Almost everyone wants to see champion diversity in LCS

DeusVult·Jan 5, 2015·136 votes·43,298 views

Because for at least the past 2 season its basically been the same 25 champs banned/picked every game. If they aren't banned, they are picked. 16 champs are banned/picked every game, that leaves 9 champs that are interchangeable in the usual lineup.

But wait the nay sayers shout, there are a ton more champs picked than 25.

Ok your right. Over the course of the summer split, I beleive 67 champs were picked/banned out of the 120+ that are in the game. However, the pick/ban rate for those champs varied immensely. Champs like Lee Sin, Zed, Elise, etc had enormous pick/ban rates, being in almost every game. By contrast, other champs that were selected such as veigar were picked maybe a handful of times, never banned and almost exclusively picked by one pro because its a niche pick. So, in reality, it really was just about 25 champs every game that were seeing action.

I love watching pro games, but watching games were every game looks so similar to every other one being played across the entire season gets to be a bit boring. So, I humbly submit this change to the LCS series games.

Each time that a champ is picked/banned, they are disabled for all following games in that series. So, each game, the champion pool decreases by 16 champs and no game will feature one pro playing the same champ over and over and over. In a best of 3 series, at least 32 champs will be picked or banned, at most 48. Way more diversity. In a best of 5, 48 champs will see the rift (or be banned). Or, if it goes to 5 games, a whopping 80 champs will see some form of the action.

"but this will stretch pro's champion pools to limits where they can't even play"

Not really. Sure, they won't be on their mains or whatever is FoTM, but I've seen pro streams. They can play way more champs than what they actually do in the LCS, they just don't play them in the LCS because they are more comfortable on their pool of 4-5 main champs.

I might get downvoted to oblivion by people who like watching LCS the way it currently is, but having watched it for years I can honestly say that it has gotten stale and watching games now looks basically the same as it did 2 years ago, barring a few changes to the main champion pool. Change is scary, but variety is the spice of life, and LCS desperately needs variety.

159 Comments

RiotPhreakJan 7, 201531 votes

It's definitely an odd space.

On the one hand, you're right: The number of unique champions played in top tier competitive play is dwindling slowly over time. The real question is "Why?"

You could certainly force a wider variety. You could say "Okay, you can only play each champion once per month / once per series / if your opponents haven't played it either." Enforcing a wider variety of champions can be interesting because you'll see more of them played. You could have 20 bans. You'll definitely see different stuff played if you do that.

Another question can be if just "Champion named Ezreal was picked" counts as one unique pick. What about Mid Ezreal vs. ADC Ezreal? What about Support Nautilus vs. Jungle? Kayle Top/Mid/Support? How about different builds? AP Amumu vs. Tank Amumu? You can track the specifics of "Champion named X was picked." Does that tell the whole story? Do you care if they were built differently? AP Mid vs. AD Bot Kog'Maw? I'd argue this counts as a "different" pick, but it's of course not tracked as that. Certainly, an edge case, but it's food for thought.

On that line of reasoning, I think 2014 was a year full of flex picks. We saw Karma, Lulu, and a whole host of other mages go in various lanes. Would a better line of reasoning be, "How many Supports did we see this year? How many Mid Laners did we see this year?" Double-counting Jayce doesn't make for a very interesting comparison, but Annie might count. I think we saw more flex picks in 2014 than any other year. There were probably at least two dozen champions that were played in more than one role this year in professional play.

The game has also become more homogenized. Up until halfway through Season One, many teams weren't running ADC+Support bottom lanes. Now it's considered commonplace. Not everyone knew Kassadin was crazy strong throughout 2013, Cloud9 least of which, but he defined the first half of 2014's Ban phase. Nowadays everyone's watching the Koreans and saying, "Ah, LeBlanc and Corki are contested. We should all learn them." The fact that all the top-tier players have a standard to look to and compel themselves to emulate shrinks our champion pools significantly.

I specifically asked Cloud9's Hai about this at the beginning of 2014. He said they sat down, had a meeting, and told me (paraphrased), "We chose to drop our old playstyle. We should play like SKT. They won the world championship. Let's be like them" Well, SKT couldn't even qualify for Worlds the next year. I'm not certain that emulating a specific team or style of play in a constantly-evolving game is the right way to thrive. Cloud9 had, consecutively, their worst splits ever after making the decision, "Let's copy SKT." Throughout 2013 they made their own rules. Meteos made his own jungle style. Sneaky and LemonNation pulled in their own champion pools and style (Hello, Ashe/Zyra). Certainly, other factors than just "not innovating" led to teams taking more games off C9 than before; I'm just bringing up trends I see.

I think the trend actually feeds on itself. Because everyone's compelled to learn specific champions because "better teams" do so, everyone shares similar champion pools. And because you can easily predict your opponent's champions, and magically you ALSO play those champions, it means you have heavily contested picks. I know they want Corki. Well I know how to play Corki! Let's first pick Corki. This repeats for every role, 2-3 champions deep. Some players branch out and have their own fun touches (Xerath players, Rengar players, Rumble players, Vayne players, etc.) but anything that sees a lot of success falls back into the old pattern of, "Oh this champion's successful, let's all learn it."

In my opinion, almost every single champion in League of Legends can be that champion. The next Rengar is out there. The next Support Annie or Support Morgana is out there. People just arbitrarily started playing them and everyone decided it was a good idea. But people seem to glom onto them really, really hard, so the pools decrease.

What's the way to fix that? Is it OK to "force open" the champion pools? Should we just track "# of Supports played" across seasons and trend that? What should change?

GorzkeJan 7, 20159 votes

I know this doesn't belong here, but the "Same champion making different roles" has been against every balance change you have ever made in the game (Except a MF AP buff). If you are taking care of them now, you should start to think about the balance changes too.

RiotPhreakJan 7, 201537 votes

That's not quite correct, though I understand where you're coming from.

We are not, as a game, against a champion being viable in multiple roles. We're fine with Lulu working in 4 roles right now. We're fine with Karma working in the same ones. We're fine with Hecarim as a jungler as well as a Mid Laner (and I'm sure he's fine Top also).

The changes to champions when they worked in certain lanes came from the gameplay impact of that lane. When Janna walked into lane, Pressed Q in the vague direction of the minions, and then immediately last hit the entire wave, that was an issue. When Lulu clicked "E" and then pressed "Q" twice, causing you to lose 50% of your health without it honestly being a real skill shot, that was the issue. When Annie's low level base damages and stun were so obnoxiously high you immediately lost any possible 2v2 fight bottom lane, that was the issue.

Notice how literally nothing changed about Karma after we saw Bjergsen get a pentakill on her in the LCS playoffs, despite being played as a support the week before. Lulu hasn't been changed in about 4 months (E duration on enemies being the big change) after her mid lane pattern became significantly less toxic.

The awkward thing about all of this is that it's not that pro teams were looking for support mids to play. They didn't immediately replace Janna with Morgana, or Karma, or Lulu, or Soraka. They played mid Janna because she was bullshit. They played mid Soraka because she was bullshit. Pros really like to pick champions that are un-counterable. Their opponents are, just like them, extremely skilled League of Legends players. If you can find a champion that CANNOT be outplayed, that's a really strong champion to play in top tier play. So while a lot of people see, "Oh, Janna got played outside of her recommended lane, so Riot nerfed her," what's actually happening is, "Janna mid has no counterplay, let's add some." And then to pros go, "Oh, this champion has counterplay? Time to find something else to abuse."

Samflash3Jan 7, 20153 votes

Hey Phreak. Sorry about the last post I made about AD TF. Seemed like you already answered it before I got to look at the comments. So I had a few questions:

Is it really that hard to compensate a support? Because 2 of the 4 problematic supports got reworked while the other 2 suffer from high mana costs for almost the same utility.

Also can we live in a League of Legends world where support Lulu can build to do damage or not suffer from crazy mana costs whenever she tries to poke?

Also, what was the motive behind Soraka's base AD nerf? Considering her lack of a true escape (although she has the Bananambulance passive) and reliable damage source, why was lowering her base AD a choice? Wouldn't that be considered as interacting with an opponent?

Finally, is there any tips you could give in building Kalista? Following your spotlight gave a lot of insight but I have a problem choosing between IE and Statikk. If i had 1500 gold, would I go for BF sword and attack slowly, or buy the bits of statikk shiv? Or is Bork also a good choice as a first rush?

CuixJan 7, 20153 votes

So while a lot of people see, "Oh, Janna got played outside of her recommended lane, so Riot nerfed her," what's actually happening is, "Janna mid has no counterplay, let's add some." And then to pros go, "Oh, this champion has counterplay? Time to find something else to abuse."

DRAG 'EM, GURL! PREACH!

RetillinJan 7, 201510 votes

{quoted}

They played mid Janna because she was bullshit. They played mid Soraka because she was bullshit. Pros really like to pick champions that are un-counterable. Their opponents are, just like them, extremely skilled League of Legends players. If you can find a champion that CANNOT be outplayed, that's a really strong champion to play in top tier play.

But this is the problem....

I don't know how much longer I can go without feeling like I'm taking crazy pills. I have yet to see Riot acknowledge this. The pro pick bullshit champs because they give them the best chance to win. This is 100% correct.

So the best move would be to maybe nerf the champs that are ALWAYS at the top? Last season Jax was a monster top lane for 5 weeks in the EU & NA LCS. Then you guys nerfed him. And a few buffs, Gragas and Mao became the kings of top lane. Kassadin was in the top 3 picks for mid lane in 20 out 22 weeks over the same period. (Not counter playoffs and Worlds) Are you really going to say that Riot doesn't know why he was picked so often? And why did it take SOOOO long to address it?

I can go on and on. Lucian was top 3 in 20/22. Elise 22/22. Thresh 22/22. I can go on and on. It's not the random Hec in mid lane. It's being bored of Elise vs Lee Sin. Thresh vs Leaon/Morgana.

If the game has gone stale, and we have this much domination from so few champions, we can only come to one of three conclusions.

Number 1~ Riot doesn't know they have a problem. Number 2~ Riot doesn't know how to balance over loaded kits. Number 3~ Riot doesn't care. They WANT Lee Sin. Kassadin. Thresh.

Please tell me how I am wrong here. I want to love the game. But I watched every NA LCS game last year, and most of EU. And I'm just tired of it.

RiotPhreakJan 7, 201521 votes

Well let's look at Kassadin as a core example.

We don't want to just play whack-a-mole with champions. For example, we could say, "Okay, we're just going to nerf and buff every champion's base health until everyone has exactly the same pick/win rate." That wouldn't make a very good game, but it would produced a balanced one. Definitely not the goal. Certainly, that's an extreme example, but that's what you get when you don't make the right choices.

So instead what the designers do is slate reworks, direction shifts, take time to try to make the right changes, etc. Right now Kassadin, I would argue, is in a really good spot as a result of this work. Picked situationally where the champion makes sense. Has strengths, weaknesses, feels uniquely like Kassadin and no one else. Great!

I'd argue it's actually Number 4 - There's not enough time in the day. We don't want to just play whack-a-mole. We're very aware of overplayed as well overpowered champions.

The following is personal opinion, so feel free to disagree. Lee Sin isn't actually the best jungler, he's just the most fun (and the most played across the entire playerbase). Thresh isn't the most powerful support, he's just the most fun. Do you really think we should nerf champions because they're more fun than others? You can make your own reasoning and have your own opinions on champion power at the very top tier, but as far as our actual matchmaking gameplay, objectively Lee Sin and Thresh aren't anything close to the most powerful champions in their role. I'd never ban them myself unless I knew I was facing someone who was specifically a "main" of that champion, just as I'd ban Urgot from an Urgot main.

Kowe The EwokJan 7, 201512 votes

I dare say that it's not "only because of fun" because that he is picked so often... Rather because of his safety, damage and CC which make him incredibly powerful, even if not everybody can play him to his maximum potential...

RetillinJan 7, 201511 votes

{quoted}

Well let's look at Kassadin as a core example.

We don't want to just play whack-a-mole with champions. For example, we could say, "Okay, we're just going to nerf and buff every champion's base health until everyone has exactly the same pick/win rate." That wouldn't make a very good game, but it would produced a balanced one. Definitely not the goal. Certainly, that's an extreme example, but that's what you get when you don't make the right choices.

If he is still top 3 in 95% of the LCS don't you think that speaks to his over all power level?

So instead what the designers do is slate reworks, direction shifts, take time to try to make the right changes, etc. Right now Kassadin, I would argue, is in a really good spot as a result of this work. Picked situationally where the champion makes sense. Has strengths, weaknesses, feels uniquely like Kassadin and no one else. Great!

I'd argue it's actually Number 4 - There's not enough time in the day. We don't want to just play whack-a-mole. We're very aware of overplayed as well overpowered champions.

Well this is countered by the slight tweaks to Sona on the PBE but not Thresh or Lee Sin? They are both thought of (as proven by their competitive pick rate) as being top of the line champions. But why don't they get looked at? Is it really just being scared of the blow back, or do you HONESTLY think they are not the best all around at their role?

The following is personal opinion, so feel free to disagree. Lee Sin isn't actually the best jungler, he's just the most fun (and the most played across the entire playerbase). Thresh isn't the most powerful support, he's just the most fun. Do you really think we should nerf champions because they're more fun than others? You can make your own reasoning and have your own opinions on champion power at the very top tier, but as far as our actual matchmaking gameplay, objectively Lee Sin and Thresh aren't anything close to the most powerful champions in their role. I'd never ban them myself unless I knew I was facing someone who was specifically a "main" of that champion, just as I'd ban Urgot from an Urgot main.

Okay I'm going to call BS on this. Are you really trying to tell me that Meteos picks Lee Sin because he's more "fun" than Skarner? Or Xpecial plays Thresh because he's more "fun" than Janna? Froggen's Anivia, okay I'll agree on that. But come on. Is there some data you can share that backs this up? If Lee Sin and Thresh are the among the top 3 picked in their role in competitive from day one they are allowed in pro games... are you telling me that it's just because they are fun and not the best? That pros who are doing every little thing to win (playing bullshit champs as you said) would rather play a weaker champ than the best all around at their position? This just doesn't make any sense. If "fun" is the way to label champs and that is what the pro's only play, does this mean your champion creation/rework/balance team has failed in all bout a small hand full of cases?

RiotPhreakJan 8, 201517 votes

For part of it, I'm talking about matchmaking play vs. competitive play. For matchmaking, as reflected by the patch notes, Janna and Sona are just actually the best supports in the game. They just outright win games 20% more often than they lose games. Lee Sin and Thresh, they're 50/50.

The data is that we know the win rates and picks rates of every champion in the game. We literally know how often each champion wins a game of League of Legends. We also know the pick rates of every champion in the game. The bar graph over "Jungler" is hilarious when you see the gigantic spike for Lee Sin. We know that Pick Rate is actually not very heavily influenced by champion power. Fiora had one of the 10 highest win rates in the game for I think over a year and remained unpopoular. I can tell you pretty much unequivocally that the general League of Legends player picks what's fun over what's powerful. We are all playing a game, after all.

The point I'm the least strong on is competitive pick rates. I admitted as such. I said you guys can all have your own opinions and that I was merely stating mine. But I can pull out a mountain of facts that back up what I'm saying.

How long between the last Kayle change before she was #1 Pick and Ban? How long did it take for Kassadin to go from unplayed to #1 in I believe the beginning of 2014 (when his Q became a magic damage shield). For how long did everyone ignore Janna until NJWS GorillA was like "Guys, Janna's OP" and then everyone was like, "Oh shit you're right!" Go watch the VoD of the Analyst Desk in the Group Stage at Worlds. I literally said just that on air and MonteCristo and Krepo directly laughed at me or straight disagreed. What did we see at the end of worlds? Janna became the #1 or #2 contested support pick despite being COMPLETELY UNPLAYED for the year leading up to it.

What I know is that pros have some very weird decision making around what they pick. They all have their reasons, but from where I sit it looks arbitrary. I know they copy the Koreans. I know they copy Solo Queue when they face a champion without counterplay. Otherwise, I know they just play what they enjoy playing. Why do you think 90% of all Support players' Most Played champion in Solo Queue is Thresh? Why do you think every Jungler's Most Played is Lee Sin? Again, I'm talking about specifically Matchmaking games. Games where Rammus is provably stronger than Lee Sin. Where Fiddlesticks is provably the best jungler in the game. They're clearly not picking just to win Solo Queue, otherwise they'd pick based on win rate. They're picking to play things they enjoy playing. And that's where the rest of the picks come from. That's what I see.

LankPantsJan 8, 20158 votes

You can't judge power by win-rate allone like you are trying to with Sona/Janna. There's another factor that applies to Sona especially, she doesn't make plays. By extension this also means she doesn't make mistakes. She's not winning her teams more games, she just losing them less.

In comparison a lot of players who play Thresh will take riskier hooks and often just feed the enemy team kills. Thresh has more power as a champ, he can impact a game more than Sona but he can also impact it negativity while Sona can't unless she's trolling.

Pro's pick riskier champs because they have more power. The pros don't often make stupid mistakes when they play Lee/Thresh so they get to use their full bullshit levels of power. There's nothing arbitrary about it at all, pros pick the most overpowered champions as they always have, I'm sure you can find any number of pro players stating this.

They're picking to play things they enjoy playing.

This is bullshit, a lot of players will just mirror what ever they see pro players play and not question why they are doing it.

RiotPhreakJan 8, 20158 votes

Yes, some will. Obviously there is some minor influence on perceived power -> pick rate. But Lee Sin's been one of the most popular champions in the game forever, WAY before he was considered an A or S-tier jungler.

I mean ask yourself, REALLY how many Zileans did you see in Ranked around the World Championship. Every game? The same pick rate as the players in the tournament? Yeah you probably saw a couple when people went to try it out, but it's not nearly to the same scale.

HellioningJan 8, 20156 votes

Is anyone really disputing that people find Lee incredibly fun? I mean seriously, lots of people find him fun. So many people find him fun that Riot decided to go back on the proposed rework. That's a lot of people that find him fun; more so than Cass, Skarner, or Sona, at least.

LankPantsJan 8, 20153 votes

There's also the other side of the coin though, Lee is immensely frustrating to play against, more so than Cass, Skarner or Sona at least. He's borderline unchaseable, has super high damage for how tanky he is and never runs low on his resource due to low energy costs and high energy regen on his kit. Also you can't run from him since even if you dodge every Q he can ward jump forward or just out run you with his super high base MS.

ShinjusukeJan 8, 20158 votes

The issue isn't that people find him fun, the issue is that a large part of his fun is that he's overpowered as hell, and also that being fun is not an excuse for being immune to nerfs and, as LankPants points out, an S-tier pick for 2.5 years, at least.

Plenty of other champs are just as fun as Lee Sin and many, including myself, would argue they're MORE fun, but they're not picked anywhere near as much. Because Lee Sin is far more powerful.

RiotPhreakJan 8, 201514 votes

That's the crux of my argument: For you and me, the guys who aren't playing in LCS, Lee Sin is not overpowered. He wins less games than Fiddlesticks. He wins less games than Amumu. Hell, he wins less games than Support Sion (actual fact). He is literally not overpowered in solo queue. The argument for top-tier LCS-level play, I can't definitively say. I just suspect that the popular picks are overrated. The results speak for themselves. If Lee Sin was actually overpowred (like launch Rek'Sai, or 4.20 Warwick overpowered) you'd see obnoxious winrates. You don't, because he's not overpowered. He just feels incredible to play, and very honestly, obnoxious to play against for many players. It may FEEL overwhelming, and I am not here to dispute that, but he is not factually overwhelming.

LankPantsJan 8, 20157 votes

You're running into problems with correlation and causation here. Power and win rate are correlated, but that does not mean that power is the sole definer of win rate or vies-versa. Both power and win rate are also correlated to other factors as well.

Power is correlated to interpretation, when you think a champ can beat you, you play safer. It's also correlated to impact and consistency, which are in turn generally negativity correlated to each other. High impact champs have high amount of risk and as such lower consistency, as such high impact actually less correlated to win rate than high reliability. Obviously a high impact high consistency champ is broken, that was patch 4.20 WW.

Win Rate on the other hand correlates to impact and constancy, obviously. It also correlates to the %mained as you have suggested. Another thing that win rate correlates with is play style, which correlates with champion pick. A Lee Sin might have a lower win rate than Ramus, but that's at least somewhat because Ramus is often played a lot safer, staying with his carries and peeling for them, this play style is better suited to winning in solo que since you never throw a game with it.

KingsgraveJan 8, 20154 votes

{quoted}

You're running into problems with correlation and causation here. Power and win rate are correlated, but that does not mean that power is the sole definer of win rate or vies-versa. Both power and win rate are also correlated to other factors as well.

Power is correlated to interpretation, when you think a champ can beat you, you play safer. It's also correlated to impact and consistency, which are in turn generally negativity correlated to each other. High impact champs have high amount of risk and as such lower consistency, as such high impact actually less correlated to win rate than high reliability. Obviously a high impact high consistency champ is broken, that was patch 4.20 WW.

Win Rate on the other hand correlates to impact and constancy, obviously. It also correlates to the %mained as you have suggested. Another thing that win rate correlates with is play style, which correlates with champion pick. A Lee Sin might have a lower win rate than Ramus, but that's at least somewhat because Ramus is often played a lot safer, staying with his carries and peeling for them, this play style is better suited to winning in solo que since you never throw a game with it.

Didn't LB still have the sameish 45% winrate when she was oppressive and ridiculous? They removed her silence still because it needed to be done.

Lee having a low winrate doesnt mean shit.

ShinjusukeJan 8, 201514 votes

That's the problem though, you're using words like "factually" and "objectively", without a legitimate proof of that versus people stating in no complex terms what makes him overpowered as hell.

I mean, I think, iirc, you're a jungle main. I am too. You can say he's not overpowered according to you, but when you say "He's not overpowered because I have info that doesn't prove it and I can't provide", then there's an issue.

You keep bringing up his win rate, yet consistently write off the fact that he's popular. How it's so hard to believe bad players pick good champions escapes me, but the fact is his win rate being low doesn't prove he's not overpowered. Hell, I'd argue it doesn't prove anything, except that people play him a crapload (which you well know) and that there's a lot of people who are bad with him. That does not make him balanced. Lee Sin wins less games because more people are playing him. It's already been addressed that there's a significant difference between some guy picks up Lee Sin because he saw pros winning with him, knows he's OP, and figures he'll get easy wins, and someone who mains that Support Sion and knows the playstyle in and out.

Logically, if he was balanced, but had his crazy high play rate, his win rate should be low, because the majority of weaker players should be losing to equal-skill players with stronger champions. If win rate = balance, that is.

"Low Win Rate = Balanced" is a pretty flawed argument that has been torn apart a billion times in these forums, yet it's the only thing you've provided us over and over. Meanwhile, I, and many others, could easily provide you with a point-by-point analysis of where his problems are, why this makes him too powerful, and have multiple times throughout this thread provided reasoning for why a champion who has literally been a top-tier pick at the highest levels of play for a few years probably is imbalanced.

Why all the sudden, when it's a champion that Riot likes, is it okay to not base a balance decision off top players, but for every other champion in the game, it's perfectly fine to dumpster a champion when a pro player steamrolls with them? I used to love playing Ezreal when I was newer before you guys tossed him in the trash bin with some panicked nerfs immediately after S2 worlds, Olaf got absolutely dumpstered following a pro game where you guys got to see his power, etc, etc, etc. In those cases, it's fine to base decisions off the top level, but when it's Lee Sin you guys change your tune?

People have been saying for years that Lee Sin is overpowered. A lot of people. At all levels of play. As I pointed out earlier, Scarra asked why he wasn't nerfed harder on Riots patch rundown and got baffled looks, and in my opinion it looked like it hadn't even occured to the Rioters on there that "wait, people think he's overpowered?".

I'm not saying he's 4.20 Warwick Op, etc. I'm saying, and many other people are saying that Lee Sin is too strong a champion. That does not mean he auto-wins games. That means that he has too much power. There's a difference. A champion can be too strong in a game and have a low win rate, just as a champion can be considered weak and have a high win rate. Win rate gives you a ballpark at best of a champion's power, except in a few extreme cases. This should be obvious.

Nobody is saying "pick Lee Sin = Win the game". People are saying "Pick Lee Sin = beat the shit out of your jungle opponent, have every tool you could want as a jungler, and have no/almost no significant tradeoffs for it". This is the exact same thing people have been saying the entire time he's been top/near the top of the charts for years, and it's honestly kind of pathetic that the first remotely extended discussion on champion has had to come from people saying "we're bored of seeing him". I mean think about that. In order to get a legitimate response on easily one of the top junglers in the game's balance, he had to be top tier for so long people are just plain bored of seeing him in e$ports. I should add the fact that Riot can't seem to recognize the difference between "basic usage of Lee Sin's kit" and a "Big Play" to spotlight is a little disheartening as well, but that's a different topic.

He's "obnoxious to play against" because his kit allows him to be better than whatever jungler you're playing at damn near everything your jungler is supposed to be good at. He feels "incredible to play" because he's good at everything and when played right, he can do whatever the hell he wants with impunity. He has every tool he could want and doesn't trade anything out to have them. Meanwhile, everyone else has to make some major tradeoffs for whatever they're good at (at least in the jungle. Other lanes are a different story/discussion). Lee Sin can viably duel, and counterjungle, and gank, and tank, and assassinate, and push, and steal, and sustain, and so on and so on and so on. Hell, most of those things he can do better than champions who actually have an identity and make tradeoffs to do them.

I have to reinforce that the only truly numeric "fact" you've given us is his win rate, and play rate, and repeatedly espouse them as the holy grail of balancing gauge (except when it's not Lee Sin), calling your statements on whether he's balanced "fact" as a result.

Meanwhile, everyone has been able to see win rates and play rates for the entirety of the years-long overbearing status of Lee Sin, and still provide solid explanations for why..

Win Rate is not an end-all representation of champion balance: By your own logic, every high-level jungler who really wants to win would be playing Fiddlesticks, particularly the ones whose jobs are based on this game.
Lee Sin is too strong, and has been for ages, and needs fixed.

The fact is, the "average player" who you're basing the "Lee is balanced because win rate" is not at a high enough level for it to be relevant: In the low tiers, where the majority of players are, there's a whole bunch of shit that's balanced with a little game knowledge that those players don't have. Wanna know why Fids is a top win rate jungler? Cuz he can absolutely trash a team with his ultimate when that team doesn't have a clue how to react to it. A bunch of low-tier players don't know how to react to it. Ta-da, insane win rate.

Meanwhile Lee Sin has too many tools, too much power on each of them, and low-to-no counterplay against them. He has had these things for a long-ass time. People have been saying he's been too strong because of them for a long-ass time. Riot ignores them because it's cool to watch Lee Sin trash people in e$ports, or just plain can't see the picture in front of them. Either way, when you continually say "nah man he balance cuz I say so", it just sounds super arrogant, and honestly a little ignorant.

Lastly, even IF, in a hypothetical situation, your assessment of "Lee Sin isn't overpowered, he's just fun to play and infuriating to play against" were true (which, as I've pointed out several times, just serves to prove his imbalance), that alone should've been cause to change him ages ago.

-First, why is 1 Lee Sin players enjoyment in dominating another person worth the 5 other player's fun? The assumption would be, that since he's been this ridiculous and infuriating this long, you guys are saying a Lee Sin player's fun is more important than the other team's fun. I can tell you, from personal experience, that a Lee Sin being better than my champion in what my champion's defining trait is supposed to be, while also being strong in every other jungler area, is not fun. And using that unjustified strength to completely dominate my team was probably not be fun for them either. Lee Sin probably had fun though. Yayyyy....

-Second, this argument would wholly go against exactly what Riot has made several balance changes in the past contradicting, that being that "no counter-play, frustrating champions are bad for the game". Lee Sin is a top played champion in the jungle. That is a hell of a lot of games that he's ruined the fun for other players over the last few years that he's been too strong. Apparently it's fine to nerf other low counterplay, un-fun champions for being unhealthy for the game, but not Lee Sin.

Following this logic, there's only a few possibilities for why Riot has left him where he is this whole time:

-Possibility 1: Riot legitimately believes he's a perfectly balanced champion. The fact that he's been a top tier pick for at least 2 years in pro play alone would seemingly contradict this, but more on that in a minute.

-Possibility 2: Riot is unaware of people believing the champion is heavily imbalanced. There's little to say on this other than "I call bullshit", because believing Riot just hasn't noticed people think he's overpowered is kinda.. bullshit.

-Possibility 3: Riot doesn't know what to do to fix him. A crapload of people have offered suggestions. Also calling some bullshit.

-Possibility 4: Riot legitimately believes a single Lee Sin's fun is worth making other players feel completely powerless. I doubt this is the case.

The first three of these are the most likely, with, if your opinion is to be believed, 1 being the most likely (The patch rundown with Scarra catching you guys off guard lends some legitimacy to the second one, but less like than #1 imo). This still means that you guys have such favoritism for the champion that you're willing to go against repeatedly stated game design goals in order to preserve his place near the top of the food chain, and have been willing to go against those goals for a couple years now. This, to me, is frankly very frustrating. While the many champions other people enjoy playing, who are unhealthy (sometimes even just borderline unhealthy) for the game and are un-fun to play against see nerfs, and in some cases full reworks, to change their unhealthy playstyle to make them less infuriating, Lee Sin continually remains immune to significant balancing changes.

Perks of being a favorite I guess.

Chromatic EagleJan 8, 20154 votes

This is why people roll their eyes whenever Riot talks about clarity and communication. How do you define being overpowered? Lee is the most versatile champion in the League. He's a swiss army knife. He has a bit of everything on top of what he excels at: mobility. The most clear weakness he has is that a majority of players don't know how to use him properly. All for the low, low price of never being realistically nerfed because Riot has literally admitted to being too afraid to reign him in because of the backlash from the community.

As for Thresh? He's in a similar boat. He can dive, he can pull, he can disengage. He may not be great at anything, but he can be used in most comps. He'll also not get nerfed hard because he's so popular.

This is why people on this forum love saying "LC$Bigplay$". They know the most popular champions won't ever be nerfed hard.

LankPantsJan 8, 20155 votes

Lee's been considered S tier for 2 and a half years. Data from the middle of season two holds almost no relevance now. Zillean was played for like 2 weeks at worlds his pick rate increased massively for the duration, but of course it's not the same amount, solo que takes a couple of weeks at least to catch on. A better example would be Shyvana top, a lot of people openly disliked her but picked her anyway because she was considered to be the strongest pick at the time.

Also you picked overall the least important part of the comment to reply to.

DeusVultJan 8, 20154 votes

I have to upvote you for the good imput, but the fact that you bring up win rates and pick rates kinda disgusts me.

Win rates have nothing to do with champion power in matchmaking. The majority of champs who have a small % pick rate have an above 50% win rate. In fact, many of the champs who have a really high win rate, top 10, are niche picks who have sub-par pick rates. For instance, WW and Rammus both had really high win rates during 2014 (before the jungle change) but had really low pick rates and were considered lackluster junglers. But against an AD team, Rammus will win almost every game. Warwick is one of my favorite picks against teams whose mid is a crazy assassin (ie fizz, kat, akali, etc). Ult them and the game is won because you lock them down.

On the other hand, champs who are considered OP or strong, such as Lee Sin or Thresh see staggering pick rates, but have poor win rates. But that's because more people play them, aren't as good with them as someone with over 1000 games on a niche champion, and since they are picked more, they are in more games to lose.

Win rates mean nothing, but pick rates really show most champions power potential IMO. There are some cases for such champs as janna, but 90% of the time you don't look at champs in the bottom 10 of pick rates and go "there's definitely a diamond there that no one knows about or uses"

RiotPhreakJan 8, 201513 votes

We're not talking about anything that's remotely going to be affected by small numbers. If you say, "Give me the win rate of Support Brand in 2300+ Elo over the last week" we're going to have issues. But the numbers I'm talking about are in the 10s or 100s of thousands of games, Rammus and Warwick included. People "consider" all sorts of funny things, regardless of the actual impact games have.

What I will say is that subjective feedback matters. LeBlanc certainly FEELS overpowered because she has almost no counterplay. Landing her E doesn't typically matter once she's ahead. Whether she wins half her games or not, she feels really bad to play against, so people ban her. Back in the height of Zed in 2013 when everyone banned him, I'm not doubting his power in the hands of a professional LoL player. But he literally lost more games than he won on the live servers. If you wanted to win a game of League of Legends, you hoped your opponent picked Zed. Hundreds of thousands of games said so.

But again, I will reiterate that everyone's subjective feedback of, "Lee Sin feels overpowered. Thresh feels overloarded" is valuable information. It's not how the game actually plays out, but what actually matters is the perception of human beings. And of course that's worth considering. I just sort of stand in my corner and say, "Well actually, he's not as strong as you think." Might not be worth much, but that's a lot of what I'm doing.

HellioningJan 8, 20158 votes

I am aware, intellectually, that Thresh, Lee Sin, and Fizz are relatively balanced.

I am also aware that any of those three being in a game drops my enjoyment of the game drastically because I hate them and want them to be removed from the game.

And I wouldn't mind that, normally. Every champion needs a reason to pick them, and they need to feel strong. I would just like them to feel strong in other ways than 'If they/their support didn't have two dash skills/untargetability/the only skill in the game that can move allies, we would have killed them there'

ShinjusukeJan 8, 20155 votes

Except he IS as strong as people think, otherwise he wouldn't be played so much. I mean the only quantifiable information you've provided to the contrary is "well, his win rate is about 50/50". But then you say "well, win rate doesn't mean everything". I mean how much more arrogant does it get beyond "kay well despite everyone else saying the opposite and me not having any actual data to the contrary that's valid, I'm right because I said so".

What is your reasoning, by the way? Cuz it seems to me that your basis for "Lee Sin is balanced" is purely pen-and-paper, ignoring how he actually plays out in games. Hell, I was under the impression Riot thought low-to-no counterplay was bad, yet you conveniently write it off in the case of the few champions that people have insisted for years are too strong.

Is your logic that "well, I mean, his ult only does X damage, and this other champion does Y more damage with their ult, so Lee Sin is balanced"? Cuz that'd just be... kinda ignorant.

Is your logic that "well, his win rate is about 50/50, despite his pick rate being stupid high for junglers"? Because then I point out the fact that the pros play him because he's an overpowered jungler, which makes every kid trying to win their games start picking him all the damn time because he's easy and powerful with every tool he could want, and some of those kids just aren't good enough to play him properly and thus cause many losses.

I'm just not seeing where you're coming off with all this "objective" speak, with literally no way to prove objectively he's NOT overpowered in an actual game, yet for years Riot has ignored the community, minus Lee Sin mains (obvious favoritism) and the Chinese (if Ghostcrawler is to be believed, go figure the Chinese might favor a Shaolin Monk archtype), saying at least once a season in a massive wave "Lee Sin is overpowered".

If you have some magic, unknown statistic, please share it, but I mean c'mon: His win rate is a bad display of his power, particularly since anyone at any skill level can play him regardless of their aptitude for him, his pick rate is super high for pretty damn obviously more reasons than "well he's more fun", and everyone is tired of seeing him and everyone minus his "mains" is saying he's got too much power.

He's got everything a jungler could possibly want and has been the, or at least one of the, top picks for years without actual repercussions, while everything that actually manages to overtake him in power is quickly nerfed.

I'm not saying Riot should balance by votes necessarily, I am saying however that after years of him being too strong, Riot's blind refusal to fix him (excuse the bad joke) is getting exceedingly tiresome for many, many players, and that the defenses you guys provide of him have been, thus far, been plagued by contradiction or a lack of solid reasoning beyond "we've got a secret drawer in the back that somehow immediately quantifies balance and it says he's fine".

He is as strong as people think, the problem is you guys insisting 100% of the time regardless of input, particularly with regards to Lee Sin, that you know better. Even the people playing in your World Tournaments state, and prove, that Lee Sin is too strong and you insist you know better.

Hell, the last time he got his lovetap nerf, you had Scarra on the patch rundown and he said outright "why didn't Lee Sin get nerfed harder" and the best response he got was "well... uh.. cuz we didn't want him to be less fun". One day you guys will realize winning games and/or dumpstering people without reproach is fun, and so yeah, a way overpowered character that, if you learn him properly, will win you a lot of games is going to be fun.

I've been responding to a lot of what you've said Phreak and I hope it's not coming off as blatant disrespect, but I feel like you're that kid in the corner covering his ears and shouting "I can't hear you I'm right go away!!!" despite loads of playtime and solid arguments coming from tons of people in this thread saying "dude, at least acknowledge it's your opinion, instead of insisting your opinion is reality". Cuz that's what you're doing. Calling your opinion an objective, quantified fact, even when your own numbers are just as easily used to say the opposite of what you are. The difference is, the people disagreeing with you are bringing up more arguments (including some of your own) beyond the statistics you're mentioning, but you're still insisting "nah he's fine I said so".

RiotPhreakJan 8, 201511 votes

You also bring up a good point with champion familiarity. There's truth to that. For example, Fiora is the most-mained champion in League of Legends. What I mean by that is that the average Fiora game is backed by more experience than the average Zed game, Yasuo game, Akali game, etc.

So there's truth to that. But again, League of Legends is the most played online game in the world. We can slice data pretty finely and still get incredibly reliable statistics. We can look at something like "win rate for # of games played." We can take EVERYONE's first Lee Sin game and average it. We can specifically take just for the relevant patches anyone who played Lee Sin for the first time, second time, third time, onward, and make a very convincing line graph for learning curve.

Even the Lee Sin experts aren't pushing ludicrous win rates. It's also a flatter curve than you'd expect. A few patches ago when we updated the "Difficulty" scores of all our champions, that's where a lot of the information came from. Singed and Udyr actually have massive learning curves since they don't have an "Out" button. Experts actually have incredibly high win rates on those champions (above the norm for other expertly piloted champions)

But again, I just have to really urge you to consider that Ban rates are certainly indicative of perceived power (Yasuo alert - Lowest winrate in the game, highest ban rate in the game. You're literally helping yourself lose by banning him), but pick rates are really not influenced as much as you'd think. People pick what they enjoy playing, first and foremost.

haywire androidJan 8, 201515 votes

{quoted}

Why do you think every Jungler's Most Played is Lee Sin? Again, I'm talking about specifically Matchmaking games. Games where Rammus is provably stronger than Lee Sin. Where Fiddlesticks is provably the best jungler in the game. They're clearly not picking just to win Solo Queue, otherwise they'd pick based on win rate. They're picking to play things they enjoy playing. And that's where the rest of the picks come from. That's what I see.

Again because it's a safe pick.

In my opinion your argument falls over it self (and Riots jungle diversity design goal). You make it sound like Fiddlesticks and Rammus would enjoy the same win rates if played as much as Lee Sin, which I do not believe. They're chosen because they're strong in a certain composition/situation (just like wanted with the design goals).

That Lee Sin is chosen to the extent that he is and still is able to maintain a 50/50 chance of winning (as stated in your post) rather tells me that he is strong in every situation and lacks counter picks (and goes against the jungle design goal).

So if you're first/second (even third) pick Lee is almost always your superior choice (and will likely give a higher % of winning that Rammus). Even if technically there are higher win rate champions, Lee gives you an equal chance to win in every game, while you have to know the team compositions to a greater extent to enjoy "superior" junglers win chance.

Then there's also the question; what would you spend time learning to play? A champion that is strong in all situations or a champion that is a niche pick but stronger in certain compositions.

KeevalroyJan 7, 201511 votes

{quoted}

The following is personal opinion, so feel free to disagree. Lee Sin isn't actually the best jungler, he's just the most fun (and the most played across the entire playerbase). Thresh isn't the most powerful support, he's just the most fun.

Oh really? They're the most fun? I think there's more to it than that with more champions than just Lee and Thresh, so let me bring up one of your quotes.

They played mid Janna because she was bullshit. They played mid Soraka because she was bullshit. Pros really like to pick champions that are un-counterable.

So tell me why you SHOULDN'T play whack-a-mole especially considering after pros start picking up problematic champions such as Soraka mid, Yasuo, Thresh, Lee, Zed, and others, the community will respond to it and make games a living hell for everyone else?

I would also argue that Elise was fun. She was a bit too strong, but she was fun to play, and the balance department had no problems essentially killing her as a champion while Lee roamed free as a bird. There's some bullshit within your own walls that your departments need to realize.

Lady SeptimusJan 7, 20155 votes

{quoted}

That's not quite correct, though I understand where you're coming from.

We are not, as a game, against a champion being viable in multiple roles. We're fine with Lulu working in 4 roles right now. We're fine with Karma working in the same ones. We're fine with Hecarim as a jungler as well as a Mid Laner (and I'm sure he's fine Top also).

The changes to champions when they worked in certain lanes came from the gameplay impact of that lane. When Janna walked into lane, Pressed Q in the vague direction of the minions, and then immediately last hit the entire wave, that was an issue. When Lulu clicked "E" and then pressed "Q" twice, causing you to lose 50% of your health without it honestly being a real skill shot, that was the issue. When Annie's low level base damages and stun were so obnoxiously high you immediately lost any possible 2v2 fight bottom lane, that was the issue.

Notice how literally nothing changed about Karma after we saw Bjergsen get a pentakill on her in the LCS playoffs, despite being played as a support the week before. Lulu hasn't been changed in about 4 months (E duration on enemies being the big change) after her mid lane pattern became significantly less toxic.

The awkward thing about all of this is that it's not that pro teams were looking for support mids to play. They didn't immediately replace Janna with Morgana, or Karma, or Lulu, or Soraka. They played mid Janna because she was bullshit. They played mid Soraka because she was bullshit. Pros really like to pick champions that are un-counterable. Their opponents are, just like them, extremely skilled League of Legends players. If you can find a champion that CANNOT be outplayed, that's a really strong champion to play in top tier play. So while a lot of people see, "Oh, Janna got played outside of her recommended lane, so Riot nerfed her," what's actually happening is, "Janna mid has no counterplay, let's add some." And then to pros go, "Oh, this champion has counterplay? Time to find something else to abuse."

What about Soraka?? Riot completely destroyed her ability to lane by herself and made her completely dependable on an ally

AbodyHUN666Jan 7, 201515 votes

They turned her into a new champ. She is a field medic running to save people, not some hermit living in a mountain around mid lane defending her shrine with a shower of stars occasionally healing pilgrims who visit her lane.

SpecterVonBarenJan 7, 20153 votes

{quoted} Lulu hasn't been changed in about 4 months (E duration on enemies being the big change) after her mid lane pattern became significantly less toxic.

Except in that case it came at the expense of putting support lulu on the same tier as support Taric i.e. barely used at all and inferior to other picks outside of skilled individuals.

Zeke MaelstormJan 9, 20153 votes

"Janna mid has no counterplay, let's add some." And then to pros go, "Oh, this champion has counterplay? Time to find something else to abuse."

But this is what the LCS is. They will find whatever is best at the time and use it. Teams that don't do this lose. If we all played Dominion then all the pros would play Urgot because he is practically god tier (Yes I know it's shocking) on Crystal Scar. That's how teams get there first leg up; by banning the extremely broken (Hello 4.20 Warwick) and then picking what is strong afterwards (Hi Thresh). And the LCS teams have the time to do this as they have and continue to invest enough time in to learning every champion well. There is no champion they can't play and therefore, instead of picking what they mained up the ladder, they play what is good because it will win them games.

AtheosisXJan 7, 20159 votes

Some of what you are saying is true, but there's a lot more to it than that. For instance, right now the deciding factor much of the time in terms of whether the pros play a champion or not is whether or not that champ is mobile. Immobile champs don't see nearly as much play in LCS, and as far as I can tell you guys don't have any interest in changing that. The reason I say that is because you a) rarely ever buff immobile champs that don't see competitive play and b) continue to release champs that can do everything immobile champs can do while also bouncing around like rabits. So basically you guys have made a decision to cut the champion pool in LCS in half simply by doing nothing to counter the extreme dominance of mobility in the game.

RiotPhreakJan 7, 201523 votes

I absolutely disagree.

Ryze, Warwick (except ultimate), Orianna, Jinx, Morgana... The list goes on pretty much the entire way.

Very few champions have no mobility abilities, so it's easy to say, "Well, mobility wins." Except that Looper showed us both Singed and Kayle as completely dominant champions. Talon can only jump to enemies, and crushed people. Jayce likewise, same impact.

So, I have to reiterate, that saying things like "Cut in half" is very odd when there is I think literally one melee champion without some way of moving faster in Mordekaiser, and then some other fraction only has movement speed buffs... Yet we saw Dr. Mundo played for most of the split. And again, as far as ranged champions go, I think literally every conventional Support doesn't contain tactical mobility skills. Twitch was arguably the defining ADC of the World Championship. Orianna hasn't gone anywhere in literally ever, and neither has Rumble.

Now you can make the point that champions can be come non-viable, but mobility is an absolute red herring.

5G8Nri0B54Jan 7, 20156 votes

In this case, kitable? Lack of adequate survival mechanism?

When was the last time you saw a Garen or Volibear played and wrecked face in LCS? On the flip side, when was the last time you saw Malzahar or Brand in the LCS? What is it that separates Brand from another mid-range mage like Syndra? Or Volibear from another tank like Mundo?

I guess the likely answer to that is, just because a champion is theoretically viable doesn't mean they'll necessarily fit into the comps that pros happen to choose to play. However...wouldn't this be a great scenario? If no champion is ever a surprise pick? The implication of that of course is that there isn't a imbalance of what's competitive or not. Would be cool to see a Garen catch a Lucian and kill him. Just as it'd be cool if we saw a game where Brand dominates a Zed.

AtheosisXJan 7, 201516 votes

Listing the exceptions doesn't change the overall trend. Most immobile mages rarely to never see play mid. Most immobile bruisers/tanks rarely to never see play top. Immobile ADCs see more play than the two previously mentioned, but mobile ADCs are still preferred generally. Even in the jungle mobility tends to rule due to ganking being so difficult otherwise. Yeah supports tend to be immobile, you are right about that. I'm kind of amazed at your position honestly.

Here are the stats from last summer: http://www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends/comments/2gg6lq/worlds_stats_874_of_champions_were_pickedbanned/

The overwhelming majority of top non-support picks on that list are mobile. Likewise the overwhelming majority of 0-10 picks are immobile. I may have over-stated it when I said half, but there is probably a solid 30-40 champs in the game who are rarely to never played because of the fact that they lack mobility and do not have anything to compensate for it when compared to their mobile brethren. The immobile champs who do tend to see play are usually loaded heavily with damage and/or cc meant to counter the mobility which we are talking about.

ShultzyJan 7, 20152 votes

Of the top 16 champions (Number of champs picked/banned in a draft phase) 50% have no dash, blink, or otherwise gap closer. (Ms Buffs not included)

Kowe The EwokJan 7, 201514 votes

Ryze's winrate dropped into nothing so he isn't the best example. Not to mention that his ultimate grants him a HUGE mobility increase.

Warwick has a "near permanent" speedbuff in teamfights - and his ultimate? How is that unbeatable movementspeed immobile?

I can accept Orianna as immobile (mainly because she can't apply it fast enough after poking) BUT her strength is that she can easily make OTHER champions mobile (E+W)

Jinx, has resets and insane speed after her kills and assists. Meaning if an enemy dies, any other low enemy anywhere near him has close to 0 chance to escape...

Morgana. Yea. She is immobile. But she has the most overloaded CC-kit ingame. Her Q is basically a sure kills once everybody has his first item finished. Not to mention that she can give CC immunity (now consider CC as mobility impairment and you know where this going).

I assume it's simply that you granted certain champions INSANE mobility that you don't value the above anymore. The worst thing about this: Mana of these champions with high mobility don't even have mana - meaning they can continiously (ab)use it. Be it to dodge skillshots (which in most cases do cost mana) or to roam.

A few examples: - 4 dashes (345 base movementspeed) - 3 dashes (350 base movementspeed) - 3 dashes (345 base movementspeed) - As many dashes as units are nearby... And another one to to knocked up targets (345 base movementspeed) - 1 direct dash, up to 8 dash tunnels, "ultimate dash" (365 burrowed movementspeed) - 2 dashes (350 base movementspeed) - can dash whenever he enters a bush, his ultimate is a dash, grants extra speed, (345 base movementspeed)

As for your Looper example: Singed has 25 seconds of 80 extra movementspeed. There's a reason why there's a saying "never chase a Singed", because he is too mobile to be caught. Calling Singed immobile is just plain wrong (if you ask me)

LucifronSunJan 7, 201510 votes

{quoted}

I absolutely disagree.

Ryze, Warwick (except ultimate), Orianna, Jinx, Morgana... The list goes on pretty much the entire way.

Seems there's a bit of misconception as to what constitutes a mobile champion from an immobile champion here. Using your given examples, ryze and ori have quite reliable and pretty strong speed boosts as well as cc. And the rest of the champions have kits that are gamebreaking enough to warrant their presence regardless of their immobility.

While lack of mobility certainly doesn't disqualify a champ if they're useful enough for it to not matter, the weaker the champion is, the more compounded the effect no mobility has. I noticed you went ahead and picked champs who are either strong regardless or have at least decent mobility.

You did not list gangplank, garen, vlad, morde, the bottom of the barrel champs that are probably what the poster you responded to had in mind. As for morde, his lack of any kind of mobility on a melee champ is the only thing that's keeping him from being able to go toplane reliably.

Very few champions have no mobility abilities, so it's easy to say, "Well, mobility wins." Except that Looper showed us both Singed and Kayle as completely dominant champions. Talon can only jump to enemies, and crushed people. Jayce likewise, same impact.

More confusion here with what you think "no mobility" qualifies as. Not being able to go over walls is not no mobility. Again you've listed all strong champions who all have good speed boosts and cc, and have strong kits as well.

So, I have to reiterate, that saying things like "Cut in half" is very odd when there is I think literally one melee champion without some way of moving faster in Mordekaiser, and then some other fraction only has movement speed buffs... Yet we saw Dr. Mundo played for most of the split. And again, as far as ranged champions go, I think literally every conventional Support doesn't contain tactical mobility skills. Twitch was arguably the defining ADC of the World Championship. Orianna hasn't gone anywhere in literally ever, and neither has Rumble.

You are, once again, listing champions strong champions who are generally unaffected because of the strength of their kits. I shouldn't have to explain why stealth makes twitch the monster he is, that mundo has a perma slow, giant heal, and tons of kit damage, why ori will never be bad as a midlaner, or how rumble is an incredibly strong and perhaps abusive top. None of these champions can be compared to morde, who is countered every game by the enemy team picking a jungler.

Now you can make the point that champions can be come non-viable, but mobility is an absolute red herring.

When you're only looking at strong champions who've seen play, then perhaps you could say that. But when you look at old and broken/bottom of the barrel champs, no mobility becomes a clear concern. There's a reason you've seen jungle tf before garen toplane in pro play.

WhitakkerJan 7, 20153 votes

If you could do us a favor and stop saying "literally" every other sentence, that'd be great. Much love, Phreak.

AMYS GRAVEJan 7, 20152 votes

Looper being sucessful on two champs doesn't mean they are dominant, so i would be careful with that wording but singed's ult has a large MS boost and he routinely build MS, and Kayle whose w has a MS boost so these are not truly immobile champions.

Also of note, Ryze has a MS boost on his ult, WW has both his ult and the e MS boost toward low enemies, Orianna has a MS boost/slow through dissonance, Jinx has her passive. i think this shows how hard it is to find champions who don't have mobility anywhere in their kit and enlightening to think about how important it is to have some mobility in champion kits in the environment that has been created.

When we talk about immobile champs i think we are more referring to champs who have none like Nasus, Velkoz, Brand, or Varus/Xerath who actually have to cc themselves to use their abilities. This is in comparison to the new champions with kits that are overloaded with mobility like Kalista's dash every AA and an ult that gives mobility to her teamates these seem like she's just varus with mobility added on. Then there is RekSai with that global presence ult alongside an at-will MS boost with the burrow and a dash through a tunnel ability. When these mobile champions can also excell in more than kite/chase then it starts to become a problem. RekSai can kite, chase, waveclear, poke, tank, sustain, split-push, have gloabl map presence, and do them all quite well.

tl;dr the mobile champs are either better versions of immobile champs and/or have no real weaknesses in comparison to the immobile champs. also mobility isn't just dashes, move speed is mobility.

AmazingGoatJan 7, 20153 votes

{quoted}

I absolutely disagree.

Ryze, Warwick (except ultimate), Orianna, Jinx, Morgana... The list goes on pretty much the entire way.

Very few champions have no mobility abilities, so it's easy to say, "Well, mobility wins." Except that Looper showed us both Singed and Kayle as completely dominant champions. Talon can only jump to enemies, and crushed people. Jayce likewise, same impact.

So, I have to reiterate, that saying things like "Cut in half" is very odd when there is I think literally one melee champion without some way of moving faster in Mordekaiser, and then some other fraction only has movement speed buffs... Yet we saw Dr. Mundo played for most of the split. And again, as far as ranged champions go, I think literally every conventional Support doesn't contain tactical mobility skills. Twitch was arguably the defining ADC of the World Championship. Orianna hasn't gone anywhere in literally ever, and neither has Rumble.

Now you can make the point that champions can be come non-viable, but mobility is an absolute red herring.

@RiotPhreak

As someone who spends a lot of time analyzing complex issues but doesn't have a lot of experience with the intricacies of League, I generally love your analysis and explanations and find them incredibly insightful and helpful. Which is why I find this response a little surprising, and can't help but disagree to some extent.

To the extent that you are suggesting that many champions have mobility abilities and that's why it seems like mobility abilities dominate... I think that that comment doesn't necessarily address the issue that the champions without mobility abilities are at risk of becoming second class citizens.

First, I understand it was just intended as an offhand listing of immobile champions who have thrived recently, but ironically I think even a cursory analysis of this list reveals just how important mobility is.

Ryze was strong because he was over tuned, but he also had a strong self-MS buff and a root which impairs enemy mobility.

Warwick was also strong because he was over tuned, but he actually has a flash like ult that also disables enemy mobility. He both has a mobility ability to flash to someone, and a suppression to prevent an enemy from using his mobility ability.

Morgana has a root which impairs enemy mobility, as well as a shield which preserves mobility in the face of CC.

Orianna is an interesting case. She has an MS boost, but most wouldn't consider her a mobile champion. At the end of the day, I think she's played because immobile mages can have enough power to make up for a lack of mobility, and she's best of class in that archetype. She has a game changing ult and great utility elsewhere in her kit. The problem this poses for other immobile mages is that if she's best in class, there needs to be a compelling reason to play another immobile mage over her.

You bring up Worlds, but as an impartial observer I found Worlds to be a huge testament to how important mobility is.

First off, I think Twitch has to be addressed. Champions with stealth dominated at Worlds to an extent that I think most people don't realize. Twitch went 17-7 while Rengar went 12-2. Some of this is that they happened to be the favorite champions of very strong players, but there is a reason these champions were favored by these players. Mobility is valuable because it allows you to create favorable situations in a way that less mobile champions would not be able to. Stealth is a mechanic which provides the same ability, but is even rarer. Notably, Eve (certainly not overpowered now) and Akali (can't say the same) both went undefeated at Worlds (in a really small sample size). To be fair, Talon did not do that well, going 3-4.

All of this is just a way of saying that stealth has its own unique advantages just as mobility does, so I don't think it is fair to say that just because Twitch can be a highly competitive ADC pick that means that other immobile ADCs can too. In point of fact, nowhere was the emphasis on mobility as apparent at Worlds as at the ADC position (except maybe jungle - more on that in a moment).

At Worlds, Lucian was picked or banned in 78% of games, Tristana was picked or banned in 50% of games, and Corki was picked or banned in 28% of games. The only immobile ADCs who were picked or banned (more than once) were the hypercarries, specifically Kog'Maw who went 7-9, and Jinx who went a poor 2-5. The only other immobile ADC picked as Varus, and he lost.

Notably, the 2-5 record overstates Jinx's performance at Worlds, as she averaged a .4 KD ratio, and only a 1.57 KDA ratio. The .4 KD ratio represents the only negative KD ratio of any ADC. Kog'Maw averaged a 1.45 KD, lower than any mobile ADC except Graves (1.4 KD in two games), and a 3.55 KDA, lower than any mobile ADC except Trist (3.36 KD). As far as I can tell, it's impossible to keep Jinx alive when she's getting dived by mobile champions of equal skill. And of course, she isn't completely immobile anyway as she has a huge MS buff on kill/assist.

Every mobile ADC picked at Worlds (Trist, Corki, Lucian, Cait, Vayne, Ez, Graves) had at least a 50% win rate except for Trist (12-20) and Ez (0-2). No immobile ADC picked at Worlds (other than I guess Twitch, who is discussed above) had a win rate 50% or above.

The jungle was arguably worse. Lee Sin, Rengar, Kha'zix, J4, and Elise accounted for 147 picks. Once again discounting stealth (Eve picked twice), if you don't count Rammus as immobile (picked twice), the only unquestionably immobile junglers to be picked were Nunu (once) and Fiddle (once). The jungle role at Worlds was all about mobility (which makes sense for the role).

After jungle and ADC, the picture gets a bit fuzzier, and your comments ring a little more true. Jayce was one of the dominant picks in the later stages of Worlds, but he clearly does have mobility, even if his dash is limited to jumping onto an enemy. He also has a passive MS buff and an active team MS buff. Ryze was very successful as well, but he was clearly over tuned and has since been nerfed.

Ori and Rumble made the best case that champions can be strong despite a lack of mobility, but both have a game changing ult that gives them a huge team fighting impact that makes up for their lack of mobility. Unfortunately, there is always a risk that if you create twenty champions with the immobile mage archetype, but one of them is best in class (e.g. Ori), that one will be played while the others will not.

It's certainly possible to have immobile champions who have enough power in their kit to make up for their lack of mobility, but I think this is only true at certain positions, and generally involves having a defining ability that a lot of their power is wrapped up into and justifies picking them despite their lack of mobility.

As I said, however, I do not claim to be good enough at the game or experienced enough to judge this in the abstract, I am just extrapolating based on the champions I see played competitively at the highest level.

Lastly, I want to say that I think that a lot of these issues do NOT exist (or are not that big of a deal) in solo queue, and in particular in lower tier solo queue. At lower levels of play, I think almost any champion is perfectly viable.

Get RekkktJan 7, 20155 votes

{quoted}

It's definitely an odd space.

On the one hand, you're right: The number of unique champions played in top tier competitive play is dwindling slowly over time. The real question is "Why?"

You could certainly force a wider variety. You could say "Okay, you can only play each champion once per month / once per series / if your opponents haven't played it either." Enforcing a wider variety of champions can be interesting because you'll see more of them played. You could have 20 bans. You'll definitely see different stuff played if you do that.

Another question can be if just "Champion named Ezreal was picked" counts as one unique pick. What about Mid Ezreal vs. ADC Ezreal? What about Support Nautilus vs. Jungle? Kayle Top/Mid/Support? How about different builds? AP Amumu vs. Tank Amumu? You can track the specifics of "Champion named X was picked." Does that tell the whole story? Do you care if they were built differently? AP Mid vs. AD Bot Kog'Maw? I'd argue this counts as a "different" pick, but it's of course not tracked as that. Certainly, an edge case, but it's food for thought.

On that line of reasoning, I think 2014 was a year full of flex picks. We saw Karma, Lulu, and a whole host of other mages go in various lanes. Would a better line of reasoning be, "How many Supports did we see this year? How many Mid Laners did we see this year?" Double-counting Jayce doesn't make for a very interesting comparison, but Annie might count. I think we saw more flex picks in 2014 than any other year. There were probably at least two dozen champions that were played in more than one role this year in professional play.

The game has also become more homogenized. Up until halfway through Season One, many teams weren't running ADC+Support bottom lanes. Now it's considered commonplace. Not everyone knew Kassadin was crazy strong throughout 2013, Cloud9 least of which, but he defined the first half of 2014's Ban phase. Nowadays everyone's watching the Koreans and saying, "Ah, LeBlanc and Corki are contested. We should all learn them." The fact that all the top-tier players have a standard to look to and compel themselves to emulate shrinks our champion pools significantly.

I specifically asked Cloud9's Hai about this at the beginning of 2014. He said they sat down, had a meeting, and told me (paraphrased), "We chose to drop our old playstyle. We should play like SKT. They won the world championship. Let's be like them" Well, SKT couldn't even qualify for Worlds the next year. I'm not certain that emulating a specific team or style of play in a constantly-evolving game is the right way to thrive. Cloud9 had, consecutively, their worst splits ever after making the decision, "Let's copy SKT." Throughout 2013 they made their own rules. Meteos made his own jungle style. Sneaky and LemonNation pulled in their own champion pools and style (Hello, Ashe/Zyra). Certainly, other factors than just "not innovating" led to teams taking more games off C9 than before; I'm just bringing up trends I see.

I think the trend actually feeds on itself. Because everyone's compelled to learn specific champions because "better teams" do so, everyone shares similar champion pools. And because you can easily predict your opponent's champions, and magically you ALSO play those champions, it means you have heavily contested picks. I know they want Corki. Well I know how to play Corki! Let's first pick Corki. This repeats for every role, 2-3 champions deep. Some players branch out and have their own fun touches (Xerath players, Rengar players, Rumble players, Vayne players, etc.) but anything that sees a lot of success falls back into the old pattern of, "Oh this champion's successful, let's all learn it."

In my opinion, almost every single champion in League of Legends can be that champion. The next Rengar is out there. The next Support Annie or Support Morgana is out there. People just arbitrarily started playing them and everyone decided it was a good idea. But people seem to glom onto them really, really hard, so the pools decrease.

What's the way to fix that? Is it OK to "force open" the champion pools? Should we just track "# of Supports played" across seasons and trend that? What should change?

its like freak forgot that after niche picks like lulu and soraka took up mid they nerfed em into oblivion

or the emulate the team thing, could it have anything to do with nerfing splitpushing or the 3 top push strats?

its like you guys dont think of your past actions or what they changed, all champs are the same power...never heard a worse joke in my life

your gonna tell me ashe was gonna beat lucian prenerf? and if you argue nerfs, someones gonna have higher stats and honestly the problem with champions is some champs do the same job as others but better and also have higher mobility

AMYS GRAVEJan 7, 20152 votes

i'd rather see a situation where if a champ is picked then they are eliminated for that player for a game or two or the series. that way Ezreal can be taken by the mid laner but can also be played by the adc in the same series but we will not see the same mid player taking zed and doing the same split push strategy 2,3,4 times.

LearndingJan 5, 201521 votes

Pretty much

2pudge1cupJan 5, 20158 votes

This solution doesn't solve anything but making the game artificially look more balanced.

It's 100% a balance issue. The balance needs to be better and not solely based on "champs that look good are allowed to be strong and champs that don't aren't."

KonidiasJan 5, 20158 votes

I think the only change I would make is that it's team restricted... not restricted to both teams just because one player picked the champ. So a player on TeamA picks Zed first game, that means TeamB could pick Zed next game... as long as he wasn't banned.

This still reduces the champs down by 5 per team each game... which would at least allow for some more creative champ selects.

Overall though, the main fix is to balance these champs a bit more. Instead of just nerfing some stats, create some real strengths and weaknesses with the champs.

TheRainInSpainJan 6, 20155 votes

they just don't play them in the LCS because they are more comfortable on their pool of 4-5 main champs.

That is precisely why the LCS pool is so small. I tend to think streams are for fun, so don't get me wrong. My favorite players mess around almost all the time on streams, or they half mess around half play for keeps. You tend to play what you feel like in NORMAL games. But when it comes to Ranked (and Yes, League Champion Series is still Ranked), you play to win. So you play the champions you're most familiar with. If that ends up being everyone uses the same twenty champions because those twenty champions are the ones everyone is most comfortable with, well, there is your problem.

FiskJan 5, 20153 votes

I agree champion diversity is important but there is just one problem. Even if champions are balanced for regular play, it doesn't mean they will be picked in LCS. For example lets think about a champion like udyr. From the normal player's standpoint he is perfectly balanced. He can split push well, is good at 1v1ing people early, good at taking early jungle objectives and has a great clear time. Does this mean he will ever see LCS play? Probably not UNLESS it is a niche or surprise pick. Why? Because his strategy has basic counter play and you are better off picking a champion that has good team synergy (lee sin, j4 etc etc) and out play the other team in team fights/skirmishes. Therefore the pro scene will always have underplayed champions.

RiviniJan 8, 20153 votes

The champion pool is limited in the LCS because the only "viable" ones are the ones who are fun to watch. When they aren't fun to watch, they are nerfed without hesitation if they see LCS play (i.e. Nasus and Sona). Riot doesn't want potential new players watching a champion stay at top and Q minions for 20+ minutes. That's boring, so let's make sure he won't be picked anymore!

Meanwhile, as a perfect example, Thresh with his blatantly overloaded kit remains as he is and only receives love taps when the cries for nerfs become too great. "Maybe if we lower his attack range by 25, that will shut them up." The thing is Thresh can be melee and still be a top support pick. His utility is just that godly. Riot merely found a cop out to apply a nerf without affecting his core gameplay. Thresh will never be properly balanced as long as he remains fun to watch. Literally every one of his abilities makes exciting plays happen, so in order for the pros to want to pick him all the time and continue to see air time in the LCS, they keep him in his overpowered state.

When you look at the big picture, it becomes clear.

http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=4358182