Riot how many time have we to suggest this ?

{quoted}

I practically play draft pick normal only. And well, I don't want to be a dick, but.. Where do you get your confidence from? Why do you feel that you, who are not even level 30, need to educate me about how bans are a strategic part in soloQ? But w/e, I am going to ignore your level.

So if people feel like a champion is OP even though numbers and results prove that he/she/it isn't.. Riot should just nerf it so that the deluded players feel better? Because that's the result, as certain champions would be permabanned with 10 bans even though they are not even OP (as proved in all my other posts).

So 2 out of 10 get to ban practically every counterpick to their own champions.. And there is nothing the others can do about it. Do you even realize how friggin unhealthy this is? This is exactly NOT what bans should be for. Sure, you can ban some of your counters. But you shouldn't be able to ban 5 uncomfortable champions for your own one.. That's extremely egoistical, doesn't even favor your team if both captains do it, decreases the fun the other players have (because they are forced into an uncomfortable matchup by default) and is not even strategically demanding or anything. That's exactly something someone would say who opposes 10 bans.

Yes if you broaden the definition it would indeed be some sort of 'strategy'. The most cheap, unsatisfying (for everyone else), uninteristing and unhealthy one.

420 q. e. d. cogito ergo sum headshot rekt blaze it

I don't feel that I need to educate you about anything, that's your own responsability. I'm just stating the obvious, you claim bans have no strategic value and you are flat out wrong. You wanna pull rank, go ahead, just proves you can't find a proper argument to prove me wrong.

I don't care what Riot does about "OP" champs. If I don't want it in my game wether for personal or strategic reasons, that should be up to me, given I'm team captain.

Wether cheap, unsatisfying or otherwise, strategy is still strategy wether you like it or not.

malph in general provides so much for the enemy team. A very strong engage, a strong slow, a heavy aoe attack slow, and his damage increases with his armor. And he somehow manages to stay under the radar with 55 percent win rate. And you don't always have the luxury of picking against him, and even if you have an ap mid, if that ap mid isn't a heavy aoe mage he can still build full armor and rek face.

{quoted}

You say most people don't know what they need to play in order to win, this might be true, it might not, I think it's best to stay away from claims you can't prove without empirical evidence.

I can indeed prove it and I actually did (-> Yasuo example, if people would want to win, they wouldn't pick Yasuo as even experienced Yasuo players have a negative winrate). But here is another example:

{quoted}

"Lee Sin isn't overrated", he's a top tier jungler and has been forever, he does well above avarage in all other roles including support, given the player is competent enough to use him effectively. This is because he's a generalist, look up the concept if you don't understand it.

Oh, you are trying to insult me, nice one! Alright, so let's assume people would want to maximize their chances to win and would actually be able to realize what they need in order to maximize their chances of winning. So we have Lee Sin who you called a 'top tier jungler [since] forever' that also 'does well above average in all other roles including support, given the player is competent enough to use him effectively.' Now, at this point I could obviously try to be a smartass like you are and say something along the lines of: ' I think it's best to stay away from claims you can't prove without empirical evidence. ' But well, I am not going to to it, because at this point you should realize how hypocritical you are. Instead I am going to show you why I am actually able to PROVE that people obviously do not pick what they'd need to pick: Lee Sin winrate for players with 125 rankeds: 49.61% So the experienced Lee Sin player performs actually below the average Jungler - on Lee's main role. That's like.. The exact opposite what you said. And now let's compare him to Dr. Mundo who has a 52.83% winrate - on players with 1-5 Mundo rankeds. Dr. Mundo JGL has a 4.14% pick - Lee JGL has 34.32%. So people somehow love to play Lee, even though they would get better results first-timing Mundo JGL. Weird, huh? INB4 'the popularity decreases Lee's winrate because the average Lee player is worse' - that's why I included games played. The Lee Sin player with 125+ rankeds is (should perform) better than the Mundo newb. Please don't try to nitpick here, you should get the idea and how this can be transfered to every role.

{quoted}

Also, please don't bring difficulty into this.

Never did. Even though it would make sense, but there is simply no need for me, as statistics are so comfortably proving my point anyways. Even if Lee&Mundo would be equally hard to play (or rather especially then) the discrepancy in winrates/games played would be even worse for your thesis.

{quoted}

Anyone knows Lee Sin is harder to pick up than Garen, but is he harder to master? I wouldn't say so, on the contrary, gereralist champions have alot more vercatility bound into their kits, thus giving them far more room to make mistakes and get away with it than 1 or 2 dimensional champions, from that perspective, I'd even go as far as claiming they are easier to play at the top level. I know people probably won't agree with me on this and I'm not saying it's the absolute truth, but it's my personal opinion.

This is so wrong, but luckily it doesn't even support what you want to say, so I don't even have to bother. Lucky me.

{quoted}

Honestly, I find it commical that you're opposed to the idea of generalist champions being stronger than others. I guess you must know better than the rest of us then. ;)

Eh, I don't even.. Alright, so I never said anything about how generalist champions compare to others (I always gave specific examples and did never ever touch the topic of generalist champions) . But yes, I am oppost to the idea that generalist champions are stronger than others by default. You are constantly bringing something up that is a: rediculous and b: doesn't even adress my point. What are you doing?! Also, why the ... do you delete your own posts? I quoted them anyways, so if you are ashamed then well, you dun goofed.

{quoted}

"No pro players want more bans" - Have you spoken with all pro players? If not, why do you speak for them all?

OH PLEASE. Originally I posted something differentiated and reasonable:

{quoted} competetive problems:

• too speculative, not going into that. It doesn't look like many (if any) pros support more bans.

And you answered to exactly that:

{quoted}

Lastly, why should the game be entirely balanced after pro play? They are but a fraction of the community yet the game should be shaped solely after their whims? Also, I'd like to know which pros are opposed to the idea of more bans since it's such an popular opinion among pros.

The beginning is completely dumb, because I never even hinted that the game should be 'entirely balanced after pro play'. And then you go ahead and say something about how many pro players would love to have more bans. Yet you don't feel like you need to prove anything. In this context I posted: 'there are also no pro players that want more bans.' because it seems that you ignore differentiated statements. You should really fix your self-righteous attitude. And stop deleting your posts or do I really have to take screenshots?!