The best sign of a well balanced game is variety at the highest level of play.
There's a pool of about 20 champs that are almost invariably either picked or banned every game in tournaments.
I don't have any numbers to back anything up, but it really feels like this is the most boring/stale the meta has ever been. Fewer champions than ever before also seemed to be picked despite there obviously being more champions in the game.
Honestly there are too many champions for them to be balanced at all levels. Balance them at the highest level and there will be obvious imbalance at lower levels (where most people actually are).
They need to completely stop making champions (about 2 years ago) and focus on constant tweaking of the ones they have. Frequent changes to all champions is the only way to make the metagame constantly change and feature a variety of champions. Also, item additions/changes can also help add variety as people "figure out" what is the best.
"them memory is xbox hard down the framerate"
From: Fluxeon | Posted: 4/26/2004 2:48:33 PM |
Balanced is subjective. Think about all sports teams. Don't similar teams always making it farther than others? I mean, just look at the Yankees! UMVC was considered the most balanced fighting game because you could use 1/3 of the roster.
Just because 1 champ has different abilities then another will put them in a totally different tier.
TLDR: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e31OSVZF77w perfect imbalance
"My plans are always practical! It's the laws of physics that get in the way of my success." - Red Mage
When money is on the line, you don't mess around with trying new strategies and champs. Any given tourney will have a group that are more represented than others but that group tends to change.
Just look at the ADCs over the last 18 months. Vayne was FotM, then Graves, then Sivir, then Graves again. Varus seems to be FotM now. Each role goes through similar cycles, and teams comps do the same.
its cuz the meta roles are formulaic and there are many champs that fill the roles and do the exact same thing. however there are a few certain champs within the set that do the job better than other champs in the set. so theres no reason to pick someone who does the same thing but worse, be it numbers-wise or whatever
also riot seems bent on preserving the meta system for the reason i can only surmise to be that it provides a relatively easy way to coordinate 5 random players in the yolo queues so that people keep playing
While there are only so many champions used, that doesn't mean there aren't more on an equal level. There's just no reason for such and such a person to pick up another champ if he has all he needs for counterpicks and bans. Picking up another champ, even if equally good as the ones they currently play, will just add another champ and another team comp that needs to be practiced on top of what they already have, so it's pointless to spread out more than they have to.
I think the best way to see more champs played at top level would be to add another ban or two on each team, that way you have to account for 4-5 bans and have to expand your roster just in case of targeted bans. Rebalancing more champs to be on an equal level won't help because the players still won't have a reason to branch out more.
Worst LoL Player NA.