Rito Plz (fasttrack the price reduction of ADC champs)

Protoform X·1/7/2016, 3:43:46 AM·2 votes·401 views
View image: Screen Shot 2016 01 06 at 9 09 29 PM

Dearest Rito (and fellow players),

I've been playing League since the middle of Season 3, and I still suck. That's not what this post is about, except that it should tell you that I am still pretty far from owning every champ, like most others I know. My champion pool isn't too small either, but when I call out a resigned "fill" in a blind pick game (my usual choice), I find myself quite regularly with fewer ADC options as opposed to other roles. I recognize that this is a somewhat ridiculous complaint, but I feel like new players in particular suffer from a lack of quickly affordable options, as I hope is evidenced by the linked screenshot.

I wrote it up a little while ago to try to see if it was all in my head, and I'm sure if anyone else tried to count out the roles the way I did they would come out with something slightly different, since so many champs can play in multiple lanes. I tried to be fairly liberal with my definitions to give champs multiple roles (I don't know if people are playing Kindred exclusively in the jungle, but I gave it/them an ADC credit), but I didn't throw every champ in each role it could theoretically succeed in, only the roles where it has been popular in my experience. In spite of the inherent subjectivity of my count, I think the numbers still clearly show the lack of cheap ADCs pretty clearly. Granted, ADC is the role with the fewest champs, but having two at 450IP and just one at 1350IP (because Teemo doesn't count) is ridiculously low. Out of 33 champions available for 1350IP or less, only three are viable ADCs (one in eleven). If you add in the four at 3150IP (still a low number), you have 7/58, less than one in eight.

So please, Riot, consider letting a couple of higher-priced ADCs jump the price reduction line order in the interest of diverse options across price ranges.

Thanks for reading (and please upvote if you agree)!

0 Comments