I know everyone will disagree with me on this but...

Spârky·10/8/2017, 5:36:55 PM·2 votes·200 views

Have we ever considered that it might be the strength of tanks is a big majority why we have this hypercarry meta? Think about it. It wouldn't matter if ardent was good if the adc's didnt have a huge tank to stand behind. Then assassins and divers could actually get to the adc/support and kill them without getting stopped by a giant wall like maokai or galio? Just a thought I know ardent is op and everyone hates this adc meta I do to but i was just thinking about this.

3 Comments

Tortunga10/8/2017, 6:08:42 PM2 votes

Maybe indirecticly a bit, but I wouldn't say tanks are the main problem, as I think they are in a pretty solid spot.. We had 'protect the ADC comps' before, with double or even triple tanks and 'support' mids. People would pick divers and assassins to fight them. Some games that would succes, some games it wouldn't. These games where all about how far ahead can we get, before the hypercarry takes over.

The large difference with today is the time needed for a hypercarry to start taken over. The reduced cost of AD items and Ardent Censer providing a large amount of 'free' combat stats for the ADC (he doesn't have to buy them) has reduced the time needed by a fair amount. Where an hypercarry would get active around min 30-35 the earliest before this Meta, they will start to get active at 15-20 min mark with the Ardent item.

So the time for a team comp with divers and assassins to get ahead is so much smaller, and if they don't get ahead far enough, they will just lose. For pro-teams that is just to risky, and so they just pick tanks and play a 'protect the ADC comp'.

That's at least what I think, as to me tanks in general are in a pretty good spot.

chipndip110/8/2017, 5:39:01 PM1 votes

I mean, duh, but what do I know?

Or rather, what do WE know?