Is there a problem with the strategic point reward mechanism in the end?

"Little brother, little brother, I would like to ask you, why does the economic lead have an advantage?"

This line "Accompany you to the top of the world" has previously been used to ridicule those "cloud players" who can't understand the game or the team whose game has been overturned, but in recent days, it has been used as irony, pointing to the strategic point bounty mechanism.

When a team is significantly behind the other side, the map will have a visible strategic point for the disadvantaged party to provide a reward, and when the inferior party wins this strategic point, the reward will be divided equally between the five players. This is a new mechanism brought about by the League of Legends 11.23 update on November 18 last year, and it has not been discussed for nearly two months until after the third game of LNG vs RA on the sixth day of the LPL Spring Games.

The game went on to 14 minutes and 20 seconds, the strategic point bounty appeared on the map, at this time the RA economy led by four thousand, and by 27 minutes and 10 seconds, the economic difference between the two sides was only more than a thousand, and the strategic point bounty gradually disappeared. In the second game between EDG and TT, the strategic point bounty came when the economic difference between the two sides reached seven thousand.

How the strategic point bounty is triggered has become the focus of everyone's discussion.

The 11.23 version of the announcement only mentions that the strategic point bounty is based on four factors: the experience gap, the gold gap, the dragon gap, and the defense tower gap, and does not give a clear calculation formula. Everyone speculates that LNG does not eat the economy and gives all the upper to the middle, and the economic difference of the counterpoint is widened, so that the strategic point reward appears early, and even some viewers do the work of analysts, calculating the weight of the four factors by counting the data of each game.

In the community comments, everyone discussed not only the unclear conditions for triggering the reward of the strategic point, but also the inaccuracy of this mechanism for judging the advantages and disadvantages of the game.

In addition to these four factors, the choice of lineup will also affect the situation of the game. League of Legends matches have a pre-lineup and a late lineup, the early lineup is strong in the early stage and insufficient damage in the later stage, and it is natural for the later lineup to make concessions to the line, dragons and defense towers in the early stage.

Lineup selection is not taken into account by the mechanism, the early lineup will have to take a higher risk, and the late lineup will be able to more easily erase the disadvantage caused by the necessary concessions in the early stage. Unless the team is confident that it can end the game quickly, procrastination is the best solution.

Once both sides have chosen the late lineup, they often avoid the early battle, and in everyone's view, the lack of collision of the game seems extremely boring, only the suspense of the last few tens of seconds.

It is true that more late-stage heroes have become the mainstream choice for the game this season, and some viewers have begun to attribute the deterioration of the viewing experience directly to the strategic point bounty mechanism. For commercial competitive events, the deterioration of the viewing experience is quite a fatal thing.

In fact, the strategic point reward mechanism should be called unjust, as can be seen from the third game of LNG vs RA, the strategic point reward brings compensation of 1650, and the equal division to five people is only 330, which is not enough for the price of a long sword, and it is not enough to influence the lineup selection. This is largely due to equipment adjustments, rather than the strategic point bounty mechanism.

However, whether it is equipment adjustment or strategic point reward mechanism, the final role and cause of the problem are the same.

As early as two months ago, equipment adjustments and strategic point bounty mechanics appeared in the game, and players did not have a clear objection to them compared to the controversy on the field.

Some players will feel that the strategic point bounty mechanism has no sense of existence, and some players will also like this mechanism, especially when encountering "orphan" teammates who send each other's heads, through the strategic point bounty, they can return to a less disadvantaged situation and get a better game experience. Even if some players don't like this mechanism, it can't be denied that it at least brings a little freshness to everyone.

The same is true of new equipment such as the Crown of the Broken Queen and the Axiomatic Arc. Players need to stay fresh, the game needs to be updated frequently, players need more interesting gameplay, and the game needs to create new equipment and mechanics.

However, playing and playing are two different things. In the game, randomly arranged players form a team, each with its own hero and no communication. In the competition, the players are fixed combinations, and the best hero combination and strategic decisions are made as much as possible.

It can be said that the random performance of the game brings pleasure to the player, but the game is a process of reducing randomness and pursuing certainty.

As a game of the strategic point bounty mechanism to keep mysterious is not bad, as the rules of the game of the strategic point bounty mechanism should be clearly disclosed, you should know how the strategic point bounty is triggered.

Although the conditions for triggering the strategic point bounty are not public to all teams, perhaps the original style of play will have an impact, all teams are still standing on the same running line, who can find out the law and algorithm faster, who can have more initiative, but the open rules of the game not only mean the verification of fairness, but also the verification of rationality.

We may only watch a sports game at the Olympics every four years, but as long as we understand the rules four years ago or eight or twelve years ago, we can still understand them now.

Do you remember what the League of Legends game was like four or eight years ago?

If you haven't played League of Legends in four years, and you haven't watched League of Legends games, can you still understand it now?

What is the significance of these changes?

For the competition, the rule modification should be a reasonable modification with sufficient verification support, otherwise frequent modifications will only make it difficult for the game to be widely recognized for a long time. The two things share a common set of logic, which may be the cause of the problem behind the strategic point reward mechanism.

All articles published in this journal are copyrighted by e-sports magazine and may not be reproduced or excerpted in any form without permission.

Some of the pictures come from the Internet, if the pictures involve copyright issues, please contact the copyright owner to ask for remuneration.