Banning and Surrendering
These have got to be, in the current state of the game, the most useless features in League of Legends.
In pregame, so many arguments are started over who to ban. So much so that entire games are thrown because people get too frazzled over who got banned and who didn't. And what does it all amount to? Nothing. Banning means nothing in this game. The whole idea of banning is to take a champ out of a game that the team feels is OP. Well that's fine if there was a written handbook of OP champs. But different people feel different champs are OP for different reasons. So to give one player the power to control all bans does nothing but set a team up for toxicity. But even without that factor, banning is still useless in the game for one very simple reason. There. Are. Too. Many. Goram. Champions. Don't get me wrong. I like seeing a new champ come out and I love the variety. But we only get 3 bans each. Out of the current 125 champions that leaves 119 champions to be picked. Banning 6/125 means literally nothing. And the fact that you only control 3 of these makes it worth even less. And the fact that 1 player controls these 3 makes it worthless. And everyone wants all of their OP champs miraculously banned in just 3 picks. I propose 2 solutions. The first of which is to give us more bans. There's enough slots in the ban list to fit 3 more champs each. Banning a total of 12/125 champions means a good chunk of the champions are out. But if you increase the number of bans, then you have the problem of needing to keep increasing them as more and more champs come out. The second solution is to? do away with banning.
To this people will say "Oh but then people will play all the REALLY OP champs!". Lets run down this list of OP champs shall we? Akali, Annie, Brand. Well there goes your 3 bans. But wait there's more! Cass, Ekko, Fiddlesticks. Well that's all the bans. But wait! We forgot Fizz, Heimer, Karthus, Katarina, LB, Lux, Malz, Nidalee, Talon, Veigar, Zed, and Ziggs. And that's just the mid laners. We still have OP junglers, adcs, supports, and tops to cover. So which 6 of these champs are you going to rage over if they don't get banned?
Surrendering is another useless feature in LoL. And its simply because you need 4 people to agree to it. Which means if you have a butt buddy, tryhard, duo on your team, it doesn't matter how many towers you've lost. Or inhibs, or dragons, or how many kills the enemy team has. You will not be surrendering. I'm fine with the whole concept of not giving up, but there is a point where you're just wasting time. If you're getting railroaded in every team fight. It's time to surrender. If your team is spending all their time arguing, it's time to surrender. If you have no inhibs and no towers and the enemy has gotten every dragon...It's time to surrender. Again, I propose 2 solutions to the problem that is surrender votes. First, decrease the number of votes you need to 3. This way a duo party doesn't control the vote. I've exploited this with my friends and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Second, do away with it completely. In solo queue, it doesn't matter how obvious the loss is, there always seems to be 2 people that believe you can win if you just believe in yourself hard enough. League is not an anime and even if it was, you are not the main character.