Lets chat. So reduction of game duration.

Kai Guy··2 votes·1,250 views

Ahoy! So yall Im here to inquire on what your thoughts are on the current game length. Id like to see how folks feeling. Some questions id like answered, Do you think the game duration has gone down this year? Do you think this was intentional or accidental? If intentionally done why? If just a result of changes what change and why has it been left this way? Now By all means chime in on anything you feel is relevant or important that's beyond the scope of this.

Id like to request that yall keep it civil, please respect any opinion that shows some thought and logic even the ones you disagree with. Reserve downvotes for trolling, toxic, and low quality content. We don't need yet another echo chamber post. In the interest of keeping a thread manageable and helpful to others I encourage you to read the player reply's first, if some one said what you feel very well please upvote that and comment any additions you have as a reply.

11 Comments

Kai Guy1 votes

So I know its bad form to reply to your own post but I wanted to separate my views from the opening statement. So Personally, My bias is that I think this has happened and its an intentional change.

I think There's a lot of reasons for it, Some of the ones I think are pretty relevant.

A stronger player base lowers the # of comebacks possibly. Games just snowball over smaller mistakes for last few years. Players know what to look for to find a weak link in comps, or a bad player to target. So the games still frequently snowballed out of control, it just took longer to close them out. Shaving off the time this took allows for players to move on faster, and I think getting folks to play more games is very much a goal of riot devs.

Now, I personaly feel that there is a down side. Late game comps suffer, the attitude of Fk it we beat them late, I feel that's increasingly rare now. If the internal data however showed a consistent trend in games increasingly rare to recover, I think the game length reduction was inevitable.

It makes the game more accessible to more casual players. League got this big by making a lot of decisions and effort into being the most accessible moba out there. Its what riot did to separate it from all the other Copy and paste Dota allstar clones, what got folks attention. Season 1, we had some real balance issues and awful servers, but many folks remember it as incredibly fun. Anyhow targeting for game length that does not discourage the average player from putting in a game or two daily, that seems very much like a decision id expect from riot.

It makes individual plays more relevant. Less time in game more impact off a play. I don't hate this, Im kinda a player who got less awful at this game not by my micro but working on Macro. I think this probably favors Micro masters then people like me, but Macro still has impact on the game so I do not feel like my viability as a players dropped to much.

My hope is that if its publicly accepted that the a dev goal has been to change the game length we can move on as a community to a discussion on top to bottom relooking at the game times for power spikes and readjust them to up the # of viable champions and win conditions.

heroikc1 votes

Game duration: yes, it gone down, waaaaayyyyy too much. 0 chance of recovery, many late game champs become useless, surrenders come earlier. Why? To satisfy some random minority who have trouble scheduling playtime around their work or to make proplay more "exciting" (instead it forced pros to play safer so as to not risk their freaking jobs). Problems now? Snowball; it's just "I hope I can get the first kill and roam to get more kills" instead of "How can I best serve my team against this threat." Lack of variety: It's mostly fighters, divers, skirmishers and assassins. Solo carries are everywhere and three roles (immobile mages, tanks, and most marksmen) are rendered useless this meta because of the DPS anyone can exude. Anything I missed?

Kai Guy1 votes

My guess is that the change really is for a majority of players. That internal data suggested when games end 25-35 min the majority of players put in a second game or 3rd game. I don't think the scheduling playtime is a minority, I think most folks tend to play fairly casually with a few matches every day or so. Dedicated folks like myself, the ones who have a day off work and sit down and spend 4-6 hours on league when they love the meta, I don't think that's nearly as common. I think we might be the minority, just going off the Dev attitude and seeing what they target and focus on. Looking at the end results of their decisions I don't feel like im the target audience for many changes to game including game time.

Snowball, Honestly it was getting pretty bad in longer matches as well, it just took for ever to close out. The attitude of we can win this in late has been way less common in my games over the last few years, seasons 1-4 I recall 12 - 20 kill gaps and folks being like WTF ever, once we get to 6 items and level 18 their lead counts for shit lets play this one out our comps superior late. Around season 6 I started noticing an increase of GG FF 20 once there was even a 3 kill lead in a lane. I don't know if that's exactly related to game time, player attitude, increase in folks not throwing leads, or just the state of the game. Its likely a mix of several, But I do know that teammates who give up and quit over any loss of a lead really handicap their team, and that shit seems pretty common last few years, and often times treated like its acceptable?

I think its possible to preserve gameplay and reduce the game time to be approachable to a majority of players. I really feel like there's the potential here to rebalance the game for this. I want to generate enough interest, to try and make enough of the boards and player base vocal about this and that its importiant to us all to hit a good middle ground. Because if you Shorten it to much and I don't think its possible to keep league as the same gameplay.

Theres just to much impact around a misplay because each moment accounts for a higher % of the game so the amount of time your team pays the price for a bad decision is higher. This Always results in more snowballing, even when game balance is the exact same. Like even if on paper you have it set so that every champion enjoys power spikes at the same % of a games time for the same % of the games duration they used to. Example (40 min vs 20 min games. Spike at 10 min, now spikes at 5 min. Loses steam at 20, now loses steam at 10.) Each individual moment in a shorter game accounts for more influence over the matches outcome. Theres no way around this.

Anyhow, current meta I kinda like, its a good opportunity for folsk to try new things learn new roles play new comps, theres a fuckload of viable comps that have not been viable for years if at all. If we could push the game time back, about 5-10 more min, I think ADCS would be viable again. I Always feel there are a lot of immobile mages that are strong and don't get the respect they deserve, but then again they need to be good w skillshots so some parts of the player base will always be subar on them. I think an increase in good tank support mains would probally assist marksmen back to viability, like my money is that Braum is likely sleeper OP currently. Might be wrong, anyhow its irrelevant.

The current meta, its fun for me, but I think if games lasted even 8 more min then this meta would be AWSOME for dam near everybody and we would see much higher champion viability and comp viability.

CaptainAntiHeroz1 votes

Braum support feels like shooting yourself in the foot some times E every Veigar apc 2000 damage ult get 0 thanks even though the champion they picked is underperforming and not recommend but BRAUM HAS TO DEAL WITH IT item 3070

Kai Guy1 votes

That's most supports thou, like if your adc is garbage you pay a price for it.

CaptainAntiHeroz1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Kai Guy,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=agTrb3p3,comment-id=00020000,timestamp=2018-07-12T13:11:44.188+0000)

That's most supports thou, like if your adc is garbage you pay a price for it.

Pre adc nerf and the removal of agility cloak you'd be able to "just keep them alive and even if you lose lane you have a chance to come back" now it's a burst meta so being bad at adc then means they're extra bad now and make comebacks nearly impossible on the bot lane side of things

RPGZexion1 votes

[deleted]

CaptainAntiHeroz1 votes

{quoted}

I never understand some supports' need for praise. It's the equivalent of praising an assassin for killing the adc. Not flaming i genuinely just don't get it lol.

When i play support leona or karma I'm doing it to set up plays and vision for the team not to get praise on using my abilities effectively. That's my job...

Did I say praise? No, I literally am expressing the fact that the burst meta botlane means having a marksman is like damnation if the enemy haveBrand I could care less about being praised for landing 80% of my death sentences, or dark bindings, but when having a specific lane partner that is deprimental to you being able to make money because they picked something that has no individual survivability into Brand and completely rob me of the chance to help the rest of the team late game, of course I'm going to complain about how the majority of marksman feel like troll picks right now and how hard it is to support them no matter how well you did pre rip adc patch

RPGZexion1 votes

[deleted]

CaptainAntiHeroz1 votes

{quoted}

You literally said "E every Veigar apc 2000 damage ult get 0 thanks" why do you need a thanks was my point. Just do your job and let the carry do theirs and gg you win lol.

I mean the Veigar ult kills you through unbreakable 25% of the time

CaptainAntiHeroz1 votes

And as far as game times.... item 3070 Soraka let me enter my lane Riot... Don't do Heimerdinger +Ziggs
To me...... Not again....

More from Gameplay

More by Kai Guy