The 10-champ ban system is coming but....

Chimp Joker·May 19, 2017·20 votes·1,060 views

"So, why aren’t we implementing the esports format in solo or flex? It pretty much comes down to the needs of a team of organized players being very different from individual players placed on a matchmade team. In organized play, having some knowledge of your opponents’ strategy means you can pivot your pick and ban phases to specifically target weaker players or home in on a small champion pool."

I have no problems that it will be simultaneous, as in everyone gets to ban at the same time. I'm also okay with our bans being hidden from the enemy team until the banning phase is over. This is fine......But the main issue I'm having a hard time understanding right now is why are these bans "duplicated?" Oh my god I can see it now in my low elo games. My team including myself bans

The other team will probably ban like three of these champs. And this shit will continue on and on.

34 Comments

Jinzo TorranceMay 19, 20179 votes

200% Banrate Yasuo

Chimp JokerMay 20, 20172 votes

Looking forward to it.

xWatersMay 20, 20177 votes

Simply, Riot lied. This isn't 10 bans, and it needs to be fixed.

Titanium70May 20, 20175 votes

It's completly understandable and definitely good that they didn't use the LCS-System.

The LCS-Bans would be a HARSH punishment for everyone who does not own all Champions and those who get matched with them because at some point not to high in the lader the LCS-Bans would gave a team that performs good swaps ALOT advantage in term of pure winratios, which is bad for SoloQ.

HOWEVER: The "Hey, look, here're your 10 Bans" (But you wont be able to ban 10 different Champions EVER)* - is such a terrible idea, a huge middle finger to all the people who asked for it based on logical arguments - just to prevent their poster-boys of toxicity from reaching 100-Banratio! (That's litterally the entire justification - nothing else!)

With this trash they effectively reduced the Bans in High-Elo from 6 to 5! (A little overexaggerated - blue team can ban something else due to FP.) I really hope the real high elo guys will notice how bad this is and get riot to reconsider - and no you wont use LCS-Ban Dia 1 upwards!

**Blind Ban in Ranked... is it just me or are the others the crazy ones... wow! **

LuggMay 19, 20174 votes

The great thing about the 10 bans is that it will FORCE Riot to actually nerf or fix OP and broken champions since they will be perma-banned until they do. Plus it will make them do it quickly.

Illâoi Evê SiônMay 19, 201713 votes

Yeah, but they're trying to avoid that by allowing bans to be duplicated.

LuggMay 19, 20171 votes

I still think the major offenders will be banned enough to make rito fix them.

Weasel KenseiMay 19, 20172 votes

Thats just it... Thats their underhanded double back psychological plan.

At least some people will ban the same bans they do now, not knowing if the enemy team banned X champ means you have too. In a match where someone sees Fizz banned, they may ban Yasuo, in a match where they see Yasuo banned they ban Fizz. Not seeing the enemy bans, they both ban Fizz... Yasuo goes unbanned.

This allowing duplication bans means that while we are getting 4 more bans, the chances are that we could in some cases ban less champs form a match than the 6 we have now. Hows that "Major offenders will be banned enough" theory sounding now?

LuggMay 20, 20171 votes

I think the really broken and OP champs will be banned at least 90% of games. This alone should ensure they get nerfed/reworked.

You have to think of it like this, at least one person out of the 10 will nerf the most OP champ and then there will be at least 4 more banned since no two people on the same team can ban the same champion. Also, there will be a couple people who will ban champs that aren't the most popular since they know the top 5 will always be banned. So you will actually end up with 7 or more different bans most games.

Hope that makes sense.

Weasel KenseiMay 20, 20172 votes

Yeah it makes sense, and for the most part I think its a perfectly logical though process. The thing is, how often do you see people be logical with bans. I dont know what rank your playing at, but I know ever since the juggernaut update, some people have banned Darius ever since. Some people just check Best Bans website and ban the thing they have a chance of laning against.

I agree that 51% or greater matches will have around 7+ bans, up to 10. The problem is they said we were getting 10 bans, and were not. Were getting MAYBE 10 bans. Probably 7-8. In some sad cases 5.

My main disagreement with you is that THEY WILL NOT FIX CHAMPS BASED ON BAN RATES. They are making the bans this way so they dont have too. They want people to say, as you did, "there will be a couple people who will ban champs that aren't the most popular since they know the top 5 will always be banned" and then both teams do it and broken champs get left open. The way they see it, the champs that are banned all the time will still be banned all the time, and they wont have to deal with actually balancing the next 4 most BS champs.

Riot wants players wasting bans playing blind chicken with the other team of "Should I ban the 75% win rate champ, or count on the enemy team to do it? The time you count on the enemy team, they counted on you, now broken champ X is in the game... or theyre double banned and a ban is wasted. This is just a pile of shit for the player base they said was getting 10 bans and they dont want to have to rework all the permaban champs, thats all this is.

LuggMay 20, 20171 votes

I agree with most of your post. However, Riot has shown that they will nerf champs when their play rate or ban rate get too high.

Titanium70May 20, 20171 votes

We'll see - however if I had to bet I'd say the Banrates will stay the same or just slightly increase. The effective Bans the Not10-Ban Systems offers are not so much more than the current ones.

Let's say there are 3 Must Bans Fizz Lulu Ivern and no team intends to pick them:

Current: 3Musts - 2Free Bans for TeamA, 1for TeamB.
New: 3Musts - 2Free Bans for TeamA, 2Free Bans for TeamB.

=> That results into +1 Ban. BUT that Ban can also be a double/wasted Ban.

The only real achievment, and I don't really know about this being a good thing anyway. If you really hate one Champ you don't have to go on boards, you can simply ban him until the day you die... x'D

Fun Part - the more Riot Balance Teams screws up (serves us mustbans) the least number of Bans we will be able to use, going down from current 6 to 5 if there are 5 must bans at a time! NICE!

LuggMay 20, 20172 votes

There have always been at least 5 must bans, but you and I both know that there are always one or two people who do some stupid ban on a champion that isn't even relevant. At least with 10 bans the worst ones will always be banned.

VolphiMay 20, 20172 votes

[deleted]

LuggMay 20, 20171 votes

OP/broken champs are always counters. After those you ban counters to what you want to play.

VolphiMay 20, 20171 votes

[deleted]

LuggMay 21, 20171 votes

Let me just throw out one example: Ahri. She only has one champion that has a decent record against her and that's Vel'Koz with a 52.3% win rate. TF and Karth are barely 50% against her and all other champs have a losing record against her right now.

VolphiMay 21, 20171 votes

[deleted]

LuggMay 21, 20171 votes

When a champion has an even or winning rate against every champion but one, that's an obvious case where win rate is indeed the most important stat.

Riot evidently agrees since they have already announced that they will be nerfing her.

VolphiMay 21, 20171 votes

[deleted]

LuggMay 21, 20171 votes

I agree that win rate can be very deceptive. A highly mechanical champion can have a bad overall win rate, but still be OP. However, when a champion has a high overall win rate, it's a pretty sure sign that they are actually OP.

Try naming any meta since Ahri was released that she wasn't one of the top mids in the game. Hint, there hasn't been one.

NiceTryViMay 20, 20176 votes

Honestly, I don't give a shit if my ban is wasted if I never see another Lee Sin or Yasuo ever again. They make the game not fun to play and I want them GONE.

DunkinNoobsMay 19, 20173 votes

{quoted}

The great thing about the 10 bans is that it will FORCE Riot to actually nerf or fix ~~OP and broken champions~~ **assassins **since they will be perma-banned until they do. Plus it will make them do it quickly.

LuggMay 20, 20173 votes

The assassin rework was pretty much a complete failure. They didn't meet any of their goals since every champion (with the possible exception of Talon) ended up being even more toxic and OP after the reworks.

HaIlMonitorMay 21, 20171 votes

Lol that guy is a scrub. He plays top lane and loses to fighters non stop and wants assassins nerfed... LOL

Crede777May 19, 20173 votes

I really don't like it.

The only potential justification would be so players don't end up banning out an entire class or role. Especially since most players don't own all of the champs. Imagine if the first 2 players ban supports, so the rest ban supports. 10 support champion bans means there's very little choice left of who to play in that role.

Weasel KenseiMay 19, 20171 votes

You cant get people in this game to conspire to do anything. "What ifs" are what people do when theyre scared and dont have any evidence to suggest the thing theyre afraid of is realistic. "Better not be masturbating, what if God punishes you!?"

HaIlMonitorMay 21, 20171 votes

In ranked that could be a lot rougher then you think. If they banned out 10 adc's no everyone would own 12 or 13 if the enemy locks in MF or ashe support on the other team. Not likely at all but thousands of games are played a day and so it could happen a few times a day.

Weasel KenseiMay 22, 20171 votes

Youre proposing that both teams... YOUR TEAM, and THE ENEMY TEAM would conspire to ban champs form the same class? To what? So the team with first pick will have the advantage? Why would your team keep banning supports after the first 3 support bans?

This is just a dumb game of "what if." What if the air catches on fire? What if the Earth splits in two? What if somehow 4 idiots on your team conspire with the 5 people on the enemy team to ban 9 others supports... then you joined them. The number of times that would happen is really low... mostly because people dont coordinate bans very often, and rarely does a team devote 2 bans to support.

What if a homosexual albino werewolf ninja rapist sneaks into your house... well youre fucked, got a really exotic std, and you never saw it happen. What if...

anankeMay 19, 20171 votes

I guess it's unavoidable, like mirror matchups in Blind Pick. I can't really think of a way to change it, since they seem to want to keep the hidden bans thing (again, like in Blind Pick) because not allowing your opponent to ban what's already banned by your team is basically showing them the bans.

SpecterVonBarenMay 19, 20171 votes

No, the reason they're doing it like this is so it doesn't take forever to get through banning phase.

PhDs NutsMay 19, 20173 votes

{quoted}

No, the reason they're doing it like this is so it doesn't take forever to get through banning phase.

All they have to do is shorten the ban time by 5-10s per ban. Poof, problem solved. Letting bans be duplicated is the dumbest thing I've heard them do in a long time.

ErockandrollMay 19, 20171 votes

{quoted}

All they have to do is shorted the ban time by 5s per ban. Poof, problem solved. Letting bans be duplicated is the dumbest thing I've heard them do in a long time.

That would basically require you to have your ban ready. And if I had to adjust my ban intent because the enemy took that ban, I doubt most people could change that in 5 seconds. Either resulting in a dodge, (slowing down everything even further) or losing the ban. (Bringing us back to where we are now.)

PhDs NutsMay 19, 20171 votes

{quoted}

That would basically require you to have your ban ready. And if I had to adjust my ban intent because the enemy took that ban, I doubt most people could change that in 5 seconds. Either resulting in a dodge, (slowing down everything even further) or losing the ban. (Bringing us back to where we are now.)

I'm talking about leaving the ban phase as one ban at a time (like it is now), but reducing the time for each individual ban by 5-10 seconds.

That's just meant to squeeze out some more time for additional bans. Time could be shaved from champion pick times, too, if needed.