks aren't possible and skill triumphs over all....yet this contradicts what boards says that "games are decided early by who beats who first". Which means that this SHOULD be a meta that's boards approved. After all: The more skilled player wins on-average more in this meta.
> [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=wGoNOgE9,comment-id=0006,timestamp=2019-01-07T09:34:22.639+0000) > > Yeah, not really. In fact, you've kind of misunderstood the whole video. > > Core-A gaming's video about lowering the skill gap is about the lack of skill required in _inputs_. Not the lack of skill required because numbers are high/low. This misunderstanding might seem small but it shapes the entire video. The funny thing is Riot _has_ been guilty of this, but not in the case of the current meta. Namely the Alistar headbutt combo being reduced/allowed to be buffer so everyone can do it. > > The current meta, as much as people meme, still does require skill. An apt comparison would be if Zed, a champion most players hated, had his Q removed for homing shurikens that always hit the player and his E was replaced with a point-and-click shadow stab nuke. The _ability_ to perform the outplay is what matters, not _if the person lives or dies_. > > BONUS EDITS: Had to rewatch the vid because last time I watched it was when it came out. It highlights a clear point where pros want a system where comebacks aren't possible and skill triumphs over all....yet this contradicts what boards says that "games are decided early by who beats who first". Which means that this SHOULD be a meta that's boards approved. After all: The more skilled player wins on-average more in this meta. I would argue that league is moving towards MORE complicated inputs a lot of the time with a higher emphasis on mechanical skill than before. Irelia and Akali reworks are examples of that, but a lot of people seem to actually dislike that direction.
: damn. I only started paying attention to healing because ours let our tank die in a dungeon and shit got stressful man
> [{quoted}](name=Alluring Agony,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=BeVkYetT,comment-id=0005000000000000,timestamp=2018-12-27T06:30:26.152+0000) > > damn. I only started paying attention to healing because ours let our tank die in a dungeon and shit got stressful man It's probably ok if it's a lower leveling dungeon, but pretty soon it'll get to a point where it doesn't heal very much and you're losing too much dps for it to really be worth it. Mainly if you do it try not to make it a habit later on and you should be good. It also means less things you have to keep track of so it might help there also
: idk I have to buff and debuff constantly, keep track of the timers on those things, control this pet thing to make sure it tanks appropriate targets, heal whenever I see someone about to die and not being healed, and spam damage. I picked a hard class I think
> [{quoted}](name=Alluring Agony,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=BeVkYetT,comment-id=00050000,timestamp=2018-12-27T04:26:33.191+0000) > > idk I have to buff and debuff constantly, keep track of the timers on those things, control this pet thing to make sure it tanks appropriate targets, heal whenever I see someone about to die and not being healed, and spam damage. > > > I picked a hard class I think Summoner is the jankiest class in the game by far, like nothing else is even close. For dps, the easiest if you just want to chill will be either Red Mage or Bard. Bard has a higher skill cap but you don't need to reach it to do fine. Red Mage is probably the overall easiest class in the game and has a really cool aesthetic too. Monk is probably the most chill melee dps, followed by samurai. Dragoon is probably the most stressful. Ninja I don't know much about how it feels to play, just that it's good to be consistent with the trick attack. For ranged, bard is more chill. MCH is janky and you need a VPN to do their rotation properly because of said jankiness, but once you underestand how to play it you can autopilot easily. Both older mages are stressful to play for different reasons. BLM has to always watch positioning and messing it up can totally mess you up hard. SMN is just a hot mess design-wise, honestly I would avoid SMN specifically unless you just really like the theme. RDM however, is easily the most chill class and if I had to recommend one class based off the things you don't like it'd be this one easily. For any magic dps, don't worry about using the heals btw. Rez spells are great, but the heals are functionally worthless outside of solo content. Trust the healers to do that part. Healers do far more than enough healing in this game to take care of everything, and most of them should ideally focusing on using as little heals as possible and doing dps spells as much as possible instead.
Hotarµ (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=A Swarm of Koala,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=7ZKA2L5H,comment-id=0019,timestamp=2018-12-26T21:30:34.826+0000) > > Probably Nier: Automata. I bought it for $20, didn't expect much. Ended up being one of the best games I've ever played. I wanted to give it a shot but I just totally forgot about it. Was it really that good?
> [{quoted}](name=Hotarµ,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=7ZKA2L5H,comment-id=00190000,timestamp=2018-12-26T21:35:05.090+0000) > > I wanted to give it a shot but I just totally forgot about it. Was it really that good? Yes 100%. Easily one of my top 3 games, although I also group nier gestalt with it. Both are amazing
: I've been playing as an arcanist
DPS is the most "brain off" role tbh. You have less responsibility and if you don't pay attention, instead of killing everyone, stuff just dies slower. You also don't have to react as much to what other people are doing and you can just zone out doing your own thing. This applies even in high level raiding in a lot of cases. I say this as someone that tried to do big dick dps whoring on fflogs a year or so ago burnt out on it.
Hotarµ (NA)
: Best game you've played in 2018?
Smash and bloodborne for me. I'm also really looking forward to playing god of war and Spiderman soon.
Evangele (NA)
: Merry Chrismas GD!
Merry Christmas! <3 {{champion:105}}
: Where is my Nintendo option?
If you want a legit answer: Theyre possibly targeting games/companies with specific characteristics and Nintendo doesn't match whatever those are. It could also just be that it's only targeting some platforms, as there's no Microsoft, Nintendo or Sony options meaning no first party console titles. One of those two reasons is most likely why. For surveys like these it's also not generally worth it to put like 50 options here because people will either get bored and quit out of it, or will become less accurate. Plus past a certain point the usefulness of adding more companies goes down and the amount here should be plenty for whatever they're looking for.
: Game devs competing for bad PR be like
Come join us at Sony. We have Spidey and God of War this year. :D Dodged almost all of the bad press this year, woo
KluPL (NA)
: A team of mine is making a new game based off League of Legends (MOBA)
You are severely underestimating the scope and complexity of this project as well as the amount of individual talent Riot has. Your competition has entire teams filled with people that have advanced degrees and/or several years of experience working with AAA sized games taking care of their research, data analysis and balancing. What makes you qualified to balance better than them?
: I'm going to apply.
> [{quoted}](name=ChickenWrap,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=YlE16vJw,comment-id=0011,timestamp=2018-11-27T03:47:52.793+0000) > > I&#x27;m going to apply. I feel like you'd probably get a spot if you do apply tbh.
: [0.4] Boards Enhancement Kit - May 7
I think I used this one before but I rly like it https://i.imgur.com/PbyYKgK.jpg?1 Pretty please and ty <3
CLG ear (NA)
: real talk i think at minimum board upvotes for prospective mods should be 5k-10k. Dont get people who barely post (< 500 upvotes)
> [{quoted}](name=CLG ear,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=YlE16vJw,comment-id=000c,timestamp=2018-11-27T03:06:45.355+0000) > > real talk i think at minimum board upvotes for prospective mods should be 5k-10k. Dont get people who barely post (&lt; 500 upvotes) I barely post and would meet that requirement, probably applies to anyone that's not very active but been around since the beginning.
: I think Riot should focus more on how the players FEEL than the data that the players create.
They actually do plenty of research/changes based off feel. They get a lot of player sentiment data from surveys and things, and also regularly run player labs to get feedback about upcoming content which let's then go in-depth on player perception and how they feel. I do player labs at a different game company, so this is my specialty :3
: Indecisive about Cherry MX Switches
I got browns on my work keyboard and have been really liking them so far, would definitely recommend. They're also probably the better option for games and are quieter, which is mostly just a personal preference thing.
: What other PS2 games should I buy?
Monster Rancher series is pretty good and had a cool little gimmick with using all your other CDs. Jak & Daxter series is amazing Final Fantasy Tactics is PS1 but a lot of people consider that their all time favorite game. Sly Cooper games are really good Psychonauts
: Where can I talk to an actual part of Riot's Balancing team?
So your plan is to talk to them by telling them to just "fix the game," and you expect that to be something they haven't thought about before?
: Preseason Dev Update Number 3!
I don't understand how the stats shards are organized. The first slot is for offence, second slot is just a few random things, and last one is defence? I feel like these 3 slots should be more clearly defined as to what each one is for. For turrets, the visuals seem like a pretty huge mismatch for the extra resists mechanic when the plates are destroyed. Coming from someone that hasn't seen the plates before, this is a definite increase in the complexity of the game, and so I think it's important to have it make sense visually. Larger complexity combined with lowered visual clarity is a pretty scary combination. How do the new towers test with players that are newer to the game? For new players or casual players that still have a lot to learn I'd be interested in seeing if the tower mechanic is learnable. In playtests, can players accurately tell what the plates are doing if they aren't told anything beforehand? Do they recognize that resists are changing when plates are destroyed? What about the extra resists when multiple people are nearby? Lastly, my first impression on the bounty changes are really positive. I love the extra clarity involved with showing people's gold value on the scoreboard. It's always felt confusing right now what people are worth. Personally, I liked the old system that showed coins next to a person's level on their hp bar also.
Electrya (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=notFREEfood,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=AbyclYkl,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-10-23T02:54:03.550+0000) > > Computer science is not really the best major for you if you want to get into game design. In fact it&#x27;s pretty shitty as far as game design goes. A lot of people think it&#x27;s the degree that teaches you to code, but what it really is is the degree that expects you to code. Fundamentally, computer science is the study of math on computers. > > Designing games tends to be more in the art department (also psychology). Unless you&#x27;re writing your own game engine, there really isn&#x27;t too much need to know about the more advanced CS topics apart from AI (and even then, you don&#x27;t always need AI). > > But really if you want to get into the game industry, you need to network. And to do that you need to do internships. Thank you! Do you know of a major that could focus on the art and game design? I'll look into internships. Best regards, Brandon
> [{quoted}](name=Electrya,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=AbyclYkl,comment-id=00010000,timestamp=2018-10-23T17:37:17.956+0000) > > Thank you! Do you know of a major that could focus on the art and game design? I&#x27;ll look into internships. > > Best regards, > > Brandon Do you have any specific definition in mind when you say game design? What would you ideally picture yourself doing if you were at work? Game design can cover a pretty broad spectrum of things, and there's also lots of different specialties. There's level designers, system designers, and similar roles that focus on analyzing and creating game mechanics and game systems. There's also more creative type roles like narrative designers, or visual designers. The first still falls heavily under game design but visual design is starting to enter a different but still useful field. There's also lots of other roles that are important to making games too if that's the main thing you're interested in. Programmers and designers alone won't be enough. There's also artists, musicians, managers, HR, QA, data analysts, researchers, IT, legal, sales, translators, etc. If the main thing you're interested in is working on games you have a lot of different options as well. In a few weeks I'm going to be starting as a user researcher at a gaming company. I didn't even know that was a role that existed until I was almost done with my undergrad school. There's tons of "hidden" roles like that out there :D
Electrya (NA)
: Rioters! Help Me with College Majors // Anyone with Experience in a C.S. Major
Honestly you don't need to decide this until at least a few years from now. Game design is a very tough/competitive field though and requires a pretty broad range of knowledge that can be hard to find in a major that isn't game design itself. I would suggest trying to learn to use some game making or modding tools and try making some things on your own to see if it's something you enjoy. Hands on practice is the best way to see if you like it and also is great practice. As a game designer you'll be expected to at least be familiar with code but not to the same extent as a computer science person, and you almost certainly don't need to be an artist. Design is an art in and of itself, but it's about creative thinking and problem solving rather than fine art like drawing is. Also watch here: https://youtu.be/zQvWMdWhFCc
: I mean one match is all it took for me to be amazed, coming back to this game lol.
This is why I just never play unless I have a premade of friends. It helps a lot tbh.
: List of overrated vs underrated college majors
Psychology has other paths than becoming a psychiatrist or clinical psychologist. I majored in psychology but had 0 interest in those things. Psych is an extremely good degree to have if you want to go into a Human Factors or Human-Computer Interaction grad program. Those can be done in 2 years and have good career prospects. In businesses, you'll see people with those majors going into the User Experience (UX) field where they use concepts from psych to either research or design products. This was the path I ended up taking. Total time in school was about 4.5 years and I start next month doing research for a pretty big gaming company :D
: How many samples you need to take a win rate seriously
Saying youre 95% sure her win rate falls between those numbers is incorrect. A 95% confidence interval means that if you repeated the same sampling method 100 times, you would expect 95 of them to contain the true win rate. You can't also say that her win rate won't change much based on that interval because you haven't accounted for which teams are picking her. Each team playing also have drastically different win rates that will influence how kaisa does each game.
: > [{quoted}](name=Fisherman Fizz,realm=NA,application-id=ELUpwER8,discussion-id=4ai19BJe,comment-id=000a,timestamp=2018-10-15T23:39:08.776+0000)So it&#x27;s important to have that disadvantage, but it&#x27;s mostly a matter of finding a sweet spot where said disadvantage isn&#x27;t too much or too little. There&#x27;s also the problem of tackling the disparity between low MMR games, high MMR games, and pro games where risk aversion will be more/less important. Precisely. This is actually why I like Herald as an objective. It can more easily be snuck and it provides a meaningful advantage (map control), but it has counterplay and requires creating an opening to use effectively. It scales up with skill as your ability to create openings or use it as a distraction rises, and while it creates a momentary advantage that can be used to snowball more it doesn't *in and of itself* give an advantage unless used properly.
Yeah, Herald is really cool from my perspective as well. It's functionally similar to other objectives with stat buffs like baron/dragons, but instead of just being stats or an aura or something to that effect, it's a lot more visually clear what it's doing which makes it feel a lot more fun and satisfying. If you were to look at the average gold advantage gained per herald, it could probably be a bit smaller than the gold gained from a dragon but would still be perceived as more impactfujl because you can see it so much more clearly. It's similar to how direct damage abilities always feel more useful than an aura that's tuned to be just as strong.
: The Cost of Failure: Does League's Design Discourage Champion Interaction?
For the aggressor/defender thing, I think it's pretty important that the aggressor is put at a disadvantage. The extent to which they're put at a disadvantage is a lot more complicated but interesting to think about. To start, I'm going to operate off the assumption that snowballing/comeback mechanics are inherently necessary for league to be a good/fun game. The length of SR games pretty much dictates that. Without snowballing, you'd regularly have the first 30+ minutes of a game not matter, because a team that plays better for that time won't get any meaningful advantage out of it, and instead only the final minutes of the game would matter. Conversely, without any sort of comeback mechanics, only the first few minutes of a game would matter, and anything after that would be a "trapped game," where the winning team has to spend a lot of time taking objective after objective while the losing team is helpless to do anything but watch themselves lose for 20-30 minutes. Now, having this kind of aggressor disadvantage on objectives serves as a really important comeback mechanic and acts as a lever that can help control how strong snowballing is in the game as a whole. This is because the pressure is on the ahead team to be taking these objectives almost always. Once a team has an advantage, it's on them to leverage their lead to take more objectives so that they can continue to extend their lead and close out a game. Any time spent not doing this is beneficial to the behind team. For the behind team, there's no reason for them to actually make any aggression. It's in their best interest to focus on minimizing losses, stalling, and punishing mistakes. Aggression made by the behind team will almost always have to be in reaction to a mistake the ahead team made, because if they try to be aggressive on even terms they just lose. So if the ahead team isn't using their lead to take more and more advantages, the game stalls out and benefits the behind team. If a team is up 23k gold to 20k gold and does nothing with that lead, over time that 3k gold advantage will mean less and less. If it stalls out and that team is up 53k gold to 50k, the % difference in strength between the two teams is much more even. So then, the reason why it's important for the aggressor to be at a disadvantage is because it gives a losing team some sort of advantage they can leverage to try and come back into the game. Without that disadvantage, they'd have fewer chances to try and take a fight and come back into the game. For example, lets say Baron does 0 damage. There will still be a few small disadvantages a team has when taking it (restricted positioning because they have to be near the pit, time, mana and cooldowns required to actually kill it), so the losing team has no chance of actually contesting it and they're almost guaranteed to just give it up and fall more behind. On the other hand though, too much of a disadvantage can also suck. The higher the disadvantage, the more of a lead a team has to have before they can safely take something, and the higher the risk and uncertainty there will be whenever making the decision to take something. The first of those effects means that games are much harder to close out and will stall out way more often. The second is that risk aversion will play a bigger part in making games passive, which would get worse the higher in MMR you go and then drastically get worse still in pro games. So it's important to have that disadvantage, but it's mostly a matter of finding a sweet spot where said disadvantage isn't too much or too little. There's also the problem of tackling the disparity between low MMR games, high MMR games, and pro games where risk aversion will be more/less important. Generally, the more skilled a player is, the more risk averse they will be. That's because, with 0 risk involved, a better player will win against a worst player every time. The higher the risk, the higher the chance that a worse player can get lucky and win despite the skill difference. In pro games, you see much more risk aversion because they have so few games to play, each with a huge impact. Worlds finals is one best of 5 series, so losing one game because of a risk is huge. In solo Q, it doesn't matter because players can play 100s of games, so the law of large numbers will prevent risk from really mattering that much. Lastly, I dont think any of this is disagreeing with you btw, especially since you mentioned tuning specifically. I just thought it was an interesting point and wanted to expand on it a little :3
Show more

Fisherman Fizz

Level 191 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion