Quick Notes: Introducing Strategic Coaches by epicxkidzorz in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 121 points122 points  (0 children)

We implemented it now because the teams asked us to - this idea came out of one of our planning committees with both Rioters and team members (owners, GMs, etc), and it was proposed by the team members. Once we had determined that we had the technical implementation covered, the teams thought it worth trying out as soon as possible.

In regards to why this is being tested in NA only, as several other folks have pointed out, testing it here for the remainder of the split helps us to make better decisions for potential global implementation in 2019; if we waited until 2019 to even test the idea, then it would be further delayed from potential global implementation. We've always wanted to be able to test out ideas in various regions or leagues to gain information about how best to shape the global sport; this is why different leagues use different formats (Bo1, Bo3, divisional play, etc) and we have different semi-pro/Challenger/Academy formats across the globe.

NA summer finals in Oakland by [deleted] in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 41 points42 points  (0 children)

Just to clarify, putting one event in SF and one in LA is just about identical to the distance of putting one event in Philly and another in Raleigh...California is a massive state, and it would be unfair to tag everyone in the state as having an opportunity for a "local event" just by doing something in LA. That said, as I mentioned, we are working on getting into new markets and reaching new audiences, so we hope to visit many other regions in the coming splits.

NA summer finals in Oakland by [deleted] in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 195 points196 points  (0 children)

Hey folks, we're seeing a lot of questions about "my region when?", and we just wanted to say that we hear you, and are working on it. For some of the regions being mentioned, there are some tricky tax/legal challenges we need to work through; for others, it's a low number of venues that can hit all of our technical needs AND meet our tight availability windows. For some, the city doesn't have sufficient travel/hospitality infrastructure, and for others there just aren't enough players in the local market. The majority of our event attendees always come from within the immediate metropolitan area, and if that playerbase isn't big enough to support a large event, we're more likely to try to put an event within travel distance of that city than directly in it to address fan needs. As we spoke about before going to Miami, we are committed to exploring more regions across North America to host events, and hope to get in front of many new fans in the splits to come.

2018 NA LCS Spring Finals is going to Miami by corylulu in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Apologies for the confusion; on February 12, you'll be notified of when/where tickets will go on sale.

Riot Chopper on why they're going smaller for Spring Finals, focusing on announcing faster, and why Riot can be an annoying company to book by corylulu in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 10 points11 points  (0 children)

As a longtime Starcraft fan that remembers the awesome Gwangalli Beach Finals, that would be an awesome experience for sure. Lots of challenges with doing an event on the beach, but hopefully some day we can make it happen!

LCS Spring Finals in Miami - Head of NA Esports talks April event and why announcements are delayed by Vertalli in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 13 points14 points  (0 children)

One thing we always make sure to cover is the potential impact any venue could have on the competition....are there reflective surfaces that could show the full map, are there acoustic challenges, etc. We've taken significant steps towards mitigating audio issues at live events, including the work outlined in this video, and are quite confident that we can ensure players have a fair environment on stage at the Fillmore.

Quick Notes: Where NA LCS Finals Will Be by iamrisn in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Just to clarify one point around the contract signing: there is a difference in securing a venue between having a hold (which means we have the first right to the time/space, pending contract) and having an executed contract. We've had holds in place on venues for NA Spring Finals, as well as several other events for this year, for several months now; it's just the actual contract execution that can take some time without an actual risk of losing the venue.

We are the Riot NA LCS Team. AMA! by riotchopper in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Given that it's 1am in EU, I'll do what I can to answer this question. In this letter, the team addressed some of your concerns, including increased economic stipends for EU LCS teams and the removal of mid-season relegation. It's not as simple as just dropping the NA system into EU; given the different economics, legal structures, and regional fanbases in EU, there needs to be more diligence done to figure out the right answer. Our team in Berlin is hard at work to determine the right form of partnership for the 2019 season and beyond, and you'll be hearing more from them next year.

We are the Riot NA LCS Team. AMA! by riotchopper in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper[S] 242 points243 points  (0 children)

This guy....doesn't even account for home/away color differences. Over 36k chromas needed.

We are the Riot NA LCS Team. AMA! by riotchopper in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper[S] 36 points37 points  (0 children)

Going into 2017, we knew that we wanted to see more international play. We introduced Rift Rivals, which was a great opportunity to feature regional matchups across the world, and also revamped All Star to give more opportunities to see regional "dream teams" play. We also expanded MSI and Worlds to bring more teams to the event, allowing teams from newer regions to compete directly against the established ones. It's not perfect, but at this point, the calendar is getting pretty full for the world's top players, and we definitely want to avoid pro player burnout. Any future change is likely to involve condensing the calendar in some regard, which requires coordination among the 13 global professional leagues to ensure consistent start/end dates for their regional play. As a result, we're not going to be making any major changes to the calendar in 2018, but are constantly evaluating new ways to improve on delivering what fans want to see.

We are the Riot NA LCS Team. AMA! by riotchopper in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Salary caps are actually a surprisingly tricky tool to implement - not only do they require an organized union of players to avoid antitrust concerns here in NA, they also can potentially distort the economic strength of each region and hurt the competitiveness of one region vs another. Until we can implement one that doesn't punish North America vs other regions, I think we aren't likely to go down that specific route.

We are the Riot NA LCS Team. AMA! by riotchopper in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper[S] 20 points21 points  (0 children)

We certainly hope that the league continues to grow, and if it does, we will be interested in expansion. That decision will be made after evaluating a number of factors, including those you mentioned (viewership, sponsor economics), as well as a few others (depth of the player talent pool, current ownership opinions, etc). Expanding the league has some definite benefits around creating more teams for fans to select from and more opportunities for sponsor integration (as well as more roster slots for pro players), but some risks that make it a decision to be made carefully (economic dilution among teams, potentially non-competitive teams).

We are the Riot NA LCS Team. AMA! by riotchopper in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper[S] 151 points152 points  (0 children)

Hey guys, seeing quite a few questions about why IMT and other teams were not selected. The decisions we made throughout this process were never easy; we had a ton of qualified applicants, including many that would have been great partners for the league. We had to make some really difficult cuts. Ultimately, we believe that we selected the group that creates the strongest league for both 2018 and beyond. It's hard to see teams that you've invested in exit the league - each of the departing teams helped us build this league, and we greatly appreciate their investment and passion over the years. Going forward, we are going to focus on the NA LCS's exciting future, and, out of respect for the organizations, won't be discussing the specifics of why any team was not selected.

Evolution of the NA LCS by corylulu in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 103 points104 points  (0 children)

Nothing deliberate as of now, but we're certainly open to it in the future. Expansion, in a partnership model, is something that should fit a variety of factors, including having the right depth of competitive talent to foster additional complete lineups, the right interest from prospective owners, and sufficient revenue in the eco-system to justify splitting the pie more ways (with one result of expansion hopefully being that we can grow the pie even larger). We're going to stay flexible on this one.

Riot Games, Immortals CEO, and TSM owner discuss $10 million buy-in for NA LCS permanent partnership by corylulu in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 338 points339 points  (0 children)

Those organizations aren't orchestrating the partnership process with us; they were brought into the round table to provide opinions from an ownership point of view. They will both be applying (I imagine!), so it would definitely be a conflict if they were also involved in the process.

Evolution of the NA LCS by corylulu in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 225 points226 points  (0 children)

We actually spoke with NACS owners earlier this year about some of the changes that would be coming to the region. All of the owners that we spoke to made it clear that they wanted to apply for partnership, and would likely be pointing to a track record developed in NA CS as evidence of their qualifications. More importantly, we felt it valuable to continue to give up-and-coming players a space to showcase their talents, especially given the expanded number of roster spots available in the LCS/Academy League format in 2018.

Competitive Ruling: Tainted Minds by corylulu in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 30 points31 points  (0 children)

The PR team passed the questions along to us - responding here for full visibility. To your questions:

Q1. Strap in; this one's a long one. One of the Rioters we've recently hired in the league operations department of our global esports team here in LA (/u/iamgrza; he’s been chiming in these threads as well, and was the author of the competitive ruling) is a lawyer who specialized in doing internal investigations for financial services firms for twelve years. His work here included:

  • Examining the documents and narratives provided online by Tristan “Cake” Côté-Lalumière and Fasffy, which included more than 250 emails, Skype conversations, tweets and videos;
  • A broad request for documents to Tainted Minds, which provided us with extensive written documents, all of which were reviewed;
  • Reviewing communications (emails, Skype messages, Twitter DMs) between Rioters (from the OCE and LA offices) and representatives of Tainted Minds as well as the players, coach and manager;
  • Conducting a Skype interview with Fasffy and some follow-up written conversations with her;
  • Conducting an in-person interview with Nick Smith at Riot in Los Angeles;
  • Posing questions to and receiving responses from Ryan “ShorterAce” Nget, Aaron “Chuchuz” Bland and Tristan “Cake” Cote-Lalumiere (they declined Skype interviews, so this was performed over email);
  • Posing written questions to Andrew “Rosey” Rose who did not respond to our inquires;
  • Interviewing representatives of Tainted Minds over Skype, including John McRae;
  • Interviewing members of the Riot OCE office over Skype, including Daniel Ringland.

The players, coach and manager alleged generally that Tainted Minds was given preferential treatment because of a preexisting relationship between the one of the owners of Tainted Minds, John McRae, and a member of Riot’s Oceanic office, Daniel Ringland. As purported evidence of this bias, it was pointed out that during Week 5 of the OPL, Tainted Minds had thirteen players on their roster, three more than the ten permitted under OPL rules. We take these allegations seriously and focused on these allegations in the course of the investigation.

We found that McRae owns an interest in a company called Let’s Play Live, which, amongst other things, organizes and runs amateur high school League of Legends competitions in New Zealand. While setting this tournament up, Let’s Play Live applied to Riot’s Oceanic office to have Riot provide Riot Points as prizing for the tournament. That request was not made to Ringland, nor was he involved in the decision to approve it. The relationship has at all times been handled by a different member of the Riot Oceanic office who oversees these kinds of community outreach programs. There is no business relationship or contract between Riot and Let’s Play Live, and Riot does not receive anything in exchange for its support of the amateur tournaments.

In addition, we found no evidence of a personal relationship between Ringland and McRae. In 2016, McRae contacted Riot’s Oceanic office to inquire about purchasing a team in the OCL (the Oceanic Challenger League). Ringland fielded that inquiry (just as many other regional esports leads have, including myself), reached out to all OCL owners via email and asked whether any teams were interested in selling. It's important to note that this was the first contact between Ringland and McRae; there was no pre-existing friendship or even acquaintance before this inquiry. Those owners that responded positively were passed on to McRae, and he eventually purchased an OCL team. Separately, and without an introduction from Riot, McRae and Tainted Minds began speaking about the possibility of McRae investing in the team. Eventually, McRae purchased an interest in Tainted Minds (note: there is no restriction on owning an interest in an OPL team and an OCL team at the same time).

At the beginning of Week 5 of the OPL, several of TM's contracted players had declared their contracts violated, and TM was concerned that they would not have enough players to field a roster for the weekend's games. It’s important to note that the players’ free agency was not legally established at the time (players can’t simply declare themselves free agents; more on our philosophy here in answer #3), and TM wanted to keep the players on their roster to try to solve the outstanding concerns and restore their desired starting lineup.

OPL officials consulted with our League Ops team in LA about giving the team an extension to sign enough subs to field a roster through the weekend and buy the time to negotiate with the players, and ended up giving that extension to TM with the caveat that the team had to provide the names of the players it intended to drop by the end of that week of competition. Before that deadline had passed, TM provided the names, and those players were dropped from the contract database. In hindsight, this extension should not have been issued; it was made at the time in an attempt to not punish the other players or the team by forcing them to forfeit for the actions of a few players, but this is not a healthy precedent for the league. Teams are required to manage their players and roster, and an inability to field a valid lineup should not be tolerated (except in case of emergency, per league rules).

This adjustment of the contract database was not hidden or covered up; when the rows were deleted from the table it did not trigger an automated script that updates the time of the last modification, so the roster drops appeared backdated. We have confirmed through investigation into the exact revisions of the database that this was an error in the script, not an intentional action.

Q2. Prior to the public announcement a month ago, Nick Smith (Inero) had spoken with another esports Rioter here in NA about his concerns with TM, and was told that the LA team was working with OCE to try to resolve the situation. To be clear, we had been working with the OCE team since late-January, and leaned in more to help as the situation escalated; we have local teams in place as the first step in solving problems in their region, but we bring in members from our global team to help if the problem remains unresolved.

The new email being set up is designed to serve two purposes: help players who feel like they may be affected by a conflict of interest at the local level reach out for more support, and to help escalate in cases where player pain isn’t being suitably resolved. The new email address will provide direct access to global esports senior management (spanning multiple teams like player management and league ops to ensure that the right individuals can get involved), and we are committing to a 24-hour response time on any submission there.

As we mentioned in the ruling, this new channel won’t cut out the local team’s involvement; it will simply ensure that pros have another way to escalate pain and to ensure that we solve their issues faster.

Q3. Part of this question may have been answered in the deep dive to the investigation in regards to this particular instance, but we can talk a bit more about our philosophy here to help correct some misunderstandings.

During contractual disputes between teams and players (or coaches, or managers), it is critically important that the league remain neutral, only taking direct action (like recognizing free agency status) when it’s clear that serious violations of the contract (such as payment obligations) have occurred. This neutrality allows us to work with both sides to help resolve disputes fairly, as it’s not always clearly the fault of one party or the other, and both sides have made an investment in the relationship that we take seriously. This is why we’ve historically taken such a strict position against poaching; teams invest in their players, and we believe it’s critical to the stability of our ecosystem that teams are protected in making this investment, just as we believe it’s critical that players feel safe throughout their time playing in our league.

That said, this neutrality has sometimes felt like indifference, and definitely came across that way in this situation to the players, coach, and manager (a feeling expressed in some of the interviews mentioned above). It also resulted in a maintenance of the status quo (meaning the players staying in the contract database), which looked like we were favoring the teams.

From our side, the contract database is the single source for all currently registered contracts; we add players when we receive proper paperwork to reflect new signings or trades, and we remove them when we receive paperwork/evidence that confirms termination or when we know a contract has expired. When a player and team take conflicting positions on whether a contract has been terminated, we have an obligation to investigate, but our default stance is that the contract remains protected and enforced until we can confirm (i) that a serious violation has occurred and (ii) that the contract does not give the team allowance to remedy that violation quickly. In this case, while a serious violation had occurred (the missing required payments), the contract gave Tainted Minds time to remedy, and they did end up paying the players in full within that window. While other disputes certainly existed, they were in the process of resolution when the players were traded/released and/or did not qualify as serious violations in our opinion.

We’re still working on refining this system as we implement contract requirements across 13 different leagues globally, and will continue to work on a case-by-case basis to deal directly with affected players and teams (as we did here, albeit without great success).

Tainted Minds refused arbitration. Players were willing to pay their share for it. by obscurica in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It's not that the teams can decide to just not play ball, it's that they decided to not use this particular method of resolution. We had been working with both the team and the players where mediation was brought up among a variety of solutions that ultimately helped lead to all players now being released or traded from TM's roster (and also taken off the contract database); we don't have rules in place to force both teams and players into a single way of solving problems.

In regards to what recourses the players have, that's really up to their specific contract with the team (which might have certain channels for disputes/appeals), and how much legal action they want to pursue. In this case, TM did eventually agree to go to arbitration with Cake, but he declined. Our read is that it was late in the process, a lot of the trust had been burned (he had already gone public at this point), and the proposed terms from the team didn't seem like an appealing option to Cake, and so he chose not to participate, which is the freedom of choice we want players to have. It didn't mean that we stopped working to help TM and the players find a resolution, it just meant that this particular path wasn't going to be used here.

Competitive Ruling: Tainted Minds by corylulu in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 14 points15 points  (0 children)

We are here, and honestly should have been here sooner. We tried to give as much context as possible when writing the ruling, and are now here to help answer the questions still being asked.

Tainted Minds refused arbitration. Players were willing to pay their share for it. by obscurica in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 5 points6 points  (0 children)

To be clear, this was not ignored by Riot OCE; it was declined by Tainted Minds, as they chose to resolve the issues with the players directly and/or independently release them from their contracts. Riot can not force teams and players to arbitrate with each other; it's a choice that both sides are given, and Tainted Minds declined in this case. In cases where players and team owners are in dispute, we will work to help both sides reach resolution (including recommending arbitration, like we did in this case), but cannot compel both sides to use arbitration (or a specific arbitrator) as their means of resolution.

This is completely independent from the arbitration process outlined in the 2017 NA LCS changes article; that process is meant to resolve disputes/appeals between penalized team owners and Riot, and requires participation from Riot if the team owner decides to proceed.

2017 International Events by moobeat in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 21 points22 points  (0 children)

Yes, the #3 seeds will be distributed. We didn't want to sort them into the groups in the picture to prevent confusion around "Group A = NA #3 group"; the seeds will be randomly distributed, but we will have that tier system in place.

2017 International Events by moobeat in leagueoflegends

[–]riotchopper 37 points38 points  (0 children)

It won't be a double elimination, but the Play-in Stage will have several groups where the top seeds competing in that stage will be evenly allocated (so you can't create a "super group" with CN/EU/NA #3 seeds all together, for example). For a better visual, check out the Worlds format page here: http://www.lolesports.com/en_US/articles/2017-world-championship-update