Boards›Gameplay

The fact that people want 10 bans shows that Riot can't balance this game right

Zuil·Dec 30, 2016·33 votes·2,554 views

If the community wants 10 bans because there are too many champions that have too easy of a time against almost every champion and Riot are ok with doing that, then there is a balancing problem.

I understand that some champions are always going to be annoying because of their kits (Yasuo, Teemo) but if there is a champion base that outweighs others significantly (Lee Sin, Vayne, LeBlanc, etc) and there way to fixing it is by adding more bans, then there is a huge counter play issue here that should be looked at after 10 bans are put in play.

It almost feels like it is a game of luck what everyone is playing, everyone is praying that..

People ban the appropriate "OP" champions
The remaining "OP" champions aren't picked (because there is way more than 6 to ban)
If people do pick these op champions, hope they play like ass, or it's gg.

Am I the only one who feels this way?

59 Comments

MarshbouyDec 30, 201611 votes

Are you telling me that a game that is constantly gaining new content and has a ridiculous amount of variables isn't perfectly balanced at all times?

zarxus1234Dec 31, 20166 votes

{quoted}

Are you telling me that a game that is constantly gaining new content and has a ridiculous amount of variables isn't perfectly balanced at all times?

Lol this game isnt even remotely close to being balanced right now. And riot isn't even trying to balance the game at the moment. If you think they are you are a a fool.

MarshbouyDec 31, 20164 votes

of course they aren't trying right now. It's holiday break. I don't expect myself to do an assload of studying for finals over christmas, so why should they be working over the holidays? (unless something was so bad that it was breaking the game)

WoonStruckDec 31, 20162 votes

He's not wrong, guys. Why downvote him?

You might not like it, but Rioters are people too, and they have just as much of a right to spend the holidays with their family as you.

I'm just as pissed about the current state of the game as the next guy, but its more about the way they're addressing champions in the upcoming patch as opposed to the patch being delayed due to holidays.

MarshbouyDec 31, 20161 votes

I agree.

deadlychuckDec 31, 20165 votes

No it's not. I wouldn't ever expect it to be balanced. However the way to appropriately balance the game isn't by outright removing player identity in favor of champion/role identity. This is EXACTLY what world of warcraft did, and blizzard has been trying to clean up that mess for years!

Instead of providing tools, which are placed onto champions in ways which are cohesive and logical, they've instead opted to provide full package deals. Now you're not longer walking into a game with a list of tools to be used to achieve victory, now you're walking in with *insert champion name here*. If it doesn't solve the problem perfectly, then it's effectively useless.

GigglesODec 30, 20169 votes

"we would have nerfed lee months ago if we weren't worried about community backlash" ~riot

https://twitter.com/Calderweiss/status/484002615001243649

Oh yea, that was two years ago, they never gonna nerf his ass.

ScissorsNstuffDec 30, 20165 votes

The fact that people want ten bans could also mean that people don't know how to ban.

Are pro players even asking for this?

rtbf221651412Dec 30, 20167 votes

{quoted}

The fact that people want ten bans could also mean that people don't know how to ban.

Are pro players even asking for this?

And how many people are considered pro and how many people are in their actual rank now?

ScissorsNstuffDec 30, 20162 votes

depends, if you're a noob that thinks every challenger is another faker then theres quite a few

If you only count the freaks of gaming then there aren't that many

rtbf221651412Dec 30, 20162 votes

{quoted}

depends, if you're a noob that thinks every challenger is another faker then theres quite a few

If you only count the freaks of gaming then there aren't that many

Idk. I know some last season diamond players who went into silver this season.

Explain to me; where is the logic?

ScissorsNstuffDec 31, 20163 votes

what logic do you mean?

They attempted to switch to a ranked system far too serious for this game and its players. Because they got rid of dynamic queue, everything below the top 1% lost any meaning. Notice how even though they had problems like the one you mentioned that the names among the top dogs didn't really change much.

Dynamic queue = absolute fairness

absolute fairness = something people think they want not realizing they couldn't really handle it, kindof like women who pretend to want equal treatment then go run their mouth at a man not wanting to get their ass kicked like a grown man.

rtbf221651412Dec 31, 20163 votes

{quoted}

what logic do you mean?

They attempted to switch to a ranked system far too serious for this game and its players. Because they got rid of dynamic queue, everything below the top 1% lost any meaning. Notice how even though they had problems like the one you mentioned that the names among the top dogs didn't really change much.

Dynamic queue = absolute fairness

absolute fairness = something people think they want not realizing they couldn't really handle it, kindof like women who pretend to want equal treatment then go run their mouth at a man not wanting to get their ass kicked like a grown man.

I mean you can try to make excuses, but the fact is there are still those players in the ranks they shouldn't be.

ScissorsNstuffDec 31, 20162 votes

There's no excuse, I didn't attempt to get excuse or ask you to excuse anything.

You asked a question and I told you the answer. Whether you enjoy the truth or not is irrelevant.

There is nobody in a rank they aren't supposed to be in dynamic queue. In dynamic queue only the law of the jungle matters. If you are weak enough to lose to 4 players + a boosted animal then that's it, you fucking lose don't bullshit around. You simply were not strong enough. End of story. The boosted animal had a position among stronger players, and you did not, that is your own fault and you deserved to lose to the fucking boosted animal. There is no excuse for your failure, either get good or lose again.

Dynamic queue is not necessarily appropriate for a game that is meant to be fun. That's more for something like hyper competitive E-sports.

rtbf221651412Dec 31, 20164 votes

{quoted}

There's no excuse, I didn't attempt to get excuse

Then what was the point of bringing it up to excuse bans being only for pros? You say diamond and plat players are not considered 'pro'? You did make an excuse. You can keep denying it. Doesn't mean I will respond anymore.

ScissorsNstuffDec 31, 20162 votes

The point is that the idea doesn't seem to be supported by high level players. You asked who's a pro, so I told you. There's no excuse there. Who is asking for 10 bans? It doesn't seem to be the pros at all. Are there any pros asking for this even?

Its not a hard or unfair question. It really doesn't matter who I think is a pro but I'll talk about it if you want to ask unimportant questions. What does matter is why you think that the ten bans is actually necessary, who actually supports it, and why I should listen to them.

What also matters is that players whining does not prove that riot has done a bad job. This also isn't excuse, this is a complete rejection of a false claim

ZuilDec 30, 20161 votes

The 10 bans I think is more of a pug idea, since the pro scene has comms and way more strategy than the standard pug which makes facing these problem champions a bit easier IMO.

ScissorsNstuffDec 30, 20164 votes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rN49srKasy4

PN JansenDec 31, 20161 votes

Nice

SmileInABoxDec 31, 20165 votes

Or it means that there are over 100 champs in the game from various times and various design philosophies all of which have to interact with each other in a fair way. But why think about this shit when we can just be negative right?

deadlychuckDec 31, 20167 votes

Yeah, except they go out of their way to make the new philosophy massively overshadow the old one, until they can take the least compatible designs (to the current philosophy mind you) to the chopping block and effectively remove the champion from the game.

Sadly the current philosophy seems to be one of extreme champion and role identity, at the cost of player identity. Instead of providing tools, which are placed onto champions in ways which are cohesive and logical, they've instead opted to provide full package deals. Now you're not longer walking into a game with a list of tools to be used to achieve victory, now you're walking in with *insert champion name here*. If it doesn't solve the problem perfectly, then it's near fucking useless.

WoonStruckDec 31, 20164 votes

Gee, its almost like the same could be said for DotA, which is a much better balanced game.

SmileInABoxDec 31, 20161 votes

Why are you here? Leave if you don't like the game.

WoonStruckDec 31, 20164 votes

What a cop-out response.

I enjoy League overall. It doesn't mean the balance team isn't horrible at their job.

SmileInABoxDec 31, 20161 votes

I'm sincerely sorry that positivity, and not being a negative asshole, constitutes a cop out response to you.

WoonStruckDec 31, 20164 votes

Telling me to go play another game is positive and isn't being a negative asshole?

Riot's been failing on this front for the past 4 years. A lot of players are negative about it for a reason. Telling them to leave makes you the asshole, sorry to inform you.

SmileInABoxDec 31, 20161 votes

I told you to leave if you don't like it. I'm sick of you negative assholes winging constantly any time someone tries to put a word in for riot. I don't give a shit whether Dota 2 is arguably more balanced, you people act like you know the first thing about designing a game when you can't even comprehend how difficult it is to do and don't understand that Dota and League are two completely different beasts. This negativity y'all pump out is so goddamn pointless.

WoonStruckDec 31, 20164 votes

Actually, League is simpler overall to balance; there are much fewer factors than in DotA.

The fact that Riot is failing on the level that they are compared to their past history (first 3 years vs last 4 years) is pathetic, honestly. That's why people are upset.

The more experience they get, the less balanced the game becomes. Its laughable.

Nobody cares if you're sick of people complaining about balance and correcting anyone that thinks Riot's doing a good job.

People want the game to be enjoyable, and anywhere past silver its not at the moment.

People aren't going to give up on a game they've enjoyed just because of a rough patch. If you don't want to see the negativity, GET OFF THE FORUMS.

Forums are there for criticism and discussion. That's why they exist. Coming here and expecting otherwise is foolish.

SmileInABoxDec 31, 20161 votes

You can't fuckin call your whining any sort of legit criticizism. You aren't offering anything constructive, all you're doing is slinging around insults

WoonStruckDec 31, 20161 votes

Actually, look around and you'll see that I offer plenty of constructive criticism.

I responded to your post because it was incorrect. Number of champions is irrelevant because they are supposed to be tuned relative to each other. You took that as an insult to Riot, for some reason.

Besides, you're just as bad. Instead of asking for my suggestions or why I feel that way, you told me to leave. Lol

Pretending/hoping the problems will disappear is probably the worst thing you can do.

LeetriDec 31, 20161 votes

Isn't Dota balanced only for competitive play? Omniknight has had a ~60% winrate for ages, and Pudge has both a higher win rate and play rate than Lee Sin. Had League been balanced for pro play only Master Yi would sit with a 70% win rate in Bronze.

WoonStruckDec 31, 20163 votes

Yes, it is. But they have a standard they balance by, unlike League.

Riot can't seem to make up their minds about whether they want the game balanced around the most casual players or the most competitive.

They keep using variable data to determine balance state and the wrong adjustments to try to tune it.

Yi shouldn't be balanced around Bronze. Doing so means he essentially is not a champion above Bronze. If the worst of League's players are objectively bad at the game, why would you balance the game around them?

Either way, my point was that the number of champions is irrelevant to balance. Not that DotA's balance tactic is better for League. League had a decent one, but they decided to stop using it in favor of 'niches', which is causing the game to fail from a balance standpoint.

LeetriDec 31, 20161 votes

Yi is too binary to be strong in higher levels of play. He only brings damage and relies on getting fed and stomping games. If they balance Yi to be viable in Challenger games he's going to absolutely destroy Bronze. And like it or not, but the vast majority of all players are Bronze and low Silver. So either you make Yi so strong that ~81.84% (Bronze and Silver) of the community can't deal with him or you leave him useless for 0.97% (Diamond+) of the community. The community already gets super upset any time Riot does anything for the 1%, how do you think they'd react if they balanced everything around them?

WoonStruckDec 31, 20161 votes

If something is too binary to be allowed to be effective past silver, it shows that there are design flaws that should be fixed via a rework of some degree.

However, Riot refuses to fix him for the same reason they refuse to fix champs like Tryndamere. So, again, it comes down to Riot poorly managing the game's balance.

LeetriDec 31, 20161 votes

Yi and Tryndamere were designed like 8 years ago, they're relics of the past and they'd have to be drastically changed to be viable. But then everyone will complain that "it's not the same champion, they're ruined", and to some extent they would be right. You'd have to make 2 new champions and slap the old names on them, like how they did with Sion. They don't have unlimited resources or developers, so they have to prioritize who gets reworked. Warwick is most likely reworked before January is over, and then I forgot who was next but I believe it was Urgot. After that they have the Divers, which might include Tryndamere and Yi actually.

WoonStruckDec 31, 20161 votes

There's a lot more than that.

Warwick, Galio, Urgot, Teemo, Divers, Eve, Akali, Irelia, Kayle/Morg, Ryze's seasonal rework, Pantheon, and I believe Nunu were already all cited. I don't remember Tryn or Yi being officially slated, but I think they wanted to get to Tryn eventually. No word on Yi, IIRC.

It'll be a really long time before they hit Yi or Tryn with a rework, most likely.

Also, next roster update was confirmed to be Vanguards on stream, which may include Nunu and Galio.

GeauxxDec 30, 20163 votes

Ban those champions and more OP champions will appear, so who cares. either way, just add more bans till urgot becomes OP then what?

CowseedDec 31, 20163 votes

Then they ask for Urgot nerfs. Then they just continue the cycle of asking for nerfs for every champion until each champion is identical and a walking stickman.

GeauxxDec 31, 20162 votes

Stickman too OP, nerf.

Professor WardDec 30, 20163 votes

not always true, i ban leona on most occasions. And it has nothing to do with the state of her balance, it has to do with me playing champs who do poorly against her.

You also have to realize first, that 2 players are currently left without bans. And second, that league has far surpassed 100 champions.(123 if i remember correctly) Its tough to say that 3 bans are enough to cover all problems.

RocketRelmDec 31, 20161 votes

Yeah, tbh, I don't super care either way in terms of 6 or 10 bans, but I think 10 would be nice simply and purely because it means everyone would get a ban 100% of the time.

Gregor GysiDec 30, 20163 votes

Alternative interpretation: the state of balance is so good, that champions are so close to each other in terms of strength that here are no few outliers but rather many strong champions that are not objectively super OP.

WoonStruckDec 31, 20164 votes

Except the bottom 60% essentially automatically loses to the top 20%, barring extreme differences in skill/familiarity.

That's not close; that's the majority being outside of the median. That means the game is terribly balanced.

Gregor GysiDec 31, 20161 votes

52% - 49% winrate. That's the difference in winrate between top 20% and top 60%. You are exaggerating and wrong.

WoonStruckDec 31, 20163 votes

Support: 59% - 40%

ADC: 53% - 45%

Mid: 55% - 43%

Jungle: 55% - 40%

Top: 55% - 42%

Yeah, sure I'm the one that's wrong lol.

Gregor GysiDec 31, 20161 votes

Top 20% vs top 60% I thought?

WoonStruckDec 31, 20161 votes

Bottom 60% vs top 20%.

Gregor GysiDec 31, 20161 votes

So.. Top 40% ?! I am not a native speaker and I really don't understand what bottom 60% is supposed to mean.

Titanium70Dec 31, 20162 votes

Not necessarily. At some point you just want to ban that certain percentage of the roaster that counters you, your team or your strategy. Champions can be as unique as they want - finally they'll all fullfill a limited set of roles. I.E. Healer. If you want a poke comp, you have to ban them.

And at 134 Champ we will have more healers in the roster as at 60. That's why a increase of bans is only natural as the roaster grows bigger and I have no understanding why we still sitting at 3.

Sadly the current state of game doesnt really allow startegy bans. The differences between the Top 20 and Flop 20 of all Champions are... sobering... And people are angry because of that.

WoonStruckDec 31, 20167 votes

More like the difference between the top 20 and the bottom 100.

More from Gameplay

3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.

GameplayJul 18, 2015764 comments

3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.

GameplaySep 1, 2015156 comments

GameplayApr 1, 2016606 comments

GameplayDec 21, 2014456 comments

3 Refunds per season, up vote if you want 3 refunds per season.

GameplaySep 17, 2015114 comments

When is ANYONE at riot going to address the awful new player experience?

GameplayNov 30, 2014634 comments

More by Zuil

Majority of people HATE going against premades

GameplayJun 28, 2016151 comments

GIVE JUNGLERS A WARNING WHEN THEY DONT HAVE SMITE SELECTED

GameplayJul 15, 201685 comments

Blah blah blah Diversity

GameplayMar 14, 2016140 comments

Thinking of playing AP Miss Fortune?

GameplayOct 22, 201696 comments

10 bans wouldn't open any doors to banning.

GameplayFeb 6, 2016105 comments

Kennen ADC in LCS

GameplayOct 11, 201582 comments