If all the champions are completely unique, then wouldn't automatically blocking you from using them while someone else can have all of them an unfair advantage? If a team had all the champions while the other team only had the rotation ones, wouldn't the former have a bigger chance?
The answer is no, because the champions are not unique enough that they serve specific purposes, lots of champions can substitute for others, this is something RIOT has even said, it's their excuse for making you pay with IP or RP to unlock champions instead of letting you play with them all.
Another example: If I said "A champion with a gap closer, and an attack speed steroid" how many could you think of? If they're all unique only one right?
Thankfully, Riot now takes longer to pump out champions which means they actually have to think instead of getting spells off of DOTA.
@Eddie-Vedder @tagyhag The best model would give you everything that's considered gameplay for free at the very start. Something Riot does not do.
It IS an acceptable model, but not when your opponents do it better.
It's not a problem though since all champions are not 100% unique and situational, which brings me to my other problem with the whole "diversity and flexibility".
100,000 viewers short from LoL and Riot claims over 3 million users playing at all times? Just goes to show what game has the more competitive community.
Heh, so many people here think they're better than him. He placed 257th out of the ENTIRE world.
Going to EVO, making a trip to Vegas, isn't something a casual Smash player would do. He played against ridiculously good people and got to the better half, so it IS impressive.
Yes the champions did better, but how many of those won American Idol?
tagyhag's comments