Do people seriously think your team and the enemy team will spend all their bans and picks just to take all your champion selection? (Unless you play just meta champs)
First solution:Increase champ requirement to play draft or ranked to 20, you get 20 mastery pages after all
Second solution:in the EXTRENELY RARE case that your whole champion pool is banned, match is cancelled and you get requeued
Flaming In 3,2,1.....
warpenguin55559 votes100% true. The only argument that holds any water is the pro play target bans, which riot can change them back to 3 if needed. The only people who are against more bans are the fotm players. I'm personally ok with 8 bans but 10 isn't a bad idea either.
YumaS2Astral9 votes100% true. The only argument that holds any water is the pro play target bans, which riot can change them back to 3 if needed. The only people who are against more bans are the fotm players. I'm personally ok with 8 bans but 10 isn't a bad idea either.
Is there any value on banning all champions of just one pro player?
Maximum Morde10 votesI'd say it's a tough call. By doing this you A. Leave some nasty picks open for the enemy team. B. Miss out on weakening counter comps that the enemy might field against your comp.
Those just to force a single player to his sixth or seven champ? The pros know more than 5 champs. Even if you deem that worthwhile, both teams have the option of doing it, so I don't really see a problem.
Narasimha10 votesThe pros know more than 5 champs.
Everyone knows more than 5 champions. But theres a huge difference between their 3rd and their 5th best. It's like telling a goalie to suddenly become a striker. They can do it. But chances are, it won't be their full potential and strength. And at that level, every ounce counts.
Though to be fair, thats not my main argument. My issue is that increasing bans simply won't do anything. You'll ban who you find annoying, then the next tier rises up to take their place. Ban them, then the tier after them comes up. Balance patches shift it around, but don't solve the issue. You may as well have 100 bans.
It Hertz When IP9 votesExcept that the number of champions in the second tier is larger, and they aren't nearly as aggravating to deal with on average.
Narasimha1 votesReally? How is it bigger? There will always be a 'best' champion to pick. And then you'll only see those champions picked at the same rate as the first tier.
Remlap122316 votesNocturne is strong, but is he anywhere near as bullshit as Fiora?
Miss Fortune is strong, but is she anywhere near as bullshit as Graves?
Do you see my point? The champions that are the most OP out of the entire roster have ridiculous balance problems. The ones after are strong, but not bullshit. There's a difference between slightly overtuned 
and just flat out broken. 
Shonjl3 votesBut here is another question then, why not make 5 bans so 1 ban per each person. They then choose who they want. Sure it could be used for just FOTM champs but maybe I am a top laner and I don't wanna deal with Fiora or Teemo since they mess my champ up. I should have the ability to do it.
I want 10 bans not so much because of the larger champ pool (That is a valid reason though) But because it SHOULD be everyone has a vote. There is literally no defense against that.
kile1475 votesI assume it would be similar to putting multiple defenders on a particularly troublesome player in other sports. You will lessen that player's impact on the game, but at risk of letting the rest of the team run over you.
Saphixia4 votesyes a lot actually, imagine instead of seeing 
and 
, you started seeing different junglers such as 
, all people who are barely, but still played in competitive league
Lost Hp2 votesyes a lot actually, imagine instead of seeing
And then you woud face he same problem again because efficiently > versatility
For example Why shoud someone pick champ X if champ Y is stronger and increase his win chance?
>>>>
AMYS GRAVE6 votesWhy shoud someone pick champ X if champ Y is stronger and increase his win chance?
Actual strategic diversity.
Lost Hp1 votesActual strategic diversity.
Before you can execute a strategie you need suitable champions.
And we are again at the startpoint >_<
AMYS GRAVE4 votesI think nemisis draft taught us that champions that we thought were weak were actually quite scary in the right situations.
ChaoticPinecone3 votesIts happened before, especially on teams with a very well known carry. Now, generally the team who does this loses, but not because of the bans - if youre in that position where youre desperate to stop one player from carrying, you arent expected to win anyway. And generally that player just pulls out another champion and carries with that.
From my recollection, its happened a many times agasint Huni, a few agasint Reignover, a few agasint Faker. It happened agasint Hai when he was a midlaner and spammed Zed in almost every game. Shiftur has had targeted bans agasint his Ziggs and Ahri a couple season ago, as did Zionspartan.
GhastlyGhoulMan9 votesIs there any value on banning all champions of just one pro player?
If you spend all your bans on Faker, he'll just take mid. ;P
AbusingMyRights2 votesask remi she just ragequit out of LCS for target bans
Left Hook Larry19 votesfotm players
Here's where that logic is flawed:
Riot has stated that they do not like how the ban system is used to ban out "OP" things. The original goal of bans was to help teams ban things that would counter their team comp (for example banning rammus because your team wants to pick a poke comp). The point is that the whole point of the ban system was never there to ban broken champs. Broken champs are the problem here, not the ban system
It Hertz When IP23 votesTell me with a straight face that there won't ever be broken champions and maybe I'll care what Riot's opinion on this is.
Left Hook Larry7 votesThere will
but more bans won't solve that issue. Riot stepping their game up will
FantasySniper11 votesAnd since they know they can't actively balance sufficiently enough for the current amount of bans to satisfy, they should increase the number of bans.
Left Hook Larry1 votesBut you're not getting my point
Them increasing the bans will just lead to more broken champs. It won't solve any problems.
FantasySniper2 votesI don't care if there's more broken champs, because at least we'll be able to ban them.
If Riot claims they don't want bans to be used for that purpose, they should be doing as you (and everyone else) said.
But they won't, so it's a necessary evil, and they have to suck it up.
Left Hook Larry1 votesRight now we have about 10 broken champs that we have to ban. If they allow us 10 bans, don't you think there will be even more broken champs coming up?
Point is more bans doesn't solve the problem and it is stupid for us to ask for more
FantasySniper2 votesAs per the thread, that argument is really bad.
More bans stop more broken champs. That's all there is to it.
TAScientist4 votesIf that's what the ban system is intended to be used for, then there should STILL be more bans. There's ~100ish more champs now than when the game launched, and it's a lot harder to ban out champs that counter a teamcomp simply because there are more champs that fill similar roles and thus can counter said teamcomp. To take your example of a poke comp, Wukong, Malphite, Thresh, Leona, Sejuani, etc, can all hard-engage on a poke comp with relative ease, but there's no way you can ban them all.
Slamurai Jack19 votesThat's never been my argument. My argument against having 10 bans has always been very simple; it's because of how people use their bans. Whenever I see someone argue for 10 bans, they always present a list of 10 champs they think should be banned. That list is always something like this: 
. Of those 10 champs, 3 of them are potentially worth banning for being too strong. The other 7 are merely "I find this champ annoying and don't want to play against them" bans. And frankly, champs should never be permabanned simply for being annoying to face because what is Riot supposed to do with a permabanned but balanced champ? Nerf them anyway? Leave them permabanned until a rework that likely won't get them out of permaban jail anyway? Just ignore it and hope it goes away?
There's also the issue that the community tends to overwhelmingly ban new things, whether it's new champs, reworked champs, or even champs that synergize well with a new item. I remember back when Feral Flare came out and literally all 6 bans were used on Flare junglers every single game, even ones that weren't particularly good with it. Point is, the community already use the 6 bans they have far too irresponsibly to consider giving them 10 bans. That's my argument and has always been my argument.
It Hertz When IP7 votesBans are for champions you don't want to face. If I don't want to face Blitz, I will ban him. COULD he be countered? Is he OP? FOTM? I DON'T CARE. I just don't want to face him.
Also, with the adding of the new champion select system, I've personally seen a much greater variety of bans. One game, the guy below me banned 
. Not because she's OP, not because she's FoTM, but because he didn't like her and the champion he was going with (don't remember who it was) struggles against Ahri. Another game the enemy banned Soraka and Sona, then ran a poke comp in bot lane.
YumaS2Astral18 votesThere is also the bad argument "If we had 10 bans, an entire class of champions could potentially be banned"
You ban an entire class and also leaves another class completely open. It doesn't matter if all assassins are banned if all mages are open, for example.
Also, none of the classes nowadays have less than 10 champions.
Nahui16 votesWhen you end your post with something like "Flaming in 3 2 1" or "Bring in the downvotes" or something, it's very immature and makes your post just sound silly, as if you're implying the counterside is a bunch of children.
Second, Riot does not want 10 champions banned every match. That makes it so easy to just ban out a meta, or in general just ban so many champions. You'll ban out the 2-3 OPs, then just ban the 7 very good ones. That's not the point of League. The balance is not so skewed that you need 10 champions banned. 6 is enough just to get through some troublesome ones, but other than that, you don't need them. Learn to play vs the other ones lol.
BadmoonBC6 votes10 bans would be great especially in the lcs where it's always the same crap. I see points on countering the 10 bans but in no way does the negative out weigh the positive. Still blows my mind with all the champs they have now that they don't have 10 bans
Kamai6 votesPeople keep noting that you can knock out a whole class of champions, but what class of champions (in teamfight roles) can be banned out with 6 champions?
Dive Assassins? 
Disengage champs? 
etc...
Longer range ADCs? 
Healing supports? 
(Though so many give sustain level shields that this might not even be a point.)
On the note of pushing someone to a bad pick, you can already do that with 3 bans/side + fp with a decent amount of luck. With dynamic queue, if a person's crippled going to their 4th pick in their main role, things are already going to be bad. The people who really want to do their role? They're going to have enough practice to be forced down to a pocket pick. The ones who aren't risk struggling already.
If someone here can list 1 class of champions that can be removed with 5 bans + fp (other than healing supports), and I'd be willing to second think 10 bans.
cuddlykitten45 votesIt's so the enemy team doesn't go "alright banning 
and . Now that the enemy support is left with piddly weak options, we'll just merc them over and over until they rage." I mean, that's how I'd do it. Ban out a whole role, then merc them when they're forced to play a weaker champ there.
warpenguin55529 votesIt's so the enemy team doesn't go "alright banning
You can pick from these still. Braum Janna and Alistair are far from piddy weak. Bard isn't bad in the right hands Lulu and Tahm are seen pretty often in the LCS as well.
Mecha MaIphite14 votes"support"
warpenguin5553 votes"support"
is that not a thing anymore?
Mecha MaIphite16 votesLet's not pretend that Annie "supports" do anything but build damage, and usually without a sightstone.
Count Zubat9 votesThe best way to protect your adc is killing enemy adc. Simple as that.
50000000000000008 votesAlso important to note: just because Annie support players are generally just people who didn't get mid doesn't mean that Annie is a bad support. You can build Annie full tank/CDR and still have a decent support.
Saphixia1 votes are midlaners tbh
warpenguin5555 votes
who can be played support. dual roles bb
ChaoticPinecone4 votesThe problem is that CuddlyKitten's bans dont make any sense. Instead, ban out and then pick . Youre almost guaranteed to counter whoever the enemy support decides to pick.
warpenguin5553 votesThe problem is that CuddlyKitten's bans dont make any sense. Instead, ban out
you could still go and be ok. you did say almost though
Elewd5 votesPeople keep acting like people will ban out a whole roll, that won't happen at all. no team is gonna band 5 adc's whiel the other team also bans the other 5. its gonne be "ban the champs that are op" and in LCS its gonna be "ban the champs that counter our comp + the op champs"
Heedprime5 votesThe only arguments I have seen against increasing the number of bans could be used against the entire ban system in the first place.
Joaffle4 votesI say teams get 4 pick bans instead because the value of the person who is picking first. If people who select their champ first would have the advantage if they are able to ban. Besides if its 5 bans for each person we will see the same 10 champs ban every fucking game. Also with the power picks in the game like elise, lee, and etc champs we always see in bans will alway be ban. This power picks champs won't mean nothing if they are always ban this gives risk when picking bans. Also heres a good example of 10 champs who will be basic be ban every game. 
Derfel4 votesYou gotta understand 99% of the playerbase can only play Ahri/Zed.
Elijah Prophet2 votesWhat about the potential issue of, like, 3 champions literally never being played. Am I the only one thinks it's kind of a dumb idea? I also feel like teams would abuse this system by targetting one lane-pool: for instance, ban 10 ADCs or ban 10 Mid-Laners. Idk, I just personally think it's simply illogical to have that many bans.
macromite5 votessounds good to me, if champions are perma bans with that system then riot should focus on making them not terrible to play against.
also, maybe five bans in one role, but you would be hard pressed to find two entire teams that would ban just one type of champion.
