Riot should only balance around pro play. Unpopular opinion I think.

y0r1ck·Mar 26, 2018·4 votes·1,110 views

Apparently they balance around plat. Well let me tell you, plat players suck dick. Riot, stop being lazy, and balance around pro play. They're the ones putting the most work into the game so they deserve a balanced playing field. Yi stomps bronze if he's viable in challenger? Rework him. Same with garen, yorick, sona, and all the other weak champs. It'll take a while so you'd better get started asap.

@boards members saying riot only balances around pro. First of all, they don't. And second if they ever do, get good.

52 Comments

PoskeMar 26, 20183 votes

I agree, but then again I might be biased due to being high elo

Thing is low elo copies high elo anyway so what is the point of balancing around low elo to. How do you balance a game around players who have no idea what they are doing.. yeah you dont

I also like how Ryze not being viable for low elo is a problem, But garen who has never ever been viable in high elo isnt a problem

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

Fuck it bro I'm plat and even I think it sucks that a large part of the roster is unplayable lcs.

EedatMar 26, 20181 votes

What? Ryze was completely gutted on several occasions solely because of LCS and high ELO

PoskeMar 26, 20181 votes

{quoted}

What? Ryze was completely gutted on several occasions solely because of LCS and high ELO

DUH????

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

That's part of the point ahahaha

rework trundleMar 26, 20182 votes

I think it should rather be balanced around masters-low challenger, there's a huge difference in playstyle between solo queue and lcs. LCS is about rotating in team around major objectives, and solo q is exactly like what it's called, solo. That leads to a couple of champions being bad outside of LCS due to their ability to control objectives but also due to their lack of solo carry potential.

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

That's a start and it's better than what we have now, so I'm with it.

EedatMar 26, 20182 votes

They balance around plat/diamond statistics mostly, but not exclusively.

Balancing around LCS is a terrible idea

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

Why?

I say it should be balanced at that level because it's the peak of LOL.

HeeroTXMar 26, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Why?

I say it should be balanced at that level because it's the peak of LOL.

Balancing around pro-play is an IDIOTIC idea because the pros are a solid, constant, well-practiced team of 5 with full comms in EVERY game. Playing solo-Q with champs balanced around coordinated counter moves is stupid. ie. "X champ is balanced, just pick Y counter and get Y+Z to shut X down". Balance around high-elo, sure, but balancing around PRO play is just dumb.

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

It's dumb to you, but working with your team to counter some strategies seems like a good thing to me.

If we can't see eye to eye on that, then I'd say balancing around master/challenger is a fine compromise. As those players can regularly use champions to their full potentials. Thanks for the clarification, makes it easier to reach a point where we can agree.

SwiftKitten88Mar 26, 20182 votes

i hope u step on yourself...

nelogisMar 26, 20181 votes

Yeah this will totally not make Teemo a more cancerous top laner but instead an ADC I'm 100% certain exactly that will happen there is no doubt that he isn't going to become a more cancerous top laner, this change just screams ADC into my ear

I'm deaf by the way

webstar1995Mar 26, 20181 votes

They do balance around pro play. If you have not noticed if something is is EVERY GAME of pro it is OP and it is nerfed in upcoming patches. Rescent examples include: Rakan, Skarner, Eve, Trist, Zoe.....you do not see them played now do you.....

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

<_<

...

They've admitted to balancing around a plat elo.

And I don't mean balance as in just nerf outliers. I mean balance as in no champion is considered a troll pick in challenger or lcs, and everyone has a viable niche.

webstar1995Mar 26, 20181 votes

Yes, but if pro players abuse it it will be nerfed ASAP. If an LCS player confronts the balance team about a champ like how they did with Zoe that champ will be nerfed. They actually nerfed Zoe so hard no one could player her for a patch before they fixed her again. The same thing happened with Eve at the beginning of the season.

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

Of course. However, there are still champs like yorick, garen, and yi that can't buy wins in high elo. I'm not saying riot needs to nerf champs that dominate high elo, I'm saying all champions should be viable at high elo. If someone wants to one trick garen or yi to challenger, then it should be possible. Even if that comes at the expense of bronze players getting stomped by garen and yi.

MalrothDragoniaMar 26, 20181 votes

Yorick is balanced, but he's by nature a split-pushing champion. One of the analysts recently talked about it, if split-pushing becomes a more dominant strategy we'll start to see him, but the current meta is a lot of team fighting, and so comps are being built around that.

I also think you maybe lack a well-rounded knowledge of the niches and reasons to pick/counterpick certain champions.

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

I probably do lack that knowledge. Care to explain why that's relevant? Since it doesn't seem like garen has a niche at high elo. Like I said somewhere else here, I really only know one champion .

Bro yorick is not balanced. Even if split pushing is viable, yorick won't be. After riot fixes bugs and makes his ai smarter than a piece of toast, he might be balanced. His ghouls and maiden are way too easy to take advantage of for anyone that knows what yorick does. As such, yorick falls off extremely hard above plat.

MalrothDragoniaMar 27, 20181 votes

Garen's strength are strong trading with the silence into spin, then disengage and heal with passive. Also good at extended trades post-6 because his ult execution means he can win trades where he is being outdamaged if he gets you low enough.

He is strong against poke comps because of the passive as well. He is very susceptible to kiting. It's binary, but that's because he's intended to be an introduction to the juggernaut style (i.e. don't get close to him or he can wreck you, but keep him at a distance and he's not much of a threat) of champion.

Yorick is balanced around proper timing of his maiden and hitting his E to make sure you're trading well. His counterplay is to try to engage when he doesn't have ghouls up, but at the point in the game where he's in full split-push this is hard to do. This means you probably need to commit 2+ members to kill him. His W gives him a very solid method of escape if used correctly, and in 1v1 he trades really well the longer the game goes, once again with proper use of his cd's.

Yorick currently falls off because split pushing isn't as viable a strategy right now, and comps that are good at teamfighting are most common, and Yorick does not do well in this style. You repeating 'he's not good right now' is hyperbole, as it's simply that the style of play he is niche for is well dealt with in the current meta. Niche champions, by definition, are only good in select places. Add that to solo-Q not being the best environment for coordinated strategies like a proper split-push and it's not surprising he's not seeing much play.

y0r1ckMar 27, 20181 votes

Yorick falls off because once a player knows what to do against him he's useless. Opgg me. Try and tell me you know yorick better.

MalrothDragoniaMar 27, 20181 votes

I see you jamming Yorick games and not having great success, and you're not in the top 50 Yorick players, so I don't see how that makes you an authority on him.

I know his design strengths and weaknesses, and I will try to find the analyst desk where they talk about him and split pushing, but this response just sounds butthurt and does not address literally anything I said about the design of the champion.

Unless if by 'knows what to do against him' you mean 'make sure he can't split-push' then you're technically correct. If you stop a niche champion from doing the thing they're niche at then they will be useless.

Not to mention that it doesn't address the larger point we're discussing about balancing champions around all ranks of play.

AhristocatsMar 26, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Riot, stop being lazy, and balance around pro play.

they do balance around pro play?

watch all the last patchs, nearly all the changes targeted pro play

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

Too many champions aren't played in high elo or lcs for my tastes. Imo balancing around the best is gonna mean more variety at the top and a healthier lcs meta. What I mean by balance around pros is make it so all champions are viable at challenger/lcs or at least have situations where they're a good counter pick.

AhristocatsMar 26, 20181 votes

i started to play in competition and this is simply not true

let me say that i may not be playing on the lvl of lcs but i'm playing in master/challenger lvl, and there are so many picks that can be used in some games that no one knows

https://i.gyazo.com/3764dcc27775441c9c9bcfb16f0c583c.png

here is an example of a scrim where i used aatrox against fiora and countered the shit out of her because in a 1v1 if she tries to slow my attack speed, she becomes immobile and i can time my Q to knock her up, and if she doesn't use W she dies because i rightclick her

Every single champion that are not used in pro are being buffed: rumble gragas lissandra graves quinn some champions like yi cannot be buffed for pro because the only time they would be viable in pro is when they would be broken and 100% banned in pro because they lack of counterplay

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

Ok so aatrox has a niche as a counter to fiora? Correct me if I'm wrong please, but that seems like a very narrow niche. Maybe he could be changed to do well against a larger group of champions? What do you think? And if riot can do that with aatrox, what about giving other champions viable niches as counterpicks at high elo?

And I think your point about yi shows what I'm saying. Some champions aren't viable and can't be made viable because of their kits. I'm saying change those kits so that they can be viable with counterplay, and then make them viable. Just like riot did with sion and poppy. They were troll picks until their reworks, and after that they were lcs viable and had some viable counterplay (though new poppy needed some nerfs).

AhristocatsMar 26, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Ok so aatrox has a niche as a counter to fiora? Correct me if I'm wrong please, but that seems like a very narrow niche.

not only fiora, aatrox is the only melee champion that can kite other melee champions that are easily kited like darius

it may be a narrowed niche

but it's not aatrox's problem, it's some champions having a too huge niche making it imbalanced

https://i.gyazo.com/bdc4b4adc664b3c9d4d590f57308772f.png

it feels really good to pick Darius and vel'koz into sejuani+alistar+sion and burning them alive with 1k true damage ult, especially alistar under ult and watch them not being able to do anything because they didn't have reliable engage to catch a vel'koz with cleanse

it feels good because you feel like you outminded the enemies by thinking about a pick that was golden in that game

if you start to make everyone having a large niche you won't have that feeling anymore

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

I was mistaken, I don't play against or as aatrox and apparently he can kite some melees. That's a bigger niche than i thought he had, and I'm hoping other champions get niches like that.

Like if perhaps yi could be used to counter adcs like trist or cait by being able to close distance very fast, stuff like that. Or if garen could be a counter to champions like ryze or cassei, machine gun mages. But it seems like even where these champions should shine, there's so much counter play that they're never viable in high elo. And without changing their kits, I don't see a good way to make them viable with counter play.

AhristocatsMar 26, 20181 votes

Yi already has a niche

he is the only melee in the game that is immune to slow, he's the HARDEST counter to gangplank who only has slow to peel himself same for ashe

but he's shit, because he has no counterplay and if he is good it means he's broken

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

Yi does have counterplay in the form of being a relatively squishy champion. Meaning if he gets cc'd he's probably going to die. Though I agree it's not counterplay the way champs like sion and Camille have counterplay.

When you say he does have a niche, do you mean that he's a viable pick in high elo as a counterpick? Because imo, if he can't be used even as a counterpick then he needs changes. Same with garen. It seems like even when they're solid counters they're still not picked.

Though if they're viable and reliable counterpicks in masters/challenger, then I'm wrong. Thanks for the info, it's valuable to hear from masters players.

Titanium70Mar 26, 20181 votes

I don't think so - there are plenty of Champions that are simply not viable in LCS due to their Kit and would only be picked if their numbers are completely hilarious. (risky Champs, less reliable ones, unique niches)

This way balancing with the idea of making all Champs 'viable' for LCS would be a huge failiure.

Assassins are a typical example - you can't make them viable for coordiante play while keeping uncoordinated play in a somewhat healthy state - that simply doesnt work.

Mages are another one: LCS-Viable Karthus? JEP GREAT IDEA xD

(And you cant - realisticly - rework a good quarter of the roaster)

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

I agree that plenty of champions aren't viable at high elo or LCS. Rework them.

Instead of saying "it simply doesn't work," say "we haven't found a way to make it work yet." Riot hasn't found a way to make assassins viable in coordinated play while keeping them inn a healthy state yet. That doesn't mean they can't do it.

If a good quarter of the roster needs reworks to be viable at the highest levels, riot better get started because it's going to take a long time.

MalrothDragoniaMar 26, 20181 votes

I think maybe you misunderstand what a champion being in a 'balancede' state means. As Titanium70 says, some champs are meant to have weaknesses/counterplay that make them less viable in pro play. Some champs are just difficult to play, and proper playing of them gives you a power level higher than other champs that have a lower skill floor.

You need beginner champs so people can access your game without having to perform like a pro off the bat. Champs like annie aren't as viable in pro play, but are great for people learning the game, this is by design. Same for Garen and Yi, their design is intentional, it's to be accessible to more people, being able to perform on them as an introduction to certain mechanics/playstyles that you get rewarded for more with other champs, that as your mastery grows you can better utilize more complex/higher skill ceiling champs.

You need to have champs designed for a range of roles/niches/fantasies as well as skill levels, and kit design is part of that. Reworking all champions to make them pro viable would wreck the game, and reduce the number of players overall, which is bad for Riot.

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

Ok I read and I think I understand what you're saying.

But what I don't get, is why do easy champs need to be so easy to counter that they're simply unplayable at high elo? I think it sucks that some people can't use their favorite champions because they're just too good at the game. I think it sucks that some people can't climb to high elo just because they play a weak champion.

I don't agree that you need champions for a range of skill levels. I think there's one skill level when balance matters, and that's pro. Let garen and yi stomp low elo if it means we can see these champions in challenger streams or lcs from time to time.

Also you can't just say reworking all champions to be viable at high levels would wreck the game and reduce the number of players. You got no proof for that statement and you haven't even provided a chain of logic to follow...

MalrothDragoniaMar 26, 20181 votes

Ok, so the reason you need more reliable counters for beginner champions is because of the nature of that beginner status. Meaning, if any person, even a beginner, can find great success with a champion because it is intended as a beginner level champion, then that champion's weaknesses also need to be similarly defined. It puts a learning mechanism into the game itself that helps you get better. Once you understand why a champion is 'beginner' tier you will understand more about counters and the mechanics of the game. In this way you can kind of teach yourself many skills that will make you better at League, and that new knowledge can help you choose the next champion to master.

If beginner champions were viable at high level that is all that would be played, as the burden of execution would be much lower. Why spend time mastering a high-tier champion when I can execute my strategy much easier with a beginner champion whose mechanics don't require as much skill to execute?

There should be a reward for learning skills and achieving a higher level of mastery. That should for sure come in the form of champion power, that way if I spend the time and train myself to be good at a high-tier champ I will get more value out of it than if I spent that time perfecting my play of a 'beginner' champ

As for changing this paradigm reducing number of players, it's called 'burden of entry'. When you want new people to play a game you need to give them a natural starting point, tutorials help this, as well as giving them champions that are easy to understand so they aren't overloaded with information off the bat. Some players never get out of that beginner status, but bc of the nature of the game they can find success on champions that require less mastery.

If you make all champions require that high-level of mastery then not only will you alienate new players, you will alienate players who were comfortable on their beginner picks and now feel the game has no place for them. The largest poll of players are in Silver, so not alienating them is in Riot's best interest, but they also want people to take League seriously enough to be an eSport and to attract talent. The gamut of different skill-intensive champions achieves this, and it seems the balance team is kind of coming to terms with the fact that certain high-skill champions need to deliver on that mastery and that changing that about them would mean gutting them to the point of non-viability or changing them so completely that they no longer resemble the champion they're meant to be.

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

Ok I agree that a champions strengths and weaknesses should be similarly budgeted. Though we can see that for some champions, their weaknesses outweigh their strengths at high levels. We know this because we don't see this champions used in high elo or LCS.

Your point about why play a champion when x does just as well and is easier is good. But I think that if champions are different enough then you won't see this problem. As a hypothetical: Well x is easy but it's weak to common champions. So let's reserve x as a counter to h, j, and k. What we have now: Well x is easy but literally anything can be used to beat it so we can't use x.

I think the problem is that some champions are just too easy to counter compared to what they bring to a team. Garen brings a meat shield and some damage, but he's so easy to deal with at high elos, that he's a troll pick there. I think champions like garen and yi should be adjusted to fulfill their niches better so that they can at least be viable counter picks, if not viable first picks.

In the case of garen, he's weak to being kited so riot stepped in and gave him some help vs cc. Changes like that are great for champions like garen without adding too much complexity. It's a great step in the right direction and I'd like to see more like it.

In the case of yi, perhaps allowing him to mediate during all cc would be a similar change. Low in complexity but helps shore up some weaknesses while adding some skill expression. Again, just a small change to push him towards viability at higher skill levels.

Changes like these don't make the champions much more difficult, imo. So it circumvents the problem of alienating poor players. I'd like to hear your opinion on the garen w change, since it seems to go against your philosophy but imo it was a good change.

MalrothDragoniaMar 27, 20181 votes

Riot is currently pushing some binary champions to have a little more skill expression, basically trying to raise their skill ceiling so that players can feel more rewarded for putting more time into them. The addition of a small window on Garen's W where he is less susceptible to cc was a good change, same with the Volibear knockback.

I'm sure Riot is working on similar QoL changes for many older champions if they can figure out a direction that makes sense. This still doesn't mean they'll become viable at the pro level, and I still assert they're not meant to be.

Building a system of hard-counters unnecessarily restricts the design space Riot has for new champions, which is what it seems you are suggesting. If you have to make sure every champion is viable, and the lever you use is 'hard-counters' you are basically asking for a redesign of the whole game. Otherwise if certain champs only have a single hard-counter, and then are banned away you have a stale meta where these unstoppable beginner-tier champs are dominant.

Differences in kit will only get you so far, you have to look holistically at the types of abilities present throughout the game and their natural play patterns rather than just looking at a kit and trying to make it powerful enough to see pro-play.

I would recommend going through the old Quick Gameplay Thoughts in Dev corner, as well as the Red Tracker, and other relevant posts made my Meddler and the balance team. It should give you some insight into the types of things that go into champ design, balance, and why some champs are in the state they're in. They will often talk about toxic play patterns, and they released a video about the way the assess 'off-meta' picks and their contribution to game health. These should all give you a better idea of how champs are meant to interact, why some champs are more beginner friendly, and possibly you'll come to the same conclusion that they have. They also will sometimes deep dive on the intentions behind some champions' kits and hits and misses and how they decide to change things.

At the very least it seems you need a wider base of knowledge about the reasons champs are designed the way they are (though sometimes the answer is just "They're old" and Riot has learned a lot since the game was released) and those resources should help you paint a clearer picture than just X is a counter to A, B, C.

BernMar 26, 20181 votes

The big issue is that it entails balancing around levels of coordination the average player never sees and methods of counterplay that aren't reliable in solo queue. This means that the vast majority of the playerbase is not going to have fun. You know how you need to be able to coordinate Realm Warps to get the full value out of Ryze, because so much of his power is budgeted into his ult? Imagine the entire game feeling like that with a few exceptions. Most people would hate it.

Maybe if they game provided better methods of coordination AND players were reliable about using them AND there was an established standard for communication and shotcalling (something like everyone agrees support is main shotcaller, listen to the support, except jungler calls baron/drag -- something braindead and easy for people to understand and remember), Riot could balance in this direction. But it's not happening.

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

They've added voice chat. Which is nice for coordination. Though if LCS balance is bad for solo queue due to coordination differences, then riot should balance around high elo solo queue.

I think most people would hate a game like that, just because most people do not want to cooperate.

Ahri BakaMar 26, 20181 votes

How many players do play in Plat Elo and how many pro players exist ?

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

Plat has many more players. Balancing around plat results in a more balanced meta for more players. I'll concede this point.

However, silver has more players than plat+ combined. So should riot balance around silver instead to satisfy an even larger player base?

I don't think so. So far it seems impossible to balance champs for every elo. I think riot should balance for the top, so that when every champion is played to its full potential - or as close as is possible - they're all on a level playing field. Since riot hasn't balanced champions for all elos, I think this is the best way to go about balancing.

Ahri BakaMar 26, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Plat has many more players. Balancing around plat results in a more balanced meta for more players. I'll concede this point.

However, silver has more players than plat+ combined. So should riot balance around silver instead to satisfy an even larger player base?

I don't think so. So far it seems impossible to balance champs for every elo. I think riot should balance for the top, so that when every champion is played to its full potential - or as close as is possible - they're all on a level playing field. Since riot hasn't balanced champions for all elos, I think this is the best way to go about balancing.

The best thing is the do at the middle , not too high and not too low , Balancing Silver is something Impossible , Master Yi is weak in high but can dominate in low Elo , the best solution is to balance around an Elo with a good amount of players and in a good position , Silver players are mostly new or bad , it's not even worth balancing , and it won't be balanced in the first place , Plat Elo was chosen because all players there should know what to do Balancing for pro players is a huge mistake , and you should know that no matter what the company does , Pro players are just " Meta Slaves " no matter what happens , they only pick the same champions again and again , especially for tanks , it might seem like a joke but yeah Pro Tier is the same level in Silver Elo , can't be balanced

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

They only pick the same champions because they're meta slaves and the same champions are meta most of the time. Do you see how you're using cyclical logic to defend your statement that balancing around pro play is a mistake? Pro players will only pick different champions if more are viable at their elo, and that would only happen if riot balances champions for the highest elo.

The problem is that plat players don't really know what to do. I'm plat and I'm going to be honest, I only know one champion and one way to play. Why should the game be balanced for me? I'm trash and barely know how to play. I think balancing around players that can barely play isn't a good strategy, because this results in a good portion of champions being not viable at the highest elo.

How about this as a compromise, like you say "not too high, not too low." Balance around masters/challenger. Still the best players playing champions perfectly or as close as possible to perfect, but without factoring in the intense coordination of LCS.

Ahri BakaMar 26, 20181 votes

{quoted}

They only pick the same champions because they're meta slaves and the same champions are meta most of the time. Do you see how you're using cyclical logic to defend your statement that balancing around pro play is a mistake? Pro players will only pick different champions if more are viable at their elo, and that would only happen if riot balances champions for the highest elo.

The problem is that plat players don't really know what to do. I'm plat and I'm going to be honest, I only know one champion and one way to play. Why should the game be balanced for me? I'm trash and barely know how to play. I think balancing around players that can barely play isn't a good strategy, because this results in a good portion of champions being not viable at the highest elo.

How about this as a compromise, like you say "not too high, not too low." Balance around masters/challenger. Still the best players playing champions perfectly or as close as possible to perfect, but without factoring in the intense coordination of LCS.

That can't happen , not all champions are tanks , and if they nerf tanks , no one would play tanks , it's not like I'm using the same compromise or idk lol but that only means because I suck at English since it's not my first language so I didn't know the meaning of what I wanna say exactly , not all plat players are trash , most of them at least they know how to play I said , balancing also includes Diamond Elo too btw.

y0r1ckMar 27, 20181 votes

I get that English isn't your first language, but please use periods.

Yes all plat players are trash. Diamond players are trash. Anybody that isn't challenger isn't playing the game right.

PuddleTroubleMar 26, 20181 votes

If you want real balance, I agree. Otherwise it's likely just a serious of band aid fixes to try to make champions equally viable across all MMRs. It's extremely hard to pull this off.

y0r1ckMar 26, 20181 votes

Yeah, it seems like the only way to achieve true balance to me.

SwiftKitten88Mar 26, 20181 votes

you do realize if they did they they wouldnt HAVE a game LEFT to balance becuase they would lose the 92 % of the playerbase that isnt plat +. do to brainded simple champsion like Garen needing absolutely absurd skills in order to be defeated if he was buffed to be viable in pro play..

no one would play this game...

they have already nearly ruined the game from damage creep.. they wouldn't have a game left to ruin if they do that.

y0r1ckMar 27, 20181 votes

No proof

Scary DoorMar 27, 20181 votes

{quoted}

Apparently they balance around plat.

Not exclusively. Usually around August x.14, x.15, x.16 patch or so, they start heavily balancing toward worlds.

The entire reason that Master Yi received his initial update a few years back was because of low Elo play.

If Riot balanced entirely around pro play then prepare for champions like Master Yi and Yasuo to receive massive buffs----while I'm fine with that part of it, it will make the game for the majority of the playerbase much less enjoyable.

Contrary to popular opinion, Bronze-Gold players keep this game alive as they represent well over 80% of the customer-base; I may not have graduated from Harvard Business School, but I would wager that you generally don't want to irritate four-out-of-five of your customers if you plan on staying afloat.