2015: Top lane is an island

Altiverse·Mar 15, 2018·1 votes·425 views

2018: Top lane is a different game. You might as well be playing Clash of Clans while being a top laner and still have the same impact over the game.

13 Comments

71060670DEL1Mar 15, 20181 votes

IF top lane really has as low of an impact as you claim, then top lane champion's winrates would not vary that much from 50%, as they would not be powerful enough to impact the game. However, this is not the case, so while at high elo top lane is less impactful than it was in previous seasons, it still has a decent amount of impact.

SlythionMar 15, 20181 votes

Top lane arguably has the most impact, as most of the top players are top lane mains.

AltiverseMar 15, 20181 votes

I don't know where you get these statistics ("most", while having to compare them to the player main role distribution, which definitely is not 20% per role in the first place); But whether that's true or not, "top players" is not an argument. Sample size.

SlythionMar 15, 20181 votes

this is one thing you can't claim a low sample size skews the distribution. We're using the best of the best to truly analyze a role's potential impact, not the role's average impact. I couldn't give a rat's ass if a bunch of plat top laners complain about not having an impact, because if some of the best players in NA are able to actively climb and influence games against the other best players of other roles then top lane has an impact.

If there are 5 top lane mains in the top 20 spots in NA (not including LCS players), then I don't understand how you can tell me these guys have 0 impact in their games. You're gonna sit there and argue that Adrian Riven and TF Blade, 2 of the best top laners in NA, are wrong when they say top lane has an impact? It's important to note that Top is either the least or 2nd least played role in NA (I can't remember for sure, I'd have to go back to that Red post to check the graph) so holding 1/4th of the top 20 spots is significantly more than you'd expect from the least played "0 impact" role.

I just don't understand, I feel like just because a bunch of silver-d4 players say something enough that the boards just decide its true without actually looking at facts.

Source: http://na.op.gg/ranking/ladder/

This is however, only one fact that suggests top has an impact. As Nefireous explained, if top was truly a role that didn't matter and had 0 impact then it wouldn't matter what champion you picked. You wouldn't have 44.35%, 46.94%, and 46.97% winrates while others have 52.18%, 51.58%, and 51.42% winrates because supposedly it wouldn't matter what you pick.

That's just a second thing that suggests top does indeed have an impact.

AltiverseMar 15, 20181 votes

Sometimes I just feel like I'm forced to equip my challenger icon just so people won't have the attitude of "a rat's ass about plat top laners" instantly. (While that, too, is also something I have to disagree about. Is the game ideally balanced only for the top 0.02% of players?)

That aside, firstly it seems you misunderstand "sample size", simply by how you go on by giving examples from a set few of top players when it's statistically down to luck. (Why? Shortly, If you pick a small sample, you run a greater risk of the small sample being unusual just by chance. Choosing 5 people to represent the entire US, even if they are chosen completely at random, will often result of a sample that is very unrepresentative of the population. Imagine how easy it would be to, just by chance, select 5 Republicans and no Democrats for instance. That doesn't make the entire US population Republicans does it)

Secondly, you seem to be wrongly reinforcing your argument by a confirmation bias (google that if you're unfamiliar with the term). Bringing examples that come to mind like Adrian Riven and TF Blade, while other known top players have complained for ages about how bad the state of top lane is suddenly don't come to mind(?).

SlythionMar 15, 20181 votes

First off, I just want to clarify that I was never accusing you of being a random plat top laner. I don't ever discredit a player based on rank, which is why I don't generally snoop on people's rank when I'm having a discussion like this. I'm just saying the the majority of complaints here on the boards are parroting lower-elo players that heard some Hashinshin rant and thought they could sound clever or are using this argument as a scape goat for their poor performance. I just want to be absolutely clear that I never meant that as a personal insult, and more of a general analysis based on my personal experience and observations.

As for your argument about sample size, I don't think you can argue that it's just random luck that a disproportionate amount of top laners at the top of the ladder. I blame myself for not clarifying this earlier, but you would be 100% correct on saying this isn't a good argument if there was fluctuation. However, TF Blade and Adrian Riven are consistently at the top of the ladder, and that suggests that there's more than luck at play. If 3-4 top laners can consistently be in the top 20 NA (non-LCS players) over a long period of time, that counterargument of "it's just luck" becomes extremely questionable. However, what it does suggest is that while top lane has the potential to have a large impact, it is also easy to not. This could be what separates good top laners from bad ones.

As for your claim about confirmation bias, that you may have me on. I personally don't know of many top laners that are outspoken about it's low-impact in games beyond Hashinshin. I do know that TF Blade, Adrian, and Dekar believe that top lane has a decent impact in games with Dekar himself essentially telling Hashinshin to get good in one of his podcasts.

I want to actually link one of Hash's videos here and pull a quote from it at the 2:40 mark: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AWJKQNo4gJM

"The current top champions (for top lane) are so outrageously good, in my opinion, that by merely picking them and playing them, you're pretty much guaranteed to get into challenger" - Hashinshin 2018

I want to ask how this is possible if top lane has 0 impact? How can you be guaranteed to consistently win games if you have no impact?

Overall: You can probably make the argument that top lane's meta is too rigid. You might might be able to make the argument that it's easy to not have an impact, or that as hash says later in the video "the power disparity between top laners (champions) is horrendous to the point of playing a top-tier champion being a free win".

These arguments I can understand and may even be inclined to agree on. But the fact that several top laners have consistently been at the top of the ladder shows that the lane is capable of having an impact in games.

Scratch that, I do agree with those arguments in the "overall" section. I think top lane is in a terrible place, bruisers especially, and it definitely needs work. What I don't enjoy is watching players go "gg I have no impact as a top laner" as a parrot-excuse for poor performances or poor picks, because when it comes down to it then top lane does have a significant impact given you pick the meta and play correctly.

AltiverseMar 15, 20181 votes

While I advice taking this post with a grain of salt (I've literally had quite a few games recently as a top laner where both me and my enemy just split pushed the same side lane the whole game because we knew we won't be able to get a single hit through on the enemy adc through their shields before we die to their 3hit)...

then top lane champion's winrates would not vary that much from 50%, as they would not be powerful enough to impact the game.

Just pointing out this logic is somewhat flawed as you seem to only look at one side of the coin. Top lane exists for both teams.

71060670DEL1Mar 15, 20181 votes

Yes, but i'm talking the variance in champion picks. If toplane wasn't impactful at all, there would not be top laners with winrates like 46%, as it would not matter who you picked because you have no impact no matter what.

makkiiMar 15, 20181 votes

{quoted}

While I advice taking this post with a grain of salt (I've literally had quite a few games recently as a top laner where both me and my enemy just split pushed the same side lane the whole game because we knew we won't be able to get a single hit through on the enemy adc through their shields before we die to their 3hit)...

Just pointing out this logic is somewhat flawed as you seem to only look at one side of the coin. Top lane exists for both teams.

im not defending the idea that top lane is okay or anything as i do think its too weak but, you are looking at what he said wrong, he was saying that if top lane was so unimpactful, all top lane champs would cluster more around the mean win rate or 50% because they dont actually influence their games.

what he said is not flawed logically.

AltiverseMar 15, 20181 votes

he was saying that if top lane was so unimpactful, all top lane champs would cluster more around the mean win rate or 50%

I think the key here is the differentiation between "top lane" and "top lane champs". From my point, the champion used as a top laner doesn't make them more impactful (though obviously it does matter within top lane). Reasoning: 1. Top champions that are also being played in other roles do have agency over the map. 2. It's safe to assume that top lane meta champions would be simply changed to ADCs, mages or supports if the problem was within the champion pool itself.

Thus "Top lane exists for both teams".

makkiiMar 15, 20181 votes

{quoted}

I think the key here is the differentiation between "top lane" and "top lane champs". From my point, the champion used as a top laner doesn't make them more impactful (though obviously it does matter within top lane). Reasoning: 1. Top champions that are also being played in other roles do have agency over the map. 2. It's safe to assume that top lane meta champions would be simply changed to ADCs, mages or supports if the problem was within the champion pool itself.

Thus "Top lane exists for both teams".

No one is claiming that it’s the champion pool itself.

It’s simple and I don’t think you get it.

If you take any given lane and make a chart of the win rate spread, a wider and more varied spread would indicate more impact whereas a narrow one would indicate less impact.

It’s going right over your head man

Galaxy9492Mar 15, 20181 votes

I am ussually playing to or mid rarely anything else but the things is if a top lane is fed and every other lane is losing that too lane can just carry their team as long as the rest of the team knows what they are doing too lane definitly impacts the game although it may not look like it to you im pretty sure it has one of the most biggest impacts in the game but thats just my opinion

MortekaiserMar 15, 20181 votes

players get the idea that toplane is impactful when instead its usually toplane mains beating autofilled players and making it seem as though its impactful when the fed guy smokes everyone else. toplane is the least queued role so autofilled tops are common these days

autofilled vs autofilled will end in a dumb stalemate, as will main vs main (assuming equivalent skill levels)

all of this can be thrown out of the window based on jungler performance, however. junglers have far more impact across the game than most toplaners at all. id rather have a great jungler with an autofilled toplane than a great toplaner with an autofilled jungle