"58 champions were picked and banned during the World Playoffs and Finals."

  • Topic Archived
  1. Boards
  2. League of Legends
  3. "58 champions were picked and banned during the World Playoffs and Finals."
3 years ago#1
Too high, low, or just right? - Results (149 votes)
Too high
4.03% (6 votes)
Too low
61.74% (92 votes)
Just right
34.23% (51 votes)
This poll is now closed.
Was just wondering what you guys thought about this number. That's about half of the roster deemed not worth picking or banning in competitive play. But that's also half of a 100+ champ roster being deemed good enough to use in competitive play. I personally feel its a bit low because I'd say probablly half of those 58 were picked/banned MUCH more often than the champs that maybe saw 1-2 matches (and many thanks to M5).

3 years ago#2
I would like to see at least 75% be picked/banned and the rest be at least viable
"Whats the penalty for dodging in ranked?"
"Phreak comes to your house and punches your screen."
3 years ago#3
It's honestly more than I expected, but it still feels painfully low.

Was hoping for a showing in the 40-50 area.

And about 15 of those were only played/banned once or twice, so they're super niche (cough M5 comps cough)

If about 70 Champions were played commonly and 90 were viable, I'd be super happy.
Remember that failure only occurs the moment you've decided you will no longer strive for success.
- Lysamus
3 years ago#4
To be fair the number of champions constantly rises while there are limits to how many can be played and how many can be reasonably expected to be played, making adherence to a percentage-based model silly.
98% of the teenage population has tried or has been around alcohol. Put this in your sig if you like bagels.
3 years ago#5
Should be 80%.
http://i.imgur.com/qd9BZ.gif http://i.imgur.com/rEw7c.png
3 years ago#6
Sorry, but for this game to be competitively viable the Champions need to have depth of gameplay. If they have depth of gameplay then players have to specialize is just a few in a given role. It is unreasonable for you to expect more champions to be played/picked in the World Finals than they were Players participating. For that to happen players would have to have almost no overlap in their preference of champions.

Did anyone even think about that?
fight fight fight fight HOLD ON MARIO PARTY TIME! - J Koch
3 years ago#7
It's not the greatest but I believe part of the issue that there simply aren't enough games at a single tournament to properly show diversity. There's also how most pros seems to have a pool of 3-5 champions they feel very comfortable on in a world caliber level of play and will heavily favor those few baring special circumstances. Between 60 players I could imagine certain champions overlapping between pools, especially the ones on that are considered above the line that is balanced.

I'd be more happy with around 2/3rds showing in a tournament such as this. IMO there aren't enough supports and ad carries and too many ap carries and tanky/brusiery types.
[Under Construction]
3 years ago#8
there were 60 people playing lol
http://i.imgur.com/qd9BZ.gif http://i.imgur.com/GEzm1.gif
3 years ago#9
If those 58 were well spread, I'd be ok with it... but 10 of those 58 were had over 60% Pick/Ban ratio (Ezreal had 90%, Jayce had 83%, and so on).

I hate always seening Karthus vs Orianna.
Our Drunker Master picked up the only remaining improvised weapon which would work, the dwarf. Since the dwarf was lawful we now had a lawful aligned weapon.
  1. Boards
  2. League of Legends
  3. "58 champions were picked and banned during the World Playoffs and Finals."

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived