wouldnt giving 1 ban per player make sense?

MunchCrunchLunch·Apr 23, 2016·254 votes·5,572 views

hmm?

142 Comments

sir d wreckApr 24, 201672 votes

It does make sense, that's why Riot won't do it.

56552559_DELApr 24, 201611 votes

Actually it DOESNT make sense which is why Riot wont do it.

The reason it doesn't make sense is because you are asking them to give you more bans on champs that you would consider OP. That is a solution to a symptom.

The PROBLEM is the reason why you are having to ban all these champs......because of balance issues. If you guys were to keep asking more for balancing of those champs rather than bans that you wouldn't even use on champs you WANT to ban but instead HAVE to ban, then it would be a lot easier.

But no, for some reason everyone thinks if you just ban all the champs then the problem will go away......it wont. Because there will be troll bans and bans on champs that people are just tired of playing against that are NOT OP.

The solution is not more bans, its balancing the champs that everyone wants 10+ bans for.

The problem isn't how often you are having to ban these champs and its not how many bans we have, the REAL problem is WHY we have to constantly ban them. Why people still don't understand that is beyond me.

MrryZApr 24, 201619 votes

Fair point but with the addition of many more champions to the game, three bans per team isn't enough anymore so while the real issue may be that some champions are unbalanced, there are also enough champions to justify more bans.

56552559_DELApr 24, 20162 votes

But again, that doesn't solve the problem.

What do you expect Riot to do in that case? Create an extra ban slot every time the release a new champ?

And to your point of there being enough champs to warrant more bans, that falls right back to my point of balancing. Everything can be solved with balancing so the matter of how many champs there are is irrelevant.

Bans should be used for banning the champs that counter your team comp or for banning you intended champs counter in lane/jg. But they should NOT be for banning champs because they are OP or because of how many champs there are.

That is my point.

Regu1us 9Apr 24, 201628 votes

It's like inflation. With more champs available, each ban is worth less than before, so the quantity of bans should be adjusted accordingly. It's quite simple really.

56552559_DELApr 24, 20161 votes

The quality of bans should be based on who you don't want to see your opponent as in regards to lane/jg opponent.

But the problem with your statement, and please correct me if im wrong, is that each ban is still worth the same considering the same champs keep getting banned in just about every match. If we had a better balance system then every patch, where there are class or champs reworks/nerfs and buffs, would allow us to switch up or rotate our bans accordingly with only maybe 1 or 2 bans for "OP" champs and the rest for actual team comp/lane opponent bans.

nfzetaApr 24, 20167 votes

I understand what you both are saying but either way i side with Reguius, After all this game has been going on for very long now and because they have so many of certain types of champions i believe even if we take out the op bans 6 is still a lot of times not enough to do strategically. What i mean is that there are so many champions with specific roles that even if you were to only use your bans on things you think will really mess up your comp you will still be left with many champs that play similar enough to still wreck you regardless.

Also that would slightly cure the whole one trick pony way of advancing, which i think is a bit cheap.

Regu1us 9Apr 24, 20165 votes

Except so many of these new champs are getting banned, based on their general hypercarry mechanics. So the number of viable bans are definitely increasing.

56552559_DELApr 25, 20161 votes

And MY argument is that you cannot ask for an extra ban each time they release a new champion. Whatever happened to just finding the counter to it instead of being a chicken shit because everyone is too afraid to find out the answer themselves? That is not a crack at you, just a general statement.

When Aurelion came out, I used ranged against him and did fine even though the helpful hint was trying to say melee was better. With Illaoi, that took a lot longer to figure out than I care to admit but I found that after so many months of playing against her I finally found a solution.

That is what part of the game is about,

dEAdbUsApr 25, 20165 votes

More champions > more champions that counter your combo > more bans

LaventillePrinceApr 25, 20163 votes

You sir are pretty closed miinded. Bordering on simple minded as well. Can only see one side of the story. We definitely need more bans on this game. So many new champs and still only 3 bans per team. 4-5 bans will be perfect per team.

56552559_DELApr 25, 20161 votes

Im looking at a bigger picture. Say you were to get more bans even though the balancing is the problem. Getting more bans would force people to play more champs and that is fine, HOWEVER, what about the people who don't have the points to get more champs? You cant force them to spend money on RP and it wouldn't be fair to force people to buy certain champs they don't want for their role.

Besides, I even mentioned this somewhere else, the more bans you have, the more people can target ban a specific role and by doing that, it gives that team an advantage by banning 5 champs in that role and then building a team comp around that. Grant it, the other team can do that too, but the odds of the other team doing that in the same match are slim.

And my other point is still the fact that getting more bans doesn't solve the issue, only delays it. There are still going to be OP champs if the balancing is not there which no one seems to want considering I hardly see any threads on that but see more on wanting bans. That plus the fact that more bans would also mean more chances for troll bans and possibly higher queue times.

But if you people would rather champion for more bans to treat a symptom, go right ahead because in the end you guys will be right back at it again at a later time since you are wanting the wrong thing.

Biff ManlyApr 25, 20163 votes

So all we have to do is get Riot to stop producing new champs, items, and any other additions so that they can get the game into a perfectly balanced state?

MrryZApr 24, 20166 votes

And I agree with your point wholeheartedly that bans should be used strategically to remove counters but whichever way you look at it there will never be a true state of balance, there's always going to be strong picks and with more champions it becomes harder to achieve a team where you can say you've banned counters to it.

sir d wreckApr 24, 20164 votes

I agree with your line of thinking, but so far this season they are not taking that approach and they aren't even showing signs of them changing/balancing these OP champs in this snowball season. So people are asking for the next logical thing in hope that Riot might actually listen to that, which is extra bans. Also, IMO it does make sense to have 5 bans, because currently if you're first/second pick you don't get to ban anyone, forcing you to pick OP champs in the hopes to overcome your counter (your team won't always ban who you want). If all 5 members got a ban, that might help with letting them pick a champ they WANT to play, not pick a champ that is a safe first pick because it's pick or ban.

56552559_DELApr 24, 20161 votes

With how Riot is and people saying that Riot wont listen to the community on the balancing, what makes people think Riot will listen to the community on wanting more bans?

That doesnt make sense.

sir d wreckApr 24, 20164 votes

Because they listen sometimes? It's how this game has worked since the beginning.

56552559_DELApr 24, 20161 votes

So if by chance they DO listen, you would rather them listen to the community for more bans rather than to have them listen to the community on balancing the champs everyone wants more bans for?

sir d wreckApr 24, 20164 votes

No, the fallback request is the extra bans, the main request is to balance the champs properly. It's not like we can pick what they listen to. Think of it as we're asking Riot this: "Well, if you're not going to balance champs, can we at least get more bans?".

FantasySniperApr 24, 20166 votes

The point of bans is to remove champions you don't want to play against.

Much more often than not that means you ban the frustratingly bullshit champions.

There's no way around it, so they might as well embrace it and leave room for more choice in the matter.

56552559_DELApr 25, 20161 votes

I know what the point of bans is.

But to sit there and try to make people accept that its easier to just ask for more bans instead of fighting for the balance of champions is a DEFEATIST attitude which is the REAL bullshit.

FantasySniperApr 25, 20165 votes

We're already fighting for both. We're getting neither.

56552559_DELApr 25, 20161 votes

But if you fight for the balance then there would be no point in fighting for the bans.

That is my point.

FantasySniperApr 25, 20164 votes

That's wrong. We still need more bans if we can ever hope to achieve that idealistic situation where we're not banning because a champion is OP, but because they'll counter your intended composition. It's extremely difficult to ban counters if you only have 3 bans and not everyone gets a choice in what's banned.

56552559_DELApr 25, 20161 votes

If anything is wrong, it is what YOU are saying. By your logic, we would need around 20 bans or so because then instead of constantly balancing champions, you would want more bans every time something becomes even remotely good to use considering how many champs there are.

Everything about this subject has to do with the balancing of the champs. Yet most people here still don't understand that and going based off your comment, you are REFUSING to understand that.

rescuedApr 25, 20163 votes

Lets say every champion is perfectly balanced. You are saying its not right for every person on each team to get 1 ban, so they can ban whoever counters their champion? Balance has nothing to do with counters, its how the champion plays itself. Morgana will always counter Leona, Annie will always counter Yasuo, whether they are balanced or not. It has to do with their kits.

AMYS GRAVEApr 25, 20163 votes

That is a solution to a symptom.

I'll gladly take a treatment while i wait for a cure.... Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

56552559_DELApr 25, 20161 votes

And by doing that, it will make people forget about the actual problem until it comes up again at which point the cycle will continue.

Its like trying to hold something broken together with duct tape and the longer it goes on the more tape you have to keep using because the original thing is not fixed.

I would rather them make sure the actual thing is ready to go rather than to release a half assed solution just to make you people forget about the real issue and have the same issue rear its head again with you guys asking for yet another strip of tape.

AMYS GRAVEApr 25, 20163 votes

Can you tell me what they should do to fix the problem? What is in the works to fix this? There is no silver bullet solution to perfect balance, the only thing we can hope for is a temporary solution to an otherwise permanent problem.

56552559_DELApr 25, 20161 votes

Its a very simple solution either everyone is ignoring or is saying wont work yet they think Riot will give in to the "more bans" idea.

Its called BALANCING. The thing I have been saying this whole time. All they have to do is look at all the most banned and pick champs and their stats for in-game and balance those champs accordingly. And when those champs are balanced, focus on the next line of champs to be fixed and just keep up with the balancing as the cycle goes on since it is a continuous process.

Its just that simple. But people would rather have more bans and complain about why nothing is being done rather than to hold Riot to what they are supposed to do.

AMYS GRAVEApr 25, 20163 votes

There will always be balance outliers, and to expect perfection from the live balance team is nothing but naive. You even admit that by saying

All they have to do is look at all the most banned and pick champs and their stats for in-game and balance those champs accordingly.

which means that they must be left imbalanced for some time in order to assess that. When they balance those champs then the community inevitably finds another combination of items and champions that is stronger than what is currently being played and the cycle continues. How was riot to know that iceborn+sunfire was imbalanced before someone even discovered the combination? Once it was discovered it takes a few patches to know that its overpowered, another patch to work on a fix, then the balance adjustment is out the following patch so the balance team is by design 2 months behind any meta shifts. That's not even mentioning balancing new content like champ updates or item adjustments.

56552559_DELApr 25, 20161 votes

Im not expecting perfection. I am expecting something better than just a Band-Aid or putting a rug over a hole in the floor which is what you and a lot of others are wanting.

AMYS GRAVEApr 25, 20163 votes

You said

Its called BALANCING. The thing I have been saying this whole time. All they have to do is look at all the most banned and pick champs and their stats for in-game and balance those champs accordingly.

Which is basically hating on the live balance team saying they aren't doing their jobs which is just not true. Their work is necessarily delayed so long that that is not a valid solution to the problem. So i ask again, if we cant have more bans what can we have that we don't already have to improve the situation?

56552559_DELApr 25, 20161 votes

Oh really? If they were doing their jobs then why does everyone keep banning Mundo, Jax, Yi, Graves, Zed, Udyr etc in just about every match everyone gets into? That doesn't sound like they are doing any balancing to me.

All the reworks I have seen are on champs that were not really used like Taric and Poppy.

But go ahead and keep thinking they are doing their job. I will let the bans make my argument for me.

AMYS GRAVEApr 25, 20164 votes

everyone keep banning Mundo, Jax, Yi, Graves, Zed, Udyr

https://champion.gg/statistics/#?sortBy=general.banRate&order=descend

Mundo? hes 75th in the most banned list. dont know what you're smoking....

You can hate on the balance team, qq more.

All the reworks I have seen are on champs that were not really used like Taric and Poppy.

the rework team is not the balance team, and those champions are reworked because they were not compelling to play. Why would you want them to rework the popular champions?

But go ahead and keep thinking they are doing their job. I will let the bans make my argument for me.

You dont want us to have bans, but you use them to make your argument... which only speaks to our need to have more.

56552559_DELApr 25, 20161 votes

Im only going to say this 1 more time since you are having such difficulty understanding it.

The reason you don't need more bans is because the bans are NOT the problem. Why is it you guys are wanting the bans? Its because of the champs and how abused they are. Yet you are trying to twist my words to fit your argument.

The problem is the balancing which is why you guys want more bans yet you obviously don't understand that so this conversation is over.

AMYS GRAVEApr 25, 20163 votes

The reason you don't need more bans is because the bans are NOT the problem.

The bans may not be the problem, but they aid in easing the symptoms of a problem that has no long term solution.

Yet you are trying to twist my words to fit your argument.

I'm really not.

The problem is the balancing

Which is constantly worked on but perfect balance is unachievable given the constantly changing landscape that is league of legends.

yet you obviously don't understand that so this conversation is over.

Good day then.

Elijah ProphetApr 24, 20168 votes

I personally feel that 10 bans is too many. You would simply never, ever see the meta champs.

LudovicoApr 24, 201617 votes

And that´d be bad... why?

RoodToobApr 24, 201612 votes

because if your main becomes meta, you can no longer ever touch them

LudovicoApr 24, 20169 votes

Why would I even want to play what´s "meta". Sure one or two of the champs that I like to play can get meta somewhen - and then until Riot decides to remove the reason they are meta, I wouldn´t play them.

I don´t play Sona/Zed/Ali in URF, I didn´t play tank Ekko/Fiora, and I sure as hell didn´t play the juggernauts, when they were so op. Honestly, I wouldn´t mind if all meta-champs were banned.

RoodToobApr 24, 20165 votes

Illl give you my example i guess : Im a die hard Khazix main. Like through and through i play him in ranked as much as i can. IF there are suddenly 10 bans and Khazix becomes meta. I can no longer play my favourite champ, because he's now forever banned unless people mess up badly.

OneSmoothDudeApr 24, 20168 votes

You're completely ignoring his point.

We don't care that you specifically don't play meta champs, for semi-hipster reasons or otherwise. He's talking about players who main a champion that they love to play, who becomes meta. With 10 bans, they are more likely to never be able to play that champ again while they are in the meta.

There is no doubt that this would happen (more bans = more champs banned = more champ mains who are upset), but I think that such a cost pales in comparison to how much good would be brought about.

LudovicoApr 24, 20162 votes

And you appearently choose to ignore my point. I say, it would be GOOD if he couldn´play his main, if that main´d be broken in the current meta (due to synergy with items, or ANY other reason).

It´d be good to be able to ban out ALL the stuff that´s completely broken/unfun to play with/against! That´d at least promote creativity in terms of comps etc.
It´d be good, if you had to play more than just your one go to main! I´m sick of one trick ponys claiming they are semi "pro". League is about more than "maining" a champion.

OneSmoothDudeApr 25, 20161 votes

And you appearently choose to ignore my point. I say, it would be GOOD if he couldn´play his main, if that main´d be broken in the current meta (due to synergy with items, or ANY other reason).

I agree that there should be more bans. Check out my second paragraph one more time.

What I disagreed with is your reasoning. What you posted looks like, "Well I never play meta champs, so I don't care if everybody else's mains get banned out." You are free to your opinions, of course, but so is that person. And they had a legitimate complaint, so when you reply as you did, you are not exactly helping our cause.

For example, which argument do you think would be more likely to convince someone that having more bans is a good idea:

I'd like more bans because it would empower more players in champ select, and I believe the overall game health would improve.
I'd like more bans because it would probably benefit me the most, and I don't really care what others think.

It´d be good to be able to ban out ALL the stuff that´s completely broken/unfun to play with/against!

I agree. Having more bans would help this.

It´d be good, if you had to play more than just your one go to main! I´m sick of one trick ponys claiming they are semi "pro". League is about more than "maining" a champion.

Eh, that's your opinion. Some people prefer quality over quantity.

I don't see the problem with one-tricks whatsoever; if they perform best with any given champion, then more power to them. For me personally, as a top lane main, I value more what the team comp needs or having a favorable matchup over playing my best champion every game.

It is worth noting that it would seem Riot doesn't have any problems with one-tricks, what with the whole new champ select and such. It encourages one-tricking more than the old system ever could have.

LudovicoApr 26, 20161 votes

I honestly don´t see where my original post gave you the impression, that I specifically:

think it´s for MY benefit if meta-champs´d be banned

so, attributing this to me, feels kinda bad:

I'd like more bans because it would probably benefit me the most, and I don't really care what others think.

But if I understand you correctly you are with me on having more bans, so no point beating a dead horse :P.

Regarding the one-tricks though...

I don't see the problem with one-tricks whatsoever; if they perform best with any given champion, then more power to them. For me personally, as a top lane main, I value more what the team comp needs or having a favorable matchup over playing my best champion every game.

I get all that "quality over quantity" talk. I really do. And if someone in champ select asks the team what he should pick, my answer is almost always "go for your best champ". So in a certain way I´m supporting this playstyle (just so my chances of winning go up).

But if you´d ask me about the skill of the players that only main 1 or 2 champs, I´d say that it CAN be pretty low.

Take for example Zed mains. Did you ever watch any of those trying to last hit with Anivia or Vladimir? Hilarious.

Just because you are the number one challenger Ahri player, doesn´t mean you are fit for the LCS. Playing like that is good enough for dymanic until Dia 1 or Master.