Boards›Gameplay

Weak Link League is a Problem of Philosophy, Not Math

RookPusher··7 votes·6,491 views

I'm seeing this argument come up a lot lately, the one about which player determines the win; The best player or the worst player. In sports it's typically Basketball v. Soccer. In the former, a Jordan, Kobe, or LeBron can win a title on their own. In Soccer, Lionel Messi was no match for the big German football machine.

I've often thought, "I hope that LoL is a weak link game because it's a team sport and that aspect should be encouraged." But the difference I've come to realize is that unlike Basketball or Soccer, players are rarely fixed to a team. In solo queue, the worst player just gets shuffled around, and in some senses, that is equity. This makes LoL a little weirder to put in the Weak/Strong Link argument because the team isn't the 5 people you play with in a particular game, but "team" ends up being your bracket over 10 games (in a manner of speaking.)

In another thread, someone said the 9/1 Riven no longer determines the game, it's the 1/7 Lucian. Let's assume for the sake of argument that this is factual. The problem with this is that the game is now determined more by luck than by skill. If a 9/1 Riven has the ability to overcome a 1/7 Lucian then long-term statistical victory is a matter of personal effort. If the 1/7 Lucian determines the match, it's a matter of odds.

The outcomes here are logical. If the game is determined by who you do not play with, then the person most able to climb is the person who dodges best. Not who plays well. Meaning that if you invest in knowing the bracket (which is still the team in this situation) then you have a better sense of who you should dump off on other players, in turn meaning the best bet you have for climbing is knowing the bracket, not knowing a champ (so long as you play something with a low-skill floor). This system also makes the concept of promos - where you really can't dodge far more detrimental than they had been in the past.

The end result here is what most other folks are saying. "We need to change how the games are determined." The reason I thought it was valuable is because if you know what you're dealing with - e.g. why a weak link concept is good in sports, but bad in LoL - then you have the ability to make changes that could, in theory, achieve both aims. Not allow snowbally all-stars to crush while not allowing trolls to decide your fate. As soon as we see the bracket as the team, and not the in-game team as the team, only then (imo) can we move beyond some of the problems with this season.

23 Comments

Wild Geese4 votes

"the worst player" is a fallacy in itself, should be "the player who is having the worst game".

Harden Stepback2 votes

this makes more sense

princeblumpkin3 votes

[{quoted}](name=Wild Geese,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=aaAoTpaf,comment-id=0001,timestamp=2018-05-17T00:24:11.422+0000)

"the worst player" is a fallacy in itself, should be "the part who is having the worst game".

It's not even the player that is necessarily having the worst game either. It's just the player that got fucked the most this game whether it was their fault or not.

DuskDaUmbreon3 votes

In another thread, someone said the 9/1 Riven no longer determines the game, it's the 1/7 Lucian.

I despise these kinds of statements. The 1/7 Lucian isn't magically 1/7. If he's 1/7, someone's 7/1 (Yes, there's kills being spread around and all of that, but on the most part, you tend to see it like that. You feed your opposing laner more than the rest of his team).

And since it's a Lucian, he's probably botlane. Since he's probably botlane, he has a support. And the enemy team has a support.

Lucian is 1/7. His support is also probably 0/7/1, because most kills botlane result in a double kill. That gives you a 1/14/1 allied botlane. Which means the enemy botlane is 14/1/14 (ignoring the jungler stealing kills, for simplicity).

So, yes. The singular Riven is going to matter less than the two people who have a combined KDA of 14/1/14. Because that just makes sense. You should not be able to win a 1v2 in normal circumstances, unless you're significantly more fed than them, or far* better than them. And, while the Riven is fed, she's also behind the enemy botlane by an effective 12 kills, which is a staggering 3600 gold. The only two items worth more than that (Excluding Ornn's upgrades) are Trinity Force and Bloodthirster! And that's not even taking into account the doubled passive gold gen from 2 people instead of one, the support's gold item, or any possible CS lead!

So, yes. The 1/7 Lucian matters more than the 9/1 Riven. Because he's bringing down a second person with him, doubling enemy kills in his lane.

If a 9/1/0 Riven ever matters more than a 14/1/14 ADC+Support, that's a massive problem that needs a hotfix. Hell, even a 1/0/0 Riven shouldn't matter more than a 0/1/0 ADC+Support, because the fact that they have two people should more than compensate for the minor gold deficit.

TS Media3 votes

You stating the issue now. Honestly, bot lane use to be the adc was 1.5 the lane and supports were 0.5 This is what kept the game in a balanced state. It was never a "2v1 mid vs bot" it was always a "2v1.5+0.5" bot because supports didn't have the income to even be considered a threat. This means they were all utility based and how a SUPPORT is meant to be played.

Now, supports can just about single handedly wreck a solo player. And that, honestly, should NOT be a thing considering solo players should have, justifiably, way more gold than the support.

League's just out of it's wits right now.

NocturnalSheild5 votes

[{quoted}](name=TS Media,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=aaAoTpaf,comment-id=00000000,timestamp=2018-05-16T22:46:54.933+0000)

You stating the issue now. Honestly, bot lane use to be the adc was 1.5 the lane and supports were 0.5 This is what kept the game in a balanced state. It was never a "2v1 mid vs bot" it was always a "2v1.5+0.5" bot because supports didn't have the income to even be considered a threat. This means they were all utility based and how a SUPPORT is meant to be played.

Now, supports can just about single handedly wreck a solo player. And that, honestly, should NOT be a thing considering solo players should have, justifiably, way more gold than the support.

League's just out of it's wits right now.

Nah fuck that.

Literally no support ever wants to go back to being walking ward sticks.

If anything supports should be given more power till they are equal to mid and top.

Its a 5v5 game not a 4.5v4.5

Ifneth3 votes

That’s a little scary because most Support champions are designed for a 2v2. They’re not healthy when ‘strong’ enough for a solo lane.

Done252 votes

He's saying that they should be as strong as as solo lane...in ideal conditions.

Ex. Morg throws her spell shield on someone Eve was about to charm then snare+pools her for Morg's allies to follow up on. This is an example of good support power.

Morg one shotting Eve with her Q is bad support power.

VICHEL CHAOS1 votes

More power? That would completely shift the meta to be even more bot centric to what it is now. If supports want as much power as the toplaner or midlaner, make them need to get the cs and experience for it, because the game has a limited amount of resources that every champion needs to fight for except supports, that get a free pass on it, so why should they be as strong? They already get too much power for the complete lack of effort they need to put to achieve it...

NocturnalSheild1 votes

[{quoted}](name=VICHEL CHAOS,realm=EUW,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=aaAoTpaf,comment-id=0000000000000001,timestamp=2018-05-17T16:58:46.904+0000)

More power? That would completely shift the meta to be even more bot centric to what it is now. If supports want as much power as the toplaner or midlaner, make them need to get the cs and experience for it, because the game has a limited amount of resources that every champion needs to fight for except supports, that get a free pass on it, so why should they be as strong? They already get too much power for the complete lack of effort they need to put to achieve it...

Exactly make support items actually cost gold.

So supports are an extremely late bloomer but can still hold their own late game/while being fed.

DuskDaUmbreon5 votes

Why is it that a 2v1 shouldn't beat a 1v1?

Sure. A support by themselves is about half a champion. But they're designed to amplify a champion. Supports are an entirely different kind of threat than, say, a mage. A Soraka might not be able to kill you, but they'll keep someone who does do a lot of damage alive, and will keep you disabled. While even an 0/5 Riven might shit on a Soraka in a 1v1, she'll generally lose to a Soraka and her ADC. Not only because it's a 2v1, but because Soraka is designed to amplify her allies.

Shouldn't a 0/1/14 Ivern and a 14/0/0 Ahri stomp a 9/1 Riven (assuming they land skillshots properly)? It's a support (Ivern is a jungle support, like it or not) with another champion. Why should that scenario be any different?

Don't pretend it's a problem that supports are actually relevant. It's not. It should not be a problem that a class is relevant.

Now, supports can just about single handedly wreck a solo player. And that, honestly, should NOT be a thing considering solo players should have, justifiably, way more gold than the support.

This is wrong...Although right, in a way. A support will single-handedly fuck up an enemy champion, by either disrupting their combo via CC, or providing peel, heals, shields, or buffs to another champion. They're not solo killing them. They're just disrupting them. It's no different than Annie going "Lmao nope" and stunning the Riven as she runs at Annie.

And, finally, the reason a support has lower income is because they're designed to function with a lower income. All of their items are cheaper, because they're (on average) getting half the gold from kills, and little to no CS.

TS Media2 votes

Supports were relevant in season 5. They're straight up broken right now. Their ratios, damage and barely anything have changed, yet they get way more gold income. This game is blatantly bad and unbalanced. I really can't see how people don't see this. Look up any season 5 teamfight or 2v1 situation, and you'll see most of the time adcs and supports got 2v1'd it's because they played it badly and NOT because there was not "counterplay" to it.

I'm not talking about taking supports back to season 2 or 3, but back to where they were mostly balanced already. And NOT where they are exceeding generalists.

VICHEL CHAOS1 votes

The problem is that right now ADC+support is a 1.8+0.8, not a 1.5+0.5. A neutral support+ADC should not be able to 2v1 a fed skirmisher, because the latter has to face tradeoffs in order to excel at 2v1s and 2v2s, just the same that said skirmisher can 2v1 the opposing laner + jungle with a small lead. Of course the support amplifies the adc, but that is the reason the adc is 1.5 instead of 1 (arguably 0.9) in this, because in reality the adc gets as much gold but less experience than solo laners. Why should a top lane skirmisher or Juggernaut be able to 2v1 a toplaner (full lane gold and experience) and Jungler (full jungle gold and experience) but not an adc+support (shared lane gold and experience)? The answer is simple, supports are overtuned.

RookPusher4 votes

{quoted}

I despise these kinds of statements. The 1/7 Lucian isn't magically 1/7. If he's 1/7, someone's 7/1 (Yes, there's kills being spread around and all of that, but on the most part, you tend to see it like that. You feed your opposing laner more than the rest of his team).

And since it's a Lucian, he's probably botlane. Since he's probably botlane, he has a support. And the enemy team has a support.

Lucian is 1/7. His support is also probably 0/7/1, because most kills botlane result in a double kill. That gives you a 1/14/1 allied botlane. Which means the enemy botlane is 14/1/14 (ignoring the jungler stealing kills, for simplicity).

So, yes. The singular Riven is going to matter less than the two people who have a combined KDA of 14/1/14. Because that just makes sense. You should not be able to win a 1v2 in normal circumstances, unless you're significantly more fed than them, or far* better than them. And, while the Riven is fed, she's also behind the enemy botlane by an effective 12 kills, which is a staggering 3600 gold. The only two items worth more than that (Excluding Ornn's upgrades) are Trinity Force and Bloodthirster! And that's not even taking into account the doubled passive gold gen from 2 people instead of one, the support's gold item, or any possible CS lead!

So, yes. The 1/7 Lucian matters more than the 9/1 Riven. Because he's bringing down a second person with him, doubling enemy kills in his lane.

If a 9/1/0 Riven ever matters more than a 14/1/14 ADC+Support, that's a massive problem that needs a hotfix. Hell, even a 1/0/0 Riven shouldn't matter more than a 0/1/0 ADC+Support, because the fact that they have two people should more than compensate for the minor gold deficit.

This is fair, but it assumed 7 deaths occurred in the bot lane, and before the laning phase ended. While possible, it's not probable. And I'm saying that from the B5 where it's most probable. In the larger scenario you're describing, Riven's kills were gained in a vacuum from not roaming and Lucians were spread around.

Again, possible, not probable.

Snowman Arc1 votes

And that's what we are talking about. The 9/1 Riven, who is a good player, can only do that much against a decent team who will hard focus her down. A bad 1/7 Lucian will feed the entire enemy team, resulting in a good boost from an enemy decent team to getting good. Also, that Lucian will be irrelevant as well. It will be a 4v5 game.

ModKnightsKemplar2 votes

Mm, well said. I have never thought about it like that.

I don't think it's quite that cut and dried, but it's a good point to consider.

Awf Meta1 votes

{quoted}

In sports it's typically Basketball v. Soccer. In the former, a Jordan, Kobe, or LeBron can win a title on their own. In Soccer, Lionel Messi was no match for the big German football machine.

The basketball part is not true at all. An individual will always lose agency in a team sport. Even Jordan can't win a championship 1 on 5.

RookPusher1 votes

{quoted}

The basketball part is not true at all. An individual will always lose agency in a team sport. Even Jordan can't win a championship 1 on 5.

I don't think the facts back you up.

Awf Meta1 votes

You must be lost.

Awesome coach and teammates, wins championships.

Goes to Washington Wizards and doesn't make the playoffs.

RookPusher1 votes

{quoted}

You must be lost.

Awesome coach and teammates, wins championships.

Goes to Washington Wizards and doesn't make the playoffs.

So you're telling me Lebron didn't single-handedly give Cleaveland a championship?

Automated Riven2 votes

No he didn't. May have been the deciding factor, but there were other teammates and coaching staff that helped. He was part of a team, and without it he would have lost.

RookPusher1 votes

[{quoted}](name=Automated Riven,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=aaAoTpaf,comment-id=00020000000000000000,timestamp=2018-05-19T20:55:17.498+0000)

No he didn't. May have been the deciding factor, but there were other teammates and coaching staff that helped. He was part of a team, and without it he would have lost.

Ok well, you're not just arguing against me here, because scholarship in the field uses this example constantly. Basketball is widely considered to be a strong-link sport. In "The Numbers Game: Why Everything You Know About Soccer Is Wrong by Chris Anderson and David Sally" it's written: Soccer is vastly different from basketball, the most superstar driven sport

Kilanost1 votes

The problem at low elo is that the distribution of player skill over the ranks wasn't made to be a normal distribution. Silver 4 is roughly the rank of an average player. But someone in silver 4 can be matched with B4 which is the bottom 10%. That means the difference in their skill level spans 40% of the player base and is roughly equivalent to sticking that same silver 4 player in a low diamond game. If you don't play a carry role (bot or mid) then you have a significantly higher chance of getting at least one trash-can level player in roles you need to win as opposed to when you play one of those roles yourself and are only gambling on the other carry role. This is why everyone I played with back when I was playing consistently has since switched to bot/mid as their primary and secondary roles and climbed.

More from Gameplay

3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay764 comments
7,167
votes
3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay156 comments
3,510
votes
UPVOTE FOR URF
Gameplay606 comments
2,440
votes
Yes plz.
Gameplay456 comments
1,721
votes
3 Refunds per season, up vote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay114 comments
1,716
votes
When is ANYONE at riot going to address the awful new player experience?
Gameplay634 comments
1,383
votes

More by RookPusher

To all those who downvote the "New champs banned from ranked" threads
Gameplay146 comments
117
votes
Ruby Sightstone Needs an Upgrade Option
Gameplay37 comments
66
votes
Rakan and Bard: Give Allies some indicators
Gameplay39 comments
54
votes
What's your ideal game length?
Gameplay134 comments
52
votes
Please reinstate Groovy Zilean's old splash art
Story, Art, & Sound18 comments
50
votes
A friendly reminder that Blind Pick is the worst way to intro people to LoL
Gameplay21 comments
49
votes