If a champion's internal Riot data says it's win rate exceeds 60%, the champion should be disabled in Ranked until re-enabled by Riot. That way major balance problems won't majorly impact Ranked. Agree or disagree? EDIT: I don't mean personal win rate. If you have 80% win rate with someone, you can still play them. I mean when Skarner has a 65% win rate and is instantly banned every game.
TeemoJenkins1 votesWin Rate is a bad statistic when used by itself. You'd need a more complex algorithm than just Win Rate = Disabled.
FacerollKatarina1 votesBut having bullshit high win rates is a sign that something needs changing pronto
TeemoJenkins1 votesBut having bullshit high win rates is a sign that something needs changing pronto
I have an 80+% WR with Swain - better ban him... oh wait, it's because I played against Bronze players who didn't know what to do against me and I rick rolled them... when I got into Silver, people knew how to play and I started losing lane... but based on this logic, Ban Swain. Bullshit high win rates mean one thing and one thing only: Some players are winning with X champ.
What's the time frame on this? 1 hour period, 2? 24??? At what point do they disable champs for LOSING too much, obviously if they have a lower win rate they are a garbage pick and team mates shouldn't have to deal with that, amirite?!?! WR is a crap stat by itself.
FacerollKatarina1 votesYou aren't the only person in the community lol If a champion like skarner gets a huge rework and his win rate shoots up, you know he needs nerfing
Sakura Mirage1 votesYou aren't the only person in the community lol If a champion like skarner gets a huge rework and his win rate shoots up, you know he needs nerfing
Which he has got nerfing.
Penns1 votesHow about win rate times play rate = x and if x > [insert number that makes sense] ---> champ disabled in ranked Thats not really needed tho lol.
Meep Man1 votesI have an 80+% WR with Swain - better ban him... oh wait, it's because I played against Bronze players who didn't know what to do against me and I rick rolled them... when I got into Silver, people knew how to play and I started losing lane... but based on this logic, Ban Swain. Bullshit high win rates mean one thing and one thing only: Some players are winning with X champ.
What's the time frame on this? 1 hour period, 2? 24??? At what point do they disable champs for LOSING too much, obviously if they have a lower win rate they are a garbage pick and team mates shouldn't have to deal with that, amirite?!?! WR is a crap stat by itself.
No you misunderstand, I mean total win rate not personal. As in, if Skarner is winning 64% of his games, he is disabled in Ranked. Also, this has only happened 3 times in the time I have played League (Pre-5 WW, Skarner, maybe current Morde). If a champion is winning nearly 2/3rd of their games, they are going to be instantly banned anyway as well.
TeemoJenkins1 votes[{quoted}](name=Inept Maverick,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=EWR2rbYM,comment-id=0000000000000001,timestamp=2015-09-04T18:35:16.672+0000)
No you misunderstand, I mean total win rate not personal. As in, if Skarner is winning 64% of his games, he is disabled in Ranked.
You didn't answer the timeframe, what would it be? What MMR is this for? Are you solely using WR?
steelblacksky1 votesthought exercise:champion played by exactly one player during a patch cycle. said champion hits 60% winrate. suddenly restricted.
hells at various points things considered not ban worthy, massively underplayed have hit rates that high for the minority who mained them. would repeatedly bone such cases. furthermore abusable.
skarner is 97.25% Role Rate jungle pick. 55%+average winrate after a sample of 6626 games(5.16 cycle, champion.gg data). whats his overall when people choose him other places as well. for that matter how hard is it to smurf tank with said champion to lower the overall winrate? if the statistical sample is only hitting in the 4k games range for some champions by patch end thats a fair bit of time to get a statistically significant number of failures in, and some quadrants of the community are in fact the sort who would do so. just look at feedlfg for example of such extreme behaviour patterns in pursuit of basic ip gain, and their average game length targets ~7 minutes per.
such a system would need to be somewhat more intelligently designed to have a hope in hell of working or it would only help in the case of high pickrate high winrate all position champions, and would still need to delay until pickrate was high enough to not be able to skew the samples in a given unit time, or clamp far too early(ie with no wait time or lead time it would decide disable champ after two games played, two wins. clearly undesirable behaviour of such a system, so finding a safe/good/effective lead in sample count would be very very very important).