Still sitting at 6 bans...why? and don't give me that "they could ban out all of a specific role" there are multiple champions who can do every role very well you won't accept them because your to stuck on what the LCS is doing.
OyddAWqJ5r19 votesBecause even though you already said not to say it it really is the reason. Banning out a specific role is actually that easy honestly. It takes some serious work to play a champion on LCS level let alone play multiple champions on it. If you look at alot of the pro players they have pretty shockingly small champion pools. I'm not talking about the ones that have been around for multiple seasons, I'm talking about the newer teams.
I don't know the statistics but I'm willing to bet most are comfortable with or have mastered only 3-5 champions for their role. So yes, banning out would happen with more bans. Heck, it still happens with only 3 bans. It's probably not fun to watch and it'd probably be pretty stressful for the pro to have to be playing a champion he hasn't mastered yet due to being targeted. Hell, Wickd pretty much ONLY plays Irelia. And while I don't endorse only playing 1 champion and you should definitely be good at many (like Faker senpai) not everyone is able to do so. 3 is a very reasonable number IMO. 5 is what you should strive for but honestly sometimes your mains fall off and fall off at the same time as each other leaving you with 3 or less mains.
Hell, Season 3 I could only play Hecarim top, Renekton top and Aatrox top. And to get to Diamond in season 4 I only played Hecarim top, Kassadin mid and Talon mid. Cuz Aatrox fell off and halfway through the season Renekton did too, essentially kicking me out of toplane. Point is, I devoted my time to maining those champions (alot of time) and only came out with 3 "mastered". I try to play more now but it's still hard to have more than 3 mains. Hell, hitting 3 is hard.
What exactly do you need that many bans for anyway? I haven't run into the problem once yet. Every time I do it's just like "I wish I could have banned x champion too".
Well that's decision making for ya huh?
TurquoiseYoshi3 votesI'm just remembering the MSI match where both teams went for 3 top lane bans
Nunya Bezwacks1 votesno its their job to know the characters
OyddAWqJ5r4 votesCool you can have your own opinion on that. I don't agree but I really don't care because that's not the main reason.
The main reason is you don't need more bans. Fact. It's called decision making. Banning phase isn't meant for banning out the top viable picks.
Keevalroy16 votesThe only reason I can think of is that LCS wouldn't be entertaining to watch if someone gets banned out and be forced onto a champion they're unable to make flashy plays with. Spectators want to see fluid movement, not clunky hesitation - that's why we're still at 6. Feel free to disagree, but that seems to be the obvious answer to me.
Edit: If it's going to be an issue for the pro scene, they can keep 6 while we get 10. Even 8 would be fine, we just need more. There are too many champions that aren't balanced and/or aren't fun to play against that we want to get rid of.
Edit 2: Another thing I wanted to add since I see the argument of "my mains could all get banned" come up, is that you likely aren't going to be banned out every single game. I mean, if you can only play FotM champions, you're likely going to be banned out, and that's your fault if you don't have something else to fall back on, so you should play champs outside of that group.
In all seriousness though, what are the chances that a single role is going to be completely targetted? What would happen 10 support bans go through champ select? There are still support options, same for ADC, same for jungle, same for top, and same for mid if they're targeted. Additionally, if you are concerned about losing because you're a one trick pony, and are afraid the extra bans could be used on you once the problem champs are taken care of, then sorry, you deserve the loss for having a champion pool with the depth of a puddle.
Remlap122311 votesTypical Riot, catering to the .01% of their fanbase at the expense of the rest.
But dem #LC$PIGBLAYZ DOUGH!!!1!
Mandang04 votesIdk why this is downvoted - refusing to do something simply because of the LCS is absolutely catering to the 0.01%.
Remlap12232 votesWelcome to the boards, where we circlejerk each other, and where your opinion doesn't matter.
Whose Whine is it Anyway?
Nunya Bezwacks6 votesthat is the WORST argument i have ever heard because it is counted by 3 words "IT'S THEIR JOB" they are suppose to be the best of the best if they are in the LCS its also countered by the fact that most of the teams like C9 and TSM have been around for multiple seasons and have used tons of champions in the LCS so they already know a lot of good champions for that situation.
t3hcollective9 votes[{quoted}](name=Nunya Bezwacks,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ukt6xzch,comment-id=00020001,timestamp=2015-05-16T06:04:45.569+0000)
that is the WORST argument i have ever heard because it is counted by 3 words "IT'S THEIR JOB" they are suppose to be the best of the best if they are in the LCS its also countered by the fact that most of the teams like C9 and TSM have been around for multiple seasons and have used tons of champions in the LCS so they already know a lot of good champions for that situation.
Hate to break this to you, but their job is to SPECIALIZE not GENERALIZE. They choose a play style, as a team, and learn champs to execute that plan. Why would you want an aggressive bottom duo/team to suddenly try to farm it out for late game dominance? Forcing them out of what they do naturally would only lead to lousy games full of errors and devoid of #lcsbigplayz. While this may spark some interest initially, it would die off really fast due to the current expected level of play. It would be like going from a dedicated viewer of the nba to watching only the wnba. Sure they are still pros, sure they are better than a majority of the populace, but the skill level just is not as high and it never will reach that bar. Natural tenancies are part of what make them great players.
The number of seasons they have been around is irrelevant. The changes to the game DURING the season can be fairly large, while the changes between seasons are immense.
TurquoiseYoshi2 votesDon't you hate on the WNBA m8. At least say NBA D-League.
FluxBound64 votesSpectators want to see fluid movement, not clunky hesitation
. The only thing fluid about him is the way his fat rolls.
Vistha Kai8 votesWhy I can give this comment only one upvote?
Mandang05 votesThen Riot should separate the bans and picks into phases (like Dota does) so you can't use all of your bans before the other team gets a chance to pick. It could be 2 bans for each team, 2 picks for each team, then divvy up the rest of the picks/bans as needed (depends on the number of bans Riot decides on).
This way it works EXACTLY like it does today: other team uses their bans (and possibly first pick) to take away 3 of one player's champs? Better grab that player's champ first to prevent them from getting banned out further. At the same time, they've focused all of their bans (and possibly first pick) at that lane already, so maybe you'd prefer to get priority in the other lanes.
That complaint about expanding bans is just a convenient excuse for Riot being lazy.
Sammystorm1 votesthen we have an even longer pick/ban phase.
Mandang03 votesFine by me. An extra minute out of 30-60 isn't much to pay.
Sammystorm1 votesThen someone dodges. Then other stuff happens. Still doesn't solve the problem of people getting banned out.
Mandang02 votesMake up your mind, is the problem the time spent in draft, is it the fact that someone dodges (happens in today's ranked anyway...), or is it someone getting banned out?
The first two are problems that we already have and that wouldn't get any worse with my system. I've already explained how it solves the 'problem' of getting banned out.
You might think we don't need more bans now, but do you really think Riot can continue to release Kalistas/Yasuos/Ahri reworks for another 30 champs without increasing bans? It's just gonna keep getting worse and anyone who tells you the number of permaban champs has remained the same this whole time is saying so because they have no way of knowing any differently. If you can only ever ban 6 champs, then you'll identify those 6 most popular bans as the set of permaban champs, but if you expand that number to 10, it'll probably look like permaban size is 10 champs.
Varkrey3 votesThis kinda reminds me of Darius. He used to be perma banned in bronze through gold but no one in plat or diamond gave a shit about him because his kit was easy to counter. 2+ years after his release people in lower tiers finally caught on to his weaknesses and he got a few nerfs enough to make people not care anymore.
There is no one champion and there never has been a single champion who has no counterplay (although I'll admit Braum and Yasuo botton is a hell of a lane to fight against with traditional ADC/Support).
There will always be a champ the masses don't understand because they're too lazy to think about it, or in some cases lack the mental capacity to process problem solving.
You can't just play one style and expect to win every season. Especially in LCS. Why do you think so few people stay in LCS and we mostly see new players every season who abuse that season's strongest playstyle?
We've shifted from mages s1 to tanks s2 to adcs s3 to assassins s4 to tanks again in s5.
The only people who are successful in league are the ones who adapt. Adding more bans encourages people to not adapt but to simply ban out champs that they don't understand how to beat.
TL;DR: You're not hitting the core problem here: people are idiots.
Remlap12235 votesThere is no one champion and there never has been a single champion who has no counterplay
Nobody remembers 
Mori.
Varkrey3 votesLet us all pay our respects to Yorick with a joke.
Yorick walks into a bar.
There are no counters.
ate them.
Sammystorm1 votesJayce was at that point at the end of season 2 as well.
Sammystorm9 votesThe points of bans are not to hit every single powerful champ. The point of bans is to hit key champs in 1-2 important strategies or to hit specific players. In solo queue most people just ban whatever they think is the strongest. Imagine now in the LCS if we get some more bans. A team could literally ban out a player unless the player had a stupid deep pool.
Another problem that you ignore completely. With more bans it is possible for teams to ban out strategies completely. Meaning you could win games at champ select.
So basically you just want to add bans for no reason then just force lower quality games on everyone across the board. As it stands it is unlikely that any specific champion will be banned unless they are sej or kat. Also why the hell would you think we need more bans now? Half the time I can't even figured out 3 bans because most things aren't really game warping.
The only situation I can think of that would require us to have more then 3 bans is if we had more then 3 game warping champions which has never happened.
Whimsy Spook8 votesMaybe there should be 0 bans. I think that would be more interesting.
Starrow16 votes[{quoted}](name=Whimsy Spook,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ukt6xzch,comment-id=0000,timestamp=2015-05-16T02:28:25.466+0000)
Maybe there should be 0 bans. I think that would be more interesting.
yeah same. sejuani shyv gragas hecarim every game
xl Kirito lx2 votesIf everyones OP, then no one is.
Hinro Honato21 votesthis is dota 2 now?
SH Azykan6 votessolo que needs 1 ban per person, Ranked teams can keep it at 6 bans total as you should communicate with your team on who to ban.
TurquoiseYoshi1 votesI actually really like this idea. It gives everyone a say in what they want, and probably won't result in one lane target bans, since the players will most likely ban their lane opponent.
AbodyHUN6662 votesStill, there would be no point in maining top tier champs for solo Q, because they would be permabanned.
Nunya Bezwacks2 votesnot really there are more meta champions then 10 bans can get around and it would force people like you to learn more then one champion instead of saying "I can't play "X" lane/jungle"
DemiluniS2 votespeople playing specific champions/roles because they enjoy them. Forcing people to play something just because, is kinda stupid, since the main goal of the game is to have fun, if someone forced into something he's not comfortable with the game just becomes not enjoyable
Sukishoo6 votesBecause they don't need them.
If you were to actually get them and then say "Oh no, champion 200-250 is out! why are there only 10 bans?!!! We need 20 or 30!" It could seriously go on and on and on. The champion select page would need to be redesigned to where more then half of it was ban screen and wouldn't even feel like the same game any more.
Nunya Bezwacks1 votesYou're telling me at 250 champions you would be fine with 10 bans? your argument is beyond stupid kid you may want to learn math before you talk again
Sukishoo6 votesAww that's cute, calling people kid when you don't know their age.. pretty sure I'm far older then you. So you might want to learn before you speak honey. I'm perfectly fine with 6 bans that we have right now and have been for the 3 years I've been playing.
Narasimha4 votesBecause it doesn't change anything. All it would do is make one tier of champions permabanned, and the next would take its place. And then it would rotate. And again. And again. And in the end, someone would come along and say "Hey guys, 10 bans isn't enough..."
Earl Eulrich1 votesthe thing is though...if a champ will get permabanned - it might be a good idea to have him unavailable till he´s reworked? Champs donßt get banned for no reason, they mostly get banned because they are either very binary or very frustrating to play against - or both.
Gregor Gysi3 votesI don't think so. The most banned champion is currently Gragas with about 80% banrate. While I agree that he is really strong in the current meta, I don't think that he is binary nor is he especially frustrating to play against. Also I don't even see too much of Gragas, IMO those people who ban him are simply sheeps. Even when he gets picked (his pickrate is quite okay) he doesn't perform too well (51% winrate). So chances are good that you play against some sheep without any clue how to play Gragas.
And you want to make him unavailable? That's a joke.
Earl Eulrich1 voteshe´s a prototype-binary champ. If he gets rolling he´s turning almost invincible and it´s fairly impossible to ever get past him to reach the opponent backline. Though if he doesn´t find success early on he turns fairly ignorable due to a major lack of dmg later on.
and no, i personally don´t waste bans on Gragas (nor would i if i had 5bans) - but as 80% of some millions of players apparently do...I tend to believe that he´s not in a fine state currently.
Gregor Gysi4 votesNope he is not. He is simply a tank. Your attempt at describing his kit is pretty common tho. "almost invincible" "impossible to get past him" "binary kit" That's just your average complaint on tanks in the tank meta.
The counterpart complaint against assassins is: "no counterplay" "to much damages in 0.1 sec" "no counterplay" "overloaded kit" "such mubulutu"
Besides that: do you really think more bans would solve your problems? Do you think there were no problems back then when there were few champions? If you ban T1, the former T2 will be the new T1 and so on. Learn to deal with it.
Earl Eulrich1 votesi think more bans would lead to a lot more diversity, and a high banrate shows that a Champ is currently in a problematic state...if you donßt think a Champ that reaches a banrate >60% is somewhat questionable then that´s not my problem. Apparently you are more important than the majority, what do I know.
and as I said, i wouldn´t even ban Gragas to begin with...so don´t make it sound like that´s my problem here. And yea, he is binary - as he excels at blocking other frontlines, so whatever frontline currently is stronger will come out ahead. Not a huge fan of his current kit obviously, but there are many flawed ones like him.
footfoe4 votesIDK 4 bans per team wouldn't be too bad. So banning doesn't take forever both teams could ban 2 at a time.
I think it would be a good thing for the lcs. People like to see more champions, and this would encourage pros to play more champions.
Myrddin2 votes6 is a bit much at this point, there isnt a kassadin or tf anymore. there are strong champions for sure, but just the nerf to those two opened up 2 extra slots over the past 2 seasons
Nunya Bezwacks2 votes
there are all of the bans currently that at least 80% of the playerbase aren't smart enough to deal with and that leaves 
and a few others that I'm not gonna waste my time bringing up. All are ban worthy in solo queue most of which are problems all the way up to plat and diamond.
Myrddin9 votes[{quoted}](name=Nunya Bezwacks,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ukt6xzch,comment-id=00030000,timestamp=2015-05-16T06:13:48.276+0000)
those are strong champions.
Ever think that lets say we give 40 bans, then the next batch of people would be clamoring for whatever is strong at that point to be banned.
There is no champion that is insanely meta warping at the moment, there is nothing that is old Kassadin or TF level, nothing at all. The game is relatively balanced when you can list that many champions as viable or even really good at what they do.
StupidSavant2 votesI have to disagree with the well balanced bit, if there are only 22 viable champs, out of 125 then it isn't well balanced, I may have misunderstood what you are saying but i think you were saying 22 viables were correct
Myozthirirn2 votesthen you want 22 bans to bann all of them? xDD
stealthfox943 votes22 viable champions???? define viable?
Nunya Bezwacks1 votesthe stupidity is contagious in this thread....your all infected by the dumbest plague i have ever fucking seen some how saying we need one or 2 more bans per team automatically means "UP THE BANS TO 100"
Myrddin2 votes[{quoted}](name=Nunya Bezwacks,realm=NA,application-id=3ErqAdtq,discussion-id=ukt6xzch,comment-id=0003000000000001,timestamp=2015-05-17T08:02:47.645+0000)
the stupidity is contagious in this thread....your all infected by the dumbest plague i have ever fucking seen some how saying we need one or 2 more bans per team automatically means "UP THE BANS TO 100"
then why not add two more because there are still champions people play and do well with, then add too more because people still found a way to win, then add two more... ... ...
Adding bans doesnt balance the game any better, it would then just be the next best things on the list being played more and in need of bans
you're just being obtuse