Boards›Gameplay

Why Forcing X Mastery on a Champion in Rank Will Not Work

Zeke Maelstorm·7/5/2017, 8:41:21 PM·9 votes·687 views

So Kayn is set to release in a patch or two and just like every new champion people will take him into ranked. Then the boards will be filled with complaints such as, "No new champions in ranked" or "You should have to have X champion mastery to take a champion into ranked". Now these complaints are legitmate, it sucks to lose a game when someone decides to first time a champion in ranked.

So why don't we disable the new champion in ranked for a patch or force a player to have X mastery with a champion? It is because neither would and achieve the desired results.

Disabling the new champion in ranked for a patch or two is not going to achieve the result of stopping people from first timing the champion in ranked. Simply put a lot of people play ranked only and they're not going to not play ranked to maybe play the new champion. They'll just wait a patch and then first time the champion. The problem isn't gone it's just delayed.

Alright so why won't forcing a certain mastery rank work. It boils down to the rank either having to be to low to matter or to high that it causes additional problems.

Let's start at the beginning, mastery 1, 2, and 3. These masteries are way to low to even matter. Playing one to twelve games on a champion is not enough to learn how to play a champion effectively, especially some of the more difficult ones.

Okay so why not just make it level 4 or higher? It takes roughly 24 or 42 games to achieve mastery 4 or 5 on a champion respectively. Now let me ask you a question, do you have the patience to get 3 or 4 champions to mastery 4 or 5 for the role you hate? Not likely however with this new restriction you still need 20 champions at mastery level 4 or 5. So most players will end up with a bunch of champions for their main roles at level 4 or 5 and maybe have 1 or 2 of their off roles at level four or five but not likely, especially players who just hit 30. So what happens when they get autofilled? Best case scenario they dodge or worst case scenario you end up with "Support" . It would ruin so many games in hopes of preventing first times in ranked.

But that's just my two cents.

17 Comments

HaIlMonitor7/6/2017, 12:50:43 AM3 votes

For best of both worlds why not make it were if a champ is under say 3 months old or 6 patches, and they need mastery 3? Yes it it might only be 12 games, but if you are an ADC main for example 12 matches should be enough to pick up Xayah for example. The builds and positioning are usually similar between similar champs.

The real issue is the "It just came out so it must be op" people that dont even read the skills before the first game in ranked, and that will fix it.

Zielmann7/5/2017, 8:51:36 PM2 votes

Not to mention that requiring level 5 mastery on 20 champs in order to be able to queue for ranked would mean 800-1000 games played, minimum, in order to even be able to queue up. And that assumes you put equal time into each champion that you bring to level 5, quitting with that champion and moving to the next the moment they hit 5 with one.

Warlord Scrap7/5/2017, 8:52:27 PM2 votes

you make a good point for mastery level.
A champ should still be disabled in ranked for a patch to allow people o both learn the champ and learn to play against him. Sure there will still be people first timing a champ but it will be significantly less. Also its a wasted ban now 2 possibly as everyone bans the new champ

sobi9997/6/2017, 2:39:50 PM2 votes

I think OP is generalizing every situation a bit too much. Giving a certain period of time when a new champ can be played in raked will not only delay the issue but will most likely decrease the amount of people that use, kayn for example, in ranked for the first time. This obviously would still not solve the underlying issue but it will surely make it less impactful.

However if a requirement of achieving a mastery was added for ranked then that could really cause issues with every other champ that you want to play in ranked. If that requirement was only added for a new champ for a certain period of time then that may not have ridiculous amount of problems.

Such as in the first patch kayn cannot be played in ranked. You will also need a level 3 mastery on him to play ranked for a certain period of time, lets say 1 month. Level 3 mastery is not alot but a solid 10-15 games makes a whole lot difference. This requirement will obviously be for new champs as its a temporary requirement. This is so that you are not forced to have level 3 or 4 mastery with older champs to play ranked. What if you were on an alt and already knew how to play a 500ip champ? One could think of several problems but a temporary requirement will ensure that any new champs are not used for the first time or if they are then it doesn't cause choas as every other person is doing it.

There will be a ton of other issues that riot simply cannot solve i.e. like OP said, what about the players that only play ranked? Also what about players that use older champs for the first time? Therefore the advantages must be weighed against the disadvantages of placing such requirements, as everyone suffers because of those careless few people.

ananke7/5/2017, 8:46:43 PM2 votes

you make a good point.

An Enemy Sutando7/6/2017, 7:27:05 AM1 votes

While the former will not completely solve the problem, it will still at least give time to reduce the amount of people who don't know jack shit about the newest champion in ranked. I'm pretty sure any self-respecting player uses Normals to gauge how good they are at a certain champion before going into ranked.

Sun Wu Ryuumoku7/6/2017, 10:40:10 AM1 votes

U can add balancing too. They need some sample to understand what's broken or not. And u won't find theses in normals games (full bronze, silver or lv30).

From my experience when someone lose hard, it isn't because he first timed, but cause he's already a bad player. Unless the champion is totaly unique ( Ivern Taliyah ), most of time u can be more or less efficient on him. I mean a main assassin won't have so much trouble to play Kayn (his gameplay is basic).

zero3567/6/2017, 2:19:16 PM1 votes

Level three would be a good intermediate. The point is less mastery and more a general sense of what you're doing. Even just 2-3 games can make a huge difference in how well you handle a champion.

As for the case against higher mastery, I must object. If you really cared about the champion and ranked, you would get to level 4. If you don't care for the champion, you found that out in more forgiving environment. I think it would help lower ELOs in general because only the champions you like and care about enough to play would be allowed, as opposed to people just following the current meta.

Darkdemon6537/5/2017, 8:51:42 PM1 votes

Yet another problem that would be solved by removing auto-fill