[MODE][GAMEPLAY] Aram should have all champs unlocked for everyone

diamondlight·Apr 17, 2015·31 votes·1,839 views

ARAM is not nearly as random as it should be.

It's should be a good place to play a champ you've never played -- maybe you'll buy it after you try it, similar to free champ week, only you don't have much of a choice here since it's randomly selected, this is good.

Make all champs available to everyone so that it randomly picks out of the full champ pool, otherwise you get these players with 5 champs who spam ARAM of IP (Kat, Yi, Lux, Fiora, Heimer).

It will REALLY improve the variety of ARAM which makes it much more fun!

Note: I have all champs, which is why I am suggesting it, so that I see more variety in ARAM. I find it is so limited in terms of variety of games because of everyone else's champion pools.

37 Comments

Earl EulrichApr 17, 20154 votes

Well, that has been longed for sicne they made aram an official mode...but as it is, it´s already kind of a miracle that they finally bring poro-toss to the mode to balance the melee vs poke thing out a tad. And yea, i also own all Champs...and it´s ridiculous that i get punished for it when playing ARAM.

WhiskeyAgogoApr 18, 20154 votes

I agree with those saying they wouldn't enjoy ARAM as much if they were forced a random champ among the entire pool. I don't know of many people who I've come across and said "this is an ARAM account, I only own mages"... Who honestly does that?

It's even on both teams too... It's not like 100% of the time you are against jinx/sona/xerath/ez/karthus or whatever... You can have those champs on your team too.

The beef with ARAM comes from people who only play bruisers/melee... They do not enjoy ARAM for some reason... But I can't count how many times I've gotten stomped by all melee/tank teams... Probably about the same amount of times I've gotten whooped by all poke.

ARAM is pretty popular for a reason. I know that I would play much less if the other 60 champions I don't own were forced on me when I was out of rerolls. Also, as mentioned earlier, the free champ rotation adds a good amou t more of variance (helps with trades of you need), and does at times make you have to think outside te box. I think ARAM is super healthy the way it is, and loath the day where id have to play as Vi, Riven, Garen, Fiora or Wukong.

AuryielApr 17, 20153 votes

You do realize that people don't buy certain champions because they do not enjoy them, right?

I don't want to play Garen on SR, Crystal Scar, Twisted Treeline OR Howling Abyss. I don't buy Garen. Simple as that. Why do you think forcing people to play champions they actively dislike would be a good thing for the game mode? It would be LESS enjoyable for a lot of people, not to mention that certain champions require a lot of knowledge to be good OR that certain players don't do well with certain champs.

Also this would mean that everyone has a chance of rolling Bard ... I know that's as stupid an argument as it gets, but please, for the love of everything, NO!

diamondlightApr 17, 20157 votes

Sorry, but I think that's the point of ARAM, to practice/play champs in a light no-stress no-loss environment, who cares if you lose an ARAM? You only want to win with the select few champs? Play Rift or TT.

AuryielApr 17, 20153 votes

No, the point of ARAM is to have fun.

I actually own over 2/3rds of the champions in the game. I hardly get the ''select few'' that often.

It just so happens that the champions I enjoy to play are mages. What is wrong with that? Nothing. I absolutely HATE playing bruisers. It is a MISERABLE experience for me. I remember an ARAM game I played where I rolled Irelia. I went something like 22/4/12. I had less fun that game that I had losing on Varus.

I'm fine with randomly rolling champions. It's fun. What's NOT fun is being forced to play champions I do not own and never wish to touch. If I wanted to play those champions, I'd use some of those tens of thousands of IP I have sitting idle in my account.

Earl EulrichApr 17, 20152 votes

the point of ARAM is to play a RANDOM Champion and try to do your very best with it. If you don´t want to play a random Champion...maybe don´t play a gamemode with random in it´s very name?

diamondlightApr 18, 20151 votes

Well maybe you can have 3 rolls instead of 2, make it so you can earn more rolls easier or quicker. But still select a random champion from the full pool!

Be adventurous! If you want a predictable game, play rift or tt or scar!

AuryielApr 18, 20152 votes

Again : ARAM is for FUN.

You're the one trying to force people into playing champion they don't enjoy.

I hardly see how rolling through 80 champions is not already SUPER random. What exactly is the point of making people play champions they dislike? That's not fun.

Earl EulrichApr 18, 20153 votes

Every game(mode) is for fun. There is plenty for you if you dislike playing a random Champ already. But for people that apparently only have fun in ARAM if they play a Champ in the top 10% winrate-wise then they spoil the fun for everyone that likes the gamemode exactly because it´s making the best out of a worse situation/comp.

AuryielApr 18, 20153 votes

Maybe you should stop playing if you don't like that :D

RozzetaApr 19, 20151 votes

Right back at you.

AuryielApr 19, 20151 votes

Except I'm not the one complaining about the current system

T RexHasLongLegsApr 18, 20152 votes

I think the argument against that is that when people are drawing from different pools a competitive advantage. I may want xyz champs to play in ranked, or another mode, but not like them because they are weak in ARAM. The problem of differing pools is that I can make a second account and ONLY buy ARAM champs that are strong and because the overall strength of the pool of champions I have is stronger for ARAM I will always have an advantage over people who don't do the same thing. It sucks to know going into champ select you're at a disadvantage before the random roll happens.

The obvious counter argument is why this isn't an issue for ranked. Same advantage exists there, if one player has eve pre rework for jungle options and the other player has udyr, J4, and 12 other Jg champs the second is at a huge advantage, and that's in ranked, not ARAM. Difference is you can always buy more champs w/ IP, you can't delete champs in any way, ever so there is no way for the disadvantaged ARAM player to catch up, but the disadvantaged Ranked player can if they spend some time.

Earl EulrichApr 17, 20153 votes

Well...if you don´t want to play a Random Champion that is understandable. But then just stay away from ARAM and enjoy all the other gamemodes.

MandaariApr 18, 20151 votes

I agree with the overall point of the threat (more variety), but Auryiel has a valid point. I have the vast majority of champions as well, but there are some champions that I have zero interest in playing (including champions like Xerath, who is amazing in ARAM). That doesn't mean I don't like getting random champions, it just means there are a select very few that I hate. It'd be a shame to waste a reroll on them.

Earl EulrichApr 18, 20151 votes

well if you wouldn`t want to reroll then...what´s the point of having rerolls in the first place?

MandaariApr 18, 20152 votes

For champions that don't work well in your comp. For example I love to play pretty much all ADCs, but if we get 5 ADCs then I'll reroll mine. If we have a lot of damage and I'm sitting on a tank that I don't particularly enjoy then I'll keep the tank. Only after I take my team's needs into consideration will I reroll a champion. Even then, tell your teammates that you're going to reroll in case someone else wants them. You can always reroll what they give you.

Playing ARAM is all about making the best of what you're given. Rerolling stuff blindly just because you don't like it is selfish and an easy way to lose.

Earl EulrichApr 18, 20151 votes

Playing ARAM is all about making the best of what you're given.

I think that is entirely the problem...for me I personally don´t even like the reroll option, as I think it should really be about making the best of a bad situation. If you get a champ you don´t fully understand than grab your chance to improve! But as this thread shows some people are very repulsive to this aspect and so I´m inclined to keep the rerolls as is. However, if the differences between individual Championpools stay as they are then "making the best of what you´re given" is just unfair, as there are people that own all Champions and those can be sure to get suboptimal Champs at least half of the time while there are optimized accounts aswell that will roll a high-winrate-aramer 85%of their games...thus punishing those suboptimal Champions far more than it should be happening.

I still don´t see why so many people are reluctant to the idea of trying new Champs in new Comps without terrible much pressure. e.g. a day ago i had been stranded with AP-Olaf because i accepted and then my coffee screamed...so I went into it with a "already failed anyway"-ish mindset and just tried to enjoy the game anyway...somehow my team just grapped that spirit and with some ridiculous dives (azir flashing into turrets 1v3 for some terrible insecs and so on) it had been the most enjoyable olaf-game i had after his rework/nerf - even though chances are i would´ve happily rerolled the fellow if i wouldnßt have had to look after my coffee. tl/dr: Just try and be openminded about Champs and Comps, no Champ is really that badly designed that one couldn´t enjoy playing him/her.

MandaariApr 18, 20152 votes

I want to point out first that it's not about inability to play champions or to try new things. In any of these scenarios I'm assuming the player is skilled at the champion and knows the optimal build path for that game. Regardless of those things, there are some rare cases where your comp just won't work. Things like all melee, late game champions with no waveclear or sustain. Those cases are super rare, but that's what I save my rerolls for.

That being said, I'm somewhere in the middle with my own opinion here. When I watch lower MMR ARAMs the reason that I see teams lose to "smurf comps" isn't because of the comp. It's because they give up immediately. In fact I've seen tons of games where a smurf comp is a lot worse than a comp that people give up with. It's their mindset that's losing the games, not the comp. I almost never see smurfs in higher MMR games, nor do I see people give up when they get tough comps. Of course there are matchups that are very tough, but they're so few and far between that I don't think it's worth unlocking every champion.

I also don't think that unlocking every champion is the way to address that issue. Like I said, the likelihood that you get a truly unwinnable game is tiny. Increasing the number of champions in a pool just makes it less likely, but it can still happen. Rather than doing that, I'd rather see the root cause of those teams addressed. For example, the most frustratingly difficult comp to play against for me is a poke comp with a lot of disengage that doesn't fall off late game when you yourself don't have a particularly great late game or wave clear. Notice that this is an incredibly specific scenario. I'd want those specific issues addressed by the following (and I'm spit-balling ideas here):

Increased health for the outer health relics that decays while the relic is left up (think reverse bard heal). The effect fades away as the game approaches 10 minutes. If your team is pressuring then you have to walk back, making you both spend extra time to get the relic and not get the full heal. If your team is getting pressured then you get the full effect. Unless the other team pushes you behind your inner turret very early then they can't take advantage of your relic.
Waveclearing laser on the outer that charges up when your team nearby and decays when nobody is around. By always requiring nearby teammates this will only be effective if your team is stuck under turret. Since it's only on the outer turret the effect should not be much of a factor later in the game.

These are things like just give troubled comps a bit of a bump. They shouldn't be abused by already strong comps (like Mark/Dash) and they directly target the problems that weaker comps have without making them too strong while also being easy knobs to tune.

Earl EulrichApr 18, 20151 votes

that could work out aswell, as i would agree that it´s often a mindset thing if a team just gets slaughtered by poke...as often they would win fights if they would just force them instead of hiding behidn the turret and just letting that one go down achieving nothing. The thing is though...it´s just very easy to play a poke/disengage comp in Aram, while setting up fights without a flank can be ridiculous hard. I really hope the new poro toss will help out with that, but i´m still confident a lot of players will still be too hesitant to fight when they´re at a disadventageous comp. However, i´d say roughly 70% of my Arams end with poke or pokish comps currently...and that trend surly isn´t all smurfs - but it´s mostly because most people just donßt like playing melees/tanks...as it´s a role that just gets kited around and rarly has moments when they can obviously shine...while they often win fights by soaking cc, keeping the backline save and zoning carries. So Mages, ADCs and Supports just are overwhelming the map no matter what you change if you don´t give everyone all Champs.

I´m still a fan of going for true random madness out of the full pool without rerolls, but just balancing it out with better (waveclearing) turrets and the poro-toss might be a fair compromise.

MandaariApr 19, 20151 votes

I'm glad you brought up Mark/Dash because I really think Riot's making a huge mistake by adding it for two reasons:

Lack of engage is rarely directly the deciding problem against poke comps. The problem is that you'll end up either losing the engage or you win the engage and it's not worth it. There are a lot of ways that winning an engage can make it not worth it. For one, melee comps (the ones that need to hard engage) have an exceptionally difficult time pushing turrets, so unless you get a clean ace with a minion wave coming then you're not going to get a turret out of it. Another case is where you trade somewhat closely. In that case the poke comp ends up in the better position because they can just continue to poke.

Keep in mind there are already a lot of tools to engage with. Melee champions tend to already have plenty of engage tools in their kits in the first place. On top of that, there are plenty of items like Righteous Glory and Talisman of Ascension that make engaging pretty easy. Of course there are certain comps that are still very difficult to engage, but they're again so rare that it's really not worth balancing around.

Lack of engage is usually just one several other problems that come together to make certain comps have a hard time. It's more the conglomeration of lack of sustain, lack of waveclear, and lack of income that cause the problem. Once you get behind because of those factors do you start to feel like you can't engage. Adding Mark/Dash is attempting to fix a symptom, not a cause.

The second reason I think Mark/Dash is a huge mistake is because it's available for everyone. There are already a lot of extremely strong champions that would benefit much more from a strong engage tool like Mark/Dash. The ones I usually site are Galio, Amumu, and Alistar. Having a low risk, low cooldown engage spell on those kinds of champions is going to cause more problems.

Earl EulrichApr 19, 20151 votes

I think you´re mistaken here mainly for 2 reasons:

it´s just one lane, no flanking...so while on paper there are engage tools like rightgeous glory, it´s very easy to disengage from them with a little cc (and a lot of comps have someone like janna or nami or even the jack of all trades sivir ult) that mostly is on a lower cooldown anyway (or to just hide near the turret) + usually once your engage failed you just get poked down again. With poro-toss on a low timer this doesnßt have as much impact and is way less frustrating
the move itself is very easy to read, it´s basically a lee sin q. So if you get hit and still group as 5 for a mumu/galio-ult you kinda deserve to lose the fight. It´s nowwhere near low risk when everybody knows you´re coming.

MandaariApr 19, 20151 votes

Sure, disengage is still strong against those tools and Mark/Dash would help engage. I'm not denying that. What I'm saying is that it's usually not the direct problem and it's not worth what you're giving up.

As far as being easy to read/avoid I disagree. It's a long range Lee Sin Q on anyone. When Lee Sin is behind his Q he still has to pull of an Insec to engage. Amumu is not Lee Sin. Yeah, letting him get a 5 man ult is still avoidable, but you're still going to be in a really bad spot. It doesn't have to be a 5 man ult to be effective. Keep in mind he still has the rest of his engage tools to get an even better position.

And IIRC (and judging from the PBE videos) Mark/Dash makes you untargetable while traveling, so it's not like you can CC someone out of the Dash like you can with Lee Sin's Q.

Earl EulrichApr 19, 20151 votes

sure, but you also can´t do stuff while flying to your target location...so it´s kinda like zonias. If you time things right you can screw up the engage. as it´s basically the same as Poro-King i don´t see why it suddenly should lead to problems (though if ever, it would be about time that poke/disengage-champs get the lose end for some time after dominating the map since forever) as the melee/poke-balance during Poro-King felt really good.

MandaariApr 19, 20151 votes

Melee champions weren't strong in poro king because of poro toss. They were strong because they could return to the king after diving. It was basically that everyone had an invulnerable Lee Sin Q with a Zed ult activation. That's what made champions like Akali super strong in poro king. She could dive in, blow someone up, and RttK if anything didn't go her way. Again, it's not the lack of engage that's the problem; it's what to do after.

The things missing here are Rttk and the poro king itself. Akali, who is pretty weak in ARAM unless she gets fed, got a lot out of those two mechanics. She got the disengage from Rttk, the sustain from the poro king, and the turret pushing from the poro king. Those are the things that made her so strong in poro king, not the extra engage.

Earl EulrichApr 19, 20151 votes

guess we have very different approaches to the game then...i never once used the poro-king to escape from a brawl. That´s kinda fainthearted. It really had been all about getting a fight started in the first place for me and my lot.

MandaariApr 19, 20151 votes

Not just me. That's all I saw anyone do. I don't mean this as an insult, but calling a move like escaping a fight "fainthearted" is like calling someone scared when they're playing smart. You wouldn't call a Zed fainthearted for taking his ult back, would you?

Out of curiosity, at what level do you play ARAM?

diamondlightApr 28, 20151 votes

The point is adding variety, ARAM is for fun, sure winning is great, but losing isn't a big deal. You can always trade your champ to someone else or re-roll. You aren't stuck 100% with your champ unless no one will trade and you're out of re-rolls.

In which case you can dodge, or you can play it out like a brave soul. I prefer the latter, it's good to try new things. I like the Mark/Dash because it adds flavor to the game mode. It was fun in Poro King, but now it will be without the king, but I do think it will still be fun. You are also giving up a summoner to use it...

diamondlightApr 17, 20152 votes

It could even be an ARAM "All-Random" Game (like an option in the list when selecting game modes), where you know all champs unlocked.

Right now it says "Normal All-Random" but it's only random based on what your pool is. Well there are plenty of people who farm IP by keeping their pool small.

EthillectualApr 17, 20151 votes

[deleted]

diamondlightApr 17, 20155 votes

There is a hole in your hole: What "higher incentive" are you referring to? You're saying that because you own the champion you will play better at it -- that you have incentive to play better because you own it?

ARAM has no incentives, it's a break from the rift, to spam abilities, have increased gold and have fun. You could say that fun is the only incentive, there is no ARAM ranked ladder.

Having a full range of champions increases the variety and challenge, which is a good thing.

MandaariApr 18, 20152 votes

Gotta call you out on that one. The vast majority of people I encounter in ARAMs play it seriously. Competitively even. It's only on rare occasions that I see someone say "it's just ARAM" and even then it's usually because they're trying to cover up their feeding.

EthillectualApr 18, 20151 votes

No, I'm saying that people who want to play a larger variety or a newer selection of champions should be paying IP for it. Otherwise, ARAM is just whoever got a better champion. This concept similarly applies to Runes (also IP) and Masteries (XP).

MigrañaboyApr 17, 20151 votes

Unlock all champions was a recommendation a while ago OP, but now with the new spell incoming, we will have to wait if its still viable.

Though I am against that this spell has a 20 second timer, which I fear that it'll twist a lot the feel of ARAM to that of legend of the poro king.

SpectralWraithXApr 18, 20151 votes

The problem I see with this is you generally have a much higher chance of getting champions you own. For newbies, this would mean the majority of the time they would get a champ from their very small champion pool. I think you can see where I'm going with this.

plazma dj04Apr 19, 20151 votes

This point has been made over and over again. The ARAM Smurf accounts fight it tooth-and-nail because they don't want to lose ARAM games when they can instead keep rolling OP champs and power-housing to their IP wins and high MMR with the rest of the smurfs.

This game mode NEEDS all champions unlocked to really be viable and fair. Yes, I have all champions unlocked. Yes, there are champions I don't do well with. But I enjoy playing them knowing that I don't have a "smurfed" pool and had just as good a chance to get them as Lux or Yi or another OP champion. It's pathetic that Riot has let the community get away with owning low champion pools to get such a big advantage in at least 75% of the games. On top of that, Dodgers don't even get a big penalty so those same smurfs can reroll, reroll, dodge without much of a penalty if they don't like the champions they got.

Every game mode is supposed to be treated with the same goal, to WIN. Yes, each game mode is "for fun", as League of Legends is a game itself. However, purposely not caring and not trying to win just hurts your team every time. You might not enjoy the game mode enough to want to win all the time, but others do.

cocacolalipsApr 23, 20151 votes

I have heard this proposal many times, and I don't think it's a good idea.

While that will add more randomness and variety to the teams line-up, and arguably, maybe somewhere along the line, maybe, a semblance of fairness, that won't improve the game's experience.

You will get people even more so than before who will have no idea what they are doing with their champions, resulting in as many if not more one sided games, or people who dislike their champions or don't want to play them. And what do you think will happen when people get champions they don't want to play multiple times back to back? They will dodge, they will grief, they will afk, they will leave, they will give up, even more so that what it is now, and eventually they won't be playing aram anymore. Less players = longer queue times, more unbalanced games with players from different elos clashing together.

Really, the positive arguments (more variety) don't alleviate the negative ones (everything else)