: @RIOT So I didnt get the full amount of my Twisted Treeline Rewards.
Try sending a ticket. It might be a similar issue as with Dominion's removal rewards, where there was a bug on Riot's end. Back then, the initial Support response told me that I'd played 0 games, despite the fact that there were multiple Dominion games in my match history.
: If we have ranked tft why don't we have ranked ARAM?
[According to Meddler](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/Hg0eMco2-quick-gameplay-thoughts-september-20?comment=001a0000), it's because the majority of TFT players are expecting a competitive experience, whereas the majority of ARAM players are expecting a more laid-back experience. Which personally seems rather circular and self-fulfilling, given that Riot has always promised a competitive experience with TFT and always treated ARAM as a more casual mode.
: What's the problem with that? No Random All Mid (NoRAM) is where the ARAM-account tryhards could go. It could even be a ranked queue to replace TT.
God no. If Riot ever does get around to adding a new ranked queue, it should absolutely be for regular ARAM, rather than for All Blind/Draft, All Mid. A semi-compromise might work (e.g. draft from a limited random roster), but ABAM/ADAM are too simple and too close to being SR-lite to justify having a separate ranked queue.
: The Effect of ARAM Balance Changes
While that's certainly encouraging for overall balance, I'm curious how the graph changes when filtered by MMR and/or player familiarity with the champ. How many of those "This champ is terrible and badly needed buffs" were influenced by (average) players just being bad/unfamiliar? Likewise for the top of the range.
: ***
People think you're trolling because bots have been a problem in just about every online game, and League's no exception. A [cursory glance](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=4840396) at [the old forums](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=4867131) (from 5+ years ago) shows [a multitude](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=4898290) of [complaints](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=4084878) about [rampant bots](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=4686541) in League. Even with [the current Boards](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/help-support/G9Mpfahb-bots-in-game), there's [numerous official](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/help-support/EyYej3ir-lvling-bots) posts [from Rioters](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/help-support/rE6blQ2e-bots-in-league) mentioning [the problem](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/help-support/gEGgTAWq-rampant-leveling-bots-in-aram). As for your question about "Riot having players in every single skill tier all the time," Riot doesn't. That's why queue times differ drastically. It's explained in Riot's [official Matchmaking support article](https://support.riotgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/201752954-Matchmaking-Guide). Players with unusual MMR (i.e. super high or super low), premades, low queue sizes (e.g. off-peak times or unpopular queues), and so on all increase queue times. If Riot actually put bots in to fill out queues, [these people](https://old.reddit.com/r/LoLTwistedTreeline/comments/69gesd/im_frustrated_with_queue_times_in_tt/) likely wouldn't have had to wait several hours for TT games. Or [this guy](https://old.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/3eyi3p/i_have_been_in_a_dominion_draft_queue_for_28/ctjkt5l/) who apparently waited for a Draft Dominion game for over a day. You can also check any high-MMR SR streamer for further evidence of queue time disparities.
: > [{quoted}](name=Minarde,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lrXXG06M,comment-id=00000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-11-07T19:43:41.623+0000) > > Please don't spread false information, especially when the truth already supports your point. Treeline had [two patches in the first 6 months post-rework](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/5PoNfKfk-the-real-reason-twisted-treeline-failed?comment=000200000000000100000000) and a surprisingly decent number in the year following that. Then patch frequency more or less dropped off a cliff again. > > Riot absolutely did an abysmal job supporting Treeline. However, claiming "Treeline never got any patches at all" isn't much better than others claiming "Riot heavily supported Treeline, but it didn't help." The rest of your argument is solid, yet the misinformation detracts from it. New Treeline, in total, had the Relaunch, and then 2 major patches. It technically had smaller patches, but these came in the forms of "we nerfed 1 champion slightly" or "we added the normal jungle items for junglers so that they can jungle". It'd be like claiming SR had patches if the only thing that changed was Kai'sa lost 5 damage on W; you are technically correct, but the patch does fuck all and changes nothing so you can be forgiven for not counting things that anemic. Treeline had the Relaunch in October 2012, 1 major patch almost a year later at the end of July, 2013, and then 2 years later one final big patch at June 2015. Past that the only changes for Treeline were minor bugfixes and whatever SR changes ended up impacting the meta. Literally the largest impact on Treeline for the past 4.5 years has been Riot nerfing SR funneling because they never bothered to fix it for Treeline. I also ask you not to put words in my mouth. At no point do I say Treeline received no patches; I'm certain you (or anyone else) can make a fine argument against my post or myself without needing to fabricate things.
> [{quoted}](name=Lord Dusteon,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lrXXG06M,comment-id=000000000000000000000000,timestamp=2019-11-07T20:11:54.494+0000) > > New Treeline, in total, had the Relaunch, and then 2 major patches. It technically had smaller patches, but these came in the forms of "we nerfed 1 champion slightly" or "we added the normal jungle items for junglers so that they can jungle". It'd be like claiming SR had patches if the only thing that changed was Kai'sa lost 5 damage on W; you are technically correct, but the patch does fuck all and changes nothing so you can be forgiven for not counting things that anemic. > > Treeline had the Relaunch in October 2012, 1 major patch almost a year later at the end of July, 2013, and then 2 years later one final big patch at June 2015. Past that the only changes for Treeline were minor bugfixes and whatever SR changes ended up impacting the meta. Literally the largest impact on Treeline for the past 4.5 years has been Riot nerfing SR funneling because they never bothered to fix it for Treeline. > > I also ask you not to put words in my mouth. At no point do I say Treeline received no patches; I'm certain you (or anyone else) can make a fine argument against my post or myself without needing to fabricate things. Fair enough. I misunderstood your referring to meta-shifts or more substantial balance passes as "patches in general." Sorry about that.
: The Twisted Treeline Farewell Rewards For Dedicated Players
The rewards are disappointing, but not really surprising. Riot did the same thing with Dominion, where the only reward tier was 100 wins. I had about 900, and, if I'm remembering right, some people had over 5k. Riot did mention they were considering extra rewards for the more dedicated players, but nothing ever came about from that discussion. Honestly, the emote is fine. The icon(s) make no sense though, as Riot explicitly mentioned a few days ago that TFT's going to stop giving out icons because League players already have so many. A champ skin/chroma would have been neat, but a ward skin would at least be somewhat meaningful. Maybe a Ebonmaw or Vilemaw Little Legend, since Riot's been pushing those recently.
mack9112 (NA)
: TT was literally just full of bots because nobody enjoyed it.
No, low-MMR TT is full of bots because Riot effectively pushed them there. Bots went to Co-Op because Riot changed custom game XP gains. Bots went to PvP because Riot changed Co-Op rewards. Dominion players mostly held off the bot invasion until Riot removed Dominion. With TT gone, the bots will just redistribute themselves again.
: So riot them twisted treeline rewards..... what the hell?
Why is Riot giving out even more icons anyway? We're still limited to only using one at a time and have no way to showcase others. Riot explicitly said they stopped giving icons out for TFT passes because we've already got so many. The emote's fine. A champ skin or chroma would've been unusual, but a ward skin would've been nice. Hell, make a tiny Vilemaw/Ebonmaw Little Legend. Just some sort of variety, especially for those of us already representing dead maps.
: > [{quoted}](name=SirTauntsALot,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lrXXG06M,comment-id=000000000000,timestamp=2019-11-07T09:07:17.578+0000) > > Was looking forward for it to beeing improved. instead they just threw it in the garbage. "New' Treeline had a total of 2 patches in the entire lifetime of the mode, and 1 bugfix/patch months after Runes Reforged to let Altars count for Dominantion's Hunter runes. Not much hope of them improving it if they take years to do anything with the mode, and the only thing they do is make some runes work. The largest TT patches in those years were SR only patches with funneling changes that were ported over. I really wish Riot's announcement said the truth; "hey guys, we abandoned your mode for years, refused to do even the bare minimum of balancing, and surprise! It sucks when we do that! So we're deleting it now." Feels pretty insulting when they lie about how they "supported the gamemode" while they leave funneling as the dominant strat for years and have no balance changes so some champions end up with 55%+ winrates for months or years.
> [{quoted}](name=Lord Dusteon,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=lrXXG06M,comment-id=0000000000000000,timestamp=2019-11-07T19:26:34.102+0000) > > "New' Treeline had a total of 2 patches in the entire lifetime of the mode, and 1 bugfix/patch months after Runes Reforged to let Altars count for Dominantion's Hunter runes. Not much hope of them improving it if they take years to do anything with the mode, and the only thing they do is make some runes work. The largest TT patches in those years were SR only patches with funneling changes that were ported over. > > I really wish Riot's announcement said the truth; "hey guys, we abandoned your mode for years, refused to do even the bare minimum of balancing, and surprise! It sucks when we do that! So we're deleting it now." Feels pretty insulting when they lie about how they "supported the gamemode" while they leave funneling as the dominant strat for years and have no balance changes so some champions end up with 55%+ winrates for months or years. Please don't spread false information, especially when the truth already supports your point. Treeline had [two patches in the first 6 months post-rework](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/5PoNfKfk-the-real-reason-twisted-treeline-failed?comment=000200000000000100000000) and a surprisingly decent number in the year following that. Then patch frequency more or less dropped off a cliff again. Riot absolutely did an abysmal job supporting Treeline. However, claiming "Treeline never got any patches at all" isn't much better than others claiming "Riot heavily supported Treeline, but it didn't help." The rest of your argument is solid, yet the misinformation detracts from it.
: > [{quoted}](name=ZT Xperimentor,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=jY93WBvi,comment-id=0000000100000000,timestamp=2019-11-04T18:25:22.659+0000) > > You're either lying or forgetting . . . I don't care which but will remind you with proof. > https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-514-notes#patch-bilgewater:-burning-tides > https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-78-notes#patch-ha > https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-710-notes#patch-ha > https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-811-notes#patch-aram > > Now lets compare the last time twisted treeling & dominion got noticeably changed. > https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-511-notes#patch-tt > http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=2898650 > Twisted treeline gets removed the end of this year or season, and crystal scar was deleted in patch 6.4; both were largely ignored for years! It's no wonder players don't show interest when the developers don't bother doing anything. Just look at aram when they did both bilgewater events. > https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-97-notes#patch-aram---back-to-bilgewater So we have: 1 event, which had event specific things. 2 Patches _**that have TT changes directly below them**_. And finally, just bringing back an already existing asset *for an event.* TT had an entire map update. Twice. Entire itemization overhauls. And all of that still did. not. bring. any more players. That's the thing that too many people aren't seeming to get. The mode had next to no players from the get go. **THAT'S** why it received fewer changes. Then, when Riot does try to update the mode, bring in new players, and even **THAT** does nothing to help the numbers.
> [{quoted}](name=Wilk Rycerz,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=jY93WBvi,comment-id=00000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-11-04T20:33:57.365+0000) > > TT had an entire map update. Twice. Entire itemization overhauls. And all of that still did. not. bring. any more players. > > That's the thing that too many people aren't seeming to get. The mode had next to no players from the get go. **THAT'S** why it received fewer changes. Then, when Riot does try to update the mode, bring in new players, and even **THAT** does nothing to help the numbers. There was the one controversial map rework back in S2 (2012) that solved some problems while introducing other issues. What/when was the second map update? The texture updates that every other map got too? Additionally, what "entire itemization overhauls"? From what I remember, itemization changes only involved a handful of items each time. That's the other thing that too many people don't seem to get. The mode was unpopular because Riot ignored the mode because the mode was unpopular because... There were four patches involving Treeline in the three years prior to the rework. Meanwhile, SR was getting monthly/biweekly patches all throughout that time period. By the time the map rework came out, Treeline already had a community perception of being "neglected" or "not worthwhile," and the map rework did nothing to address that. Riot made no effort to popularize the map or even provide much-needed support to change that public perception. Post-rework, there were only two patches in the first six months. Would increased resources/support have made Treeline (or Dominion) more popular? Maybe, maybe not. Perhaps they were just always going to be relatively unpopular. I'm not trying to argue that Treeline should (have) gotten more resources. However, did Riot make a good effort to try to support those maps? Absolutely not.
Émilia (EUW)
: lol why everyone not giving a fuck to dominion
It's fast, it's fun, it got absolutely no advertisement!
GripaAviara (EUNE)
: What beta rewards? You mean the rewards from TFT screen where you start the game? Are there non TFT related rewards ( like champion skins) ? Because if all rewards are TFT related and you don't play TFT then they are useless
There's icon and emote rewards, which can be used outside TFT. Even with the TFT-specific rewards, some people might feel motivated to play for them out of fear of missing out on exclusive stuff.
: Game modes
Including multiple modes at Worlds could be confusing for (potential) viewers, so it sorta makes sense for Riot to focus their branding around SR at that time. However, you're right that Riot could better support alternate game modes. For instance, Treeline could've been represented at All-Stars or had featured tournaments during the SR off-season. It would've been nice for Riot to occasionally acknowledge that League is not *just* SR.
Saezio (EUNE)
: If it means we get another map down the road I am super satisfied they removed that mode. I'd rather have Nexus Blitz easily. TT had next to none playing in it if you exclude people that played for rank rewards and the bots. Queue times were long especially considering it only needed 6 payers.
I wouldn't be satisfied, but I'd probably be less upset if Riot added something in place of TT. NB was personally unappealing, but it'd at least be an option. However, there was/is no such replacement for Dominion, so it seems unlikely that there'll be one for Treeline.
: on paper sounds cool but the entire point of aram's existence was to be a chill, casual, non competitive mode. plus it is rng. not even like TFT RNG because in tft you still to some degree have a choice on adaptation each game. in aram ya just get what you get and suck it, or use a reroll that isnt always even available.
No, the entire point of ARAM's existence was to play with and against random champs. The casual/laid-back aspect is due to the years of Riot neglect and lack of competitive options (e.g. ranked) rather than being an inherent part of the mode. Plus, it's very much like TFT RNG. The main difference is that ARAM is front-loaded while TFT is spread throughout the match. So basically it's either "adapt to a lot of randomness only at the beginning" or "adapt to some randomness the entire game."
: Arcade mode balance changes
>The reason these game modes don't have a ranked ladder is the same as why they shouldn't have balance changes; you are playing for fun. You're (most likely) playing *League* for fun. Doesn't mean that it can't also be competitive. I can sorta see your point with respect to URF, given that it's only a temporary mode, but not for ARAM. Anyway, the point of URF is more that it's chaotic rather than unbalanced. Yes, Caitlyn's probably going to lose to Fizz/Kass, but she should at least feel like she has a chance to win. Otherwise, URF devolves (even further) into "Pick these obnoxious champs and only these obnoxious champs or else you don't get to have fun." In terms of the ARAM percent balancing though, agreed. Changing specific parts in their kits would probably be more effective. Unfortunately, Riot presumably doesn't do that anymore because it takes more time and effort than throwing flat percentage changes. "Confusing the playerbase" isn't a reasonable argument either, since the current changes still aren't communicated well.
: Still No Ranked ARAM
Ranked ARAM would be great, but just *something* for non-SR players would be nice. The other League modes had updates and/or improvements announced. TFT's getting a mobile port. SR's getting a console/mobile version along with the annual map balance shenanigans. Meanwhile, non-SR players are getting the removal of Treeline. Riot's historically neglected alternate game modes (and their playerbases), and it's sadly unsurprising to see that that's still the case for League's 10th anniversary.
: This made me stupid emotional, something about seeing clips from the first worlds I ever watched, and the old maps and just overall look and feel of the game as it was when I first discovered league is just so nostalgic. You've come a long way. It hasn't all been sunshine and rainbows but we're proud of you regardless and its things like this and how you interact with the community that keep us coming back for more. I'd also just like to say I'm excited for what all you have in store for us, the shooter looks fucking dope and that honestly means a lot coming from me I haven't been excited/had high hopes for a game launch in well.. a long time. Thank you guys for everything you do for us
>how [Riot interacts] with the community that keep us coming back for more Pretty sure non-SR players keep coming back despite how Riot interacts with the community, not because of it. Riot treats SR players reasonably well, but that's very much not the case for non-SR players.
: My thing is that even though it would be ranked it would still be ARAM. Id rather play ranked aram than solo duo ranked. I get there being a game mode that isn't serious but how serious could ranked aram be. A more fun team fight oriented mode that really depends on how well you can play all champs rather than macro gameplay the summoners rift calls for.
I'd prefer playing Ranked ARAM over Ranked SR as well, but that's not the point I'm trying to make. If Riot's currently thinking "we're not doing Ranked ARAM," it'd take a massive amount of effort to completely reverse that and get them to do Ranked ARAM. Instead, it'd be more realistic to consider alternatives to ranked that still sorta satisfy that competitive itch. Smaller steps/improvements that maybe one day lead to having ranked outright.
Zarsin (NA)
: Lets get Ranked for ARAM!!
Ranked ARAM would be great, but [Meddler mentioned about two weeks ago](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/Hg0eMco2-quick-gameplay-thoughts-september-20?comment=001a0000) that Riot's not currently considering it. >ARAM - the large majority of players engaging with ARAM tell us they're doing so because they're looking for something lower stress, less competitive, a less negative experience with their teammates etc. We don't think a ranked queue makes sense as a result, given presence of a ranked queue changes expectations and play even in normals. Secondary issues with likely queue health being poor in lower population regions. TFT by contrast we've seen very clear desire from most TFT players for a at least somewhat competitive experience and ranked TFT gets much more play than normal TFT at this point. It'd be a more productive discussion to consider possible alternatives to ranked for the players who are interested in the competitive side of ARAM. For example, maybe Clash could have an occasional ARAM-variant once it stops crashing servers. Maybe it's leaderboards (e.g. [Top PBE TFT players](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/developer-corner/uU3LVE8R-tft-top-500-players-from-the-teamfight-tactics-beta-on-pbe) \), maybe it's something else.
: Idk man, I play a decent amount of ARAM and it's pretty easy to get an S. ARAM is one of the 'for-fun' gamemodes, it's definitely not as skill intensive. I'm not trying to offend anyone by saying it's not skill based... ***it's just not***. A gamemode where you aren't required to farm for gold, need 0 knowledge of wave management or macro play, 'teamfights' are kinda just fun free-for-alls, and you don't even pick your champion-- team comps are completely random. Why do you think 'ranked ARAM' is such a meme? Comparing it to TFT is just naive. TFT, for one thing, is still very much in beta, and requires a completely different set of decision making skills and an understanding of the mechanics that go into the 'luck' based attributes. In ARAM you run it down at each other until one team wins. Do you see the difference here? I don't even like TFT but saying it requires as much skill as ARAM is kinda rude to people who do competitively enjoy that mode. It's fine to like ARAM-- I ***LOVE*** ARAM! I think it's hella fun, and I'm not ripping on that. It's also suuuper casual, and that's why I love it. After playing scrims or solo queue it's nice to relax and like turn my brain off and just play purely mechanically. I'll agree with you that the mastery system is majorly flawed compared to what it's supposed to represent, but that's still what it's supposed to represent. Which is why I think Riot limited tokens to SR games only. You can't get them in Twisted Treeline either. Idk, I agree with keeping the tokens on the more competitive gamemode though. It's not like you get nothing for ARAM. Like you said, you can get up to level 5, plus still amass points in numbers.
First and foremost, Treeline is an atrociously low bar to compare to in terms of game features like Champ Mastery. Riot's neglected the game mode to the point that TT's the only PvP mode that doesn't grant paid Event Pass tokens. SR, ARAM, TFT, and even Nexus Blitz and ARURF have all granted Event tokens. Treeline hasn't for at least a year or two, and there's never been an explanation either. Secondly, I'd prefer not to discuss Ranked ARAM here because it's polarizing, complicated, and, most importantly, out-of-scope. As an aside though, I can't remember the last time I saw "Ranked ARAM" used as a meme rather than as a serious request, so experiences clearly vary. On that note, I don't think claiming that TFT is similar to ARAM is rude at all to people who competitively enjoy TFT. If anything, it's significantly more rude to the people who want to competitively enjoy ARAM to claim that ARAM isn't skill-based. I think one of the strengths of ARAM is that it *can* be a casual experience, where someone can just mindlessly smash into the enemy team. At the same time, it *can* be a competitive experience, where someone's breadth of skill is tested as they're forced to adapt to unusual situations. That's why I think ARAM's comparable to TFT. The specific skills required are obviously different, but there's areas hidden beneath the "LoL rAnDoMnEsS" facade that let players show off their abilities. Anyway, back to the main topic of Mastery tokens. I agree with you that it makes sense to keep tokens in the more competitive *queues* (i.e. ranked). However, I think the intent behind the system was completely thrown out when Riot enabled Mastery tokens in the chaos that is Normals SR (and briefly URF). As far as I'm aware, Normals SR has never been considered a competitive experience. That's explicitly what Ranked is for. Given that Mastery tokens are already being granted in a casual environment, it doesn't make sense to me to not grant tokens across all of League's PvP modes. It feels like yet another example of odd SR favoritism, like those "Place 1 control ward" or "Get at least 10 vision score in a game" Missions. Trivial/simple to do for any SR player, but physically impossible for non-SR players.
: Getting S's on ARAM is way easier though, lmao. ARAM is less skill and more 'which team rolled the better comp'. You can still earn mastery points on ARAM and get up to level 5, but I disagree with ARAM being valid for tokens. Mastery is supposed to represent your time and dedication to learning and playing a champion, and if you only ever play that champion on ARAM, you don't ***REALLY*** know how to play them outside of on a minor mechanical level since ARAM is just team-fighting in a narrow alley-- you don't even need to CS.
Getting S-ranks in ARAM is definitely not easier. As of [about a year and a half ago](https://nexus.leagueoflegends.com/en-us/2018/05/dev-aram-changes-incoming/), Mastery grades were changed to be more consistent with SR. Prior to then, it was apparently harder to get S-ranks in ARAM than SR. Moreover, skill absolutely factors into ARAM. If it was just luck, strong ARAM players wouldn't be able to consistently win. It's sorta comparable to TFT, where there's a balance between luck and player skill, and TFT explicitly has a ranked queue. Finally, your argument about "Mastery representing time and dedication" would be reasonable if the Mastery system reflected that, *but it doesn't.* The only current requirement for high Mastery is five "good" games (and some Essence) at some point in a player's League career. There's no upkeep, minimum performance baseline, Ranked requirement, or anything to have Mastery actually reflect skill. Hell, someone could conceivably grind up to level 5 exclusively playing ARAM, play five SR games for tokens, and then go right back to ARAM. Someone else could spam thousands of SR games averaging D-ranks until they get five lucky games, and they'd have the exact same "achievement" as the first person. Limiting Mastery tokens to classic SR is much more of an annoyance for non-SR players than any sort of meaningful requirement for League players.
kwGifty (NA)
: Oh darn a game mode came out that a huge majority of players like and the micro minority who liked TT are upset about it. It's like ppl who whine that a new call of duty comes out every year. Why waste your time whining? Us 30 million players don't care and riot will keep TFT in the spotlight while we play it. Go find a differnet game if you don't like it
> [{quoted}](name=kwGifty,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=E9gmgEse,comment-id=0003,timestamp=2019-09-26T18:06:41.825+0000) > > Oh darn a game mode came out that a huge majority of players like and the micro minority who liked TT are upset about it. > > It's like ppl who whine that a new call of duty comes out every year. Why waste your time whining? Us 30 million players don't care and riot will keep TFT in the spotlight while we play it. Go find a differnet game if you don't like it No one in this topic is complaining about Riot supporting TFT. What we are complaining about is that Riot's justification for supporting TFT (over "standard" League modes) is misleading at best. It'd be one thing for Riot to state that supporting TFT makes sense because TFT is different enough to appeal to a separate playerbase apart from the existing League playerbase. It's an entirely different thing for Riot to claim that TFT is just so much more popular than everything else without acknowledging all the advantages TFT has over its competitors. For instance, TFT had ranked support and regular balancing announced immediately. Meanwhile ARAM didn't get specific balancing until years after launch and still doesn't even have Mastery tokens, much less ranked.
Meddler (NA)
: ARAM - the large majority of players engaging with ARAM tell us they're doing so because they're looking for something lower stress, less competitive, a less negative experience with their teammates etc. We don't think a ranked queue makes sense as a result, given presence of a ranked queue changes expectations and play even in normals. Secondary issues with likely queue health being poor in lower population regions. TFT by contrast we've seen very clear desire from most TFT players for a at least somewhat competitive experience and ranked TFT gets much more play than normal TFT at this point. Co-op versus AI - we've got some small work underway, though no ship date at present. It's aimed at things like re-enabling a few bots that have been disabled due to bugs, making it so bots buy items a little more intelligently etc. Not a major overhaul of anything though, more a polish pass. Zyra - nothing underway at present.
Is it possible that Ranked TFT being announced at the same time as TFT itself influenced community expectations? That is, maybe TFT players desire a competitive experience because they were promised a competitive experience. Similarly, ARAM players might tend towards a lower-stress environment because ARAM has been the lower-stress option for years due to a lack of ranked queue. Nevertheless, are there any ideas bouncing around about other sorts of achievements or options for ARAM players who do want a competitive experience? SR/TT have different skillsets, game flow, etc, so they're not really viable substitutes, especially with TT's impending removal. I know a similar discussion was brought up regarding Ranked Dominion years back, but that clearly never panned out.
SmashinBob (EUNE)
: Ranked aram would be awesome, but it should still be RNG champs, that is what makes aram great in the first place, you remove the RNG, then you just have regular run it down mid games, that is often played in rift anyways.
Depends on what you mean by "RNG champs." The current "system just gives you a random champ" works, but "drafting from a list of random champs" should also be considered. It'd help cut down on the "RNG loss from champ select" sentiment. Random Draft wouldn't be a departure from "ARAM" either, as it's effectively an extension of the existing reroll+bench system.
Lovelle (NA)
: I would rather have Ascension. It's faster and offers a vastly different experience than the other modes, while also having the biggest viable champion pool, as a result of no laning phase, no snowballing and fast ambient gold gain. There's only like 3-5 "must ban" champs at most, and even those are debatable. There's also no RNG involved with winning/losing games, like with Nexus Blitz.
I'd prefer a (revamped) Dominion, due to the increased depth, but Ascension would be pretty decent.
Get2 (NA)
: Yep. I mean there's a whole slew of info that drives an ARAM that you need to know before you ever even hit a load screen. And you shouldn't have to MOBAfire your way though the game to play it, but ARAM will force you to or risk being totally useless. The only thing you need to know about TFT before you get started is where you plan to start clicking to get the best item/champ on the table. Haven't played in a couple weeks in case something has changed. But TFT is making the best decision given your options. ARAM is making the best of. .. well I have no idea where I am going with this. Give me Kat in an ARAM and I will be a concession stand with free hotdogs and pizzas made out of my cartoon body. Give me Zyra, and I will run the other team into the ground. I don't think anyone wants to deal with that any more than they have to.
>But TFT is making the best decision given your options. ARAM is making the best of. .. ".. what you're given." TFT throws a bunch of randomness at you throughout the match while ARAM front-loads its randomness. There's upsides to each approach (e.g. only having to deal with small amounts of RNG at a time vs. being able to have a game plan in mind). Personally, ARAM's front-loaded randomness feels less frustrating. Champ select is the primary source of randomness, so I can go into a game already knowing what I'm responding to. It's much easier to manage expectations. On the other hand, TFT's distributed randomness can result in constant losing gambles. It feels absolutely terrible to repeatedly find only pairs of champs or to get a 6th Negatron against auto-attack comps. Also, I disagree about the burden of knowledge bit. There's a significant amount of knowledge needed before you start TFT (e.g. what *is* the best item/champ on the table and why?). If you're going into TFT blind, you could do the same in ARAM. There's even recommended items in ARAM that, while questionable at times, at least provide a starting point, unlike in TFT. I will acknowledge that team-based vs. free-for-all does influence things. Failing in ARAM affects your entire team, whereas failing in TFT only affects yourself. However, I feel like that's not an ARAM-specific problem, and it's also handled by MMR. If someone has a bad game in Ranked SR (or TT), it affects their entire team, but everyone just moves on afterwards, more or less. If someone consistently has bad games, their MMR goes down until they start getting more appropriate matches.
: 1) It wasn't instantly released with ranked? 2) The sheer popularity of it even on the PBE, causing queue times of over **20 hours** at times, are probably more than enough indication that it's popular
The [original announcement for TFT](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/gameplay/teamfight-tactics) already mentioned ranked along with an estimated timeline for it. Yes, TFT didn't technically launch with a ranked queue, but ranked was being planned before TFT even hit PBE.
: If TT is getting removed, bring back Dominon
When Dominion was around, some people complained that it was too different from the rest of League. Now some people want Dominion back *because* it's different from the rest of League. That's kinda amusing.
: > [{quoted}](name=Minarde,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=EKqN0Z3U,comment-id=00000001,timestamp=2019-09-07T04:28:21.559+0000) > > *Kind of*. [Around the time they tested out bans](https://nexus.leagueoflegends.com/en-us/2018/05/dev-aram-changes-incoming/), ARAM switched to using its own metrics rather than just modified SR ones. The required performance is supposedly consistent across maps. > > Additionally, "demonstrating full mastery of the champion" is questionable even in SR, since tokens are position-independent. It's not unheard of for people to spam off-meta positions (e.g. Soraka Funnel Jungle) to get easier S-ranks. I'd probably agree with your reasoning if the current Mastery system actually reflected "skill and dedication," but it doesn't. That's more or less what I said. The values that are checked are the same (metrics), it's just a different series of thresholds (values) that you need to "beat" to get the S rank. I can understand why you thought differently. Also, while it is easier to get S ranks on off meta due to lower thresholds, those off meta picks usually need to be done in specific circumstances to work well. It still becomes as a show of mastery because you're making the champion work where they normally wouldn't.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=EKqN0Z3U,comment-id=000000010000,timestamp=2019-09-07T15:49:21.712+0000) > > That's more or less what I said. The values that are checked are the same (metrics), it's just a different series of thresholds (values) that you need to "beat" to get the S rank. I can understand why you thought differently. > > Also, while it is easier to get S ranks on off meta due to lower thresholds, those off meta picks usually need to be done in specific circumstances to work well. It still becomes as a show of mastery because you're making the champion work where they normally wouldn't. My nitpick was that, while some of the thresholds are lower due to the nature of ARAM, others are higher. It's not just "easier" across the board. And I'm still unconvinced. With the lack of any consistency, upkeep, or other more stringent requirements, Mastery tokens feel more analogous to "banging your head against the wall until you get lucky" rather than an actual "show of mastery." Made easier with off-meta, different queue MMR, premade shenanigans, and so on. If "making a champion work where they normally wouldn't" is an acceptable option to show overall skill with said champ, ARAM should be acceptable as well, as it doesn't seem appreciably different.
: > [{quoted}](name=Minarde,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=5PoNfKfk,comment-id=000200000000000100000000,timestamp=2019-09-07T04:03:24.380+0000) > > I didn't misread his premise, and OP isn't the one confusing cause and effect. You are. From release (October 2009) up until the rework (October 2012), there's four total patches addressing Treeline that aren't just maintaining parity with SR (e.g. particle updates, dragon callouts): [1.0.0.52](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=24433), [1.0.0.61](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=30496), [1.0.0.87](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=130837), and [1.0.0.106](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=369958). That's two patches in the first year, two in the second, and absolutely nothing for the third year. > > *"Oh, but Riot did a lot of work supporting Treeline starting from the rework!"* That didn't happen either. There were only two patches in the first six months following the rework: [1.0.0.152](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=2860671) and [1.0.0.154](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=3005056). They are notable for being the first instances of item balancing though. > > With that said, I will readily acknowledge that Nome and later ManWolfAxeBoss did some amazing work for non-SR maps starting from [3.8](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/patch-38-notes-0) (June 2013) and especially [3.9](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-39-notes) (July 2013) with the introduction of map-specific champion balance changes. There was at least one balance update in most patches up to [4.15](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-415-notes/) (August 2014). > > So at what point do you consider that the "investment of resources petered out"? Post 4.15? Sure, you could make a convincing argument there, but how do you explain the 7 total patches over Treeline's first 4 years? Most of those patches didn't address the meta either. Meanwhile, League, and SR in particular, was consistently getting 1-2 patches per month. Moreover, a case could certainly be made that the "year of plentiful updates" was intended more to reduce the deterioration of Treeline rather than popularize it. Not to mention the map rework itself was and still is controversial/questionable. > > At most, you could argue that the OP is omitting part of the cause-and-effect chain. After all, Treeline suffered from the same vicious cycle as Dominion. "Riot didn't support Treeline because it wasn't popular, and Treeline wasn't popular because Riot didn't support it." Even Riot admitted that was an issue during Dominion's removal. However, I cannot see how anyone can reasonably argue that Riot made a good faith effort to support Treeline. That the map was unpopular *despite* Riot's best attempts. As stated many times, the list OP used is extremely incomplete. Anyone with the slightest knowledge of TT knows that there were many more changes not included in that list. I even looked up the first TT-specific item I could think of, Lord Van Damm's Pillager, and most of its changes were _after_its return in Season 4, when you and OP believe Riot was totally ignoring the mode. Unfortunately, you and OP are far from the only people who want to bemoan the loss of a mode they never play and pretend to be experts on its demise just so you can portray yourselves as the cool kids who know so much about a map most other players probably haven't heard of. All you want to do is lie and scream and waste everyone's time and insult people and the beautiful part is that _Riot won't budge because money talks, it tells the truth, and it's louder than you_. So let's all just move on with our lives and continue not playing TT.
Are you even reading any of my responses? I haven't argued for or against Treeline's removal anywhere in this topic. I'm just trying to correct misinformation. Riot implied in [Treeline's removal announcement](https://nexus.leagueoflegends.com/en-us/2019/07/dev-state-of-modes/) and, clearly, numerous people in this topic appear to believe that "Riot tried to nurture Twisted Treeline, but players just never liked the map." That's blatantly false, as I've shown. Riot played a major role in TT's failure. It's insulting that Riot's seemingly attempting to absolve themselves of any blame in Treeline's decline. Anyone with the slightest familiarity with TT knows Riot neglected the mode. Riot knows they neglected the mode. Simply accepting the/some blame and owning up to the failure [like they did in Dominion's case](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/features/retiring-dominion) would be so much more respectful to players. Both Treeline fans and the overall League playerbase. However, considering that there's actually players not just accepting, but outright defending Riot's absence of fault, maybe the League playerbase doesn't deserve that respect after all.
: I think the biggest reasoning is that you aren't really demonstrating full mastery of the champion because you're basically skipping the lane phase entirely and have accelerated everything. While the same metrics are used between SR and ARAM, some of those metrics have much lower thresholds because of the nature of ARAM.
> [{quoted}](name=Busty Demoness,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=EKqN0Z3U,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2019-09-06T15:44:57.983+0000) > > I think the biggest reasoning is that you aren't really demonstrating full mastery of the champion because you're basically skipping the lane phase entirely and have accelerated everything. > > While the same metrics are used between SR and ARAM, some of those metrics have much lower thresholds because of the nature of ARAM. *Kind of*. [Around the time they tested out bans](https://nexus.leagueoflegends.com/en-us/2018/05/dev-aram-changes-incoming/), ARAM switched to using its own metrics rather than just modified SR ones. The required performance is supposedly consistent across maps. Additionally, "demonstrating full mastery of the champion" is questionable even in SR, since tokens are position-independent. It's not unheard of for people to spam off-meta positions (e.g. Soraka Funnel Jungle) to get easier S-ranks. I'd probably agree with your reasoning if the current Mastery system actually reflected "skill and dedication," but it doesn't.
: https://leagueoflegends.fandom.com/wiki/Twisted_Treeline Scroll down to patch history. If you want to prove me wrong then you can go through every patch in the game YOURSELF and find every instance of a slight change to TT. I've done enough extra work for one day. If you find any instances of champions and items being BALANCED (not just added or removed / disabled or enabled) specifically for TT, you let me know and I'll add it to the list. I'm not going to do that myself, because I really don't have that kind of time. I have a feeling though, that what I would find if I did, would not be enough to justify saying "Riot did the best job they could to make TT work." That is my point. Prove my point wrong. Prove to me that Riot pulled out all the stops, and did everything in their power to make TT work before they decided they were going to pull the plug. Go on. Prove that to me. Prove it to us. We're waiting.
>If you find any instances of champions and items being BALANCED (not just added or removed / disabled or enabled) specifically for TT, you let me know and I'll add it to the list. [Done. Up to the end of Season 4, more or less](https://boards.na.leagueoflegends.com/en/c/gameplay-balance/5PoNfKfk-the-real-reason-twisted-treeline-failed?comment=000200000000000100000000). Main thing I didn't explicitly mention was the map rework. From what I recall, changes get too sporadic past that point, so I stopped there.
: > [{quoted}](name=Minarde,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=5PoNfKfk,comment-id=0002000000000001,timestamp=2019-09-06T08:46:33.008+0000) > > Although it's certainly true that OP significantly understated Riot's efforts with respect to Treeline, the full information still supports, rather than invalidates, his basic premise though. Riot's support of the map is/was incredibly lacking. You misread his basic premise. It was that "the real reason Twisted Treeline failed" was a lack of support from Riot. This is, in fact, backwards, confusing cause and effect: the real reason that Riot stopped supporting TT was that it failed to bring in players. The investment of resources petered out once it became clear that those resources were being wasted on a mode no one played. Now that it's being removed, people just want to be hipsters pretending that they liked or might have liked it, when they clearly never had any interest in it. In a couple years, when more recent players ask about TT, these whiners will wax poetic about how TT was just SO MUCH FUN and they played it all the time with all their friends and everyone loved it and Rito James removed it for no good reason.
I didn't misread his premise, and OP isn't the one confusing cause and effect. You are. From release (October 2009) up until the rework (October 2012), there's four total patches addressing Treeline that aren't just maintaining parity with SR (e.g. particle updates, dragon callouts): [1.0.0.52](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=24433), [1.0.0.61](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=30496), [1.0.0.87](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=130837), and [1.0.0.106](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=369958). That's two patches in the first year, two in the second, and absolutely nothing for the third year. *"Oh, but Riot did a lot of work supporting Treeline starting from the rework!"* That didn't happen either. There were only two patches in the first six months following the rework: [1.0.0.152](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=2860671) and [1.0.0.154](http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=3005056). They are notable for being the first instances of item balancing though. With that said, I will readily acknowledge that Nome and later ManWolfAxeBoss did some amazing work for non-SR maps starting from [3.8](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/patch-38-notes-0) (June 2013) and especially [3.9](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-39-notes) (July 2013) with the introduction of map-specific champion balance changes. There was at least one balance update in most patches up to [4.15](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/patch/patch-415-notes/) (August 2014). So at what point do you consider that the "investment of resources petered out"? Post 4.15? Sure, you could make a convincing argument there, but how do you explain the 7 total patches over Treeline's first 4 years? Most of those patches didn't address the meta either. Meanwhile, League, and SR in particular, was consistently getting 1-2 patches per month. Moreover, a case could certainly be made that the "year of plentiful updates" was intended more to reduce the deterioration of Treeline rather than popularize it. Not to mention the map rework itself was and still is controversial/questionable. At most, you could argue that the OP is omitting part of the cause-and-effect chain. After all, Treeline suffered from the same vicious cycle as Dominion. "Riot didn't support Treeline because it wasn't popular, and Treeline wasn't popular because Riot didn't support it." Even Riot admitted that was an issue during Dominion's removal. However, I cannot see how anyone can reasonably argue that Riot made a good faith effort to support Treeline. That the map was unpopular *despite* Riot's best attempts.
: Well, good thing is I can do it for you. 6.12 is the first change documented on the wiki. A buff to Nasus to double his stackrate there, to 6 and 12. 6.24 is a change to give Shyvana a passive there, since she literally didn't have one before. The next actual change is 7.8, where they tweak health packs and minion gold a bit. 7.10 also has some more changes (removing gold items and more tweaks to minions), then there's a dry spell until 7.24, where...they nerfed dark harvest by making champions drop 1 less soul. 8.11 was the event, and that's most likely the easiest point to say that the systematic changes were beginning. The mode was released in 2012. That means it was around 4 years before it got a single change, and almost 5 before it got any change that could remotely be considered significant. That's more time before it got a single change than between **any** of the changes for TT. Yet ARAM was arguably more popular at all times. TT had had changes before ARAM ever did, yet...It still ended up with a fraction of the playerbase ARAM did. **That's** why it's considered dead, and that's why it's being killed. It's never managed to be more popular than anything at all (except maybe Dominion, which was axed years ago). Even a queue that started as a fucking custom gamemode did several times better than it did. With as long as it took for ARAM to get changes, but ARAM still managing to be successful, TT really has no excuse for how poorly it did. EDIT: Whoops. Mixed up the actually popular crystal scar map with the one that was a bot haven.
People really need to stop trying to bring up ARAM balance and popularity compared to Treeline. ARAM is not a good comparison at all because the mode has specific quirks that separate it from other League modes. For one thing, ARAM has been solely confined to a casual queue. Combined with the extremely low barrier to entry (e.g. no positions, no knowledge of meta required, not even a need to pick a champ), the stakes and the playerbase's expectations are much lower than in competitive queues. Furthermore, the randomness mitigates stagnation by (semi-)forcing champ variety. Remember the frustration from constantly seeing Hecarim, Zed, or whoever else was broken pre-nerfs in URF? It was made worse by the knowledge that all those players had intentionally picked those annoying champs. That doesn't happen in ARAM. Sure, some champs are/were more favored (e.g. Sona, Ziggs), but things are up to RNG in the end. (Or you just blame ARAM accounts.) If anything, Treeline's balance frequency should be compared to the Rift's. Despite SR's regular 1-2 patches per month, players still complain about the game feeling stale at times. Small wonder that Treeline's regarded poorly when it had, at best, 1-2 patches per year. >That's why it's considered dead, and that's why it's being killed. It's never managed to be more popular than anything at all (except maybe Ascension, which was axed years ago). Wasn't Ascension one of the most popular RGM modes, at least based on number of appearances? Or did you mean Dominion there? That's a better analogue than ARAM, yet it's not a particularly useful comparison. Riot treated Dom even worse than TT, considering Dom was a competitive game mode confined to a casual queue and effectively abandoned at launch. TT at least had ranked rewards as an incentive.
: > [{quoted}](name=caffeine abuser,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=5PoNfKfk,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2019-09-06T02:06:48.869+0000) > > It's the full list of patches under the "Twisted Treeline" heading on the wiki. Well, it obviously paints a woefully incomplete picture. The full information totally invalidates the point you were making.
Although it's certainly true that OP significantly understated Riot's efforts with respect to Treeline, the full information still supports, rather than invalidates, his basic premise though. Riot's support of the map is/was incredibly lacking.
: The problem with trying to save Twisted Treeline..
>Riot cannot set a precedent that they will revert big decisions like this, or else the community thinks that Riot will just revert anything with enough backlash. Wasn't "Position Ranks" a big decision that got reverted after it went badly? >Also they reverted making Nexus Blitz a permanent gamemode which had a ton of promise, but we all know where that went... :( Riot repeatedly said that Nexus Blitz was *potentially* permanent, not that it was going to be permanent. As a side note, I personally still don't understand the appeal of NB. It just felt like the most frustrating elements of the other game modes thrown together. >The only reason I'm making this post is because I think there's essentially a 0% chance that this decision gets reverted, and I don't want a lot of people making posts about it because it's almost like spam. It hasn't happened, this is more of a preventative measure than anything. No offense, but you weren't paying attention when Riot announced Treeline's removal, were you? There was already a bunch of outrage then. Part of the outcry came from TT fans upset at losing their home; another part came from players concerned that "regular" League was deteriorating down to just SR and ARAM. Yet another segment was just angry that Riot chose to justify the removal in an, at best, exceedingly misleading way (i.e. "Oh, we tried *everything*, but TT just wasn't popular"). There should absolutely be "lots of people making posts about it" because it's a massive development in League's history. Treeline's been around since before League's official launch, yet its removal announcement gets buried in an article discussing all non-SR game modes? Even the fact that Riot hasn't attempted to address any part of the outrage should be a humongous red flag. At this point, it wouldn't be surprising at all if Riot starts retiring unpopular champions to "keep [their] focus" on more popular champs.
: RNG in Teamfight Tactics affects everyone equally. There is no particular micro skill to the different comp types, meaning no is is on the backfoot for having to build a comp they don't usually play. In ARAM, an individual champion is very different from another. For instance: I main mages and ADCs. For the most part, I can pick up any one of those and play them at least moderately effectively. However, stick me on a bruiser, someone like a Jax or Olaf, and I will be completely useless. The RNG in ARAM totally affects *how* you can play. It affects everyone differently. While someone gets a champ or class they main, someone on the other team gets a class they never even touch. In TFT, the randomness affects everyone equally. That's why ARAM won't have a ranked mode.
For one thing, following that argument, Summoner's Rift shouldn't have ranked either. The RNG in ARAM affects how you can play, but so does RNG in SR. The old position-calling and even the current autofill system are both effectively random elements that affect everyone differently. For instance, it's far from being unheard of for an autofilled to get matched up against a main. If that's acceptable for SR, there's no reason for it to be unacceptable for a hypothetical Ranked ARAM. Secondly, and more importantly, "ability to play the champ you're given" is a skill that ARAM specifically tests. SR doesn't require players to know objective control, warding, etc. before queuing for ranked because that's reflected in a player's actual rank. Likewise, TFT doesn't require players to know economy, adapting, and so on because, again, a player's grasp of those skills is reflected by their rank. The (large) possibility of a player getting a champ or role they're unfamiliar with isn't a strike against ARAM; it just means that that particular player's gap in skill would likely be reflected in their hypothetical rank.
xelaker (NA)
: wouldn't it just be custom aram only accounts doing the best? Maybe if ranked opens up the whole roster for everyone, but that might cut into profits and such
There's a number of potential ways to address the advantages of ARAM accounts. You mentioned enabling all champs, but a seasonal roster like TFT or Snowdown ARURF could also work. The shared champ pool that One for All used is another possibility. A whitelist/blacklist is yet another option. Point being, I'm sure Riot could figure out some way to keep things fair if they wanted to.
Nmagoun (NA)
: I dont get why everyone is angry over TTs removal
I'll try to briefly summarize the three main areas of frustration. People are outraged because one or more of these topics resonates with them. 1. Riot's (mis)handling of Treeline leading up to this point Riot has done an absolutely terrible job in terms of supporting TT. Twisted Treeline's original version came out in 2009. Item balancing didn't come about until the map rework in 2012, and the first champ balance changes were in 2013. The last balance changes of any kind were circa 2016. Out of ten years of existence, roughly three years at the beginning and three years at the end had virtually zero balance updates. Keep in mind that, as shown by the existence of ranked, Twisted Treeline is/was intended as a competitive environment. Moreover, Treeline frequently missed out on other features as well. RGM modes got Champ Mastery before TT did, including Mastery tokens which TT and ARAM still don't have yet. Missions frequently exclude Treeline from eligibility (e.g. Ranked Season 2019 had "5v5 Matchmade" as a requirement). Paid event Passes reward event tokens after every game except for 3v3 matches. 2. How Riot broke the news Twisted Treeline's been around since before League's official launch in 2009. Announcing its retirement should be a big deal, but it's only mentioned in the middle of an article that covers all non-SR game modes. Furthermore, the article brings up Riot's efforts to support the map, yet there's no mention of Riot's lack of effort in supporting the map. It's misleading and comes across as Riot attempting to absolve themselves of any fault in TT's fate. As messy as Dominion's retirement was, Riot at least respected the playerbase enough to explicitly accept some of the blame. 3. How's Riot's proceeding in the future Especially with Dominion before it, retiring a permanent game mode sets a questionable precedent. It reminds players that "permanent" doesn't actually mean "permanent." Back during Dominion's retirement, Riot said that Treeline's health was fine. Now with Treeline's retirement, Riot's saying that the remaining game modes are fine. There's a certain sense of credibility that's increasingly lacking. Furthermore, at the time of Dominion's removal, there were four game modes. Three years later at the current time, there's still four game modes. Riot claims that removing the unpopular mode frees up resources to improve existing game modes, but there's distinct lack of results. Particularly considering that Treeline has effectively been in maintenance mode for years, which calls into question what resources it's taking up.
: > [{quoted}](name=Freedom Dividend,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=ZAkQjAGV,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2019-08-01T14:31:23.536+0000) > > E-sports is the death of variation. In more ways than one. > > If the enjoyment of League of Legends and average player were the focus; everything released would exist in custom games and custom games would have extensive customization features to allow for fun and/or interesting games. Fam, it wasn't Esports that killed TT. It was the fact that TT didn't have enough to offer over any other mode. 3v3 instead of 5v5 just isn't enough of a draw.
> [{quoted}](name=DuskDaUmbreon,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=ZAkQjAGV,comment-id=00010001,timestamp=2019-08-01T14:56:46.202+0000) > > Fam, it wasn't Esports that killed TT. It was the fact that TT didn't have enough to offer over any other mode. 3v3 instead of 5v5 just isn't enough of a draw. On the contrary, someone could probably make a compelling argument that esports did kill Treeline. By Riot's own admission, part of the reason they deprioritized Dominion at launch was due to an internal shift towards supporting the burgeoning LCS and esports scene. The Treeline redesign came out around that time period, so it's possible that Riot siphoned needed resources (e.g. balancing, advertising) from TT in favor of esports.
Manxxom (NA)
: I am the only one here who notices that vilemaw is slightly larger than baron too
Based on [the old bug where you could pull it](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yelIbmgVYDw&t=79s), Vilemaw's roughly twice the size of Baron.
: That's not how any of this works....replacing code and removing code are not comparable. Most games that utilize game-mode features use modularization design principles in their code. It's how many games today are popularizing rotating game modes. Since the code is self-contained in it's own module, all you have to do is enable and disable the required modules.
> [{quoted}](name=I Play This Game,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=LoljPctW,comment-id=0005,timestamp=2019-08-01T17:23:54.930+0000) > > That's not how any of this works....replacing code and removing code are not comparable. Most games that utilize game-mode features use modularization design principles in their code. It's how many games today are popularizing rotating game modes. Since the code is self-contained in it's own module, all you have to do is enable and disable the required modules. To be fair, back when Dominion was still alive, we were told that the personal score system couldn't be removed without potentially breaking something. Given Treeline's age, it's not inconceivable that there's some odd dependencies. Maybe Skarner spires will break from losing TT altars or something.
: I will point out reworking those champions is doing exactly that. Yes you get a replacement but the old kit/champion is effectively removed.
Kinda. Riot generally tries to keep the same theme or feel as the old champ, though that obviously varies (e.g. Poppy vs. Warwick, Aatrox vs. Darius). More importantly, as you mentioned, there's a replacement when champs get reworked. There's no replacement announced for Treeline at this point in time.
: And people wonder why Riot doesn't take the boards seriously. The title is overblown and frankly foolish. You would need to have literally zero understanding of the game industry to think riot is the worst of the worst in game companies. They go well above and beyond the call of duty in a lot of ways. They have no obligation to share ANY information with you, believe it or not. They could always ghost the community like bethesda has for Anthem. Would probably make their lives easier. OP doesn't have a single match on their match history. They aren't even playing the game right now on this account. I suspect, STRONGLY, that if we were to see their main account (if this isn't it) we would be hard-pressed to find matches on TT which they so zealously defend. You want variety? Perhaps actually playing the game would be a good start. Based on what I'm seeing, they aren't losing a player. They've already lost you so your opinion here doesn't matter anyways. This seems to me like a classic upvote bait thread intended to latch on to the outrage about the loss of a mode the vast majority of people here didn't play more than 10 times in the past 3 years. ------------ But for the sake of conversation, let's break down the post despite that. > You shoved TFT down our throats and hyped it like there is no tomorrow, then act like keeping it permanent was an unexpected event. Even if it would have utterly failed, you would've kept it anyways, you never introduced it just to test the waters like you did with NB, you put it live for good from the very beginning. You never gave NB that kind of chance or treatment, even though from what I've personally seen, the feedback for it was overall better than for TFT even if apparently the popularity didn't follow, the ratio was there. TFT is massively popular. Massively. Don't act like it was just 100% going to stay. We have plenty of evidence that they have no problem pulling gamemodes when they fail. TFT did not fail. It's got a healthy streaming community and a consistent playerbase in a way that Twisted Treeline NEVER EVER had. They gave Nexus Blitz the exact same kind of treatment. They hyped it, the did balance changes for it and bugfixes for it during its run. It didn't pull the numbers they wanted as a company which needs to make a profit so they didn't make it a permanent facet of the game. Don't mistake the boards or your friend group liking Nexus Blitz as some evidence for its popularity. For most people it was a fun distraction at best, not something they were interested in doing for a long time. --- > The only reason TT has been deserted is because you didn't care for it. For one, I've always wanted to play TT, but I just didn't because I know they is absolutely 0 balance. You never gave it a chance, either. And neither did you toward Dominion. You gave TFT more love in a week than you have TT in years. You have no casual friendly mode where you can actually pick your champion. TT didn't attract players even when Riot updated it in 2012. They stated that the playerbase didn't go up for that mode. They sunk loads of resources into it with zero payoff. Of course they aren't going to suddenly start bending over backwards for it. It was deserted even when they did care for it. I actually play TT from time to time, and I can tell you that unless you play the hell out of it and get decent MMR you aren't going to be encountering much in terms of funnel strats. in maybe 40 matches of it over the last 2ish years I've faced that one time. So save your excuses for not playing the mode. Secondly, based on your OWN admission, TT already wasn't a "casual friendly mode" if you went in and were so concerned people would be tryharding and using funnel strats in it all the time. --------- They care about ARAM because it has a playerbase. In terms of not keeping ARAM bans? Idk on that one. I liked them and hope they get put in permanently and I'm not sure why they haven't. But that hardly necessitates the level of self-righteous rage in your post. Also, you don't need to like TFT. But it IS popular. Your opinion is irrelevant, especially since you're so determined to quit anyway. Why should Riot care at all about what you have to say? Because 100 salty people upvoted this thread without looking at the contents because they are angry a mode they seldom played is vanishing? People are allowed to be upset that Twisted Treeline is going away. It's a bummer. There's a lot of cool art and resources sunk into it that I'll miss being able to see. But threads that try and manufacture some evil corporate conspiracy about it are ridiculous.
> [{quoted}](name=Void Kaiju,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=qYcmzkom,comment-id=0021,timestamp=2019-08-01T14:55:58.018+0000) > > I actually play TT from time to time, and I can tell you that unless you play the hell out of it and get decent MMR you aren't going to be encountering much in terms of funnel strats. in maybe 40 matches of it over the last 2ish years I've faced that one time. So save your excuses for not playing the mode. I didn't play/grind TT specifically to avoid getting into the Hyper meta MMR bracket. Even down in Gold though, I was running into it 10-20% of the time.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Midg3t,realm=EUNE,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=qYcmzkom,comment-id=000000000001000000000001,timestamp=2019-08-01T12:26:24.894+0000) > > If riot at least tried to make some changes to make it better, more people would've played it probably. > For example, i dont want to play ARAM because I hate how I can end up with immobile melee champ while some aram-only acc can buy only the best aram champs and end up playing them majority of the time. If riot unlocke all champs in aram then i would definitelly play it. > > Just as more people would play TT if riot made some updates to make it feel better to play. I mean, how can you expect people to play the gamemode that had it's last update back in season 5? > > Not to mention that you cant finish your missions on TT, you cant earn event pass tokens, nor champ mastery tokens. (this is what I've heard by reading some of the comments, so if I was incorrect somewhere in here lemme know) > > And even if people didnt play TT in years they're mad for a reason. This is just another sign that riot doesnt give a shit about what their players want. Even if it had REALLY SMALL playerbase, you shouldnt ditch them like this. ESPECIALLY because riot didnt update that gamemode for several years now. > > What message does riot give us by doing this? i would say it's "We'll only focus on stuff that brings in money, and if youre consuming a content that doesnt bring profit, compared to other content that does, well fuck you, you cant have that." People weren't even playing TT back when it was being updated though.
> [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=qYcmzkom,comment-id=0000000000010000000000010000,timestamp=2019-08-01T16:05:00.977+0000) > > People weren't even playing TT back when it was being updated though. To be fair, the updates were sporadic and only came after years of Riot neglect. The damage to the overall playerbase's perception of non-SR modes was already done. As a result, that level of updates seemed more suitable for placating existing fans rather than attracting new ones.
Jamaree (NA)
: > [{quoted}](name=Technorch,realm=EUW,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=qYcmzkom,comment-id=000000000001000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-31T23:43:17.233+0000) > > Why are you pitting all the misdeeds of many companies as if they were one against Riot's? If you look at each of these companies in a case by case basis, then at Riot, then at actually good companies, it's gonna be obvious on which side of the fence Riot is. To me, it's all the same, except Riot's single game is not fun anymore. Are you kidding me? What has Riot done that is even slightly comparable to trying to make a profit off of the death of one of their employees? What has Riot done that is comparable to remastering a game then making you pay for the same content again? What has Riot done that is comparable to baiting their pros and then pulling that shit out from under them with not a single notion, just boop, instantly out of a job. What has Riot done that is comparable to putting pay to win mechanics in their game? What has Riot done that is comparable to making people pay for additional save files mind you all of these things are in games YOU HAVE TO PAY FOR, and aren’t free like this one. > The removal itself is bad, but it's the way Riot act as if it's our fault for not playing it when they're the ones who have completely neglected the mode, as with what happened with Dominion, that personally angers me the most and I think it's a sentiment that's shared by other people as well. And that’s fine, but they aren’t wrong either, it is how businesses run, there comes a point where you stop investing money into a thing because it doesn’t bring profit in. “Well that’s just them being greedy, they should do it out of the kindness of their hearts.” Sorry, this is the real world, doing things out of the goodness of your heart doesn’t put food on the table, doesn’t turn the lights on, and doesn’t pay employees. I hate that entitled mindset gamers have so fucking much without even the slightest understanding of the other side, it is maddening because I know in their personal lives they don’t do that shit. Do you comp food for free on the daily as a restaurant worker/owner? Do you comp clothes or products at your store? Do you do free labor out of the goodness of your heart on every project? Of course fucking not. Do you guys keep throwing money at projects hoping to eventually have it stick or do you do the smart thing and let it go when it clearly isn’t work because I can almost guarantee it is the latter. I’m not saying don’t be upset about the removal but be fucking realistic at the very least, and if you don’t have a single TT game in your match history in the last six months, please shut the fuck up about liking this game mode, because if you actually liked this game mode, you would be playing it, problems or not.
> [{quoted}](name=Jamaree,realm=NA,application-id=yrc23zHg,discussion-id=qYcmzkom,comment-id=0000000000010000000000000000,timestamp=2019-07-31T23:57:01.135+0000) > > And that’s fine, but they aren’t wrong either, it is how businesses run, there comes a point where you stop investing money into a thing because it doesn’t bring profit in. As the previous person said, I'd be less frustrated with TT's removal if Riot had simply been humble and truthful. It's not like players weren't acutely aware of the possibility of this happening. My main gripes are that a) Riot's shifting all the blame away from itself and b) burying the news of TT's retirement. [Dominion's retirement](https://na.leagueoflegends.com/en/news/game-updates/features/retiring-dominion) had some spin as well, but Riot at least directly acknowledged the abysmal support along with posting a news article specifically announcing the removal. In Treeline's case? The news is only mentioned in the middle of an article that covers all non-SR modes. Moreover, Riot notes the items, balance changes, and redesign, yet there's absolutely zero mention of the years of neglect. Basically, the playerbase knows Riot ignored Treeline. Riot knows they ignored Treeline. Simply admitting their failure and facing it head-on would've been significantly more palatable than what Riot decided on doing. Wait, hold up. >Or Blizzard who will tell you you don’t want that map, that you want to play this thing instead that you clearly don’t want. (Refusal of releasing classic servers until massive backlash and telling people they want mobile Diablo.) Isn't Riot doing something similar here? Riot's telling players that the players didn't want Treeline, but wanted Summoner's Rift instead. However, TT players clearly didn't want SR or else they would be playing SR. Riot even follows up with saying there's no TT-specific chroma this year because they didn't want non-TT players to spam TT games? If someone's spamming TT games, aren't they by definition a TT player?
: > Rito needs to think about what they are doing before they lose another playerbase like Dominion before it. Course said playerbase apparently barely registers on charts next to ARAM and the like sooooo apparently that's not a big loss. There's more people upset TT is being removed than actually PLAY the thing.
>There's more people upset TT is being removed than actually PLAY the thing. Well, of course. Imagine if, rather than attempt to rework them, Riot simply removed old/unpopular champions from the game. There'd be outcry from more than just fans of those retired champs. Some of the outcry would be from fans of other champs, worried that their own favorites might eventually end up on the chopping block. "But this won't happen with any other game modes. They all have healthy playerbases!" Yeah, and so did Treeline back when Dominion died.
: Yes, people will always complain when something they no longer have. Remember how the boards were flooded with posts from Yorick mains prior to his rework despite being the least used champion in the game? This is going to be a bitter truth to you and to everyone on the boards complaining about it now, but TT is not popular and never will be no matter how much work they put on it. When they tried, the mode remained as unpopular as ever. The only way they would really get people to play it is to offer incentives, which they did (Golden Chroma for Victorious skin). And even with that, if it's pulling in the numbers Riot is saying, it doesn't pay to even utilize it any more. It still works on their server.
>The only way they would really get people to play it is to offer incentives, which they did (Golden Chroma for Victorious skin). I find it important to point out that Riot also *disincentivized* playing TT. It took over a year for TT and ARAM to get Champion Mastery. Not only did RGM modes get the Mastery system earlier, they also had Mastery tokens for a while as well. In contrast, TT players have never had access to Mastery token drops. Furthermore, Event Passes have been awarding event tokens for all games (including TFT) *except for Treeline matches*. Plus a (frequent) lack of Mission eligibility for Treeline. For instance, the Missions commemorating the start of Ranked Season 2019 explicitly required "5v5 games." In other words, Riot deemed that playing ARAM to celebrate the start of this ranked Season was more fitting than playing Ranked Treeline.
Show more

Minarde

Level 183 (NA)
Lifetime Upvotes
Create a Discussion