Champions are never unviable, they just aren't in the current meta.

IsIsGankedParis·Aug 22, 2014·6 votes·1,289 views

Ever pick a champion that currently isn't fotm/picked often and you have somebody say something along the lines of: "GG X sucks now and Z is so much better because X needs buffs"

Then roll along 2 months when X becomes meta and Z isn't meta due to item shifts and not actual buffs/nerfs to said champs.

You pick Z.

"GG Z sucks right now, why are you trolling? Pick X I want to win this game"

Champions never truly lose out on their power unless actually nerfed/buffed directly. Just because Nasus isn't meta doesn't mean he isn't strong.

I will play Twitch mid, Darius support, Malzahar top and get told they are terrible picks where they are because "they aren't meta".

Meta doesn't mean only X champions are viable and everything that isn't X is trash tier/not viable.

They still have their traits that make them op, their traits just aren't favored right now.

19 Comments

ShrikesnestAug 23, 20142 votes

Yeah, okay, people bring up Poppy and Urgot, champions that have such problematic kits that Riot has admitted to nerfing them until they can be fixed. But it's extremely rare that anybody is getting bitched out for choosing Poppy. People have literally thrown games because they got a Twisted Fate ADC and they absolutely refused to even acknowledge that they could win.

"Unviable" picks might change your team's chances of victory by as much as 5%. 5%, people. That's still damn near a coin flip if both teams play at the same level of skill. And it will only have an impact even that large at the very highest levels of competitive play, where your lane opponent is going to have an encyclopedic knowledge of your unconventional pick's weaknesses.

Basically, people need to stop throwing a damn fit every time someone tries something different. The biggest reason I despise the LCS is because people treat it like a freaking religion. Play Ryze top before someone at the LCS does it and your teammates suffer a nervous breakdown. Do it after someone does it at the LCS, you're "abusing freelo." Same champ, no patches directly affecting the choice. Someone just has to make it "okay" for other people to do.

Remlap1223Aug 23, 20142 votes

This. So much this.

redniwediSAug 22, 20141 votes

While I like what you are trying to say it's not completely true. Every change to every champion and every item has an effect on the game as a whole, and as such a champion can go from viable to trash tier without being altered one bit. The three examples you gave have nothing to do with viability, they simply go against the meta in one way or another.

A better example would be the champions who were hit hard by the Randuin's Omen change a few patches ago. It took away a huge tool for champs who rely on sticking to their target, and have no natural way of doing so. This changed their viability according to the way the game is played at this time.

WheatloafAug 22, 20142 votes

The basic idea is that there (almost) isn't a "Trash-Tier", an idea with which I agree. It's possible (and not unnecessarily difficult) to win with any champion, even Urgot, if you and your team understand how to use them. Only champions like Urgot and Poppy sit anywhere near a mythical trash-tier, because their kits have problems that force Riot to keep them numerically weak.

redniwediSAug 22, 20141 votes

The thing is that while these champions can win, in the current state of the meta there are more matchups than not where they are unable to do well, to a significant degree. You can pick a champion who is not considered viable and carry a match, but they are considered unviable for a reason, typically either being that the group of popular champions at a given time are heavily able to hard counter the unviable champ, or because a far more viable champion fills the same role in a better way.

WheatloafAug 23, 20141 votes

This is really only true for full-on competitive gameplay, partially because hard-counters are losing their place in LoL. You can't just look at champion select any more and say "Lane X is guaranteed to win because of their matchup" because it isn't even close to that. One side may have an inherent advantage, but it isn't difficult enough to play around the strengths/weaknesses of each champion to warrant labeling a champion unviable. Most of the "true" hard-counters left are high mobility assassins against vulnerable long-range damage-dealers like Vel'Koz, and even then, the range advantage can be abused to keep the assassin in check.

In the case of far more viable champions filling the same role in a better way, this is usually due to either poor champion design, which cover a few champions slated to get reworks in the next couple of years, or misconceptions about what a champion does. For example, it is widely perceived by the community that Malzahar goes in looking for a single target, Ults their face off, and if his target has either their team or a QSS, poor Malzahar is screwed. What they don't know is that he can contribute to fights in a similar fashion to Ziggs and Xerath, throwing out long-range damage to zone out and whittle down opponents. People make the mistake of thinking a champion only has a small number of success cases, when it's actually more than that. Another example which I'll elect not to make a wall of text out of is the current state of Ashe, and parts of the community perceiving her as much weaker than she is.

Bottom line is, while the meta may technically favor certain champions, unless you're really high up in organized play (where reliability is favored above all else), the advantage these certain champions hold isn't enough to make anything unviable. I'm based, since I've always been the kind of player to take out whatever champion in whatever role I happen to be in the mood for (which is often just their standard role, because they're usually there for a good reason), but I don't think the idea that every champion is viable is so far from being true. Once real problems like Sion, Poppy, and Urgot get reworked, it probably will be 100% true.

redniwediSAug 23, 20142 votes

I honestly agree with the heart of what you're saying, since viability is just a champion's ability to fit into the meta really, but some are just weaker by default. You've covered it more than enough.

WheatloafAug 23, 20143 votes

Thanks man, good discussion. Sorry for getting all wall-of-text-y :c

redniwediSAug 23, 20141 votes

ploki122Aug 23, 20141 votes

Actually, scratch that Poppy, she's incredibly fine number-wise, the only thing keeping her down is the community's false image of her from being played by poor players. I'm seeing more and more Poppy players (all jugnle and support, mind you) and honestly, she can easily wreck people.

I feel that her case is basically like if Yasuo was released as a support because of windwall + knockup + duo lane synergy (able to proc ult off teammate), got played by rushing bork+BT for 3 years, and then got labeled trash tier. Then, when you lock in Yasuo nowaday, people will ask you countless times to go support, because he's less trash in that position, when all you wanna do is facemelt mid laners with your shiv+IE.

WheatloafAug 23, 20141 votes

I specifically said "anywhere near" trash-tier, because I understand she's still plenty workable; I still pick her up every now and again, because when you're in the mood she can be pretty fun. If Urgot can be used successfully, even in the LCS, then sure as hell Poppy can. The two reasons we don't get to see oddball picks more often are that:

A lot of pros just don't have the balls. If they screw up, it could cost them their job, so don't be too quick to judge, but this is why they might hesitate to consistently innovate.
At least in the NA and EU LCS, teams get less than a week between official games; excuse them if they practice what they already know.

I'd still like to see how pros would make Poppy work in a professional game, though, same as I would like to see them actually use Malzahar right (No, Snoopeh, that was not how you Malzahar.).

ploki122Aug 23, 20141 votes

Well, if we ever were to see Poppy in the LCS, people would indeed be upset. My 2 main candidates for her are acutally Kiwikid and IWillDominate, which kinda explains my point :P.

She would probably wither have insane success leading to nerfs and possibly bans/counter-picks, or end up being camped early on and people discard it as a troll pick since hse would have 0% win rate (and still see minor nerfs).

I'm telling you, right now she's a numerical beast...

WheatloafAug 23, 20142 votes

I'd be scared to know the gold value of her passive alone...

WorgslargAug 22, 20141 votes

I agree with the statement that no champion is unviable.

However, many champions have glaring kit problems much larger than simply being out of meta( poppy for say)

Baron von JigglyAug 22, 20141 votes

i agree with you just because champ X isn't as good as it was last patch doesn't mean he is completely dead. Champ Z the 1 people always say is doing great suddenly gets a slight debuff they instantly become champ X. just because a few debuffs and item changes doesn't completely change how good you were with that champ. take kass for example after his rework everyone found him shit. when actually he was great after the rework people just weren't used to not having a silence.

so what do you do?

you play that champ and learn how to play him without that silence. nidalee, leblanc, and sona went through the same process and people abandoned them as well right after their patches. Yet as can be seen currently all 3 of them are pretty bull shit right now.

items and patches do affect champions but if you play that champ enough you will get good enough to do the stuff that people say that champ can't do anymore.

kha'zix has been nerfed to hell that is true but i have seen people who didn't abandon him after said patch Do amazing with him. the meta makes people not play champs they could be great with. so that leaves them with no room to complain. just because you followed the meta and abandoned a champ doesn't mean that champ is bad it just means. you gave up on it before you got good

WheatloafAug 22, 20141 votes

AD Malzahar is the god of top lane, bow to his crab army!

Chibi BotAug 22, 20141 votes

Mostly its champions that synergize with what the team chooses. For example:

Leona is commonly played. So I play leona support and i cringe/dodge when i am paired with a sivir. Sivir is good but not with leona. Tristana is more bursty and can synergize her movement with leona.

WeFlyNoLieAug 25, 20141 votes

This whole topic was a great read, and I agree wholeheartedly.

This is why I love teambuilder so much, because you can really get some interesting stuff going. I've had a lot of fun and success playing stuff like GP ADC bot or Braum top.

I wish people were more open to things besides what they see on streams or on the LCS.

bbbbatesAug 25, 20141 votes

I kind of agree with this but not really. I saw a good video on youtube once about it but I cant find it. Something along the lines of:

Everyone takes their idea of meta picks from watching the competitive scene (basically)

Some of these picks are good because something changed to make them good Some are good because they are FOTM and no has figured out a counter on the pro scene yet Some are good because their 5v5 potential in the competitive scene is great.

What it comes down to is that anywhere below plat level play, (which is like 90% of people I think?) champion "viability" is not really a thing. There's no way that your average solo Q team has the level of team play and coordination that a pro team does. It mostly comes down to, how well do you know the champ you are playing? and how well do you know the matchup? Even at higher levels this is kindof true, there is a korean streamer who plays only GP I think? and hes like D1 to challenger level.

Point is that basically champs are considered weak if they dont show up in the pro scene. And this idea is pretty flawed.

On the other side of the coin, you have certain reasons why non-meta champs could be considered weaker.

If you watched the spring split for season 3 LCS in NA or EU regularly, you would have a way deeper understanding of champions like renekton or shyv than you would of maokai or swain. Because of this reason alone, if you pick a champ that you are good at but your team never sees, they might not really understand how they work and therefor will find it harder to play with you. Case and point I played a game with my friends as Galio mid, I used to play a ton of galio support and mid so I knew his kit inside out. My friend was the jungler and came for a gank and said "Galio has a taunt right? Can you taunt him?" so I flashed and ulted, thus taunting the enemy ziggs. My ult ran its course with my friend still waiting. After it channeled and I asked why didnt you come, my friend responded with "Oh, is that his taunt?."

tl;dr Meta comes from the competitive scene, people wont understand non meta picks as well, doesnt mean they are bad, just that less people know how to play with them.