Honestly? If a champ has a PERFECT50% win rate they are balanced. That's half games won and half lost meaning the perfect balance
Sure above 50% means they might need minor nerfs or so (the higher the % the more nerfs) but is 40-60% really that bad?
Tormentula4 votesIt depends on several factors:
W/R means nothing in most cases... however if the winrate is ridiculously high then there is an issue.
The problem that synergizes with W/R is pick rate, if something is used only 1% of the time, then the high winrate isn't the champion being broken, it's the 1% population actually knowing how to use that champ.
If the champ has a high pick rate like 10% with 60% winrate (udyr) then that means a huge majority of people are picking that champ, and are infact auto winning with it. The high pick rate would assume both good and bad players are using him, ratioing it around 50% but in this case, almost anybody can use this champ to its full abilities based on his usage (a huge sample size) and win.
There are champs with very low win/rates (kindred and rengar, champs people worry about being broken but they have a 45% w/r) but high usage and ban rates, meaning people who do play these champs often can be easily bad with them and less mindless using them, or their bans prevent people from having much practice with them and the few times they see the light of day it usually ends badly.
Sir Yamazuki2 votesIt depends on several factors:
W/R means nothing in most cases... however if the winrate is ridiculously high then there is an issue.
**The problem that synergizes with W/R is pick rate, if something is used only 1% of the time, then the high winrate isn't the champion being broken, it's the 1% population actually knowing how to use that champ. **
If the champ has a high pick rate like 10% with 60% winrate (udyr) then that means a huge majority of people are picking that champ, and are infact auto winning with it. The high pick rate would assume both good and bad players are using him, ratioing it around 50% but in this case, almost anybody can use this champ to its full abilities based on his usage (a huge sample size) and win.
There are champs with very low win/rates (kindred and rengar, champs people worry about being broken but they have a 45% w/r) but high usage and ban rates, meaning people who do play these champs often can be easily bad with them and less mindless using them, or their bans prevent people from having much practice with them and the few times they see the light of day it usually ends badly.
Completely not true. Some low pick rate champions are picked by inexperienced players far more often than some of the higher pick rate champions (as a ratio), or at an equal rate. Less people playing a champion doesn't mean it's only experienced players, it simply means there's both less experienced and less inexperienced players playing that champion; so the ratio simply depends on champion and nothing at all to do with their pick rate.
The only time pick rate really matters is when they're winning often even when being picked with and into anything, as a champion that can do well with anything or against anything is generally not very good.
Tormentula1 votesI think you misread something.
Of course if something has low pick rate and low or adverage w/r, they'll even out from good and bad players trying the champ.
However if you see something like.. (example, not saying this happened) evelynn with .6% Pick rate and a 60% winrate, does that make eve broken or just the few players playing her making her w/r look insane? It's not showing everybody just picks eve to win, it shows some use her right, but most don't bother cause she's too difficult. Udyr for example, he has high pick/win ratings which is why he's an issue right now... in this case players are picking him to win, and simply just to win as 10% pick with 60% w/r doesn't particular even bad from good.
I requote myself when I said the high winrate champ I never mentioned it's only experienced players picking that champ, I said if the champ is dominating the meta without that much play, it's not the champ that's broken, it's the playerbase using it to their fulliest potential, either evening or overwhelming the bad playerbase.
The problem that synergizes with W/R is pick rate, if something is used only 1% of the time, then **the high winrate isn't the champion ** being broken, it's the 1% population actually knowing how to use that champ.
Would you want a nerf on a champion with 1% usage just because it has high winrate? Or something used all the time (10%) with high winrate?
Sir Yamazuki2 votesI think you misread something.
Of course if something has low pick rate and low or adverage w/r, they'll even out from good and bad players trying the champ.
However if you see something like.. (example, not saying this happened) evelynn with .6% Pick rate and a 60% winrate, does that make eve broken or just the few players playing her making her w/r look insane? It's not showing everybody just picks eve to win, it shows some use her right, but most don't bother cause she's too difficult. Udyr for example, he has high pick/win ratings which is why he's an issue right now... in this case players are picking him to win, and simply just to win as 10% pick with 60% w/r doesn't particular even bad from good.
I requote myself when I said the high winrate champ I never mentioned it's only experienced players picking that champ, I said if the champ is dominating the meta without that much play, it's not the champ that's broken, it's the playerbase using it to their fulliest potential, either evening or overwhelming the bad playerbase.
Would you want a nerf on a champion with 1% usage just because it has high winrate? Or something used all the time (10%) with high winrate?
Here's a recent example: When Brand support had a ~55% win rate and a lower pick rate he was played by someone with 5 or less games almost 40% of the time or 15 and below nearly 60% of the time. He was very rarely played by someone experienced with him yet had an above average overall win rate. On the other side, you have Thresh with his constant 30%+ pick rate and he's played by someone with 125+ games ~27% of the time or 50+ 54% of the time yet has only peaked at 49% win rate. With your argument, Brand didn't deserve to be nerfed and Thresh does, even though inexperienced Brands were out performing Experienced Threshs and then we would have to nerf Thresh despite the fact he's performing rather average even when played well which would result in him being useless.
So, again, a lower pick rate doesn't mean the people playing the champion know what they are doing. It is different depending on the champion and has absolutely nothing at all to do with their pick rate. If a champion is dominating, they should be nerfed regardless of their popularity.
By the way, Udyr was already doing really well before his pick rate skyrocketed, so are you going to tell me you would be fine with Udyr's high win rate if he stayed at an average pick rate?
Then two last things:
This is my last response here, I will read what you respond with though, if you do.
astralwit2 votesWinrates != Balance
a champion can have a high winrate and still not be OP
winrate reflects mostly on reliability and ease of use
Dominick Destine2 votesWin rate in isolation means nothing barring edge cases (Release leb and post-rework GP with over 80% win rate).
Win rate must be used with other data points to form a cluster which can then be accurately evaluated.
Tohob1 votesi should hope people don't think 50% = op
YCitizenSnipsY1 votes=< 45% or => 55% is usually when balance concerns start to arise. It is also usually paired with pick rate. If a champion has a high pick rate and win rate they are depending on the numbers strong or out right op. And vice versa if the champ has a low pick rate and win rate they are probably weak or UP. Very rarely do champion balance issues come up unless both of those conditions of High pick rate and win rate or low pick rate and win rate are met.
2LUCID1 votesAnything over 55% is unbalanced when represented by over a 10% play rate. It simply means many players can jump in and have success more often than not on a champion without much exp on them. Look at all the Godyrs running around now, it's because he's broken.
Abyssphere1 votesYes, 40-60% is bad. If you think anywhere between 40% and 60% means balanced then we only would have had about five sets of nerfs/buffs over the entire history of the game.
DeathBurst1 votes40 or 60 % is really bad, yes. There are 10 champions in a single game, so, if we simplify a bunch of things, each champion is responsible for only a tenth of the outcome. Being at 55% already means that you have a perfect outcome, and that you lose only because of other champs in the same match. Being at 60% means that you are so strong you are able to compensate for another champ in your team.
Of course, this is grossly over-simplified, it's just to give you an intuition, and winrates should never be used alone for balance decision, there a LOT of other factors*, but +/-10% is a HUGE deviation in a 5v5 game like LoL.
*(For instance, champions with a small but dedicated player-base are expected to have higher than average winrate. Mechanically complex champs are expected to have lower than average winrate because of lower leagues polluting the stats, etc.)
