There should be a two week delay before new champions can be picked in ranked.

Gare Jordans·Oct 20, 2015·109 votes·2,173 views

I'm tired of having teammates pick a brand new champion that they have absolutely no clue how to play or build the champion.

EDIT: The feeding bronze and silver kindreds in ranked are downvoting me :^)

55 Comments

Deep Terror NamiOct 20, 201517 votes

Meanwhile in reality, it neither takes 2 weeks to get enough experience to be proficient with it nor are new champions the only ones that are brought into Ranked by a player with less than 2 weeks experience with it.

In other words, 2 weeks is an arbitrary requirement.

YumaS2AstralOct 20, 20153 votes

[{quoted}](name=Deep Terror Nami,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=AjwKwwu4,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2015-10-20T07:43:39.575+0000)

Meanwhile in reality, it neither takes 2 weeks to get enough experience to be proficient with it nor are new champions the only ones that are brought into Ranked by a player with less than 2 weeks experience with it.

In other words, 2 weeks is an arbitrary requirement.

but 1 week or 3 days would be very good, just enough.

For an experienced player, this is enough time to have a good understanding of the champion, even if this is not enough time to master him/her.

A bad player would probably make mistakes with any champion that they would use, new or old.

On Your SideOct 20, 20155 votes

There are players inexperienced with their Champion in almost every game. The only reason you notice it is because they're playing a Champion you're expecting them to be inexperienced with. This is a cognitive science called confirmation bias, look it up. It's not an element that should be prohibited in Ranked play because statistically speaking, the likelihood of your enemy team having such players are greater as long as you've mastered your own Champion (4 potential bad players vs 5 potential bad players).

It Hertz When IPOct 21, 20152 votes

Except that the odds that you will encounter an inexperienced player on a brand new champion are higher than on a champion that has been around. It's a mathematical system called statistics, look it up. Which also states via the gamblers fallacy that your skill with or mastery of a champion has NO effect on the probability that any specific player on your team is a bad player.

ChaoticPineconeOct 21, 20152 votes

How is it higher? Explain with your statistics that its higher. Because unless you have data that shows that inexperienced players tend to play new champions, your argument has no basis.

And the gamblers fallacy isnt implicated here. First of all, you stated it wrong - gamblers fallacy states that your experiences in one game will not have a greater effect in the next, given that the chances are independant. For example, getting 4 experienced players on your team in one game does not increase or decrease your chances on having 4 experienced players on your team in the next game. In any given game, you have 10 unknown variables - the skill of each player their champion. By removing 1 variable (playing a champion you are skilled with), you are more likely to have more experienced players on your team than the enemy team.

It Hertz When IPOct 21, 20151 votes

It's easy, compare the two variables being discussed assuming that your teammates are pulled in a truly randomized system from the available pool of players in your MMR range. For the first scenario, what percentage of that player population is skilled enough to attain average or greater competency with a new champion with less than two weeks to study and practice with them (keeping in mind the probability of someone else doing the same first and producing online guides or tips/tricks to reference)? Now the second scenario; what percentage of that player population possesses average or greater competency with ANY existing champion in the same class as the new champion?

Assuming an equal Poisson distribution of player skill without any bizarre outliers, the latter scenario will have a probability of 50%. Which means that for **YumaS2Astral's **statement (that players using new champions are more likely to be bad with them) to be invalid, the probability of the former scenario would have to be equal to or greater than 50%.

I don't have the exact numbers for the probability that a player without any external help could reach average or greater competency with a champion in less than two weeks. But for the tiers that comprise the overwhelming majority of the playerbase, I do NOT see that scenario as being particularly common.

Even if you compare the first scenario to the probability of a third scenario - a player who is skilled enough to attain average or greater competency with an old champion with less than two weeks to study and practice with them - the player with the new champion still suffers, as Player #3 has access to online guides, tutorials, and gameplay/build data accumulated over that champion's lifespan. Player #1 does not. The only time that the odds of Scenario #1 match Scenario #3 is if the player in question has either deliberately or unintentionally ignored or overlooked every piece of advice and help with regards to the old champion that they have just started playing.

And it is gambler's fallacy. Look at each individual player on a team as a separate event instead of each game as a separate event, and use the odds of getting a lousy player. Your skill level has no effect on the probability of each individual player on your team being skilled; if anything, since teams are matched against each other by the average MMR of all the team's players, if you are a skilled player then you are more likely to be paired with a bad player than if you were merely average (assuming individual MMR to be a generally accurate representation of skill).

ChaoticPineconeOct 21, 20152 votes

First of all, your variables are a bit off. Its not about achieving average or greater than average competency on a champion compared to your rank - its about achieving an average competency on a champion consistent with your competency with other champions. And what exactly is "competency"? Because the goal of the game is to win; if you describe competency as the ability to win, making sure you have average competency before playing ranked makes no sense if the average is based off of ranked game wins. For every win there is a loss. If everybody had "above average" winrates, then we would all be in Challenger.

And lets be honest here - of the population who decides to play a old-but-just-bought champion into ranked for the first time, do you really think they would put hours of research into the champ? Are the people who impulsively choose a champion for the first time in ranked the same people who will look up guides, tutorials, and gameplay/build data?

The gamblers fallacy requires an assumption that the probability of getting an X (in this case, player who is experienced with the champion they are playing) is consistent across the 10 players in game. And if this were true (and the team selection was random), then you would be right. But in every game there is one variable you can control - your own champion you chose. Its not 10 separate, random events; its one controllable event with 9 random events. Of course, this is an oversimplification since there are other considerations (like team comp, filling roles, counterpicks, bans, etc). But that doesnt change the fact that you can choose whether you want an X or a -X on your team by your own pick.

FFirebranddOct 21, 20151 votes

{quoted}

How is it higher? Explain with your statistics that its higher. Because unless you have data that shows that inexperienced players tend to play new champions, your argument has no basis.

I think you guys had a miscommunication.

I think Darien meant that You are more likely to run into a player inexperienced with their selected champion when they are playing a new champion.

That statement makes perfect sense. If someone picks a new champion on the 3rd day after the release, they can only have a absolute maximum of 72 hours experience with that champ, and lot less with sleep and life and such.

ChaoticPineconeOct 22, 20151 votes

I only responded because Darien was pompously saying that "its statistics". And I'm saying, "give me the stats then". Without any data or analysis, its hard to state "statistics" as the reason why players are inexperienced with newer champions compared to older champions. Especially for newer players who dont have a ton of champs.

And here is my problem with focusing on "experience" with a champion - Kindred does not have the lowest winrate. According to Champion.gg for plat+ games and Na.op.gg, Kindred has a higher winrate than Darius overall. "Experience" isnt everything

On Your SideOct 21, 20151 votes

By how large a percentage? You don't actually know. You just presume that percentage is large enough to warrant a complete ban, an assumption based on confirmation bias. An argument could be made that more mechanically challenging champions are less likely to perform well on release, but those champions also tend to perform worse overall in solo queue because their skill cap is higher (e.g. Lee Sin insec move vs Vi ult).

With simpler words, you said statistics but you're guessing. You don't know fuck all whether people actually perform worse on a release Champion, you assume and that assumption feeds into a stereotype that builds on every new release Champion. You could make all sort of arguments about why new release Champions are good or bad, like nobody knows how to play against them which also gives an advantage. But the statistics you claim to know? Do not exist.

In order for you to prove your claim, you need the actual numbers to demonstrate a problem. Because statistically speaking, both teams are equally affected by that Champion's release however negative or positive. If you think you lose more when you get a new release Champion on your team, then you win more as well when it gets picked by the enemy team. And again, you are the biggest difference in your win rate. Statistics go hand in hand with logic.

DrCyanideOct 20, 20154 votes

2 weeks is an arbitrary requirement.

That's not entirely true.

Patches roll out every 2 weeks. If a champion looks like it's OP (bad for the enemy team) or UP (bad for the ally team), then there's a follow-up patch to try and fix the problem.

Additionally, picking a new champion for the first time in ranked is far worse than picking an older champion for the first time in ranked. The older champion has many tried-and-true guides available, and chances are you've played against them at some point to know roughly what their combos are. A new champion has no tried-and-true guide, but rather an assortment of guides of unknown quality. Kindred already has 12 guides on Mobafire, many of which were written the first day and not updated as the player actually played more games with them.

Furthermore, the 2 week window gives at least a limited an opportunity for allies to learn how to play with the new champion before getting them on their team, and enemies a chance to learn how to play against them.

In short, there are many benefits from such a 2 week delay, while there are no benefits from allowing a champion to be allowed immediately in ranked.

ChaoticPineconeOct 21, 20152 votes

if you want your position to be taken seriously, you need to take the other position seriously and find if your position is maintainable. merely stating that "there are no benefits" is a poor argument.

There are many reasons why allowing a champ immediately in ranked is a good thing. For example, ADCs are similar enough in playstyle that if you can play most of them, you can probably play Kindred sufficiently as well from mechanics alone. Also, there is the "surprise factor" which can be beneficial. And it allows more champion diversity in picks and bans - its an extra pregame decision to ban out Kindred (even forcing the enemy team to waste a ban), to plan on picking Kindred, or gambling that there isnt an amazing enemy Kindred.

WookieJesuzOct 20, 20151 votes

At least 1 week tho

2yordles1cupcakeOct 20, 20156 votes

And how is that going to prevent people from playing other first time champs in rank?

Hayaishi2Oct 20, 20151 votes

{quoted}

And how is that going to prevent people from playing other first time champs in rank?

It's also in case the new champion has game breaking bugs.

KrigjerOct 21, 20151 votes

how is that going to prevent people from playing other first time champs in rank?

Not to mention that preventing them from playing a new release champ in ranked doesn't mean they're going to play normals just to play it.

They queue up, realize they can't select the new champion, go 'oh well' and continue queueing ranked until the new release champion is unlocked for that mode.

Daedalus871Oct 20, 20156 votes

Level 2 mastery required for any champion to be played in rank.

Best Ork EUOct 21, 20153 votes

It would be a good idea if the mastery system existed more than 6 months. For example I have more than 150 games with Jax but i haven't played him since the champion mastery system came out. We can argue that i should have experience with Jax in the current meta to play him in ranked but i assume mastery points are going to be carried over to next season in a possible new meta which would make the arguement invalid. I should be able to play a champion i think i'm comfortable with.

Kitten of EvilOct 21, 20151 votes

This is my problem. I hadn't played in awhile, so there are champions who I've used many times before, who I haven't got to level 2. Also I play a lot of ARAM which, while it isn't full SR, gives you at least some practice on mechanics... and doesn't add to mastery score.

Remlap1223Oct 21, 20152 votes

It will never be a good idea, because all it takes is that one guy who played since the beta, took off for a couple years, and then came back only to find that he can't play Jax in ranked because of some stupid arbitrary requirement, despite the fact that he was Diamond II in Season 2 with Jax jungle or some shit, but because the mastery points didn't accumulate, he has to arbitrarily play 4 matches before he can go into ranked. It will NEVER work.

3tysonOct 20, 20154 votes

But but but im lvl 5kindred

Ignis0Oct 20, 20151 votes

I'm almost there too only lvl 4 atm ;-;

CppLOct 20, 20152 votes

I think 2 weeks are to long.1 week would be enough.

MarthianOct 20, 20152 votes

It isn't just bronze and silver kindreds, it's also gold and higher kindreds. Heck, some of the Silver players might as well be gold (in my experience, there's a big skill gap between Silver 3 and Silver 2.)

Repeat of previous posts: This is ONLY an issue in lower elos. In higher elos, people are competent enough to quickly learn a champion, quickly theory craft a good build, and have tools to learn more about a champion fast. (Similar reason why requiring r5 champion mastery with a champion in order to play ranked with them is stupid: It's only an issue in the lowest elos.)

xSleepyOct 20, 20151 votes

i don't play kindred and i'm bronze and i downvoted the op for this reason

IntakiNineOct 21, 20151 votes

Counterpoint: at higher mmr you will not quickly accumulate the experience you need to thrive on a new champion when playing against an equally skilled opponent who has played their champion for weeks (if not months).

It also really doesn't help that so many Kindred players don't know how to jungle with a squishy champion, nor did they pay attention to the repeated warnings in the spotlight video about not invading for marks alone.

MarthianOct 21, 20151 votes

you seriously under-estimate how fast higher mmr players can learn a new champion. Your point works the opposite way too: the enemy wouldn't have enough experience playing against the new champion. (When I did ranked a lot, people would frequently take new champions into ranked games and do very well with them, and the ones that don't it's pretty obvious what they did wrong and how it could have been avoided. That also applies to people taking an old champion into ranked and have never played a game with them.)

Also not knowing how to jungle with a squishy champion or learning when (not) to invade aren't new champion issues. Those are player skill/knowledge issues. They have the highest starting armor stat out of EVERY ranged champion, their W gives plenty of sustain, Ranger's Trailblazer is frequently recommended (and lets them jungle for basically forever), and Kindred isn't the first squishy jungler. If you don't have vision on the area you are attempting to invade and/or have not seen the jungler recently, best bet is to focus elsewhere. She isn't the only counter-jungle champion either.

IntakiNineOct 21, 20151 votes

Learning to play against a champion is not nearly as time-intensive as learning to play as one. There is an entire factor of muscle memory and unconscious mannerisms that separate someone who has just picked up a champ from someone who is playing them for the 500th time.

Diamond+ players can probably reach standard proficiency in a few days to a week of regular play (assuming a couple hours of play each day). Below that, basic proficiency takes longer and mastery is all but out of the question.

xSleepyOct 20, 20152 votes

how about instead of telling people they shouldn't be able to play champions in ranked, you just avoid ranked when new champions come out or, you know, ban them

Gare JordansOct 20, 20152 votes

And waste a ban that should have been used for a powerful, popular champion that could potentially snowball a game and carry?

xSleepyOct 20, 20151 votes

the nature of bans evolves with the patches. banning new champs so you don't have to deal with them forces you to deal with the old ops that have been banned thus far, or leaving the new champ open forces you to deal with the new things and learn counterplay for the new champs. it's a shame that you've had to deal with a couple kindred's feeding on your side, but just cause my adc isn't a very good player doesn't mean tristana should be banned from ranked until everyone can play her well

Gare JordansOct 20, 20151 votes

Tristana is not a brand new champion, so your teammates and you would know how play with her. Brand new champions don't have this luxury.

xSleepyOct 20, 20151 votes

just cause she's not brand new doesn't mean everyone knows how to play around her or play as her. i bet most players at our elo don't even know how to play around bard, hell i bet most players even above our elo don't know how to play around yorick. if you aren't prepared to face something new when you get into ranked, don't play ranked. things change every day: new builds are invented, patches change the effectiveness of certain champions, someone decides to take a champion into a new lane. if people aren't trying new things, like new champs, the meta doesn't change, and everything is boring.

ModAttysu The PoroOct 21, 20151 votes

The point is, why have a brand new champ that no one knows how to coordinate/work with, be able to be picked day 1 of released in ranked. It also makes playing against a new champ unfun cause they're either OP as shit or so boring/trolly (AKA Bard)

Red RyuOct 20, 20151 votes

[{quoted}](name=Gare Jordans,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=AjwKwwu4,comment-id=00080000,timestamp=2015-10-20T20:58:26.787+0000)

And waste a ban that should have been used for a powerful, popular champion that could potentially snowball a game and carry?

http://champion.gg/statistics/#?roleSort=Jungle&sortBy=general.banRate&order=descend

Is this because Kindred is new? or because Kindred is worth more of a ban?

Gare JordansOct 20, 20151 votes

Because she's new. She has a 46% win rate when she's picked. Right now she's being banned to stop the retardation of teammates picking her and feeding, not because she's overpowered.

TurquoiseYoshiOct 20, 20152 votes

Or make it so that you need Level 2 mastery to play a champion in ranked.

#DownWithFirstTimers

Slamurai JackOct 20, 20151 votes

How are we going to find out how strong a new champ is if theyre banned from ranked the first 2 weeks? What if they're released insanely OP? You're basically giving them an extra 2 weeks to run amok and an extra 2 weeks for everyone to learn how to play that OP champ and take it into ranked.

DorkunedAurasOct 20, 20151 votes

uhhh, normals exist. If anything, riot can study the normals and quickly figure it out and throw out a nerf before they get into ranked.

Slamurai JackOct 20, 20151 votes

Do you honestly think you're going to get worthwhile data from normal games? Players of massively different skill levels are playing against each other, most people aren't tryharding, and both teams can (and almost certainly will) have the new champion. That data is basically worthless.

DorkunedAurasOct 20, 20152 votes

there is a such thing as MMR based matchmaking in normals as well, so those giant variances you speak of are untrue.
People still try to win certainly, you make it sound like 80% of people don't give a crap.
Normal draft is also a thing. Functionally identical to ranked, just without the ranked part. A lot of people play it. You think Normals are only blind.

You didn't have to use such aggressive language in destroying my idea as well, especially since you have a lot of misconceptions in there.

stealthfox94Oct 21, 20151 votes

agreed in one game someone went bruiser Kindred mid.

KatCraftOct 21, 20151 votes

Its not that bad actually.

KyronOct 21, 20151 votes

time isn't the best delineation

i just posted about this for same reasons and got flamed.. because... yeah...

there should be minimum games played per character before being able to be picked in a ranked match...

UBcrawlinOct 21, 20151 votes

It's just as bad that only people who pick that champion up have had any exposure to that champion and interaction with that champion. Basically, if someone gets good at a new champion really quickly people have no fucking clue how to play against it. Quite literally like having a secret weapon. They're forced to guess at damage output, cooldowns, what abilities do, etc. etc.

CrossetteOct 21, 20151 votes

I'm tired of Kindred's 70% slow at level 1 already.

Worst part is, they ganked while I was fighting a fucking Nasus. I almost rage quit that game because of the stupidity of their slow combined with wither and their 3-hit proc.

We lost. go figure.