Final call is 56/132 champions available played in worlds

Trolosaurus·Oct 30, 2016·1 votes·509 views

That's 42.5% of the roster. In case you were curious Edit: Yorick is disabled, so 56/131 is 42.7%

13 Comments

Odd GnomeOct 30, 20161 votes

Certain champions are better than others. Simple as that. Pro players practice these certain champions.

RobbieFry13Oct 30, 20161 votes

I don't think that is a bad thing, it would be awesome if the number was higher but, over 40% I think is pretty admirable. You have to expect some champs that are easier to play will not make it into top tier competition, and newer champs won't be appropriately play tested, so really if you toss the cheapest RP champs and all the updates/new additions you are really looking around half the possible champs. Still pretty good, and with tweaks and buffs many of those will be different next year. So good work Riot!

DrakylonOct 30, 20161 votes

Technically it should be 56/131, as Ivern and Yorick were disabled for all of Worlds. That makes the percentage 42.7%, slightly better than 42.5%.

TrolosaurusOct 30, 20161 votes

{quoted}

Technically it should be 56/131, as Ivern and Yorick were disabled for all of Worlds. That makes the percentage 42.7%, slightly better than 42.5%.

Ivern is not available on this patch, but yes, that is a bit better. Was not aware of Yorick being disabled.

Meep ManOct 30, 20161 votes

He is disabled since 6.18 was his release patch. It's to prevent a potentially super imbalanced/bugged champion from impacting Worlds.

NiyumiOct 30, 20161 votes

But, how many were picked or banned 3-4+ times? Maybe half that number. The balance in this game is terrible, and the pros know it.

TrolosaurusOct 30, 20161 votes

{quoted}

But, how many were picked or banned 3-4+ times? Maybe half that number. The balance in this game is terrible, and the pros know it.

I'm just presenting a single statistic I don't give a shit about balance in worlds

NiyumiOct 30, 20161 votes

One reason I don't watch Worlds is because it just kind of reminds me of the bullshit champs I have to deal with in my ELO. Oh hey, they have Olaf? Well, they win. Oh hey, none of the champs have any kind of skillshots or skill requirements? Well, they one shot people. Just showcases Riot's terrible design philosophies.

TrolosaurusOct 30, 20161 votes

{quoted}

One reason I don't watch Worlds is because it just kind of reminds me of the bullshit champs I have to deal with in my ELO. Oh hey, they have Olaf? Well, they win. Oh hey, none of the champs have any kind of skillshots or skill requirements? Well, they one shot people. Just showcases Riot's terrible design philosophies.

The only champ I know that can legit one shot you without a skillshot is Veigar, and that's his gimmick. But let's agree to disagree eh?

NiyumiOct 30, 20161 votes

Legit one shotting, I know of Vayne and Veigar. But, so many champions can kill you in less than a second that it's ridiculous -- and none of them are hard champs, they're just braindead clickers.

TrolosaurusOct 30, 20161 votes

{quoted}

Legit one shotting, I know of Vayne and Veigar. But, so many champions can kill you in less than a second that it's ridiculous -- and none of them are hard champs, they're just braindead clickers.

I don't think I've ever seen a vayne kill someone in one auto

NiyumiOct 30, 20161 votes

Vayne with her newly buffed Q and a crit build with Statik Shiv will literally one shot an ADC or APC with not much health (as in no health items) -- I've hit for over 2400 in one auto with it. Next patch, with Duskblade, she can one shot mid laners as well.

DrakylonOct 30, 20161 votes

{quoted}

But, how many were picked or banned 3-4+ times? Maybe half that number. The balance in this game is terrible, and the pros know it.

Actually, only 12 champions have been picked/banned in 50% (39) or more games, 27 champions have been contested in 20% (15) or more games, and 15 champions have been contested 4 or fewer times.

Also stats aren't final yet as the finals have been extended.