Should games be balanced around majority or minority of players?

If you want to make the common folk the most happy, but in turn undermine your game for the sake of profit and admit that you care more about an enjoyable experience then a balanced one, then the majority.

If you want to make the people who spend the most amount of time, have an actual idea what they are talking about and showcase through skill that they know what they are doing happy and thus create a more balanced experience as you only focus around them, then the minority.

There is no clear winner though, if you want a better balanced game, then minority, if you want a more enjoyable game, then majority.

Riot's problem is they are trying to balance for all three of the majority, minority, and pros that starts to muddle things.

Both. You make sure no champion is overpowered at either level. This also means some champions will only be viable in one and underpowered in the other. An underpowered champion is healthier for the game than an overpowered one.

If the game was balanced for "Majority" a.k.a. worse players in this case, Nobody would want to play the game competitively, because the game would be completely busted.

Ryze. Azir. Cassiopeia. Main examples.

For Ryze to even become playable low-elo, you'd need to buff him so hard, that he would LITERALY break the high elo. Even when he was at his MOST overpowered state, low elo, he had 46% winrate, while in high elo, he was practically a freelo.

For Azir to become playable low elo, you would probably need his release version, without the bugs. Anyone remembers release Azir? Let me remind you. He had negative winrate in dia-, he almost had Xerath range, and his DPS/Burst (3hit) was absolutely insane. His scalling & range, was so hardcore, that he could 2hit an AD with 2-3 items.

Cassiopeia example, she is trash in low elo, since worse players are worse at kiting & positioning, wich is crucial for this champion. She is made to out-endure the enemy. Basicly, you land a Q, spamm E, and you need to dodge things until you wittle down your opponent (wich is a 3-4shot in late game, but early-mid game it's really not anymore). Her E damage would need to be increased for her to be viable low elo. Wich would make everyone who is competent on the champion, just straight up break it.

You can't balance the game, around people who are not playing it correctly. Example also being, point & click CC. In high elo, an AD carry, who is under threat of lets say, Lissandra ultimate, is going to get a QSS, and most likely cleanse the ultimate in 0.2-0.3seconds after it's cast (if not even sooner). In low elo, if they get QSS, their reaction will take longer, and they will most likely still die. That makes point-and-click CC quite OP low elo, while kinda weaker in high elo. Also, let's not forget, that in low elo, there's quite a high chance that the ADC won't even get the QSS.

The game has to be balanced around playing correctly, not around "BUT I WENT 1v5 AND THEY CC LOCKED ME & KILLED ME 26 TIMES, MY YASUO WINRATE IS 23% RIOT PLEASE BUFF HIM"

A game should always be balanced around the best players that play it. If you balance the game around players you get a lot of problems:

• The balance problems in Iron and bronze would still stay the same as the game is still not balanced for them.
• It would make it so that the more you improve the less fair the game gets for you.
• In a vast majority of the time it really wouldn't change patching this much.

minority if you mean plat + and not pro.

minority with taking some thinking for the majority by that i mean if they gonna buff someone for high rank plays but he stomp low elo they should nerf what make him stomp low elo and buff something that make him viable in high elo.

zed im is a good example (might be overbuffed but the idea was good) they buffed his power in general to make him viable but also removed what made him snow ball extremely hard in low elo, the passive on R.

Yes.

You need to balance for both the highest and lowest tier. If there's no low-tier balance, you'll just bleed players non-stop. If there's no high-tier balance, there's no reason for anyone to get better because they don't play .

The best way to handle it is making sure nothing is overpowered at either tier, even if that requires them being useless at all other tiers. If Garen is useless in proplay that upsets overall game health less than him being overpowered in iron-silver. And if Ryze is mediocre at best in low level gameplay, that's better than you having to play Ryze in high tier.

Around Outliers in ANY mmr.

That simple imo.

Here's how Champions should be balanced:

AD(ADD) +AP(APD) + HP + A + MR + S + AS + MS + TD + CD + CDR + RC + G = Same for other champs

There are a lot more variables, and the variables I've mentioned can be represented in many different ways. But this is it in a nutshell. Optimally, every champion impact potential when played perfectly should match some other champion played perfectly.

But... We know that will never happen, because data is skewed by smurfs, actual reasons for being in any specific ELO varying, low game base accounts, and the magnitude of rework some champions would need to meet that standard (Yasuo would have to be really reworked before he'd be appropriate in low elos; Even a poor Yasuo player can destroy game balance, simply by clumsily doing what Yasuo does, in a room of clumsy players who don't know how to react to the champion at all).

Balance by lane. You have a gold mid, they have a gold mid and so on. Most of the time when I see a gold matched with a silver I know 95% of the time that lane is lost. I’ll try to help even lane matchups hoping one gets fed.