Boards›Gameplay

Increase # of bans?

Logi Kobee·2/5/2016, 5:03:42 PM·25 votes·1,593 views

When the game came out 2/21/2009 into beta there were 4 bans. For the first 17 champs released(About 24% bannable). Which was increased to 6 after fizz(The 88th champ release and 6.8% bannable) We are now at 129 with still only 6 bans which is 4.7% of the current roster of which we can ban. Huge decline since beta release. In past seasons the same 6-8 champs that were deemed "broken" or "op" and got banned from matches. Since people LOVE to play the easy, broken champs to win games. In season 6 with the current roster there are 10-12 maybe more "broken/op" champs in the game that seem to make it into every game somehow. Most games I see played or personally play have the same rotation of champs depending on the bans. It's kinda irritating. I just found myself now banning all the time cause he is wreaking havoc on most games I've seen him in. With the same items everygame, devourers and rageblade then just tankyness coming out of nowhere at 600ms and destroying you then outrunning all cc and damage.

I just think it's about time with the new ban system that they need to either make it 8 or 10 bans(10 would be nice then each player gets 1 ban) And would have a lot less of these .

But that's just my opinion. What do you guys think?

17 Comments

Eawaf2/5/2016, 7:05:20 PM7 votes

With over 120 champions i'd be up for 10 bans on each team, each player getting 30 sec to ban 2 champs. Heck you could even make it 20 seconds for 2 bans. And if folks don't ban on time, the system randomly bans champions.

I'm up for w/e gets more champions into rotation instead of seeing the same 20 champions being picked over and over at all elo's.

Penns2/5/2016, 5:22:56 PM2 votes

Still TahmKench ? lol How about Fiora Malphite Lux

67chrome2/5/2016, 6:42:45 PM2 votes

But that's just my opinion. What do you guys think?

Main issue with more bans is this: While the number of champions one can play has certainly increased, the amount of time it takes to master champions really has not. It generally takes 3040 games with a given champion to really main them: and periodic nerfs/buffs/item changes can dramatically change how a champion lanes, builds, trades, and team-fights requiring even more time to get the hang of. As such: more bans increases the likely-hood of target-banning a certain person. While individuals certainly exist that are impossible to ban out even given 25+ bans against them, the vast majority of players competitive or otherwise tend to have a rather small pool of champions they do well with. With enough games with a player picking an "OP" champion because they're available and proceeding to fail hardcore, it's also pretty clear target-banning a player so they play like that guy is going to significantly increase your chances of winning over pretending to be Riot's balance team as well.

More bans would place a lot of stress on players to diversify rather than perfecting their skills with there favorite champions, and forcing players to play a lot of champions they have ~eh levels of fun with rather than there favorite isn't the greatest. Sucks a lot of fun out of the game.

More bans also increases the amount of champions new players need to enter ranked for the first time (as you need enough to not be completely banned out to enter ranked). Which sounds good initially until you realize getting to level 30 in the first place takes ~2 months with daily play, and ~1 month with no job/no school heavy play. A wide range of games on the market don't even require that level of investment to 100% complete, and yet LoL players are barred from the ranked experience even longer. Making ranked an even more exclusive club is also really counter-intuitive when contemplating what ranked actually is: it's about ranking how good players are compared to one-another, not a place where good players hang out. And making the entry much more time consuming excludes more naturally talented players while still retaining a lot of unskilled players.

And with how champions are priced in the store: a 2 champion increase due to picks/bans is a substantial hike in the IP entrance fee, as you run out of all the 450 champions and need to branch out into more and more costly champions. If you're trying to learn a specific roll rather than running fill, it's probably 2 6300 champions just to enter ranked.

A higher IP demand for entrance to ranked also places a higher demand on IP farming bots and purchasable accounts, which isn't great.

Finally - most broken, OP, must pick/ban champions are only better than the next guy in line by 0.1% looking at their statistics and performance, even factoring in things like checking games vs. players with 40+ games on the champions they're playing. The notion there's an exclusive club of ~~15 champions in total that are must pick/ban super-OP and giving 15 bans would make the game really balanced is complete BS. All champions in LoL are on a really steady gradient of power. Ban the best guy? there's the 2nd best guy that does everything the best guy does but 0.5% worse. And a 3rd best that does everything the 2nd best does but 0.5% worse. And a 4th, and 5th, etc. Giving more bans so the player-base can pretend they're the balance team just moves the arbitrary line of perception concerning who's OP and who's T_T never played. Granted - there's occasionally 12 champions that Riot accidentally over-tunes that actually do have a huge lead on the next guy and really should be banned, but 6 bans has always been perfectly capable of dealing with those champions. Riot doesn't rework/release champions in large enough quantities to make that a percentage of the roster problem.

TLDR: Increasing the number of bans isn't a kind of change that should be done lightly, doing so has it's fair share of cons.

Slamurai Jack2/6/2016, 1:11:02 AM2 votes

Half the champs you listed never deserve to be banned and the other half only deserves to be situationally banned. The only must ban champ on that list is Graves and only because he's blatantly overtuned.

HeIen KeIIer2/5/2016, 6:27:32 PM1 votes

I do think that there should be more bans, but there are also some big cons:

Champ Select already takes longer, and adding more time to the bans phase would extend that
More people would queue dodge, extending pick time even longer

Although I do have an interesting idea: What if you could switch pick spots with someone. Like if you had first pick but you would rather ban someone. (for example if you intended to play Tryndamere , you could switch spots for the sake of banning Teemo , a deadly counter) And in another case you could switch to first pick if you wanted to secure a popular champion, for instance Jhin is popular right now.

HeIen KeIIer out.

Phenyxs2/6/2016, 2:26:56 AM1 votes

I agree with you and I posted myself the other day asking the community the thought of more bans. 3 bans per side isn't working. the focus has been on top jg sup or a bad encounter game before they had so they blow a ban with a new group. I have seen a lot of players get frustrated over the position not being looked at. I think we need more bans at least in the Rank side of it for now and see how that goes. We do have a ton of champs but never enough. But to ban the same ones over and over leaves the door wide open for a mistake and bad counters. Edit- I think there should be bans allowed per lane. so each lane can ban a counter they know may be a issue in there match up. This at least gives you a small shot at what your counter could be.

TheMinez2/5/2016, 5:32:08 PM1 votes

Let's see, Jax Rengar DrMundo Rengar Darius Fiora Rengar and maby Rengar

Left Hook Larry2/5/2016, 7:33:44 PM1 votes

Lmfao what? You ban Udyr and you want more bans? How about instead of wasting bans a champ that isn't OP you actually learn how to deal with him? Maybe then you will climb out of silver

B6WS TSW992/5/2016, 10:24:41 PM1 votes

I think we should have more bans but only in soloq and not competitive play, because then it would be possible to ban out a player

Alex Sloan2/5/2016, 11:03:49 PM1 votes

Needs to happen, I would prefer 10. But even 8 would be such a significant improvement.

aperson12/6/2016, 7:36:44 PM1 votes

I really don't see the downside to 10 bans in Solo Queue. In competitive there is maybe the possibility of banning out a player, but beyond that I don't really see an issue. It deals with obnoxious champs, gives equal banning power to all players, and increases champ variety.

Like, what is the downside? Some champs will be permabanned, that's not the players' fault, it's the balance team's fault. At least people will be able to play champs they enjoy without worrying about getting dumpstered by that malphite/corki/zed/whatever who they left open.

Malhammers2/5/2016, 6:05:24 PM1 votes

Could you imagine how long it would take for there to be 10 bans at 30 seconds/ban? 5.5 minutes JUST TO GET THROUGH BAN PHASE (including the 30 second "this is who I am going to pick phase"). Then another potential 5 mins just to get through picks, probably to have the last pick dodge anyways. Your talking potentially 11 minutes from the time you join a game until you get to the loading screen. Then add another 3-5 mins for the loading screen and then another 2 mins until jg camps spawn. Nearly 20 mins from when you click to join a game until the game actually starts...Ill HEAVY pass on that.

supersonic22/5/2016, 6:08:29 PM1 votes

its funny