How do you know if you're doing right or wrong? There must be numbers to check. So what numbers do Riot Games check? World's champion pool? No! Only amout of viewers. You're watching, means they're doing great job. "Balance? Doesn't look like they need it, they like it when there are just 20 champions, so we're ok". Nuff said.
I've recorded 47 separate champions picked so far over 4 days That's a bit over a third of the roster.
you think the pros have time to learn the complete champion pool of the game for 1 tournament?
You're the kinda guy who likes to complain and have people agree with him huh?
I will agree that I would like to see more champions played, but in order to have solid reliable gameplay, strong players often have smaller champion pools.
Personally, I want to be a good 'all-rounder' but I am not anywhere near as competitive as most people who play this game. I'd rather be able to play everyone well enough to be decent than to play a few champions perfectly.
However, I completely understand that a 'one-trick' would most likely destroy me if they have played their smaller selection of champions in even half the number of games I have played my current 123 champion roster.
Riot may care more if we are entertained, but the players care more that they win. They are going to play the champions that they are most comfortable and most consistent with. Also remember that they are not just playing a champion they are comfortable with, they are playing in a team they are most comfortable with as well. They don't have to only worry about being able to effectively set up their own skills, but setting up coordinated attacks with their team. Knowing approximately how often their jungle can clear camps, when they gank, when their mid can roam, when each respective ally reaches their power spikes, ability ranges, cooldowns, ....
And as Trolo pointed out, the champion pool is a decent size this year. It has actually gone up significantly each year over the previous 3 year (I believe that is the case, .. don't quote me on this because I don't recall my source, but I do remember seeing this somewhere. I'm mostly not sure about the number of years. The fact that it has been trending up is a fact though.)
I'm going to make a suggestion, because to be completely honest I have thought of this myself. Keep in mind before I say this, that it would be either an exclusively off-season tournament, or separate tournament all together, in which there would most likely be different players, because different players would most likely be more skilled at this.
How about if a tournament format was created to work in elimination matches, best of 5, in which after a champion is drafted for a match, they are banned from selection in the remaining best of 5? Depending on the set up, either the banned champions would not be available to that team, or either team.
I do think this would be fun, but I definitely don't see this being done in Worlds.
This has been the most exciting Worlds yet and you're complaining about the champion pool? People stick to their favorites because they've mastered those champions and it gives us a higher level of play on said champions. None of those happen to be my favorite champions, but so what?
The champion pool has seemed pretty good to me so far
You're never going to perfectly balance 100 champs unless those 100 champs do the exact same things and have the exact same stats. And there you really have one champ with 100 different names. There will always be champs better at particular roles than others and roles more wanted than others.
This has been the most exciting worlds. How many upsets have we seen already?
The amount of genuine mastery of a champ required to play him at a consistently high pro level is enormous. Further, the team has to know what team comps the champion fits and which it doesn't and what their win conditions are. This takes time to learn, time the pros don't have during the season. So we're not going to see many flavors of the week picks.
