Regarding Pro Play - Possible suggestion to promote champion diversity

masterdragon481·Feb 11, 2020·3 votes·1,188 views

Hi all!

So I have started watching this season of professional League of Legends and so far have been disappointed by what appears to be such a stale selection of champions. To illustrate this, I remember a game (I don't remember if it was NA or EU) that everyone was very excited to see Draven and Kai'sa. The announcers even mentioned how nice it was to see champions that weren't Senna, MF, or Aphelios. And in order to have that game, it took bans on all three.

Now, of course there is always going to be a list of S tier, A tier, and B tier champions. As the nerf (or buff) wheel turns, that tier list changes. That tier list defines the meta and then, since that is the dominate strategy, that is all we get to see.

This got me thinking; we have a 140 ish champions, The players we are talking about are (arguably) the best the region has to offer. Why isn't a rule established where professional players cannot play the same champion more than once in a week?

Perhaps when it comes to a series (best of 3 or best of 5), it would be appropriate to change this limit to "per series" instead of "per week".

I see several major benefits.

More champion diversity means more appealing to wider range of players
More dynamic team comp building; the A tier list is much broader allowing for far more team comp possibilities. Also the idea of saving S tier picks for certain matches/ consideration for bans
More realistic comparison (at pro level) of S tier and A tier champions and the disparity between them.

As this is a discussion, I'd love to hear people's opinions. I can't be the first person to suggest something like this, so why isn't something like this being done?

10 Comments

MrFawknSunshineFeb 11, 20201 votes

the issue to pro play diversity is they are only going to pick champs they feel give them the best chance to win in a give game/series

and every time something changes in meta, like AP carry bot or whatever it may be ( raka top ) people on the boards cries about it.

masterdragon481Feb 11, 20201 votes

I'm not proposing to change or address the most dominate meta though. I don't mind seeing the S tier champs and the comps we have seen. The first few times.

Of course the pros are going to pick the champions they feel give them the best chance to win; they are getting paid to play the game. But most pro games are a question of "Who played X comp better?" My suggestion is to encourage/force the pro players to find more strategies to beat their opponents with.

Each week, ~15 champions per team are unable to be used (Assuming Monday-Sunday is a full week). This is going to dramatically increase the number of team comps that the teams have to naturally draft. Its also going to add levels of complexity to pick and ban phase as well as guarantee a much larger selection of champions getting to be in the limelight.

In short, the meta is interesting and I'm not trying to make micro adjustments as the meta shifts. I'm encouraging the best players in each reason to need to adapt and really change what they are doing rather than essentially playing chess every match.

MrFawknSunshineFeb 11, 20201 votes

well to your idea of only playing a certain per player per week

then we get into series, when is faker gonna go LB or ZED or who ever ( he is known to be a beast on) teemo mid LUL. jk vs what comp /match up best of 3 series are really hard to have that, best of 5 more doable. but that can create such a gap in team strength from game to game

masterdragon481Feb 11, 20201 votes

It would encourage the pro players to demonstrate a mastery on more champions. Imagine people talking about a teemo mid! And that team strength gap is going to affect all teams, not just one. Pick and ban phase becomes far more dynamic at that point. I mentioned a week for now, because of the round robin format of the professional scene at the moment.

I see nothing but excitement by forcing more champion diversity. I know from experience that when I see the same lanes/champions being drafted every game, I am more likely to start watching something else. I know how each player is going to try to navigate the game; what they are going to look for, how they will try to execute, and even where the champions fall short. Of course every sport (esport or not) is "predictable" in that sense, but IF we got to see other champions, it would be a little more stimulating that it currently is.

Are the secondary team comps and strategies as good as the top tier ones? No. But beneath the top tier strategies lies countless other team comps that are perfectly viable; your average ladder game doesn't only have these top tier team comps. And again, but playing a wider range of champions, you appeal to a larger group.

MrFawknSunshineFeb 11, 20201 votes

the pros already show their ability to master more then one champ. and you see this when they are targeted banned. and or they pick a champ they arent known for playing to fit a team comp and it works.

and no matter what teemo is not going to be picked LMAO

masterdragon481Feb 12, 20201 votes

Agreed about the teemo bit.

And I agree with you about everything you said about the pros.

So wouldn't it be more interesting to see the pros play more champions? To see different team comps work?

ChompyWulfFeb 12, 20201 votes

We will see variety develop a bit. Some teams will abandon champs because it's not working. (Doublelift playing Senna) Some champs will take top tier and others will drop because of patches changing balance. Some teams will pull out a pocket pick here or there just because.

Overall, the idea of only allowing a player to play a champ 1 time per week is bad.

GeminiRuneFeb 11, 20201 votes

You could really look as far back as Week 1 LCK to see a wider diversity of champions. Frankly it is a bit driven off of the capability of a best of series. But even in single game sample size it's more diverse.

At the moment we're definitely in a meta trinity for bot lane and somewhat support: basically picking 2 of 3 if not banned out. If I remember correctly, the original trinity was something like Mundo, Shyv, Renek in the Top Lane...for like an entire season or something. But that's old school.

I wouldn't worry too much especially still early in the season. The last two seasons had some killer meta shifts that promoted a lot of willing diversity (never forget the Banner meta though...single-handed deleted the item and it started there in the first place). And it's unfortunate that this season's diversity trends has started so sloppy especially in the LCS. And without the LPL to slot in another sample, it definitely hurts the perspective further.

ChompyWulfFeb 11, 20201 votes

I didn't follow pro LoL before season 3, bit that year the Trinity in top was Shen-Jax-Renekton. A big part of SKT stomping Royal Club was out-smarting them in the draft, getting Jax to Impact in top after Shen and Renek were banned, and there was no top lane answer to it.

masterdragon481Feb 11, 20201 votes

I was around until Kai'sa's release, then I wasn't really paying attention to the game until right before this season start. I remember that holy trinity you are talking about. We are facing the same problems today, and I don't know why I have never seen my suggestion before.

Are we really seeing that kind of diversity right now? PS: A single game sample size by definition cannot be diverse. It feels like anytime I turn on a Riot broadcast, I'm looking at the same drafts every time. If we were to track the statistics for champions getting selected in a pro draft (either ban or pick) we are talking about a tremendously small champion pool; especially in certain roles (Mid and Jungle have probably the most variance; but even jungle is maybe 8 champions total?).

My suggestion would essentially increase the number of "bans" a team had against them. It would encourage more champion and team comp diversity independent of game balance. That, to me, is actually why I see so much value is something like this. We end up with a stale meta mostly due to strategies or champions that are, for lack of a better word, exploitable. Long term, those problems get dealt with in patches. But the professional scene lags behind even that. This suggestion wouldn't prevent those exploitable situations from occurring; it would just make those situations occur much less frequently.

More to the point, I've given reasons why I believe this to be a good suggestion; may I ask why this would be a BAD idea?