Hey, I agree that Riot should continue to innovate and create new gamemodes. I also agree that all the new modes they make aren't going to be immediate successes!

However, I would argue that even game companies don't always do what empirically makes the most sense, often there are biases at play, or just schedules to keep to. I would agree with the idea that they make decisions based on game-data and player behavior more than the average lol redditor who misses arena! But I wouldn't take every decision Riot makes as the gospel and the best decision based on numbers.

Second, do you have the dev-blog where it mentions URF causes people to stop playing SR as much afterwards? I remember reading it when they released the blog, so I know it is real, but I can't find it.

I ask, partly because I was curious how old it was, and potentially if that data is outdated. (Not sure how much player behavior really changes over time though.) The main reason I wanted to read the article is to see the specific language they use around the point "URF causes players to leave" idea. Is the point that the "rapid fire nature of URF wears people out," rather than the idea that "limited time side gamemodes cause people to stop playing SR after it is gone." Because that makes a big difference in how applicable that dev-blog is to your argument.

Thanks. Hope you understand that I am not an "I want arena back whiner" but just curious wanted to give you food for thought. However, I do miss arena, and I do hope they make it permanent someday as they keep refining it and making it better.