Classes & Subclasses My Way

So, Riot's posted their view on classes and subclasses in the Dev Blog linked here, and if you haven't read it already, you should now. It's a great step forward in clarifying the game's intrinsic class system, and its intention of setting better discussions on class tradeoffs and contributions is going to help the Boards a lot. However, I personally take issue with the framework they set, ranging from really insignificant nitpicking (e.g. "the heck's an Enchanter?") to larger concerns with major parts of its structure. I could probably make a whole other post about this, but TL;DR is I think the classes and subclasses Rito set in that post, along with their ordering, go against a much more natural framework set by players, which we use commonly for communication and in-game decisions. Here's my take on them:

---

#Assassins:

Starting alphabetically, I think (and I think we can agree on this) that assassins are a class of their own, specializing in taking down priority targets from large distances before making an escape. These champions are melee as a baseline, and inevitably need to get close to their targets in order to kill them, opening themselves up to counterattack in the process.

• Core Strengths: Burst damage, dueling potential, mobility
• Core Weaknesses: High downtimes, situational target selection, squishiness
• Generally Win Against: Mages, Marksmen (a.k.a. squishy opponents)
• Generally Lose Against: Fighters, Tanks (a.k.a. tanky opponents)
• Examples: ,
• Subclasses: Umm... Well, currently there aren't any real subclasses, but that's mainly because every assassin right now boils down to just killing targets really fast, which for many reasons is why they need a roster update (they're too binary, they're not very diverse, they tend to lack counterplay, etc.). If I really wanted to hazard a guess, I'd probably make a distinction between the following (sorry for the terrible names):
• ##Hunters Assassins who are all about killing just one target and getting out, e.g. Kha'Zix and Nidalee. Generally have ways to bypass enemy counterplay via stealth or really quick mobility, but are also forced to commit to their target no matter what follows if they want to succeed.
• ##Reapers Assassins who can extend their burst to multiple targets at once, e.g. Katarina and Talon. Generally have less discriminate target selection, but poorer back line access, forcing them to get a little closer and expose themselves when going in for the kill.
• ##Rogues Assassins who can sabotage the enemy in one way or another without necessarily having to kill people, e.g. Ekko (when not going full tank) and Shaco. Generally have access to powerful crowd control, but trade off some of their instant burst.

---

#Fighters:

The description Riot has for the Fighter class is relatively accurate. They're generally melee champions built to last long in combat and output plenty of damage over time.

• Core Strengths: Dueling potential, persistent damage, resilience (and not tankiness, explained below)
• Core Weaknesses: Low reach in combat, generally need a "warm-up" time, vulnerable to kiting
• Generally Win Against: Assassins, Tanks (a.k.a. melee opponents)
• Generally Lose Against: Mages, Marksmen (a.k.a. ranged opponents).
• Examples: ,
• Subclasses:
• ##Divers I agree with Riot on these, Divers are fighters with good access to the enemy back line who love to single out priority targets, and who generally have access to bursts of crowd control too, e.g. Jarvan IV and Vi. I'd like to say a Diver's main weakness is them being forced to commit to their dives, with generally poor escapes, but let's face it, Divers could stand to have more pronounced weaknesses overall, as they're currently a bit too versatile.
• ##Juggernauts Also on the same page with Riot here, Juggernauts tend to dominate fights against entire teams through tremendous damage and tankiness, e.g. Darius and Mordekaiser. Generally have exceptionally poor target access as well.
• ##Striders A.k.a "Skirmishers" in Riot's blog, a.k.a. "light fighters" previously. I take issue with the term "skirmisher" here because it implies hit-and-run tactics, when these champions tend to stay in fights as long as they can continue killing people, particularly since they can chain kills fairly easily. I also think "Slayer", while an awesome name, steps a little too far into assassin territory, when usually these champions have the DPS and resilience of fighters, even though their own defenses are situational, rather than permanent. If there's any other class they'd be closest to, it would be marksmen, both in terms of contributions and itemization. "Strider", by contrast, tends to evoke their persistent mobility better, as well as their ability to sort of blade dance from target to target, e.g. Master Yi and Yasuo. As fighters, their main weakness is their squishiness.

---

#Mages:

I'm kind of annoyed Riot took out utility mages and lumped them into the pseudo-Support class ("utility mage" isn't even a proper class in the blog's terminology), even if I can understand where that's coming from. Mages like Zyra and Anivia are picked as mages first and foremost, not as supports, even if they can function as supports too. As mentioned in the blog, though, the common thread to all of these champions is that they use spells to control and kill opponents from a distance.

• Core Strengths: AoE damage, crowd control, reach
• Core Weaknesses: Poor repositioning, squishiness, unreliable abilities
• Generally Win Against: Fighters, Marksmen (a.k.a. DPS opponents)
• Generally Lose Against: Assassins, Tanks (a.k.a. anti-spell opponents)
• Examples: ,
• Subclasses:
• ##Artillery Mages / Bombards In agreement with Rito here, Artillery Mages are mages who have exceptionally long range, to the point where they can influence fights without being physically present, e.g. Xerath and Ziggs. Their weakness mainly boils down to even poorer repositioning and direct combat capabilities.
• ##Battle Mages / Warlocks Riot defined the subclass well here too, and Battle Mages are mages who like to enter prolonged combat with the enemy team, e.g. Ryze and Swain. Tend to have superior resilience and access to DPS, but also lower reach and oftentimes less crowd control.
• ##Burst Mages / Sorcerers As with what Rito said, Burst mages tend to combo off of single targets to lock them down and destroy them, e.g. Annie and Veigar. Generally have the best burst damage by far (what's in a name...), but also higher downtimes to their power via high cooldowns and a reliance on inter-ability comboes.
• ##Utility Mages / Sages Word of warning, I do think Utility Mages can also be defined as supports, which I'll do below, and I think it's core to this subclass that they're pretty much 50 / 50 into both the mage and support classes. I'm listing these here mainly because a) they are a clear subclass of their own, and trying to define the likes of Morgana or Karma without this subclass is a nightmare (under the official classification, they'd both be Enchanter - Disruptor - Battle Mage hybrids). Basically Utility Mages are the least kill-focused of mages, and compensate for their reduced kill potential with unique and extremely powerful forms of crowd control and utility, to the point where they can feel comfortable not focusing on kills and instead helping out their team.

---

#Marksmen:

We all know who these ones are, and so does Rito. For the sake of completionism, they're the shooty people who ping stuff until it dies. Generally recognized as the most important champions for pumping damage in teamfights and taking objectives.

• Core Strengths: Persistent damage, reach, strong late-game power
• Core Weaknesses: dependence on allies, poor early-game power, squishiness
• Generally Win Against: Fighters, Tanks (a.k.a. tanky opponents)
• Generally Lose Against: Assassins, Mages (a.k.a. bursty opponents)
• Examples: ,
• Subclasses: As with assassins, there aren't any real subclasses for marksmen. On a side note, while the Marksman Update was a success in bringing item and champion diversity to marksmen, the class needs more work for its champions to go beyond the standard hyperscaling, teamfight-centric objective masters they are now, and each marksmen should probably only cover a few of those facets instead of all of them at once. Now, a common way to separate marksmen is to sort them out between caster ADCs and autoattack-dependent ADCs, but I feel that mainly describes a difference in inputs (i.e. how you play your champion), rather than one in outputs (i.e. what your champion brings to the table), and thus can't really be used all that well to describe what these champions trade off, even when it comes to scalings and item synergies. I'm not 100% sure about this, but here's what I'd do:
• ##Duelist Marksmen / Skirmishers Using the term here to refer to marksmen who truly do want to enter and exit combat, usually taking a target out in the process, e.g. Caitlyn and Vayne. Usually have the best single-target damage and mobility out of any marksman, and therefore the best dueling potential, but have more difficulty switching from target to target, and need a bit more time to chain subsequent kills after blowing their abilities.
• ##Teamfight Marksmen / Eradicators What I think should cover marksmen who are designed especially to pump massive amounts of damage in teamfights, e.g. Miss Fortune and Twitch. Generally have tons of AoE, persistent steroids or other forms of target-indiscriminate power, but tend to have a lot of difficulty repositioning and are extremely vulnerable in one-on-one combat.
• ##Utility Marksmen / Commanders What should cover marksmen who put an emphasis on something other than raw player-versus-player damage, such as team-oriented utility, crowd control or exceptional power over objectives, e.g. Ashe and Sivir. Generally have access to extremely strong effects that would normally be appropriate for a mage or support, at a cost to their overall damage.

---

#Supports:

Let's face it, "Controller" is not the first term that comes to mind when thinking about classes in League, and I feel the criteria for "Enchanter" are so indiscriminate that pretty much any champion with an ally-targeted shield or heal fits the bill, when many of those champions are utility mages, who don't really run along the same lines as "true" fully-fledged supports. Even though supports are all about controlling the flow of battle in their team's favor, at their core, they're champions innately built to assist their team, and players who find the term derogatory are probably not going to enjoy the class as a whole anyway.

• Core Strengths: Crowd control, ally synergy, utility
• Core Weaknesses: dependence on allies, low personal power, poor damage
• Generally Win Against: Anyone else when paired up with at least one ally
• Generally Lose Against: Anyone else when alone
• Examples: ,
• Subclasses:
• ##Tank Supports / Harbingers Lumping in fighter and tank supports here because the two generally occupy very similar functions here by mainly offering a way to soak some damage away from their allies (this subclass could probably be split into two, since tanks and fighters operate a little differently), e.g. Braum and Thresh. Tanky supports usually have a lot less range than other supports in exchange.
• ##"Traditional" Supports / Clerics I feel this would be the more normative take on Enchanters, since the biggest contributions of many caster supports generally revolve around their ability to save allies and protect them, e.g. Janna and Soraka, and not specifically buff them, even if that's often the case. Cleric types tend to have the strongest overall ally synergy among supports, but also the worst combat capabilities when alone.
• ##Mage Supports / Utility Mages / Sages Reinserting the subclass here because utility mages tend to also be valid supports, or at the very least have the potential to support their allies. They should probably be recognized as mages first and foremost, since that's what their playstyle and decisions are closest to, but as supports, they supplement superior damage, usually through area control, at some cost in direct ally synergy.

---

#Tanks:

I feel this is another area where there's likely to be some disagreement between Riot and its players: while splitting tanks into Vanguards and Wardens mostly gets to the general feel of tanks (some like to be aggressive, some like to peel), I feel there's probably a little bit more distinction to be made among Vanguards. While Riot does get it right by saying tanks prize disruption over damage, imo, I think it's also worth mentioning that tanks want to receive damage, as opposed to most fighters, who are just tanky because they need to be in order to deal damage.

• Core Strengths: Crowd control, threat generation, resilience
• Core Weaknesses: Constant exposure, low reach in combat, poor damage
• Generally Win Against: Assassins, Mages (a.k.a. bursty opponents)
• Generally Win Against: Fighters, Marksmen (a.k.a. DPS opponents)
• Examples: ,
• Subclasses:
• ##Disruptors This is the subclass I think is missing. While there are a fair amount of aggressive tanks, Disruptors specialize in getting the attention of as many enemies at a time through AoE disruption, e.g. Malphite and Sejuani. Disruptors tend to be pretty happy with whoever they're attacking as long as they get to affect as many enemies at a time as possible, and tend to have superior damage as a means of generating AoE threat, but also tend to have a bit less crowd control and more overall exposure as a result.
• ##Lockdown Tanks / Jailors The other side of the Vanguard coin, Jailors are tanks who tend to be especially good at locking down single targets constantly, e.g. Leona and Nautilus. They tend to have a massive amount of persistent crowd control, but with a focus mostly on single targets, and so lose out on some larger threat generation potential.
• ##Wardens This subclass I think is mostly accurate. Wardens are probably a subclass of supports as well, as with utility mages being both mages and supports, but I feel many Wardens can affort to start out more independent than most supports. Wardens are tanks focused on protecting their allies, e.g. Braum and Shen, and usually sacrifice even further offensive power for greater defenses they can use to soak damage in their allies' stead.

So what do you think? Do you agree with this? Which of the two class/subclass systems would you agree with more? What suggestions would you make for the above?