Boards›Gameplay

So the most important reason for the new ban system a lower chance of permabanned champions

Who is Taliyah··33 votes·2,093 views

http://www.surrenderat20.net/2017/05/red-post-collection-dev-on-launching-10.html

**Alternating Bans ** Like the six ban style, but adding four extra before the pick phase https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-fBBi3rhwgBg/WShttiEybFI/AAAAAAAAl44/Tjk7p6o6N7w-RPAzTvusqvkpPbhguP5EgCLcB/s640/alternating_edit.png

✔ Everyone gets a ban ✔ Consistent champ select order to now

✘ Later bans are pressured into banning meta champs ✘ Certain champs at higher risk of permabans ✘ Much longer champ select

Snake Draft _Either this, or the ban phase is mirrored, starting on red side _ https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-W__jKa7ru08/WSht9zCIDFI/AAAAAAAAl48/c2pb7YKCEfQPoEoD-x2WBs4mPeNU8mTLwCLcB/s640/snakedraft_edit.png

✔ Everyone gets a ban ✔ Could be a shorter champ select

✘ Later bans are pressured into banning meta champs ✘ Certain champs at higher risk of permabans ✘ Basically a worse esports draft system

Captain's Draft One player picks all five bans for the team https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-UJOdL41TmMc/WShuS_f9A0I/AAAAAAAAl5A/TIkbrJoLCN8ZMx5CzZMWlz39JHkHveCPgCLcB/s640/captainsdraft_edit.png ✔ Reduces time to game

✘ One player has all the bans ✘ Every four out of five games, you have no ban power ✘ Lots of abuse cases

Blind Simultaneous _The one coming to a draft queue near you _ https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-FAd8TRSBpeA/WShuje0we4I/AAAAAAAAl5E/w01xFA0fGN8Jyzove-TAhoVfOEClSeT7wCLcB/s640/blind_edit.png

✔ Everyone gets a ban ✔ Equal ban power for everyone ✔ Shortens champ select significantly **✔ Lowest chance of permabanned champs **

✘ Duplicate bans might feel like a waste ✘ Lower strategic intent ✘ Inconsistency to pro play

I wonder WHY "certain" champs are at risk of being permabanned.

49 Comments

Lord Desert10 votes

What about a 2-3-3-2 ban system? Or a 1-3-3-2-1/2-3-2-2-1 (team who has firstban =/= first pick in those examples) Its is faster then any other systems except the blind ban. And still has all the advantages of the others.

Also "Lowest chance of permabanned champs"? Thats false! The 2-3 most op guys will be permabanned every single game! Because both teams will ban them..... Only the amount of overall "permabanned" champs shrinks a little. From ~4-5 to ~2-3.... So "Lowest chance of permabanned champs" is wrong, it should be: "Lowers the amount of permabanned champs".

And honestly trading NO stratigic banning, the (low) chance of even losing a bann(total of 5 banns not 6) and the frustration if a ban was a duplicate(aka wasted) for this blind ban system doesnt feel right to me!

But the feature of hovering banns should still be implemented, for better coordination and to see what the last persons would like to bann (So they are not forced to bann certain champs).

Legend Titan8 votes

I think the biggest problem with this, is that if the number of permabanned champions arent banned as often due to this change, then there wont be as much data showing that they are detremental to deal with, unfun to play against, opressive, or dont feel like they have reasonable counterplay.

By changing the method, they may be reducing possible data to observe those problems.

Some champions may be balanced as far as win rate, but there is definitely a reason people permaban stuff like Yasuo, Lee Sin, Katarina and many others over the years. They may simply feel oppressive or difficult to deal with. I doubt yasuo would have been scheduled to recieve a nerf recently if only his winrate and playrate were observable. His banrate gives a clear indication of, even though hes balanced, people dont enjoy how it feels to play against him. (mainly his laning phase most likely). Lee sin on the other hand has a balanced winrate, though his pick rate is phenominal, and so people dont enjoy dealing with him every single game, where skilled lee sins just dominate the game. Other champions like Caitlyn, have 40% playrates with 52-53% winrates. These are permabanned because they are statistically efficient bans. And these may not be permabanned anymore because you may assume the other team will ban it, and it go unbanned.

Overall, I understand some people want to play the champions they love, and it is sad when that champion is permabanned, though they are usually banned for a reason, even if the reason isnt balance, it is usually feel, or that they are played every single game and therefore a decent idea to ban (which usually indicates another problem, if they are pick ban). By reducing the chances of champions being pick banned, you are reducing banrate data, which provides player feedback on a champion indirectly.

the weeaboo8 votes

Rito: Well we want champs not to be permabanned Us: Well champs shouldn't be so strong they need to be banned every single game. Rito:

http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/swtn.gif

GULAG 4 U2 votes

I'm just going to repeat this. High banrate doesn't mean the champion necessarily is a problem.

Example, pantheon. He has no bad matchups right now; the worst ones he has 49% winrate. He's strong as hell. Yet no one bans this busted champion. It's definitively not pantheon isn't annoying, because he is ridiculously frustrating to face. Most players say shit like 'I want to shoot myself after playing against Pantheon' in fact. It's because of his reputation. It isn't "Opop", it's not one is aware he even exists right now.

Alygriv1 votes

What? Fiora is a bad matchup for Pantheon?

http://i.imgur.com/8fkVSJO.png

GULAG 4 U1 votes

I thought it was bad in theory, because parry blocks shield you know. Turn out in practice that isn't the case. Removing that line.

Alygriv2 votes

Yeah she has some outplay potential with her parry but the thing is that Pantheon in lane doesn't really need to stun her. The reason he wins this matchup so hard is that his block passive completely prevents not only the damage from her hitting a vital, but also the healing she gets. Also Fiora has a very hard time dealing with ranged poke. Especially against targets she can't engage easily on. So Pantheon spamming Q until she is low and then either forcing her back or outright killing her is a pretty consistent winning strategy that is rather simple to pull off.

GULAG 4 U1 votes

Does panth's sheild block Fio Q?

Alygriv1 votes

Yes, pantheon shield blocks every aa modifier. Fiora's q is one of those (seeing as it procs ravenous hydra)

GULAG 4 U1 votes

Jesus that's brutally bad for fiora.

Troll for Trump1 votes

A lot of people hate Pantheon and keep saying how obnoxious he is to lane against.

There's worse problems right now.

Darius or Fiora can be problematic for certain comps. Fizz top is at a 70%+ Banrate in Korea

Zac, Lee, Sej, some people have a vendetta against Ivern. Low elos hate Yi as well.

Cait, Luc

Kass has had a relatively high banrate. Kat in low elos.

Yasuo is one of the hated champs. Riven is getting changes to make her easier to pick up, and has benefitted well from the itemization changes.

Graves and Xayah

IPromiseTomorrow1 votes

Omg so true to Panthers counters Yasuo early game so hard and people don't ban pantheon And everything annoying about Panth can equal to Yasuo And he beats Yasuo

Can't say community is dramatizing "CERTAIN CHAMPS" But they ain't got a right to stop a player to use his champ.

INCOMING PHILOSOPHY Who are the people that can break human rights? None we're not going for long "why that is" it is what is. So in that light of the fact The people who step on and wrong other's rights are called criminals, scum, thieves, liars, That bitch, toxic people

The man that Bans Your main in champ select... That bitch. He ain't got the right to do that it's toxic. That's all I'll let that speak for itself on this whole "Nerf him so he won't be banned" Just an excuse when given by a _____ who just wants what helps him and nothing and no one else and causes problems.

End

Very Hard Engage5 votes

the system is bad, and they should balance around perma banned and realize its junk we do not want to have to deal with.

if riot doesn't want perma'd they should have introduced acceptable counters or at the minimum counterbuilds.

but as we all know, certain champions DO NOT have appropriate weaknesses.

Dannywolf4 votes

Nerf Yasuo's windwall and he won't be permabanned. Heck, delete the windwall and then he's allowed to come outside and play. Until then, NOT IN MY GAME.

Yaśuo Main3 votes

What a waste of a ban, jeez. He's sitting at a 49% win rate mid and 51% top. I really hope you are banning him only for him being annoying and not that "he is broken".

TheSingularity5 votes

He is broken... and annoying as fuck. Don't confuse broken with strong. It is because his kit is broken that he is so annoying

Chembaron Yamada1 votes

If I am a top laner, banning a champion with 51% winrate doesn't seem wasted for me. Especially if that champion is countering mine.

Yaśuo Main1 votes

If that champion counters yours, then go ahead. You have multiple options to fix that.

If 51% winrate is enough to scare you, then go ahead. It's the highest he has right now.

If you ban him because he's annoying, then that's a waste of one. No idea what you are trying to say.

Chembaron Yamada1 votes

What I am trying to say is that if a ban is wasted or not depends on point of view. After the release of Camille, everyone was perma banning her. From my point of view, that was a waste of a ban. Every time I was playing top lane against her I simply countered her and used the counterplay given to her kit.

But just because it was a wasted ban in my eyes doesn't mean that applies to everyone. Same with Yasuo. You are not the one deciding if his ban was wasted or not.

Yaśuo Main1 votes

First off, Camille was banned for her true damage and ult still staying up after death, So she had a level 2 Darius ult on her upperkick midgame, and she discouraged turret diving.

Second, every champ has counters and counterplay. You know what that means, right? By your logic, every ban is a waste of one, because they have counterpicks and counterplay and counter items, etc. But here's the thing. Zac can assassinate squishys with his full combo with only cinderhulk. If you had the option to ban either Zac or Yasuo knowing that, and you ban Yasuo, then that's why I call it a waste. Banning release Camille for being too strong compared to Banning Yasuo for being too annoying aren't the same. Having fun and wanting to win aren't the same. Therefore, if you plan to win and you ban Yasuo instead of release Camille, it's a waste of one. If you want to ban release Camille instead of Yasuo and have fun, it's a waste of a ban. Strength =/= Kit Toxicity.

KONO RUBICK DA3 votes

meh the only reason riot made this ban style was to catter OTPs

i respect this decision and will just deal with this 10 ban style

NineTailedMystic1 votes

How? They can ban out a single hard counter? I'd think that more bans is detrimental to OTPs as more bans = more chance their champ gets banned.

Xintium3 votes

My 2cents:

I honestly think this implementation of the 10 ban system is one of the worst possible choices ever. And no, Yasuo has little to do with it. Let me show you why.

Suppose a champion X is really OP (say Lulu or Ivern). In High Elo, this champion will get permabanned, no doubts.

Now suppose a champion X is widely hated and also "not bad" (winrate >= 50%), but not OP (if it's actually OP, it's already covered in previous scenario). Now, this champion will be permabanned in Low Elo, still show some bans in medium elo and have the lowest ban rate in high elo. Yasuo is just one case of a list: Lee Sin and Fizz are other examples. Given this bigger picture, the whole "Yasuo" thing is just a mere consequence and, believe it or not, if it weren't Yasuo, it would have been another champion and we would still be saying the same things (granted, Yasuo current kit doesn't really play in his favor due to its "anti-fun" factors, but don't forget the bigger picture).

So, for a reason or another, every elo will have its list of permabanned champions. Probably, they won't be same (Lulu and Ivern in high elo, Yasuo in low elo), but it doesn't really matter: for all intent and purposes, for a fixed elo, the simultaneous 10 bans won't solve the permaban.

Now take "Snake Ban" (what Riot labeled as "Snake Draft"). It's easy, efficient and doesn't waste bans. Lulu and Ivern will still be permabanned in high elo, Yasuo will still be permabanned in low elo. No difference. But wasted bans are impossible. So, overall, Snake Ban is the superior choice.

The real way of solving the "permaban problem" is to identify the true reasons (aka, is it OP or just really unfun to play against?) and try to change something in that direction. Yet again, Yasuo is not the main point here. And this comes from a guy who personally hates Fizz three times more than Yasuo and would prefer to ban Fizz over Yasuo most of the time.

In any case, simultaneous-10-bans-blind doesn't solve the permaban issue: not in low elo, nor in high elo (for different reasons). It is a false solution to a mis-stated problem which any ban strategy can't magically solve only by itself.

Despite the fact that I'm super-happy for the 10 bans, Riot should reconsider their implementation decision.

In summary: Snake Ban > simultaneous-10-blind-bans

P.S. For those interested, there is a youtube video talking about Yasuo changes in 7.11: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sREdDr1-eE

P.P.S. I don't know if 7.11 will be Yasuo's funeral, 200% banrate or other cataclysm. But I think that, after a transitory phase (how long this lasts depends on Riot and also on you, Yasuo mains!), Yasuo will be changed/reworked and come back. So, this could actually become an occasion for a bigger overall improvement: a "better" Yasuo and hopefully a better ban phase.

manbearswine1 votes

I just wanted to point out that this whole "yasuo isn't banned in high elo" is a myth, he gets plenty of bans, not as much as he does in lower elo, but still way above most champions.

AwesomeGuyDj3 votes

RIOT JUST USE THE SYSTEM THE GOD DAMN LCS USES. WHY DOES EVERYTHING HAVE TO BE SO FUCKING CONVOLUTED. It also means you cant get all your bans off before they get to pick. So you have to decide if you want to ban A/B/C and then let them pick D or ban D and let them pick etc.

TimX24968B3 votes

not everyone wants to wait that long in champ select. Sure, you might prefer it for a "fairer" game, but not many others would agree, especially when dodging is a thing.

AwesomeGuyDj2 votes

{quoted}

not everyone wants to wait that long in champ select. Sure, you might prefer it for a "fairer" game, but not many others would agree, especially when dodging is a thing.

And how often are dodges caused by riots own lazily made cop out auto fill system?

TimX24968B3 votes

thats not relevant here... autofill is a different topic...

AwesomeGuyDj2 votes

Yes it is relevant. Because most dodges are caused by autofill. And if theres a problem with dodging, then its caused by autofill.

TimX24968B1 votes

riot isn't very willing to deal with it. This is about dealing with the ban system while having dodges in place, not dealing with having to get rid of them then adjust the ban system. 2 separate problems.

FioraWillCarry1 votes

This is untrue. I see someone dodge because of auto-fill like once every 2 months. Most people just try. If they are auto filled to non support, someone is always willing to trade. Other simply lock in troll picks like Teemo or Riven support which isn't too bad. I had one yesterday that locked in Lissandra because he never plays support. They won lane hard.

Xintium4 votes

The LCS ban phase is actually more convoluted than Snake Ban, which is also the reason why it is strategically deeper. For SoloQ, Snake Ban is a good trade-off between several factors, including time and strategical complexity.

Autofill is an extraneous factor in this discussion: even in an ideal world with 0 dodges, Snake Ban would be faster than LCS-ban-phase. And since SoloQ isn't organized play, the loss in strategical complexity weights less (much less) than time.

In conclusion, both in ideal and real scenarios, Snake Ban > LCS-ban-phase (for SoloQ). With or without autofill.

P.S. For organized play, obviously, LCS-ban-phase is superior.

AwesomeGuyDj1 votes

I guess thats fair. But i believe that if there going to go with the proposed one or snake, then we should have seperate ques for the lcs ban pick phase. That way you can go for a 5 man with friends and do that rather than blind ban or snake draft. Also when i said it was convoluted, i meant more along the lines of how they just have to make things more complicated by making their own system when theres already a functioning system for it.

Xintium1 votes

{quoted}

I guess thats fair. But i believe that if there going to go with the proposed one or snake, then we should have seperate ques for the lcs ban pick phase. That way you can go for a 5 man with friends and do that rather than blind ban or snake draft. Also when i said it was convoluted, i meant more along the lines of how they just have to make things more complicated by making their own system when theres already a functioning system for it.

I believe they already stated somewhere that organized 5-man teams will have LCS ban phase, exactly for the reason that, in that case, strategical depth weights more (much more) than time.

no to toxic2 votes

I think they just did it as a market strategy to make us buy more skins

Legacy Hydralpha2 votes

It all makes sense. They release a shitload of skins for champions that aren't permabanned that relate to themes of permabanned champion so people who main permaban champions will want skins for similar looking champion skins.

Alex h87212 votes

This is exactly what it is, also catering to One trick players because with 10 unique bans a LOT of OTP champs would very rarely see playrate again which means people who onetrick those champs are more likely to quit which means less $$$ for rito.

Tbh its incredibly lame and lazy and is riot preventing solo Q from having an actual "competitively viable/fair" ban phase because it could hurt their $ flow.

Edit: And I will laugh and look forward to riots reaction when (Not if but when) there are MANY instances of duplicate bans even in the first week of this system and many justified complaints because of this.

Arcus Diabolus2 votes

Champs don't need to be strong in order to be perma banned. Thats not the type of permaban we are talking about anyway. What they are worried about is the permaban of champions that people just don't like, which is not worthy of getting permabanned.

LostFr0st2 votes

Someone pointed out a while ago that it also prevents stream-snipes.

Rito also mentioned that if a champ ends up perma'd it means they need to look at their kit for frustration problems or power trims/shuffling.

Krully1 votes

why not have everyone able to see the champ list and ban who they like x)

KoKoboto1 votes

Lol this post literally has 0 content

Stars Shaper1 votes

They will be permabanned anyway

Calabok1 votes

the one they have is just fine. stop being overly picky

Anonagon1 votes

The chance of a permabanned champ should actually be higher with the blind-simultaneous system, at least once people understand it

blind bans = you cannot rely on enemies' bans = your team must ban a champ if you don't want to see them

gonna be a lot of double bans

Violet Fields1 votes

So Yasuo can be permabanned until riot nerfs him. :>

Volphi1 votes

[deleted]

Violet Fields1 votes

{quoted}

He doesn't need nerf.

Oh, okay. Replace "nerf" with "rework" then. I know he doesn't need a nerf because his early game is so terrible, but a skilled Yasuo will never have any counterplay until they "nerf" or "rework" him.

manbearswine1 votes

I mean, at least they are being honest about it.

They could've just pretended it won't have that effect and the riot lackeys on the boards would've just gobbled that shit up.

macromite1 votes

the funny thing is that there will still be esssentially perma banned champions with the blind ban system, there will just be less of them becuase more than one person will likely ban that champion every game.

More from Gameplay

3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay764 comments
7,167
votes
3 Refunds per season, upvote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay156 comments
3,510
votes
UPVOTE FOR URF
Gameplay606 comments
2,440
votes
Yes plz.
Gameplay456 comments
1,721
votes
3 Refunds per season, up vote if you want 3 refunds per season.
Gameplay114 comments
1,716
votes
When is ANYONE at riot going to address the awful new player experience?
Gameplay634 comments
1,383
votes

More by Who is Taliyah

Please take CS out of the mastery calculation in ARAM
Gameplay71 comments
165
votes
That's the type of missions we need!
Gameplay60 comments
163
votes
First win of the day bonus should count when winning a game while it gets off cooldown
Gameplay23 comments
155
votes
So I decided to read the Terms of use thoroughly for the first time.
Memes & Games42 comments
102
votes
You totally deserved the ban if
Player Behavior178 comments
101
votes
Yet another Taliyah worked ground rant
Gameplay50 comments
93
votes