Just a quick thought. People complain about team comps in LCS always being the same 6-10 champions. What if every champion started out with a $100 bounty. If you play with this champ and win, you get $100. Every game any champ is not played, $10 is added to that champion. Imagine a team in LCS picking nunu or teemo because half way through three season, they are worth $1400. This would create excitement and new team comps with teams hunting for money. Thoughts?
hshtagniemehrcdu2 votesJust a quick thought. People complain about team comps in LCS always being the same 6-10 champions.
Then these people should learn how to count. Frankly, anyone making this statement is a moron. There was a load of champ diversitiy during the split.
And you can't just pick up a champ at pro level and play it. You need time to practice, alone and with your team.
III BAKURYU III 2 votesThe problem is really on Riot for not making more champions viable, but even so it's hard to do for Riot or anyone for that matter. There will ALWAYS be better champions even when all are viable because of how certain champions can form a great team comp.
While I do agree it's becoming pretty boring for a lack of better words, I also look at WHO plays those "6-10" champions. There are passive LCS players, aggressive LCS players, bad LCS players using the same champions; so while the same champions are being played there are diversity among who plays them also.
hotarse2 votes[{quoted}](name=III BAKURYU III ,realm=NA,application-id=9hBQwnEU,discussion-id=bxPuhEtt,comment-id=0002,timestamp=2017-03-31T18:47:53.802+0000)
The problem is really on Riot for not making more champions viable, but even so it's hard to do for Riot or anyone for that matter. There will ALWAYS be better champions even when all are viable because of how certain champions can form a great team comp.
While I do agree it's becoming pretty boring for a lack of better words, I also look at WHO plays those "6-10" champions. There are passive LCS players, aggressive LCS players, bad LCS players using the same champions; so while the same champions are being played there are diversity among who plays them also.
Yeah, this. Each player brings their own personality and style to a champ. I actually think more champs are viable. The problem is that it takes practice to get a team comp played right, and if you practice something different you're taking a big risk if it doesn't work out because then you'll be way behind on the meta. Flyquest tried to innovate this season. The results are mixed, but probably mostly poor if you factor in the second half of the split.
Better training tools would allow teams to practice more efficiently and thus be able to expand their champion rosters. I think if Riot really wants to increase diversity, they need to give teams better tools to practice.
III BAKURYU III 1 votesEven with the Riot practice tools or what have you it won't make a large difference in the long run.
we're talking about players that play around 10 hrs a day of solo Q where they do play different champions but yet it doesn't translate to the LCS, practice with weird picks in their scrims to fool their scrim partners so they don't get a 100% read on their true picks etc. So they can/do play different champions but if LCK doesn't play certain champions NA won't either because " Monkey see, Monkey do" syndrome that NA has.
I look at some of these lower tier teams(NV-EF) and it surprised me that they didn't do anything unorthodox or different in their picks when the fans and they must of have known that they would be around the bottom tier in the regular season.
Origen did great at Worlds because they did things differently - the Anivia TP was something that caught on especially the TP mid and they were successful because of it. Albus Nux Luna did great because they didn't do the same stick each game. They didn't do what the Koreans did or what NA does which is " copy paste what LCK does" and they beat NA(CLG) 2-0 at Worlds, beat a LCK team(ROX), EU(G2) and eventually made it out of Groups.
A Longer season(combined Spring/Summer Split) into 1 split could see different champions, styles and ways for teams to play and win.
If TSM was up 13-0 and the 2nd place team C9 is around 9-4 in the standings, TSM has some room to use different champions, subs to use them or the core players. Why play the same champions whenever you have a 4 game series lead, try something NEW and see if it sticks whenever you have a comfy lead, you have nothing to lose, you're in the lead by 4 game series, and it elevates your gameplay trying out something new, as well considering the longer split ( 36 game series) you have plenty of time to go back to the regular "meta" picks.
18 game series even with 3 games in each series - is still a toss up because even if a team is 0-7 in their minds " we can still make it to playoffs, we just have to try harder, Keep playing the same ol' champions".
I could be wrong about the longer season could help champion diversity but it's a itchy subject because it's still true about the " There will ALWAYS be better champions even when all are viable because of how certain champions can form a great team comp". As well as NA is a follower they only use/play champions that the LCK plays.
GeminiRune1 votesPeople complain about team comps in LCS always being the same 6-10 champions.
I read this and immediately thought this was going to be the same thing at least one fan griped about in the early weeks.
What if every champion started out with a $100 bounty. If you play with this champ and win, you get $100. Every game any champ is not played, $10 is added to that champion. Imagine a team in LCS picking nunu or teemo because half way through three season, they are worth $1400. This would create excitement and new team comps with teams hunting for money. Thoughts?
And here's the part that's expressing the "Where's the champion diversity?" complaint.
My thoughts: Heck no! That idea is just outright ridiculous and inefficient in every way whatsoever in what's meant to be a competitive environment. That's basically saying they're being paid extra to play specific champion with various result on whether or not it can win. That would also tell teams and players that they're in it for the money over being the best they can be.
You get $500 to play and win with Aatrox. Question: can you even WIN with Aatrox?! How many times are you going to attempt to play for that should you keep losing? What are you giving up for your team should you lose with something oddball and out of your pool of possibility.
Long story short, this doesn't improve nor promote anything. Pros don't always play for you!
