Skip to content

2017-18 esports events update and Rift Rivals

Riot··3 votes·27,859 views

TL;DR: We’re making some immediate changes to the upcoming 2017-18 calendar, including introducing a new regional clash called Rift Rivals in July.

Within this post, we’ll be introducing some changes for the 2017 off-season and 2018 season as well as sharing some insight on how we balance international and regional competition.

We want to create great entertainment for fans worldwide as well as a stable ecosystem that’ll be around for the long term, and there’s a couple of important ways we try to achieve that. We try to strike a balance between regional play, which supports a healthy local ecosystem, and international play which creates exciting focal points for the season. With that in mind, there’s a few changes we’re going to be introducing for this year.

Introducing Rift Rivals

The biggest change we’re excited to introduce is a brand new events series coming up in July - Rift Rivals. Held in multiple locations across the world during July 3-9, Rift Rivals will pit regional rivals against each other in mid-split grudge matches for glory and bragging rights.

Click here for a sneak peek of this event.

League of Legends no longer a part of IEM

Another change is that League of Legends will no longer be a part of the Intel Extreme Masters (IEM series) for 2017-18. While we remember and cherish epic moments from the past, we believe that withdrawing for the upcoming season is the right way to go.

We know that these changes shake up the international calendar, and while we’re excited to introduce a new brand with Rift Rivals, we also wanted to give some insight into how we’re thinking long-term around domestic and international events. Read on for more info.

How do we set international schedules/calendars?

As we talked about above, when we look at a rebooted 2017-18 calendar and beyond, it’s our goal to balance regional play with consistently high-quality international events that pit top teams from different regions. Regional play creates meaningful connections between fans and pros/teams and promotes positive things like deeper team investment and larger pro salaries - critical for a league that will last beyond the short term. International events are exciting displays of the highest level of play from the best teams in the world. Looking at 2018 and beyond, we believe we could improve the way we structure our seasons around regional and international events, so we're taking a few steps to address that - some immediate, and some in the longer term.

Why two splits? Why not kill Split 1?

It’s worth saying that no system is set in stone, and that we’ve investigated radical changes (like adjusting the structure and length of regional splits). With that said, we see some clear benefits in having a league system with the current amount of  regional play.

There are 13 regional pro leagues, over 100 teams, and hundreds of pros worldwide. A regional league system allows for stable, consistent participation for a large number of teams and pros globally - key to building local fandom and sustaining financially stable careers for pros. Tournament systems, on the other hand, reward a much smaller number of top teams and pros at the most successful and competitive end of the scale. Making drastic moves in either direction could imbalance the current ecosystem, driving down salaries for pros and sponsorship value for teams.

With so many teams worldwide, not every team can compete in meaningful international competition without making those tournaments unreasonably large. Let’s assume any international tournament would likely only feature the top 2-3 teams in a region without being unwieldy. If these replace the spring split, the bottom 6-7 teams in most regions would be playing for a total of 9-10 weeks over the year (just the summer split). With such limited play time, sponsorship values for those teams will drop, and teams outside of the top 2-3 likely will not be able to maintain pro salaries over the full year. This essentially risks nearly 80% of our global teams and pro player careers for increased spotlight on the top 20%.

Why not shorten the splits and add more international play?

It’s something we’re considering, but not for 2018. The sport is growing, but is still in a relatively early and fragile state worldwide: pro player salaries are still stabilizing, organizations are still finding their footing financially, and local teams are still building their local fanbases. Consistent regional play creates a strong economic base for all teams - and by extension, pro players. We think that major structural changes to reduce regional play could be destructive at a time when leagues are finally getting some financial stability.

We’re not opposed to the idea of shortening splits to make more room for more international play in the future. It’s our expectation that in the near future, leagues will have stabilized to the point where that kind of system makes sense. We just want to make sure that if and when we make those kind of changes, it doesn’t come at a significant cost to many pros’ and teams’ livelihood.

Why not add more international play on top of the current amount of regional play?

Our season is already long, and we want to make sure that pros avoid burnout by having a sufficiently long off-season. Elite teams are practicing or competing in as many as 42 weeks over the year, sacrificing even weekends to be the best, and with very little time off to relax, take a vacation or do anything other than train for long hours at high pressure. Creating an uninterrupted offseason for pros in 2017 was one of the factors behind our decision to withdraw from the IEM series.

Additionally, the off-season is an important time for teams to evaluate potential roster changes and for players to consider their career options. We don’t want to make the off-season more stressful for pros by making the period they have to make roster changes significantly shorter.   

Thanks for hanging in there with us till the end! Let us know if you have any questions - we’ll be sticking around to answer them.

21 Comments

AdeBug10 votes

Out of curiosity, why and who t f keeps downvoting Esports threads? I sometimes watch esports but this downvoting is off putting, deterring me from stepping in here

DebunkFunk3 votes

I know a person who hates league of legends so much he visits threads to downvote all things related. Claims DOTA is for intellectuals and fears that the world is run by league of legends idiots.

The Lexer3 votes

yeah, this is something I've wondered for a while as well. Every esports thread made by Riot ends up at like -4 after a week.

Paquay2 votes

I've wondered this too. My best guess: people who hate Esports because they feel like having some balance around pro play ruins their game. I am guessing they dislike anything Esports because it does cause extra balance issues beyond their Wood V abilities so they downvote every Esports thread.

Dark Matter7 votes

Riot is just all around so much better these days than last year good work thus far.

Laeryken3 votes

While I'll miss the fun of IEM, I appreciate putting teams and players' interests first with the uninterrupted off-season. Rift Rivals looks like it will be a blast. LET'S GOOOO NA FIGHTING!

Brother Moccia1 votes

Revenge will be had!

crabface52 votes

Interesting...

iShinobi2 votes

When is this going to happen, before worlds? After? Can't imagine where it'd fit.

ProtestantCaesar2 votes

The Rift Rivals event is in July, well before worlds. (In fact, before the Summer Split starts, I think.)

Deros1 votes

Nah it starts just over a month after summer split starts. Basically think of this as a more formalized version of IEM where each region faces in main rival instead of one small/medium tournament in which only a few teams can attend because of time issues, so there would be a break in the summer split, two weeks just like IEM in spring, for all regions so they can participate in this tourney.

RiotDanCast2 votes

Is there a common belief that international is better? All of the FAQ is focused on responding to "why not more international?". I'd rather have more local / regional! I lose interest in MSI because I'm not familiar with everyone. I'd be happy to see more intra-regional games, and am not very excited for watching NA fight EU teams I don't know a lot about.

OTP Dunker1 votes

Darius indeed

Royal Waffle1 votes

Im just here seeing if the East coast can get some love. Hasnt been a stage preformance since MSI at FSU. took forever to set up a server in the middle of the US and its been even longer to get an event. Riot why you hate us over here? Can you do an Event in the southeast. That would be great. thanks

Brother Moccia1 votes

I would have went but i had major testing during the event! I hope they come back to Florida in the future!

AbusaTV1 votes

Looking at the tournament bracket, after each of the 3 teams play 1 game vs the other 3...

Why does one of the two regions have 2 games for #3 team, while the opposing region lets their #1 team play two games and their #1 only one?.. Seems unfair. Example: #3 vs #3 #2 vs #3 #2 vs #2 #1 vs #2 #1 vs #1

In this example, the team on the right side seems to be at a dis-advantage having their #1 team only playing one game?

Shouldn't both regions have the #3 team only play one game and the #1 teams play two each? Why the lop-sided-ness?

DarkFeonix2 votes

That is because the teams play until they lose, beginning with the lowest seed and progressing upward. So if the #3 seed from region A wins three games in a row against region B's teams (the #3, #2, and #1 seeds in order) then neither the #2 seed, nor #1 seed from Region A would play at all. With that in mind, it is actually ideal (for that region) to not have their #1 seed play at all.

Brother Moccia1 votes

Ill explain my best since this is just an example. Its a tournament with the regions working together not fighting each other. So in the example both the #3s play eachother for example if the NA 3 beats the EU 3, the EU 3 is out and NA3 moves on to play EU2, if EU 2 beats NA3 then both 2 seeds play and so on for the 1 seeds. The games keep going until each team from a region is eliminated check the format example.

coeurloyal1 votes

If the other two didn't clarify it enough, this is hypothetical. The winner advances to play the next highest seed from the opposing region; In theory, it could be #3NA vs #1 EU. The entire knockout stage could end in 3 games if P1 or FNC just dominates the other region's representatives.

Sionnan691 votes

I just feel that more international exposure and exposure to the top teams would only raise the level of the lower regions who then bring that skill back to their Summer Split, then come Worlds be more prepared.

Sionnan691 votes

Instead of having two 9 week group stages before playoffs, consider maybe 6-8 week groupstages. Having perhaps more off time would allow teams to boot camp in stronger regions, and prevent burnouts.

More from Esports