Why mobility sucks so much

Miku Lv99··2 votes·556 views
  1. Snowballing. Yes, mobile champions snowball harder and thus make it harder for you to have any impact on who wins the game as it's more likely one of your teammates will have just fed so hard that you lose. And if your opponent is a fed mobile champion you get to do essentially nothing. Oh and guess what, you don't get to snowball much if they have mobility since they can escape from feeding you more.

  2. Zoning. A fed enemy mobile champion that you don't know where he/she is can essentially zone you. You can't even put up wards since they can just kill you in one combo if they're anywhere close to there and you try to get close enough to put up a ward. So guess what, you have to do essentially nothing again.

  3. Can't participate in fights. That's right, if you're playing an immobile champion, and your team doesn't really have that good of vision and dives really deep in the enemy jungle or tower dives past where it's safe for you to go, you can't even participate in the fight. Only your mobile champions can since they're the only ones that can safely get out. That's right, you get to do nothing again.

But what if no one had mobility? Then you could participate in many more things since they wouldn't be able to just jump on you and kill yes. I.e., the more mobility there is in the game, the less interactive it is. Some champions already are very boring to play since your team rarely even gets into fights where you can even participate unless it's at very high elo where they'll actually fight to make use of all the advantages their team has, i.e. you.

So what's the gain from mobility? The mobile champions get to do something more of the time and make "flashy plays" which are really just cheap low counterplay plays.

But at the cost of ruining the game for the immobile champions. If you've ever played Chess competitively, you'd know that a queen worth 9 points, whereas a rook is only 5. Why? Because a queen is basically a rook with mobility and mobility is so good that it's worth 9/5 as much. And it seems to me that this game should be thought of in the same way. Meaning that a champion with mobility should only be about 5/9 as strong otherwise since it's such a huge advantage to be mobile.

But is this the case? No. And almost every mobile champion is much better than the immobile counterparts. And the only good immobile champions pretty much are the ones that are effective from afar. I.e. they're either very long range like Xerath or they can use their abilities from safe places like Janna.

Conclusion: Mobility makes the game much less interactive for the average champion and eventually you'll be stuck doing essentially nothing so much of the time with most champions that the game will not even be worth playing. I'm thinking I'm probably going to quit this game after a couple more champions are released since we'll be closer to this game just being an idlefest.

3 Comments

SEKAI1 votes

Mobility is fine, but to trade it off, they should have mediocre stats/strength depending on how mobile they are.

Otherwise free advantages is after all, still advantages, which sucks for everybody else.

Brotha1 votes

{quoted}

Mobility is fine, but to trade it off, they should have mediocre stats/strength depending on how mobile they are.

I do not agree with this. There is nothing wrong with having a late game highly mobile hypercarry. What is wrong is that same hyper carry having multiple forms of cc.

Mobility should be the trade off for stuns/slows.

DrNova1 votes

I think the biggest problem with mobility is it snowballs itself. Champs without it now have a harder time and will without added mobility, which I dont see them getting, and newer champs have to keep getting mobility to keep up with current champs. Its a slippery slope we cant get out of now.

More from Gameplay

More by Miku Lv99