Just wondering, since I know it's been 3 since forever.
You'd think that with 123 champions (and so many that people just really, really hate) to choose from, 6 bans between two teams just doesn't cut it these days.
Wouldn't 5 bans per team also give the option of allowing each person one ban pick, rather than it all being decided by one single person? :l
doom bot 82 6 voteswatch the lcs and u will find out why. riot highly piorities that less then 0.005% of leagues community which happens to be the lcs players and highly ignores the 99.995% of the rest of the community which is us
Pastramka6 votesThe reason is rising of the number of the minimum required champions for Ranked to 20 if they allow 2x5 bans.
That will make new players stuck on level 30 for months.
So we need to find a solution for that, here are some thoughts and the problems that this solutions can bring:
Giving an IP boost pre 30 is so new accounts can get faster to 20 champs with a price of 3150IP is ok, but is bad for riot business and it encourages smurf accounts which is the biggest problem for NEW players to LoL.
The accounts level cap can be raised to 50, but then masteries and runes must be deleted and reworked from scratch; example masteries raised to 50 points or reduced to 25 - 1 point per 2x levels.
There can be a new mode... And the both 2x3 bans and 2x5 bans modes splitting summoners from competing with each-other for material reasons is no good. The only way this could work is if there is a creation of a Junior league(which i imagine is very complex) in which only players that own between 16 and 20 can play, also transferring between the two is impossible, one starts in the Senior from zero.
The** fastest solution** is: Raising free rotation number of champions to 20(rotation can cycle on 2 weeks instead of one) and including them in the rooster while still keeping the requirement of 16(or 15) champs to play ranked. That way Riot somewhat keeps the initiation for summoners to by new champion and 2x5 ban mode can be enabled.
Scuttler Slayer4 votesThe reason is rising of the number of the minimum required champions for Ranked to 20 if they allow 2x5 bans.
That will make new players stuck on level 30 for months.
So we need to find a solution for that, here are some thoughts and the problems that this solutions can bring:
Giving an IP boost pre 30 is so new accounts can get faster to 20 champs with a price of 3150IP is ok, but is bad for riot business and it encourages smurf accounts which is the biggest problem for NEW players to LoL.
The accounts level cap can be raised to 50, but then masteries and runes must be deleted and reworked from scratch; example masteries raised to 50 points or reduced to 25 - 1 point per 2x levels.
There can be a new mode... And the both 2x3 bans and 2x5 bans modes splitting summoners from competing with each-other for material reasons is no good. The only way this could work is if there is a creation of a Junior league(which i imagine is very complex) in which only players that own between 16 and 20 can play, also transferring between the two is impossible, one starts in the Senior from zero.
The** fastest solution** is: Raising free rotation number of champions to 20(rotation can cycle on 2 weeks instead of one) and including them in the rooster while still keeping the requirement of 16(or 15) champs to play ranked. That way Riot somewhat keeps the initiation for summoners to by new champion and 2x5 ban mode can be enabled.
OR!
You let people grind out champs for months.
They're new to level thirty. Having them play more before ranked is a good thing.
Pastramka2 votesI agree!
But i found most of the summoners don't. They mention various reasons why and the most common is: that one will become bored very fast after reaching lvl 30 if not challenged to compete to achieve lader-status.
Scuttler Slayer1 votesBeen playing since season 1.
I hardly ever play ranked.
It's the EXACT same thing, minus most of the stress.
However, I get it: "most".
Let's also acknowledge that "most" complain about being stuck in Bronze/ Silver. Get them to grind for a few months and chances are they'll be appreciative of the (new, and relative) "privilege" of playing Ranked games. This could lead to players actually knowing how to play before being in ranked! Maybe! Just maybe! Less trolling as well.
[Although, since I'm a 90% normals-player, I could be shooting myself in the foot by making trolls go to normals.]
Pastramka1 votes[Although, since I'm a 90% normals-player, I could be shooting myself in the foot by making trolls go to normals.]
:D
I play for almost 2 years, i don't rank too.
Cuz19725 votesYou could ban out the entire free week champs.
B3ER4 votesTheir reasoning is that it might affect the competitive scene too much. Instead of strategic bans, you'll find players being banned out more.
Gank in Progress6 votesTheir reasoning is that it might affect the competitive scene too much. Instead of strategic bans, you'll find players being banned out more.
yea and if you ban out one player then the other 4 players have their favorite picks. and you can not tell me a player can only play 5 op champions. it would promote actual good players like freddy more since they have a REALLY GREAT champion pool, but no thats too much ,lets continue promoting one trick ponies like amazing with his elise and lee sin only :^^)
B3ER2 votesThere are more reasons to why Riot thinks that banning out players isn't good. The biggest argument wasn't around whether the player could still function, it was more around seeing the wow picks like Froggen's Anivia, Madlife's Thresh, etc.
Remember that we are no longer Rito's biggest cashcow, E$port$ is. Rito will just try to keep us happy with game modes and cinematics, but whether we're happy with actual in game functions is only a second priority. So... Anyone hyped for Nemisis Draft? :D
Scuttler Slayer4 votes"They don't want to allow players to be banned out in the LCS."
If a player can only play 5 champions he shouldn't be in the LCS. That simple.
"No. But being AT THAT level is hard on 5 champions."
Yeah, no shit. If it were easy we'd all be LCS players. So what? You make the LCS for players who can actually handle more champs.
Pretty much off topic, but along the lines of LCS and bans, does no one find it weird that Gnar was pretty much never banned? Along the same lines, I would have loved to see Vi, Rek, Lee and J4 banned in one game, just to see how the jungles would react.
lojician3 votesBecause if you banned out enough of the bullshit olaf might be viable.
Zmuecat3 votesBecause they don't want people to ban out others in LCS.
Which is odd, because they can just keep the 3 bans in LCS, and let us have 4 or 5 because we generally don't know who we're playing against.
agbudar3 votesotherwise you can ban all the toxic lcs champs and they can't have that.
le
Arch Mage Magnus2 votesGiving you 5 bans would let you ban every relevant character that is used in LCS. Riot would have a field day if you weren't guaranteed LCSOMG!!!!! BIG PLAYS CHAMPS.
Gromble1 votesthen lets add another 5 minutes on the end of the lobby to stretch things out just a wee more.
A Slime Appears1 votesOr we just let every person ban one champ, give a little more time than one ban takes now, and the games actually start faster.
Narasimha1 votesBecause instead of the same 6 champions being banned, it would be the same 10 champions banned. That, and you'd have to increase the number of champions required to play ranked so that you don't accidentally ban out a player.
Stark60001 votesI'd like more bans so we can get more skilled games
Solaxo1 votesNo reason, they're just lazy
CrazedPorcupine1 votesThe thing is, All riot has to do is add the last 4 bans half way between champ select, so that people can do strategic bans. BOOM, solution fixed.
NoMonku1 votesI always felt the reason for not increasing the ban count was because they want teams(at least competitive wise) to ban against what they DON'T want to deal with. They want bans to be more of a "oh man he is so good with "insert name" champion, so we will ban it, instead of just them banning what is most OP. Also LCS wise, increasing the ban count will also let teams target ban certain individuals. HotshotGG was someone who got constantly target banned because he was only good with 3 or 4 champions. They would ban 3 of them and insta-lock the last one or they knew his team would be FORCED to pick it or he wouldn't do as well in lane. Also increasing bans would allow teams to more easily negate strategies that depend on specific champions, so keeping the count low forces teams to prioritize what they don't want to deal with.
This is of course the ideal. Certain champions are just stronger overall compared to alternatives, which is why you usually see a LOT of the same picks/bans in higher levels of play.
Kivolan1 votesShouldn't being a one-trick pony be discouraged? If you can only play 3-4 champs, you probably shouldn't be in the big leagues... :l
NoMonku1 votesI'm not saying the player should be either, but a lot of newer players coming onto the scene, they usually get target banned. Getting their top 3 banned hurts, but if that number is increased it will only get worse for that team. It basically makes it so that player won't have much chance to perform as well. Also those players either end up leaving the scene or proving that they can play other things, which then them being targeted usually stops.
Personally I'd rather lean towards champion balance, which is a LOT harder to do, then adding more bans. I do feel more bans should come eventually maybe, but to me more bans just seems like a bandaid towards poor champion balance then the actual need for them.
TSM Hai1 votesPerhaps you're unaware, but almost every LCS player only plays 4-5 champs MAX at LCS level. Sure, they can play soloQ and do ok, but, for example, Bjergsen wouldn't be able to play LCS Jungle, but I'm sure he'd be able to play it just fine in soloQ.
Kieferr1 votesYou're just bad. If you enter every single game with the mentality of "zOmgee oP cHAmp riTo NerF PLz" then something is wrong not with the game itself, but you. If that many bans were allowed, the game would just be unfun, you will never get to play the champ you want if he/she is popularly perceived as "op", and worst of all champ select will take forever. If you wanna get better you gotta constantly challenge yourself and not complain about unfavorable conditions, because the game is won IN THE GAME, not at champion select
Kivolan1 votesThat's not the mentality at all, actually. A lot of the strategy of this game comes from knowing the strengths and weaknesses of different champions and counter picking accordingly... Or getting rid of what might counter you the most. Giving everyone a ban allows them to ban one champion they don't want to play against in their lane.
Ten overall bans is not going to get rid of everything that's considered "OP", either. There are 20+ champs that I see banned frequently at the moment:
If you can only play five of these champions well and they all get banned... That's kind of your own problem of you "being bad", as you say.
Raptamei1 votesTen overall bans is not going to get rid of everything that's considered "OP", either. There are 20+ champs that I see banned frequently at the moment:
If you can only play five of these champions well and they all get banned... That's kind of your own problem of you "being bad", as you say.
TIL Morgana and Nasus are OP.
BeatzBoyFTW1 votesThen there will be lots of "wow they banned all my mains" situations.
