Why are some against 5 bans per team?

Glîtchy·Mar 26, 2017·41 votes·3,590 views

On various forums, I've seen people object to 5 bans per team, you ask me, I think it's fine, I mean10 champs banned only removes 1/13 of the ENTIRE roster, so what's the big problem?

135 Comments

Solo JoshMar 26, 201747 votes

[deleted]

SirΤeemοMar 26, 201710 votes

or riven mains.. or zed or all 3 together

TheSingularityMar 26, 20177 votes

Caitlyn Ekko Fiora Fizz Graves LeeSin MasterYi Riven Teemo Yasuo

Will likely never see the light of day. Only a few are inherently strong atm. The rest are just irritating (personally wouldn't ban teemo, but I frequently see top lane people bannin him more than quinn)

AirKingNeoMar 26, 20174 votes

Yea, cause wasting bans on Fizz, Ekko, and Teemo is such a great idea. Saved me from Lulu and Ivern.

TheSingularityMar 27, 20177 votes

People in low elo will not ban smartly. They will ban what pisses them off.

Personally I ban graves every game. These 10 were based purely on what I assume some players dislike going against

logic301Mar 27, 20172 votes

As a bronzie, i can vouch for that lmao

junglerboy16Mar 27, 20174 votes

The thing is, at least in low elo, having an enemy who tilts you is worse for your chances of winning than having a champ that is considered broken, because most of the time the broken champs require more skill to use than the other players in your games can pull off.

For instance, if Teemo tilts you, but Lee is broken when played right, banning teemo is better because you playing tilted is worse than the chance of the enemy team having a good Lee.

KnoyleMar 27, 20172 votes

There are no good iverns down here. I haven't even seen one in Bronze in weeks. Besides Lulu's a support. We only ban snowbally af high damage carry annoying bullshit here sir.

SirΤeemοMar 27, 20172 votes

teemo is strong at the moment? at lethality meta? where vayne can 1 shot him ?
LOL

Dr PoroMar 26, 201714 votes

This is my Ban Flow chart: Is Yasuo banned? No --> Ban Yasuo Yes --> Ban random champion

logic301Mar 27, 20172 votes

same lol XD

Hyrum GraffMar 26, 20173 votes

[{quoted}](name=Solo Josh,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=A2xnLfX6,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2017-03-26T16:59:07.506+0000)

Those people are Yasuo mains. Because if there were ten bans per game, would be banned out of courtesy, rather than strategy.

I already do that.

KeevalroyMar 26, 201741 votes

A few reasons:

They have no patience and couldn't stand the idea of waiting a few more seconds for the game to start. My suggestion to them is to go back to CoD where they belong.
They're trash players and can only win abusing broken bullshit, so adding more ban options creates a direct threat to their win/loss ratio.
If enough of the broken or just plain overpowered champions are banned, that means there's now room to ban the toxic champions who may be balanced, but aren't healthy in the slightest bit; those who main Yasuo, Lee, Zed, Kalista, etc. will suffer. Personally, I can't wait.
Meta slaves who only recognize a handful of champions as usable won't know how to respond to the hypothetical situation where they all get banned. They're now stuck, unsure of how to proceed, and that's a good thing. It forces people to expand their pools beyond blindly copying pros.
And finally, there's the fact that with extra bans, you would need more champions owned, impacting new players, and again, that's a good thing. There are over 130 champions in the game...wouldn't you think these fresh players should have a little more experience before trying to rush into ranked? You need to play more to grind enough IP to unlock enough champions, which translates to experience playing with, against, and as these champions, how they build, how they feel, and how well they can make them work for them to have a better understanding of the game.
There's also the other side of the playerbase where the smurf spammers are now required to own more champs and they're getting pissy about it.

paisyMar 26, 20172 votes

Zed isn't healthy?

KeevalroyMar 26, 20178 votes

Being balanced and being healthy are two different things - you can be one and not the other.

I'll start by saying I've never seen Zed as a healthy design. Here's a practically resourceless, waveclearing, hypermobile assassin with built in executes just in case he might miss a last hit despite being AD and naturally having an easier time farming, and "oops" buttons just in case he makes a mistake initiating. Take those aspects of his kit, and add extra AD for no reason, an AoE slow on a low cooldown ability that can essentially be used 2-3 times at once, and the ability to completely zone his opponents from farm at range since he has no reliance on mana and doesn't need to worry about resource management, and you have a pretty unhealthy champion. He's far from the worst nowadays, (which says a lot about Riot's lack of care in terms of game health) but taking a problem champ and introducing a bigger problem champ doesn't fix the original problem - it just becomes less noticeable.

NineTailedMysticMar 27, 20176 votes

I'd say Zed is the healthiest Assassin overall tbh, pre and post rework just because his kit inherently has the attached delay they tried to give the other Assassins. He's not the epitome of health or anything but def the best of the Assassins.

AmazoXMar 27, 20172 votes

Suprisingly I agree & find Zed the most healthy & satisfying assassin to face believe it or not after Armor Penetration change into Lethality.

InTheoryMar 26, 201729 votes

[deleted]

GlîtchyMar 26, 20175 votes

{quoted}

It's those players that absolutely KNOW that THEIR main will be perma banned from then on.

Well if they rely on an op champ like Talon or Rengar that's their problem

5000000000000000Mar 26, 20177 votes

Ban is usually due to perceived frustration than actual power, though. Not gonna argue those two specifically aren't broken (mostly because I don't know enough to argue for or against it), but 10 bans will most likely result in permabanning champions who are frustrating to deal against, such as Yasuo, Riven, or Lee Sin, with 3~4 actual OP picks.

Sraeg2013Mar 26, 20177 votes

I couldn't care less about the number of bans.

What irks me is getting first pick in Solo Q and having literally zero benefits.

Like, last picks get to pick their champion, have next to no chance of getting countered and on top of that they are the ones who decide which champions are getting banned.

DarkRitualMar 26, 20172 votes

You get a priority pick. Unfortunately, that means basically nothing in solo queue.

FaustavianMar 26, 20172 votes

Actually, a lot of first pick players are extremely happy when champ/champ reworks are first released

NineTailedMysticMar 27, 20172 votes

If I could FP every game that'd be great honestly. No chance of my pick being picked.

Daedric EtwahlMar 27, 20172 votes

As a Bronze Sona main I really don't mind being first pick at all. Yeah I might get counterpicked by the likes of Blitzcrank Thresh Leona but on the other hand it ensures that my most comfortable pick isn't taken away from me

Plus Blitz is banned pretty regularly down here anyways and I don't see Leona a whole lot, so really Thresh tends to be the only real issue

Sraeg2013Mar 26, 20172 votes

Which in my case is another reason to dislike being first pick.

I stick to my pool of champions which basically weren't pick/ban champions for as long as I play, so having an early pick only opens me to getting countered. Nothing more.

General Esdeath Mar 26, 20176 votes

Because they're FOTM players

Or Bronze Yasuo mains

FaustavianMar 26, 20176 votes

Because first you have to get out the obnoxious champions that are FoTM for a severely unfun reason, then you actually have the strategic bans, in which you ban the champions that countered your team. People at the moment only ban the most broken of the patch, or the most unfun to play against, instead of the original reason for banning, which was indeed for strategical picks.

People are against it because they feel that a lot of the high playrate champions would be banned, and most of them probably play those champions

SlaktarTaskenMar 27, 20175 votes

Adding more bans to the game is one of Riots redeeming efforts. FoTM and cancer abuser can cry all they want, because now they won't as easely be able to dip into their busted as fuck champion pool. Your tears are fucking DAAAARLICIOUS!

AmazoXMar 27, 20174 votes

It's not just them, It's also One trick ponies.

Mojihito666Mar 27, 20175 votes

Cause they play Yasuo

CochoMar 26, 20173 votes

People want 10 bans just so they can ban as much 'op' champs as possible.

10 bans in competitive is alot different than 10 bans in solo queue. I heard they were going to make it so that the bans are all up-front, before the picks. I wouldn't like this because item 3070 Katarina ~~lol. I'm not biased at all.~~ Theres some strategy behind making another 2 bans after the 1st 3 people pick. This way team will talk in champ select and have certain roles/champs picked 1st. Then banning certain champs in the leftover roles. I have other champs, but not being able to play kat period would lead me to playing less.

#I'm not against 10 bans. I'm against not having the bans and picks cycle. ~~oh and Kat bans.~~

#EDIT: ITS FUNNY THAT IM RIGHT BUT PEOPLE WANT TO BAN ~~MY KAT~~ OTHER OP PICKS MINDLESSLY SO IM BEING DOWNVOTED. WHO NEEDS STRATEGY IMPLEMENTED WHEN WE CAN JUST BAN MINDLESSLY CHAMPS WE HATE

GlîtchyMar 26, 201713 votes

{quoted}

People want 10 bans just so they can ban as much 'op' champs as possible.

10 bans in competitive is alot different than 10 bans in solo queue. I heard they were going to make it so that the bans are all up-front, before the picks. I wouldn't like this because ~~lol. I'm not biased at all.~~ Theres some strategy behind making another 2 bans after the 1st 3 people pick. This way team will talk in champ select and have certain roles/champs picked 1st. Then banning certain champs in the leftover roles. I have other champs, but not being able to play kat period would lead me to playing less.

#I'm not against 10 bans. I'm against not having the bans and picks cycle. ~~oh and Kat bans.~~

Perma banned katarina? That sounds like heaven!!

[slayer-pantheon-thumbs]

CochoMar 26, 20177 votes

feelsbad when riot reworks your champ and she becomes permabanned

General Esdeath Mar 26, 20172 votes

Or you know, I want to ban a champ I find annoying/counters the team comp we're building

CochoMar 26, 20172 votes

The 2nd cycle of bans would help that.

Like if your 1st 3 picks are all ad, you'd want to ban a tank like maokai or malphite.

You can't really do that if all the bans are at the start. Your team might change their hovered pick, or not even have one to start off with.

PhDs NutsMar 26, 20172 votes

{quoted}

People want 10 bans just so they can ban as much 'op' champs as possible.

10 bans in competitive is alot different than 10 bans in solo queue. I heard they were going to make it so that the bans are all up-front, before the picks. I wouldn't like this because ~~lol. I'm not biased at all.~~ Theres some strategy behind making another 2 bans after the 1st 3 people pick. This way team will talk in champ select and have certain roles/champs picked 1st. Then banning certain champs in the leftover roles. I have other champs, but not being able to play kat period would lead me to playing less.

#I'm not against 10 bans. I'm against not having the bans and picks cycle. ~~oh and Kat bans.~~

10 bans for OP champs in soloQ functions the same way as 10 bans in competitive. The only difference is which champs are OP because of who's playing them.

DunkinNoobsMar 26, 20172 votes

{quoted}

10 bans for OP champs in soloQ functions the same way as 10 bans in competitive. The only difference is which champs are OP because of who's playing them.

They don't. Solo Q bans what annoys them first and what's actually OP second. Competitive actually bans broken champs.

AmazoXMar 27, 20172 votes

And also play Camille support several times soon after she was released yet Yorick rework has never been picked. LOL

MaddmazzMar 26, 20173 votes

Because who want's to be forced to play a balanced champ? How are they going to mastery spam after getting killed over and over on a normal champ? That's no fun.

BisaknospMar 27, 20173 votes

all metasluts and yasuo mains

Yuta KatsuMar 28, 20173 votes

10 Bans, Please. Hurry.

JedenVojakMar 26, 20172 votes

I think there should be no bans. People should have to face the things they fear most.

Chembaron YamadaMar 26, 20177 votes

In my opinion, the ban rate has some value for feedback for riot. If a champion is banned alot while not being op objectively, maybe the kit is too frustrating to play against.They will lose some feedback that way.
Without bans, there is more pressure on Riot to do hotfixes. If a champ is objectively too strong, people are able to ban him so the unbalanced champ doesn't have an impact on their games.

Argument for me against 5 bans per team: it would mean that every player has to own 20 champs instead of 16 to play ranked. I have enough and don't play ranked really, so I don't care. But I can imagine some people won't like that.

And A Real HieroMar 27, 20171 votes

They also could just increase the free roster.

Chembaron YamadaMar 27, 20172 votes

That alone wouldn't fix it. They would have to make the free roster available in ranked in the first place. Or did they change that? Don't really play ranked as I mentioned.

And the reason they don't let you pick the free rotation in ranked is because it would be kinda dumb if you are able to play ranked in one week but not in the next week because there are champions in the free rotation you already own and the sum isn't enough to get into ranked games.

GlîtchyMar 26, 20172 votes

{quoted}

I think there should be no bans. People should have to face the things they fear most.

But then it's hard to get feedback on who needs a rebalance, I normally see Shaco banned in about 30% of games I'm in, Darius in about 80%. Note that these 2 are VERY difficult to counter.

JedenVojakMar 26, 20172 votes

{quoted}

But then it's hard to get feedback on who needs a rebalance, I normally see banned in about 30% of games I'm in, in about 80%. Note that these 2 are VERY difficult to counter.

The problem is, bans actually do not give feedback on who needs a re-balance, they only give feed back on what the community on the whole doesn't want to fight against, which can be for any number of reasons; I think we can both admit that bandwagoning hate on champions is a pretty common thing for the game.

I don't know shaco well enough, but Lulu, Caitlyn, Heimerdinger are pretty strong against Darius as I recall.

Chembaron YamadaMar 27, 20173 votes

That is some kind of feedback. Everyone has champions he hates, that's not special, but if a champion gets banned by almost everyone without being objectively op.... That means there is something about that champion that the mass of players just doesn't want to face.

That in itself is feedback. Don't say it should lead to reworks for existing champions, it doesn't even have. But this feedback can be used in other ways, too. Like figuring out which mechanics are frustrating especially and this info can get used in champion development (like: what to avoid?).

KeevalroyMar 27, 20172 votes

Exactly. More ban slots means a higher probability of problem champions moving up to around 100% banned, forcing Riot to address them and figure out why people don't want to play against them.