Dynamic Queue is down immediately and the churlish cries of the league of legends elite can be heard loud and clear. "Thank God", they exclaim, " how else was I supposed to climb my way into Challenger tier when I had to play like a team. And that's exactly what's baffling about the hostility tossed at Dynamic Queue. Players don't like dynamic queue because they want to maintain some individual privilege. The notion that rank becomes meaningless when dynamic queue is introduced is ridiculous. Ranked became a more pure representation of league of legends the minute dynamic queue went live. Everything about dynamic queue is centered around team orientation. Riot gave players the tools to solve incredibly difficult collective action problems that were often impossible to coordinate on in the past. Now by priming players to think collectively, ranked and games in general feel more team oriented than ever before.
Before we even address the elephant in the room (duo queue became trio and quadruple queue) let's examine some of the other key changes riot did. First, the ban and champion forecast system. The champion forecast system allows players to send information in a neutral manner about play style. My ability to let you know which champion I'd prefer to play tells you more than the lane I want. Immediately you can begin to see deficiencies in team composition within the first few seconds, making it far more likely to address to issue than the awkward 30 second timer of the champion select screen. Even if three out of the five champions were banned, we can at least see what kind of champions these players like to play. Then you can start reasonably negotiating in the chat. Hey I know they banned Veigar, but maybe you could consider Annie? Hecarim was a good mobile jungle, perhaps a Shyvana would be a good alternative. Suddenly we're not obnoxiously dictating team composition. The ban system fortifies this testament to good will because bans reflect a more holistic opinion of the group. You don't like Zed? Fine, get rid of him, it's your mid lane. You find fizz annoying? Zoink, no more Fizz jungle. While certain bans become a must over time (damn you Tahm Kench), teams are less likely to rage over a distributed ban responsibility.
The choosing of roles is the only aspect of the dynamic queue that runs counter to the development of league of legends play. Meta is supposed to be ever changing and dictated by gameplay. No amount of flex picks or ambiguous labeling is going to prevent the cementing of a 4 men, three lane, one jungle meta that becomes legitimized by pre-choosing roles. In some ways this could be a sign of maturation in league. What was considered viable in earlier season (season 1 and 2) lanes such as double mid or three in one lane has become outdated. As a company Riot has solidified the customs of the game, which is necessary for the professional gaming scene and for the recognition of the game as a competitive game. Sports such as baseball and football were actually quite unstable in their early years, often following house rules and at times changing drastically from year to year. But as the sports became more legitimate, the rules and expectations in the game became more restrictive. The dynamic queue reflects that same kind of maturation happening in League of Legends. And it doesn't hurt that for the most part "mid or feed" will become a forgotten phrase in the League lexicon.
Now let's deal with the elephant in the room. "But I like to play alone and I want this prove my individual skills were able to handle any random assortment of challenges thrown at it," says every Platinum player that believes they will make Diamond. Unfortunately the reality is that for the most part this is selfish nonsense. The challenges faced in solo queue were actually a shadow of what league of legends really is intended to be. This could be evidenced by the immediate complaining of pro players, who in the dynamic queue, were paired against a set of random solo queue Gods and found them quite easy to dispatch. That's because while each solo queue challenger player may have been mechanically capable and intelligent, their inability to coordinate as a team made them very easy to counter for professional players who implement strategies according to the team. In the end of the day league of legends is a team game. Anything that facilitates a team oriented mindset is going to make the game more fun to play and far more rigorous. Of course this means that individual is going to be placed in interesting and complicated collective action problems. If you have a 3-2 team (3 premade and 2 solo queue), then you're forced to adapt to what the 3 premade players are going to do. Now if the 3 premade players have a particular strategy or composition they like to run, then good players should be able to play into the strengths of their new found teammates. Suddenly you have more people running orianna mid, yasuo top and malphite jungle, leaving you to decide whether you want to choose and adc that players into the wombo (an MF or Graves) or an adc that will clean up the mess (Vayne or Caitlyn). Either way you're forced to reinterpret your role in the context of the team. Does it get frustrating when you don't have autonomy, sure. But that doesn't mean the game becomes invalid. It encourages you to play with people in a team like environment.
Anti-social tendencies in gaming are heralded for no particular reason. In MMOs and MOBAs alike, gamers have insisted that their freedom within the game is necessary for any successful gameplay to exist. While this argument might ring true for RPGs and other types of single player games, games that are multi-player by nature cannot be expected to be played within a vacuum. Unnecessary breaches of freedom will certainly be looked down upon, but anything that fosters a more competitive game that provides more options and strategies simply trumps any perceived necessary freedom. Gamer libertarians are often just selfish individuals who believe their happiness trumps every other player's happiness. They mask it under the guise of freedom, when in actuality it's a bout of oneupsmanship. It's time for use to accept it. Dynamic queue changed league of legends and I do believe it has changed for the better.
Before we even address the elephant in the room (duo queue became trio and quadruple queue) let's examine some of the other key changes riot did. First, the ban and champion forecast system. The champion forecast system allows players to send information in a neutral manner about play style. My ability to let you know which champion I'd prefer to play tells you more than the lane I want. Immediately you can begin to see deficiencies in team composition within the first few seconds, making it far more likely to address to issue than the awkward 30 second timer of the champion select screen. Even if three out of the five champions were banned, we can at least see what kind of champions these players like to play. Then you can start reasonably negotiating in the chat. Hey I know they banned Veigar, but maybe you could consider Annie? Hecarim was a good mobile jungle, perhaps a Shyvana would be a good alternative. Suddenly we're not obnoxiously dictating team composition. The ban system fortifies this testament to good will because bans reflect a more holistic opinion of the group. You don't like Zed? Fine, get rid of him, it's your mid lane. You find fizz annoying? Zoink, no more Fizz jungle. While certain bans become a must over time (damn you Tahm Kench), teams are less likely to rage over a distributed ban responsibility.
The choosing of roles is the only aspect of the dynamic queue that runs counter to the development of league of legends play. Meta is supposed to be ever changing and dictated by gameplay. No amount of flex picks or ambiguous labeling is going to prevent the cementing of a 4 men, three lane, one jungle meta that becomes legitimized by pre-choosing roles. In some ways this could be a sign of maturation in league. What was considered viable in earlier season (season 1 and 2) lanes such as double mid or three in one lane has become outdated. As a company Riot has solidified the customs of the game, which is necessary for the professional gaming scene and for the recognition of the game as a competitive game. Sports such as baseball and football were actually quite unstable in their early years, often following house rules and at times changing drastically from year to year. But as the sports became more legitimate, the rules and expectations in the game became more restrictive. The dynamic queue reflects that same kind of maturation happening in League of Legends. And it doesn't hurt that for the most part "mid or feed" will become a forgotten phrase in the League lexicon.
Now let's deal with the elephant in the room. "But I like to play alone and I want this prove my individual skills were able to handle any random assortment of challenges thrown at it," says every Platinum player that believes they will make Diamond. Unfortunately the reality is that for the most part this is selfish nonsense. The challenges faced in solo queue were actually a shadow of what league of legends really is intended to be. This could be evidenced by the immediate complaining of pro players, who in the dynamic queue, were paired against a set of random solo queue Gods and found them quite easy to dispatch. That's because while each solo queue challenger player may have been mechanically capable and intelligent, their inability to coordinate as a team made them very easy to counter for professional players who implement strategies according to the team. In the end of the day league of legends is a team game. Anything that facilitates a team oriented mindset is going to make the game more fun to play and far more rigorous. Of course this means that individual is going to be placed in interesting and complicated collective action problems. If you have a 3-2 team (3 premade and 2 solo queue), then you're forced to adapt to what the 3 premade players are going to do. Now if the 3 premade players have a particular strategy or composition they like to run, then good players should be able to play into the strengths of their new found teammates. Suddenly you have more people running orianna mid, yasuo top and malphite jungle, leaving you to decide whether you want to choose and adc that players into the wombo (an MF or Graves) or an adc that will clean up the mess (Vayne or Caitlyn). Either way you're forced to reinterpret your role in the context of the team. Does it get frustrating when you don't have autonomy, sure. But that doesn't mean the game becomes invalid. It encourages you to play with people in a team like environment.
Anti-social tendencies in gaming are heralded for no particular reason. In MMOs and MOBAs alike, gamers have insisted that their freedom within the game is necessary for any successful gameplay to exist. While this argument might ring true for RPGs and other types of single player games, games that are multi-player by nature cannot be expected to be played within a vacuum. Unnecessary breaches of freedom will certainly be looked down upon, but anything that fosters a more competitive game that provides more options and strategies simply trumps any perceived necessary freedom. Gamer libertarians are often just selfish individuals who believe their happiness trumps every other player's happiness. They mask it under the guise of freedom, when in actuality it's a bout of oneupsmanship. It's time for use to accept it. Dynamic queue changed league of legends and I do believe it has changed for the better.
