: > [{quoted}](name=Kürama,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=E2ikbKET,comment-id=000b00000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-15T07:43:09.248+0000)> 1. It's true that a combinations of 3 solos or 1 duo and a solo usually result is less coordination. However, objective of the game is still to destroy the enemy Nexus, which requires teamwork. Thus, teams will be driven to coordinate more in Champ-Select as to who will be best fit for the Dragon buff and that will carry over in-game as well. > > 2. There's a possibility things don't go as planned and the Champ who the team agreed on giving the buff to isn't the best choice given the in-game circumstances and this will drive teams to think of who should get the buff in the given circumstance. > > 3. There's also the possibility of disagreement. However once in-game, teams would very likely put aside those differences in the hopes of achieving victory. Given the circumstance of the game, all members will see for themselves who is best fit for the buff and concede. After nine years of playing *League*, I think I must say I'm skeptical that this will actually turn out the way you think it will. This doesn't even have the advantages of Red/Blue buff, where it's usually clear which character will benefit most from them, as in your proposal you have to calculate a percentage value based on current stats. Given that your proposal makes this a one-time buff when a single spawn, I don't think it earns a place. There's far too much consideration and potential frustration for something that has an overall minor impact for a partial duration of the game. If you *did* want an "empower this champion" effect, I'd consider stealing the mid relic and turning it into a channeled relic that empowers the champion who successfully channels it (or a relic you have to break, with the champion killing it claiming it), sort of like a miniature version of the **Ascension** buff from the Ascension game mode. Increased size, a moderate boost of flat adaptive power, attack speed, maybe a little CDR, all for a duration or until killed. The advantage here is that it can be secure by a team that's ahead OR taken by a team that's behind as a way to get back into the game, it creates a more interactive combat area in the jungle (and an interesting one, due to the presence of bushes on both sides), and helps to ensure that the laners pay attention to the jungle even when laning. I think that gets you a similar output (who wants this, can we secure it, adding something to fight over) in a way that A: is more meaningful throughout the entire game, B: is a bit more champion agnostic even if it does have *better* choices, C: could allow you to secure that early VileMaw you're afraid people can't reliably take now, and D: doesn't remove an existing objective unlike your later Altar proposals which involved removing the mid relic (which I think is a bad idea -- emphasizing it seems like the far more interesting and engaging possibility). -------------------------------------- > The double altar buff is indeed powerful if utilized properly and that is what'll make them worthwhile. The threat of the enemy team achieving this is a bit scary and it should be, sort of like Dragon buffs on SR. You'll want to ensure your Home altar doesn't fall into enemy hands and grab the enemy altar if the opportunity arises. You already do that though, even if the bonus isn't *that* good. This suggestion removes one of the neutral objectives (the healing relic) in favor of making altars stronger and further exacerbating the both the "you can't counterplay this" (due to altar locks) and the "only one person get a buff" issue you suggested previously. I'm definitely with you that altars should end up being meaningful objectives. The reason they're designed they way they are currently, however, is to ensure that having two altars doesn't just let you crush the opponent with superior combat power. Adding harass to that worries me, and changing the always-meaningful 10% movement speed into the sometimes-meaningful Homeguard feels generally less impactful even if it has moments where it's valuable. This immediately makes me wonder if it might actually be preferable to add a *third* altar (perhaps in the VileMaw den), and have bonuses for 1, 2, and 3, where having three altars (subsequently harder to defend) grants some meaningful bonus. You could also build in a mechanic where a team can only have a maximum of two locked altars at a time, which ensures that there's always something to play for. If the three altar bonus were big enough (say, empowered minions, or an empowered buff to your team as long as you control all three), you could stand to keep the 1-2 altar bonuses more moderate while still having altars feel really desirable and important. If we use the mid-relic replacement idea I suggested above, we *could* use captured altars to spawn health relics, basically like a miniature version of the health relics on ARAM. Those have a nice counterplay and create opportunities for allies and enemies alike, so it might be an interesting direction to take that in.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=E2ikbKET,comment-id=000b000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-15T13:06:57.839+0000) > > After nine years of playing *League*, I think I must say I'm skeptical that this will actually turn out the way you think it will. This doesn't even have the advantages of Red/Blue buff, where it's usually clear which character will benefit most from them, as in your proposal you have to calculate a percentage value based on current stats. > > Given that your proposal makes this a one-time buff when a single spawn, I don't think it earns a place. There's far too much consideration and potential frustration for something that has an overall minor impact for a partial duration of the game. It's true that nothing like this has been added to the game previously but you're underestimating the players here and you shouldn't. The notion that players wouldn't strategize when there's a heavy incentive to, in order for them to increase their chances of securing victory, they'll do it. It's in our nature. League wouldn't have survived for 10 years if people weren't like this, for the most part at least. Even in most of my losing matches, most players try, junglers give up their Red/Blue buffs / jungle camps in TT and encourage play around the player(s) who are ahead. Ex. "Don't fight when I'm not around" And these are in my solo matches as well. That feature, to put aside differences for the benefit of something better and worth it, is within all of us. > > If you *did* want an "empower this champion" effect, I'd consider stealing the mid relic and turning it into a channeled relic that empowers the champion who successfully channels it (or a relic you have to break, with the champion killing it claiming it), sort of like a miniature version of the **Ascension** buff from the Ascension game mode. Increased size, a moderate boost of flat adaptive power, attack speed, maybe a little CDR, all for a duration or until killed. The advantage here is that it can be secure by a team that's ahead OR taken by a team that's behind as a way to get back into the game, it creates a more interactive combat area in the jungle (and an interesting one, due to the presence of bushes on both sides), and helps to ensure that the laners pay attention to the jungle even when laning. > > I think that gets you a similar output (who wants this, can we secure it, adding something to fight over) in a way that A: is more meaningful throughout the entire game, B: is a bit more champion agnostic even if it does have *better* choices, C: could allow you to secure that early VileMaw you're afraid people can't reliably take now, and D: doesn't remove an existing objective unlike your later Altar proposals which involved removing the mid relic (which I think is a bad idea -- emphasizing it seems like the far more interesting and engaging possibility). > 1. A channeled relic isn't going to work in the middle of the map in the early game as both teams would end up disrupting the channel until it ends up in a forced brawl to attain the relic (in which case the losing team feels discouraged due to a force-failed battle) or both teams conceding the relic which accomplishes nothing. 2. The interesting play around the relics (and altars) would be present with relic types we spoke about. https://puu.sh/DTaOF/9b794ef43e.png 3. There will still be a relic in the middle but it'll be a team relic instead of an individual one, something that players can snatch for their team's benefit. The relic timers (which will display the type of relic spawning next, similar to Dragons on SR) will drive the engagement around the middle relic. Relics would spawn throughout the game, making it more interesting. https://puu.sh/DTaQ0/2c69306a73.png https://puu.sh/DTaWz/6303c3b862.png > -------------------------------------- > > You already do that though, even if the bonus isn't *that* good. This suggestion removes one of the neutral objectives (the healing relic) in favor of making altars stronger and further exacerbating the both the "you can't counterplay this" (due to altar locks) and the "only one person get a buff" issue you suggested previously. > > If we use the mid-relic replacement idea I suggested above, we *could* use captured altars to spawn health relics, basically like a miniature version of the health relics on ARAM. Those have a nice counterplay and create opportunities for allies and enemies alike, so it might be an interesting direction to take that in. 1. Not removing a neutral objective as stated above, only making it better and more worthwhile to drive engagement and interest. 2. The previous buffs to the altars were: * 1 altar: +10% bonus Attack Damage / +10% Ability Power. * 2 altars: +25% bonus Attack Damage / +25 Ability Power. Given that this was pretty powerful and not many complained about the buff itself but that it felt flat and unexciting, it was updated to something more interesting, what it is now (10% movement speed for 1 altar, 1% health on minion / monster kill for 2 altars). A burning effect isn't going to be as powerful as the 25% bonus previously but it does drive interest due to the triple buff and that interest will lead to increased engagement for the altars. > I'm definitely with you that altars should end up being meaningful objectives. The reason they're designed they way they are currently, however, is to ensure that having two altars doesn't just let you crush the opponent with superior combat power. Adding harass to that worries me, and changing the always-meaningful 10% movement speed into the sometimes-meaningful Homeguard feels generally less impactful even if it has moments where it's valuable. The 10% movement speed all the time isn't effective all the time though. When you're laning, it isn't effective and it isn't very effective in the jungle due to the small size of it. Given this, why not capitalize on where it'll be most useful (leaving base to return to lane /jungle) and remove and near-useless part of it (having it all of the time and not really benefitting from it)? > > This immediately makes me wonder if it might actually be preferable to add a *third* altar (perhaps in the VileMaw den), and have bonuses for 1, 2, and 3, where having three altars (subsequently harder to defend) grants some meaningful bonus. You could also build in a mechanic where a team can only have a maximum of two locked altars at a time, which ensures that there's always something to play for. If the three altar bonus were big enough (say, empowered minions, or an empowered buff to your team as long as you control all three), you could stand to keep the 1-2 altar bonuses more moderate while still having altars feel really desirable and important. Having 2 objectives is the Vilemaw den would create interaction issues when capturing Vilemaw. The 3-altar buff you proposed would also make Vilemaw pretty useless (since his buff grants empowered minions). It'll also remove the interest and engagement from the Team relics, since the Team relics were the objectives to grant most team-buffs. Not only that but we'd have lost the opportunity to provide multiple relic types and bring some really interesting buffs to the map if we were to add a 3rd altar.
: >You've admitted that the solutions are solid yourself... I don't believe that is accurate. I liked the simple sweeper change, some of the promo ideas (although I have feasibility concerns), and some of the jungle suggestions, but on the balance not enough of these changes make a strong case for themselves, and some come with potentially problematic side effects. Hence why I'm specifically interested in seeing the problems you identified with the map, as it's hard to see how well your solutions compare with alternative possibilities without seeing the specific issues you set out to solve. I'd roll out the colored sweeper for teams instantly and consider the minion swap, but I don't actually like the altar changes (even if some are interesting) and think the Ebonmaw suggestion has some key flaws.
Fair. Addressing some of your earlier concerns, which I should have addressed in my first response. > Ebonmaw / Vilemaw: This is a good example of the above. The question "does Twisted Treeline need more early objectives" is a good one, but assuming that the difficulty of snagging an early game Vilemaw and that the altars don't sufficiently fill the early game objective role seems ill conceived. Is using the Vilemaw design space the best use of this, or might it be more interesting to increase the push/pull of the altar game or include additional power boosts that could be used to secure that early Vilemaw? **The Ebonmaw proposal isn't bad, certainly (although the fact that it boosts your HIGHEST stat -- which may not necessarily be what you WANT boosted -- is frustrating, especially as in non-coordinated teams there will be fighting over this in a way that isn't shared with Rift Herald, which helps the entire team), but I feel there's analysis missing on why you picked this options.** Non-full premade teams are the concern here; 1. It's true that a combinations of 3 solos or 1 duo and a solo usually result is less coordination. However, objective of the game is still to destroy the enemy Nexus, which requires teamwork. Thus, teams will be driven to coordinate more in Champ-Select as to who will be best fit for the Dragon buff and that will carry over in-game as well. 2. There's a possibility things don't go as planned and the Champ who the team agreed on giving the buff to isn't the best choice given the in-game circumstances and this will drive teams to think of who should get the buff in the given circumstance. 3. There's also the possibility of disagreement. However once in-game, teams would very likely put aside those differences in the hopes of achieving victory. Given the circumstance of the game, all members will see for themselves who is best fit for the buff and concede. 4. There's also the possibility of being matched with a troll, who doesn't care about winning and wants to bring about as much despair he can to his team and this would be another channel to do so. However, trolls shouldn't be given the win here. Also, how often are we matched with actual trolls? >Altars: These feel a bit more skewed than the current buffs, and not in a great way. Homeguard (on a map this small) largely removes the penalty for being forced out of lane, which is a great way to secure an advantage when this buff doesn't exist. This leads to an easy win-more, as it's reasonable to retreat out of an altar fight, heal, trigger homeguard, and rush back to defend it. **On top of superior sustain AND superior harass if you have all altars, this makes that advantage potentially overwhelming. Additionally, while the ally buff effect is intriguing, this has two effects -- the "who gets it" potential fights that the Dragon buff suggested above has, and a loss of the ability to deny / contest the current relic, as you've team-locked the individual buffs. This leads to a win-more effect that exacerbates the strong altar bonuses you've already assigned.** The double altar buff is indeed powerful if utilized properly and that is what'll make them worthwhile. The threat of the enemy team achieving this is a bit scary and it should be, sort of like Dragon buffs on SR. You'll want to ensure your Home altar doesn't fall into enemy hands and grab the enemy altar if the opportunity arises. It isn't going to be simple to acquire both though as it still takes time to capture the altar and the enemy is granted vision of you while capture their altar. If you manage the take down 2 or all of the enemy champs, it'll be pretty much like a Dragon buff on SR. Arguably this will drive teams to play defensively but the threat / benefit of the Ebonmaw buff will drive the teams to strategically target and take down their enemy in order to acquire it before it despawns will mitigate this possible side effect. If you manage to takedown your enemy and capture Ebonmaw, you're ahead and can play more boldly which will drive more offensive / defensive play around the altars. Strategy and tactics would be key to both teams. Altars should be meaningful objectives, not just something you acquire on the side, like a minor jungle camp or CS.
Rock MD (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Marshbouy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=biWEbu5E,comment-id=0008,timestamp=2019-07-14T03:21:41.198+0000) > > because riot figures that ignoring the community is better than interacting with it. > > which is, ofc, wrong. > > you don't make people like you more by completely ignoring them, failing to explain your design choices, and utterly refusing to interact with your community. > > edit: I love how half of the comments here are "cause they suck and aren't constructive at all" > > and this is one of the top posts right now > > https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/E2ikbKET-proposal-twisted-treeline-gameplay-update-new-game-mode-more-riot-mort-meddler > > zero interaction from rioters. They interact with the community. The interact with the masses on Reddit and the high elo players on Twitter. This board is a washed up group of angry players, with a total count of no more than 5k. It's a shithole with people looking to go back to the glory days who don't even know what made the glory days good, lmao. Tell that guy to post his link on Reddit. It's pretty decent there, and I'm sure he'll get a hell of a lot more traction. Most of the people who post here just eat paste and complain.
Quite the opposite. Reddit culture adores brief / summarized posts and frowns upon long, fleshed out posts like ours. We've heard this is due to Reddit's population being mostly on mobile which would support why they adore brief posts. Reddit certainly is a lot more popular and it's partly due to more Riot interaction over there as well but it certainly isn't the culture for posts like ours to thrive.
: because riot figures that ignoring the community is better than interacting with it. which is, ofc, wrong. you don't make people like you more by completely ignoring them, failing to explain your design choices, and utterly refusing to interact with your community. edit: I love how half of the comments here are "cause they suck and aren't constructive at all" and this is one of the top posts right now https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/E2ikbKET-proposal-twisted-treeline-gameplay-update-new-game-mode-more-riot-mort-meddler zero interaction from rioters.
I think it's due to them still processing the ideas and not wanting to respond until they've thought it through,
: > [{quoted}](name=Kürama,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=E2ikbKET,comment-id=000b0000,timestamp=2019-07-12T22:42:39.798+0000)It was purposely omitted to remove the negative feeling towards the presentation and to Riot. We decided it was best to just focus on the updates since everybody (including Riot) already knows TT has issues and Dominion was removed. My point is more that people may not agree as to what those issues *are*, so it's helpful to cleanly identify what *you* think is an issue, and then how you plan to resolve it. > There have also been many complaints about the long healing times when returning home. Then the simpler solution feels like it might be to simply increase the healing provided by the fountain, and *then* see if other changes are needed. That might be enough, and it's a simple change. > That would be the case for a very small minority of junglers. Most of the time in my TT matches, junglers clear all 3 camps and usually just roam between lanes or in the middle since there's nothing to do on their first few clears. My suspicion is that this is an intended feature to promote more interactions and fights on Treeline. > Here's the thing though; do nothing; receive nothing - that's been the result for the past 3 years or so. It was the same with Dominion. Out of curiosity, how much have you worked in a development environment? Because while this is true, putting the resources into something that has proven relatively unpopular needs a *very* solid business proposal behind it. I'm not convinced "it *might* really take off" is worth the opportunity cost here without more research or a gameplay that prioritizes early, easy changes that might really grab players and then has plans for additional waves of improvements after that initial push has had time to gather players.
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=E2ikbKET,comment-id=000b00000000,timestamp=2019-07-14T22:56:26.771+0000) > > My point is more that people may not agree as to what those issues *are*, so it's helpful to cleanly identify what *you* think is an issue, and then how you plan to resolve it. I understand, it's a fair point but we couldn't do that without starting out negative and project the presentation as a glorified rant. Most players already understand the issues of TT as there have been several threads on the boards complaining about the issues, particularly recently. Given that they already had a good understanding of the issues, we opted to focus on solutions to the issues they're already aware of. > > Then the simpler solution feels like it might be to simply increase the healing provided by the fountain, and *then* see if other changes are needed. That might be enough, and it's a simple change. > That alone wouldn't be effective enough to protect your base or hurry to meet a teammate in need of help. > My suspicion is that this is an intended feature to promote more interactions and fights on Treeline. > It fails though, particularly due to the additional turrets which were added a few years ago. The turrets have driven players to try to poke each other down, somewhat, but a side effect of it was the very small distance between the team / enemy turrets, particularly in bot lane. This has given players a handicap, since they're always in the vicinity of their territory / safety early game. Due to the small distance, it also makes ganking almost impossible since the enemy is literally a few steps away from their turret and can easily run to safety, leaving junglers fairly useless in the early game since there are only 3 jungle camps as opposed to 6+ on SR. Removing the additional turrets wouldn't solve the problem that they tried to solve initially, as without the turrets players still played it safe, especially early game, most would farm and hug a turret if they feared they were gonna be ganked due to the lack of vision on the map. Adding wards wasn't a solution as they'd need to be very limited and even then, it would have driven players to play even more safely since they'd know where the enemy was pretty much all the time. To really drive engagement, we needed to solve the jungle issue and add more objectives to incentivize strategy to obtain said objectives and take the lead. > Out of curiosity, how much have you worked in a development environment? Because while this is true, putting the resources into something that has proven relatively unpopular needs a very solid business proposal behind it. I'm not convinced "it might really take off" is worth the opportunity cost here without more research or a gameplay that prioritizes early, easy changes that might really grab players and then has plans for additional waves of improvements after that initial push has had time to gather players. That's why we carefully analyzed the issues TT and Dominion has, issues that resulted in their unpopularity and developed full-fledged solutions for them. You've admitted that the solutions are solid yourself, mostly at least, which means that if implemented, would be effective at solving the popularity issues.
Vlada Cut (EUNE)
: YES. TT VGUUUUUUUUUUUUU
: I think a 2v2 would replace solo q... IMO
Nah. We already have Ranked Flex 3v3, that's close enough. :P
: The fact that a player did a better job at developing Riot's game than Riot does says alot about the company.
Technically we didn't develop the game, we developed ideas for the game. Hope Riot likes it as well! :D
Arcade Lulu (EUNE)
: Today is my birthday too :D Happy birthday!
> [{quoted}](name=Arcade Lulu,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=840AsMi2,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-07-13T19:10:24.795+0000) > > Today is my birthday too :D > > Happy birthday! Happy birthday. :)
Yupia (NA)
: Today is my birthday! :D
Happy Birthday!! Make it great!
: A fine idea in my opinion. Riot will not implement it.
We appreciate the feedback! I think they'll find a way to, I hope so, it's a win/win for them.
: very nice post and ideas too bad riot just ignores us now and do wtvr they want with sht excuses to do so
We're thankful, was a team effort! I think they'll find this very enticing. :)
Technorch (EUW)
: This is amazing. Didn't know how much I missed Dominion until now. Too bad Riot doesn't care.
AIQ (NA)
: It honestly is, persistent issues that the community feels concern about whether through votes or a heavy amount of post that go unanswered is just frustrating. Even if the answer is "idk". Not to say that every issue requires this or anything. But can Rioters ask others who do take care of this? Perhaps that person is simply unaware and does not know anything is wrong with WW W. An example with you is that at the beginning of the year you stated that Shyvana would receive a QOL change that allowed her to scale with elder (you probably don't even remember that), we are now on the second half of the year with nothing to remotely show for it. Now I'me scared to ask for additional things like Fury while dead, when suggesting these game play changes. Sometimes I feel like I waste my time, people tell me all the time when I post massive analytical post. "Nice but Riot doesn't care and wont read." I know I'm nobody, but it still feels bad. I feel for the guy that post an 80 page PP on TTL/Dominion/and a new mode he's suggesting with some friends. He will likely get a lot of "Nice we love it, but Riot ya know?" Thanks for the response here though, be really nice if someone could focus on WWs bugs though they are quite game breaking for him.
Hey! Appreciate the mention! Have you checked this out? Not sure if it'll be of any help though; https://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/c5lqte/patch_913_bug_megathread/
: I am Kürama. I speak for the treeline. I speak for the treeline, for the trees have no tongues. And I'm asking you sir, at the top of my lungs - that thing! That horrible thing that I see! What's that thing you've made out of my twisted treeline?
: I love this, its so thought out and presented nicely.
: ...well this is Djinn-bait if I ever saw it. And I have. Here. I love it and, as a designer myself, feel I should preface with that before I start to critique. That said, let's dive in. I'll start with just Treeline, as I've got a lot to say on all of these. :D ------------------------------------ #TWISTED TREELINE **Introduction:** You lose a lot here by not identifying your up-front goals and areas of noted opportunities improvement. By not doing this you're forcing the viewer to not only guess at the problems you identify but *also* at the validity of the solutions you propose towards resolving those issues. **Ebonmaw / Vilemaw:** This is a good example of the above. The question "does Twisted Treeline need more early objectives" is a good one, but assuming that the difficulty of snagging an early game Vilemaw and that the altars don't sufficiently fill the early game objective role seems ill conceived. Is using the Vilemaw design space the best use of this, or might it be more interesting to increase the push/pull of the altar game or include additional power boosts that could be used to *secure* that early Vilemaw? The Ebonmaw proposal isn't bad, certainly (although the fact that it boosts your HIGHEST stat -- which may not necessarily be what you WANT boosted -- is frustrating, especially as in non-coordinated teams there will be fighting over this in a way that isn't shared with Rift Herald, which helps the entire team), but I feel there's analysis missing on why you picked this options. **Altars:** These feel a bit more skewed than the current buffs, and not in a great way. Homeguard (on a map this small) largely *removes* the penalty for being forced out of lane, which is a great way to secure an advantage when this buff doesn't exist. This leads to an easy win-more, as it's reasonable to retreat out of an altar fight, heal, trigger homeguard, and rush back to defend it. On top of superior sustain AND superior harass if you have all altars, this makes that advantage potentially overwhelming. Additionally, while the ally buff effect is intriguing, this has two effects -- the "who gets it" potential fights that the Dragon buff suggested above has, and a loss of the ability to deny / contest the current relic, as you've team-locked the individual buffs. This leads to a win-more effect that exacerbates the strong altar bonuses you've already assigned. **Assorted:** Your sweeper changes are great, and the jungle suggestions are solid -- although I suspect that using Raptors or Krugs would actually drastically change who can jungle in Treeline, as those are two of the more brutal camps that kind of dictate who can and can't jungle. I suspect you'd see a reduction in viable Treeline junglers, and would, as a result, suggest that perhaps other changes would be preferable. **Promotional:** The promotional ideas are on-point, especially the Arcane Sweeper effects. That's a great little spot to add some flair without impacting the game hugely. Pool Party I think doesn't make as strong a case for itself, as Treeline would need to earn that level of attention through an increased playerbase. **Team:** I think a big failure point here is that you don't make a good argument for WHY Treeline (or other modes I haven't gotten to yet) merit this level of dedicated resources. Every developer or artist or designer you put onto Treeline for any length of time means a developer, artist, or designer not working on other gamemodes that have proven to be more popular -- this is true to such an extent that even on ARAM (a rather popular mode) champion balance is done in broad, sweeping strokes of +- % damage taken/dealt. While that might be viable on treeline, would it be sufficient, in your eyes, if that were the primary means of balancing champions? If not, what would your suggestion be for sufficiently reducing the production needs of fully supporting Treeline as a first-class game mode? -------------------
> [{quoted}](name=The Djinn,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=E2ikbKET,comment-id=000b,timestamp=2019-07-12T21:55:47.798+0000) > > ...well this is Djinn-bait if I ever saw it. And I have. Here. I love it and, as a designer myself, feel I should preface with that before I start to critique. That said, let's dive in. I'll start with just Treeline, as I've got a lot to say on all of these. :D > > ------------------------------------ > > #TWISTED TREELINE > > **Introduction:** You lose a lot here by not identifying your up-front goals and areas of noted opportunities improvement. By not doing this you're forcing the viewer to not only guess at the problems you identify but *also* at the validity of the solutions you propose towards resolving those issues. It was purposely omitted to remove the negative feeling towards the presentation and to Riot. We decided it was best to just focus on the updates since everybody (including Riot) already knows TT has issues and Dominion was removed. > > **Ebonmaw / Vilemaw:** This is a good example of the above. The question "does Twisted Treeline need more early objectives" is a good one, but assuming that the difficulty of snagging an early game Vilemaw and that the altars don't sufficiently fill the early game objective role seems ill conceived. Is using the Vilemaw design space the best use of this, or might it be more interesting to increase the push/pull of the altar game or include additional power boosts that could be used to *secure* that early Vilemaw? The Ebonmaw proposal isn't bad, certainly (although the fact that it boosts your HIGHEST stat -- which may not necessarily be what you WANT boosted -- is frustrating, especially as in non-coordinated teams there will be fighting over this in a way that isn't shared with Rift Herald, which helps the entire team), but I feel there's analysis missing on why you picked this options. Can confirm Treeline needs more early objectives, particularly if you're playing with a jungle (I actually touched on this in the Jungle segment). Early game in TT is boring most of the time, with laners trading CS and the jungler with little / nothing to do. If Ebonmaw were to make a return, it'll drive teams to strategize and take down an enemy or 2 in order to acquire it and cement their lead. Right now, there isn't enough incentive to do anything early game other than play it safe and try to outfarm the enemy. > > **Altars:** These feel a bit more skewed than the current buffs, and not in a great way. Homeguard (on a map this small) largely *removes* the penalty for being forced out of lane, which is a great way to secure an advantage when this buff doesn't exist. This leads to an easy win-more, as it's reasonable to retreat out of an altar fight, heal, trigger homeguard, and rush back to defend it. On top of superior sustain AND superior harass if you have all altars, this makes that advantage potentially overwhelming. Additionally, while the ally buff effect is intriguing, this has two effects -- the "who gets it" potential fights that the Dragon buff suggested above has, and a loss of the ability to deny / contest the current relic, as you've team-locked the individual buffs. This leads to a win-more effect that exacerbates the strong altar bonuses you've already assigned. > We had a nerfed version of Homeguard in mind, like SR - it lasts until you exit the base and decays over that time, should have made that clearer. The 1st altar gives a general movement speed buff, which not only already helps make things a win-more but feels lackluster and not worth it. Homeguard keeps the core idea of acuquiring the 1st altar (almost always the home alter) by granting a buff that feels empowering without being overpowered. There have also been many complaints about the long healing times when returning home. Sitting idle in base while taking a minute to heal feels VERY discouraging and even frustrating. Not only that but if you're in a rush to defend your base or to help your team acquire an objective, stave off an enemy etc. you can't do that effectively, you're either gonna arrive late or show up half-health and not be able to do much. It makes you feel useless. That was the reasoning for going with the Homeguard buff. > **Assorted:** Your sweeper changes are great, and the jungle suggestions are solid -- although I suspect that using Raptors or Krugs would actually drastically change who can jungle in Treeline, as those are two of the more brutal camps that kind of dictate who can and can't jungle. I suspect you'd see a reduction in viable Treeline junglers, and would, as a result, suggest that perhaps other changes would be preferable. > That would be the case for a very small minority of junglers. Most of the time in my TT matches, junglers clear all 3 camps and usually just roam between lanes or in the middle since there's nothing to do on their first few clears. The vast majority of junglers would benefit from this and the minority could be buffed if necessary and that's where the Volunteer Balance Team kicks in. > **Promotional:** The promotional ideas are on-point, especially the Arcane Sweeper effects. That's a great little spot to add some flair without impacting the game hugely. Pool Party I think doesn't make as strong a case for itself, as Treeline would need to earn that level of attention through an increased playerbase. > Here's the thing though; do nothing; receive nothing - that's been the result for the past 3 years or so. It was the same with Dominion. TFT is the living and breathing example of how something like this should be done. Think of how many players would play the map, purchase Little Legends, Trinket Skins and such because of it. Also, how about making it purchasable for 5000 RP. People would piss themselves to play on Pool Party / Beach themed map. I know I would. > **Team:** I think a big failure point here is that you don't make a good argument for WHY Treeline (or other modes I haven't gotten to yet) merit this level of dedicated resources. Every developer or artist or designer you put onto Treeline for any length of time means a developer, artist, or designer not working on other gamemodes that have proven to be more popular -- this is true to such an extent that even on ARAM (a rather popular mode) champion balance is done in broad, sweeping strokes of +- % damage taken/dealt. While that might be viable on treeline, would it be sufficient, in your eyes, if that were the primary means of balancing champions? If not, what would your suggestion be for sufficiently reducing the production needs of fully supporting Treeline as a first-class game mode? Can't sell product if you don't offer it. Gotta offer something and there are many monetization mechanisms included to ensure Riot receives their Return on Investments. Edit: to add to my previous point above, the volunteer balance team would do most of the analysis, with Riot's balance team verifying it and applying the change. Riot doesn't utilize too much resources and the players get a better experience. Win/win. > > -------------------
LBmyBB (NA)
: I should try this method of presentation
It's a lot of work but it's actually fun, especially when you're doing something you like. :D
Fat Beef (NA)
: Presentations and examples like these truly show how dedicated the playerbase is to improving the game. Props to you for putting in the time and effort, as well as proposing concepts and ideas from an objective perspective. If more ideas were communicated in this fashion, perhaps more would be done on the front of change. Although I don't think every idea should have a presentation dedicated to it, things like this (Twisted Treeline Modernization & Crystal Scar Revamp) are interpreted well in this manner. Overall, this was very well done!
Meddler (NA)
: Draft of the blog got written this week. Not certain on exact release date yet, still aiming for late July as per that quoted post though.
Is there any room for alterations with regards to your plans for this?
Meddler (NA)
: Oh, no worries, fair question. I've dropped down to one post a week since I got back from paternity leave instead of the two I used to do. That's a combination of: * New baby = less time in general for everything else * Mid year tends to be somewhat quieter in some respects, so sometimes less to talk about/more work to find stuff to fill posts * My role at work's expanded somewhat this year as well (getting more involved in some non game design stuff too) which also takes additional time
What about Scruffy, wasn't he supposed to be posting one each week as well? Also, congrats on the baby!
iiIhNqTeka (EUNE)
: This is just so well done, Kudos to you. Have you considered posting this on Reddit, because I think you must.
Team effort, we're thankful! :) Haven't but considering it now.
CytheGuy (NA)
: I'm really supportive of the ideas. However, we've learned about Riot's work ethic over the recent years. This leads me to believe that Riot will only glance at this, decide it's too much work, and go back to doing the bare-minimum to maintain their status as a billion-dollar company. My personal opinions on the subjects really only concern the Little Legend themed ideas. I think most of the ideas based around acquisition should be the standard for TFT as well as these ideas you have. If you guys are really, *really* interested in committing these ideas and want to go even further to do more work than has already been done (seriously, this must have taken a long time to put together and develop, so kudos to you guys!) then you'd be much better off talking to Rioters in person at a business meeting. I have no idea how one would go about doing that, but I definitely don't think that making a Boards post or a Reddit post is the best way to get Riot's attention on these subjects, nor is it the way to get them motivated to do something on this scale.
The ideas are relatively easy to implement with the exception of map skins and Grand Battle. We had more advanced ideas (which were scrapped) in favour of these which yielded more benefit. I agree that TFT should adopt an acquisition method like the one we've proposed, I even think they'll make more from it. Pretty sure the team would agree to meet with Riot but we'd need an invitation. :D
: Wow, that was actually really well done & well put together. Hopefully some of the Rioters atleast take a look at this presentation, you made Treeline seem better & you even got me interested in playing Dominion (a mode that was permanently retired by Riot due to low attendance).
Antenora (EUW)
: There's some really really good stuff in there. Nice work!
arowin242 (EUW)
: the sheer time and effort put in this alone would make it worth considering reading and applying in anyone's opinion. unfortunately we are stuck to riot games who will likely do nothing with this absolute piece of art. such a shame, regardless VERY well done. you have my congratz. for both paying attention to the current game and older game modes, and even potentially new ones. +1 upvote. That's all.
: I love the massive idea of Grand Battle, good job on nicely designing each slide and well thought through ideas.
Thank you on behalf of the team! Swordfall was the Lead with regards to Grand Battle, sent him this post. :)
Rioter Comments
: i hate that riot has such a fleshed out and interesting universe but is doing nothing with it
I'm pretty sure they can do something without creating an MMO.
: > [{quoted}](name=Kürama,realm=NA,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=XUGkvuzl,comment-id=0008000300000000,timestamp=2019-07-02T15:51:47.119+0000) > > Debatable. > > TFT got way more promotion and hype from Riot than any other game mode and that alone is one of the main reasons for its "success". > > Also, like NB and even Dominion when it was first released, got the level of "Acceptance" that TFT is now enjoying. It's something new, different. People are always attracted to new and different. > > Question is, is it sustainable? It also...well, it just is better than Nexus Blitz in terms of Riot's criteria: * New mode that draws in large crowds (Much larger than NB) * Caters to an entirely different group of people. (NB tried to. It failed.) * Great for streaming/viewership/interaction/etc. (Not many people streamed NB compared to TFT.) * Game is easy to iterate on vs. NB (NB had to redesign the map. TFT can just add units in a dripfeed). Fact is that TFT has a larger playerbase, better viewership/interaction, is easier to upgrade/iterate on compared to NB and is just overall more enjoyable. It checks all the boxes for what Riot wants in an alternate, permanent mode. You don't have to like it if you're a NB fan but it's undeniable that TFT is a success by Riot's metric (An alternate, permanent mode with a huge playerbase that isn't just SR dropouts) while NB was a failure, as much as I liked NB.
> [{quoted}](name=CaptainMårvelous,realm=NA,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=XUGkvuzl,comment-id=00080003000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-02T15:57:16.446+0000) > > It also...well, it just is better than Nexus Blitz in terms of Riot's criteria: > > * New mode that draws in large crowds (Much larger than NB) > * Great for streaming/viewership/interaction/etc. (Not many people streamed NB compared to TFT.) All of these depend on its sustainability.
: > [{quoted}](name=The Dreamwalker,realm=NA,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=XUGkvuzl,comment-id=00080003,timestamp=2019-07-01T18:16:12.277+0000) > > I feel like we're comparing apples to oranges. NB is exclusive to LOL. TFT is a popular across a couple of games. Of course TFT is going to be more popular because it already has a playerbase that probably moved to League for TFT. Also, TFT isn't a game mode. It is a completely different game. All other League modes are pretty much unique to League. The thing is that NB was meant to be an alternative to SR for people who didn't necessarily like the format. It was made to be something else and, in that regard, it failed. TFT was an alternative yet succeeded. Even if you compare completely different things like Ascension, Dominion or otherwise? TFT still surpasses those modes while those modes failed.
Debatable. TFT got way more promotion and hype from Riot than any other game mode and that alone is one of the main reasons for its "success". Also, like NB and even Dominion when it was first released, got the level of "Acceptance" that TFT is now enjoying. It's something new, different. People are always attracted to new and different. Question is, is it sustainable?
: Riot is owned by Tencent, and Tencent has a great interest in capturing auto-chess for their home market. The mode is also highly monetizable, unlike Nexus Blitz and Dominion. Auto-chess has also been ported over to the phone market a couple of times already, a market Tencent has wanted League to be in for quite some time. As someone who hates this new genre, I'd be surprised if TFT doesn't last at least 2 or 3 years before going into maintenance mode.
> [{quoted}](name=Glaricion,realm=NA,application-id=Ir7ZrJjF,discussion-id=XUGkvuzl,comment-id=000b0000,timestamp=2019-07-01T06:28:31.538+0000) > > The mode is also highly monetizable, unlike Nexus Blitz and Dominion. I wonder about that.
Taikobou (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Kürama,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=cXnTKtKe,comment-id=000d000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-25T17:45:47.770+0000) > > Why'd they sellout then? Riot needs to make money, smartphone games keep making more money every year, Riot was making less money year after year, so they have to revert that. Thats why they have so many skins coming out and so many passes. If they keep losing money Tencent might take action on the company.
They weren't actually, revenues were up year after year until 2018 but that was when Marc and Brandon took a step back from the Helm of the company and passed the torch to Dylan Jadeja and Nicolo Laurent. That's when lootboxes became so mainstream.
Rioter Comments
: They're supposed to be Addressing Twisted Treeline, ARAM & other Non-Summoner's Rift modes next month (some point during July). ---------------- Personal opinion: Twisted Treeline still has it's playerbase (it's there, it's just really small compared to SR's 5v5). I don't think there's a whole lot they can do with it, other than increasing/decreasing champion power (similarly how they've done with ARAM). It'll most likely go 2 ways in it's current state; - Riot might decide that like the Crystal Scar, Twisted Treeline is also "difficult to maintain/upkeep". This will inevitably lead to Twisted Treeline being retired & Riot will more than likely **never** bring it back. Removing it would open up the client for a future permanent gamemode, however there's no telling **when or if** we will see a suitable replacement. There's also a real possibility that TFT takes it's place in the client (TFT Normals & Ranked Queues), but that also remains to be seen. - If Riot decides that they want to invest time into Treeline, they can give it an update similar to the one it recieved October 17th 2012. Giving it a new layout & updating it with today's version of the Shadow Isles. This would most likely be a large project that would take alot of time & resources, chances of this completely revitalizing the mode are a complete coinflip.
Not sure they'd need to go that far to revitalize TT but there are a lot of other things they can do.
: I dont need to present anything, because i am not playing your pathetic game. If you want to conclude some sort of victory because i dont have time to feed your need for attention, go ahead.
: I dont need to "try" anything, let alone argue about objective reality to a pedantic troll. If you dont want to accept reality, that is nobody else's problem, and your denial has no effect on them.
Says the one who can't present a legitimate argument and filibusters with petty non-answers.
Zòe Porn (EUW)
: nope, riot has said they are looking to make TFT a mobile version after they are done fixing this one.
It's not a guarantee as this mode is still in beta. Even if it's promoted to official status, it still doesn't guarantee they'll make it mobile.
PaladinNO (EUNE)
: Wait, you mean they made this new mode or whatever it is...with the intent to get money on it!? :O https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJy6bJ_RxXg I don't care what this mobile game look-alike is. I won't touch it at all! > [{quoted}](name=Kürama,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=cXnTKtKe,comment-id=000d00000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-25T19:56:57.062+0000) > > Tencent didn't fully acquire Riot until 2015 So right around the time when RP sales stopped being a thing at all, and the norm for release skins went from 975 RP to 1350 RP. And the first increase in RP costs. https://eune.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/riot-games/announcements/rp-price-adjustment-europe Tencent Holding...not even EA standards (yet) of corrupting everything they touch, but getting there fast. > [{quoted}](name=hhaavviikk,realm=EUW,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=cXnTKtKe,comment-id=000c000000000000,timestamp=2019-06-25T18:38:22.669+0000) > > yes, microtransactions, like champions and skins, not in the form of gamble boxes, LoL survived, thrived even, before the game got lootboxified. I wouldn't even say "micro"transactions anymore - more like "macro"transactions, as even a single skin, with every little cosmetic thing included costs upwards of 18 EUR (Dark Star Karma bundle for this example). And that's _excluding_ the champion. I think I'll buy a NiteCore MT06MD instead for those money. There is only one thing and one thing ONLY we can vote with in this game: Our wallets. https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/uk0MeJ18-update-on-yesterdays-capsule-pricing-error
It's not a mobile game, it's pretty much another mode like TT / ARAM.
: Learn how acquisitions work.
Nice way to dodge the question but I'll play with you for a little bit. > [{quoted}](name=MagicFlyingLlama,realm=NA,application-id=RaE1aOE7,discussion-id=cXnTKtKe,comment-id=000d00000000,timestamp=2019-06-25T17:23:50.800+0000) > > Are you aware tencent has absolutely no say in LoL development? Reportedly riot does not get along very well with them. > > This is entirely on riot, this time. If we're going with the definition of an acquisition, that means Tencent owns Riot and is in complete control which nullifies your statement that this is solely Riot's decision. Tencent didn't fully acquire Riot until 2015 so it begs the question, if they weren't getting along with a majority stake, why sell them the rest? Now, it could be that there's a special agreement between the 2 companies that allows Riot to make the development decisions and as such this could indeed be solely Riot's decision. But your replies don't add up so try again.
: Are you aware tencent has absolutely no say in LoL development? Reportedly riot does not get along very well with them. This is entirely on riot, this time.
: > [{quoted}](name=Kürama,realm=NA,application-id=6WpmgL9O,discussion-id=giG4MkEA,comment-id=0014,timestamp=2019-06-22T23:09:06.459+0000) > > Why no post this week? Short version is, we're moving to a every other week post! You'll see last week bundled in this week's post.
: 9 days and ticket still open
What issue did you submit the ticket for?
Exomos (NA)
: They're still working on blitz, and "the playerbase" at large doesn't care much about other gamemodes. I don't know a single person personally who even tried blitz while it was in. I hope they bring it back eventually for the sake of those who liked it, but it makes more sense for them to capitalize on the auto battler hype while its here.
More they don't know about it / don't want to try it because they aren't updated / given any attention.
: The Good, The Bad, and the League: 6/6 - 6/12
Flemman (EUW)
: my guess is that, if TFT do well, it's the last year of twisted treeline and they will add the announcement in the article :(
It took them 7 months to decide Nexus Blitz wasn't going to be a permanent mode but they're going to decide that TFT is, in 2 weeks? If so then Nexus Blitz was a farce and they're just toying with the playerbase purposefully to piss them off, which in the end will lead to more and more players leaving and a further downward trend of their already declining revenues. (33% decline last year). TT has been around for the 10 years League is around, TFT would be for 2 weeks and TFT could easily fail after a few weeks after the "new feel" wares off.
Meddler (NA)
: No, the article I mentioned on the future of modes is one planned for sometime mid July or so. We want to wait and see how TFT looks initially and let that inform some of it, hence it's then not now.
How exactly is TFT going to inform the post?
: Nice, but quick question: there is no river in aram, what happen then? She will loses a part of her kit or it will change to poros?
No river in TT either.
Meddler (NA)
: Quick Gameplay Thoughts: June 7
When you say approaching, what exactly do you mean with regards to the permanent ones?
Show more

Kürama

Level 131 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion