EPT[Champion] Miss Fortune - Page 9
| Forum Index > LoL Strategy |
|
Koromon
United States304 Posts
| ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
If they don't think she is strong? | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
ZERG_RUSSIAN
10417 Posts
Obviously the pro meta at the moment isn't the same as even the highest level of soloqueue at the moment so there's a disparity in pick stats in the LCS, but at the very least, she's got the best winrate among ADCs in soloqueue, and that does say something about her potential. | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
lazz
Australia3119 Posts
also one unique thing about MF is that boots are completely optional on her. she's also surprisingly tanky (compared to other ADCs) | ||
|
ZERG_RUSSIAN
10417 Posts
On June 13 2014 12:19 krndandaman wrote: well, pro players are good enough to win consistently with any low tier adc so thats kind of a moot point. then again, miss fortune is not that bad. its seen pro play in actual meaningful tournaments (OGN) but I don't think shes quite up there yet with the other top adc's. Wouldn't it just be simple logic that the champions that are "higher tier" have the better winrates? And what other meaningful metric is there to the strength of a champion than their winrate when picked? It's not like Urgot has a near 2/3 winrate. MF does right now and she beats out damn near every other champ including Lucian, who's considered the best ADC at the moment, by a LOT. All I'm saying is that how can she not be up there with the other top ADCs when she's got the highest winrate by a ridiculous amount? | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
scrubtastic
1166 Posts
this is why i prefer diamond last month's diamond soloQ top champions by winrate* MF is sitting there with a 53.5% winrate with 17,000 games in diamond. i really don't think sample size is the problem here. speaking of urgot, check this shit out: last month's challenger soloQ top champions by winrate* see that ugly motherfucker at the top of the list with a pick % so small i can't even hover over it with my mouse? looking at his stats, i get around *60 urgot challenger games* played over the entire month. 60 fuckin games is a variance problem. the game number is so small it might well be influenced by whether or not some challenger urgot player shows up that month and kills people who don't know the matchup, or how much trolling a couple of dudes do in favor of the urgot player TLDR i don't think variance can be attributed to MF's really good soloQ winrate TLDR i dislike using challenger for only winrates when the # of games is that small *Edit* before people declare the champ really strong or top tier or whatever, i think a definition would be nice question 1: if a champ is top tier, is it important that someone can first pick the champ without much to fear in terms of counterpicks? question 2: if a champ is top tier, is it important that the champ fits a wide variety of team compositions? | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
ZERG_RUSSIAN
10417 Posts
Did you even click the link because Fiora STILL got the sixth-highest winrate in the past month, two spots above MF. I mean you can define her all you want, all I know is that she has the highest winrate out of literally all ADCs at the moment in both Diamond and Challenger. So basically, she's not "top-tier", whatever that means, but she wins more than the "top-tier" ADCs? The most important metric to me when I pick a champ in this game is "how likely is it that I will win this game if I pick this champ?" Beyond that, I think her kit is ridiculous right now and her weaknesses aren't that bad. Just don't FP her or pick her when they have champs that own you, just like any other vulnerable pick. | ||
|
Nemireck
Canada1875 Posts
On June 15 2014 05:04 ZERG_RUSSIAN wrote: Why would a champion with a winrate that high NOT be "top-tier"? Did you even click the link because Fiora STILL got the sixth-highest winrate in the past month, two spots above MF. I mean you can define her all you want, all I know is that she has the highest winrate out of literally all ADCs at the moment in both Diamond and Challenger. So basically, she's not "top-tier", whatever that means, but she wins more than the "top-tier" ADCs? The most important metric to me when I pick a champ in this game is "how likely is it that I will win this game if I pick this champ?" Beyond that, I think her kit is ridiculous right now and her weaknesses aren't that bad. Just don't FP her or pick her when they have champs that own you, just like any other vulnerable pick. I'm clocking in a 65% win rate down here in Gold on MF, for whatever that's worth. Most losses can be attributed three main issues. Either it's me going way too ham with passive and/or scared supports (like seriously, why do 75% of the Leona players I come across in SoloQ hide at the back of our own lane bush?) Or I snowball the early game but team doesn't know how to win with a fed as fuck ADC, refuse to group ANYWHERE, let alone mid, and throw the game away by getting picked off one-by-one clearing jungle camps. (Does this ever get any better as you climb the ladder? It's like people don't care about winning, they just want to play League deathmatch.) Or The other team has a Renekton, J4, Vi, Master Yi or other such champion that can blick me and my team is unable to protect me in teamfights. Of those reasons, I can accept the blame for 1) 2) I assume that arranged 5s teams would both try to protect the fed ADC, and also group for early objectives to try and win games early. 3) worries me on arranged teams, I feel like picking MF anything but last would result in a pretty easy champ select for the opposing team and they'd just pick champions that can make MF miserable in teamfights. In a recent IH I was fed really early on in the game and we were winning teamfights, until suddenly a wild Scip on Master Yi appeared! And even with the whole team dedicated to protecting me, I wouldn't survive more than about 3 auto's worth of time in a fight and we ended up losing the game. This is why I wouldn't consider MF a top-tier pick outside of SoloQ. | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
ZERG_RUSSIAN
10417 Posts
I equate winrate over a reasonable sample size with tiers. That's the whole point. If a statistically significant number of players tend to win more when they pick and play a champ, there must be something about the champ that's causing this to happen. Thus, something about the champ makes them a better pick if you want to win a game. I mean if you're talking about top-tier mobility or top-tier ability to not die in lane or top-tier range or whatever then sure, MF isn't top tier. BUT IF YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT HER ABILITY TO STRAIGHT UP WIN GAMES, SHE IS THE #1 IN SOLO QUEUE BY A HUGE MARGIN. If you think that anything else matters aside from winning or losing a game in solo queue, then that's where our disagreement is. I will consider champs that win a whole lot more when picked higher tier than champs that don't win as much when picked. Period. And yes, I did state multiple times that she's generally not picked in competitive play, but I think that's going to change soon. Factors which affect this: 1) Solo queue meta and the double jungle + 2v0 meta are WILDLY different. 2) Pro games are played on older patches. 3) She's vulnerable to being counterdrafted and teams generally have premeditated strategies going into pick/ban. At a coordinated, professional level, there are a lot more factors which affect her desirability. So yes, she isn't as competitive of a pick in professional games. But for all of you non-progamers out there, she's fucking ridiculous right now if you want easy wins. | ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
On June 14 2014 05:25 krndandaman wrote: not exactly, since soloq has so much variance. we would have a bigger picture if we also had stats on how often other adc's are picked along with mf. if mf had a 60% win rate with maybe 1000 games played, while lucian has a 51% winrate with 20,000 games played, all it would indicate is that we don't have a large enough sample size for mf. not only that, since lucian is so popular and mf is not, the data is most likely skewed by the people just picking up lucian without actually playing him. No, the confidence interval for 1000 games is basically zero. If there is a bias situation (because MF is only picked against strong matchups or because MF is only picked by people who main AD) then this would not be corrected by sample size increases | ||
|
krndandaman
Mozambique16569 Posts
| ||
|
Nemireck
Canada1875 Posts
The only thing that would "correct" the stats would be a high number of picks in competitive play to "test" her "real" power, but competitive play is usually either 2 months behind SoloQ, or 2 months ahead of SoloQ, depending on who you ask. | ||
|
Goumindong
United States3529 Posts
On June 15 2014 12:21 krndandaman wrote: what would it be corrected by then? that was the only thing I could come up with but I'm not well versed in statistics as you seem to be. What you're proposing is omitted variable bias. The only way to fix it is to make sure the variable is in the regression model. Which we more or less can't do for technical reasons (Only Sufficiency has the dataset and the calculation is potentially intensive on such a large dataset and its hard to define an AD main and such a regression would suffer endeogenity concerns) That being said, i don't think that we are seeing much omitted variable bias here. MF has a really strong and punishing laning phase. If she gets ahead she can easily snowball to victory, moreso than many other popular AD's, due to the nature of her kit having every offensive tool necessary to close out games (W makes shoving towers fast, Q lets you siege, e lets you generate picks, r teamfights, and her passive allows her to rotate faster than defenders) and mixed damage which is hard to itemize against. | ||
|
clickrush
Switzerland3257 Posts
this is why lucian is picked more often but has a more average winrate. the "experts pick mf" argument is reasonable too especially combined with situationally strong champions, which amplifies the impact of picking mf into the right team, against the right team, while maintaining a low pickrate because the experts know when not to pick her as well. this phenomenon is consistent with hipster junglers such as fiddlesticks, rammus, mao shaco et al. Situationally strong picks with a unique style, above average winrate and low pickrate. "not fotm but hella strong"-picks like these have the potential to rise up to op-status with just small, confidence boosting buffs on them, because they make games where they fit in extremely one dimensional. more often than not their success is dependand on your opposing team screwing up in their picking phase and their ways of responding to the situation. a classic example would be Eve/Shaco in enemy team and then you pick a bunch of aggressive laners with a lack of CC and or sustain so your only early game strategy consists of hoping to not getting caught while overextending. | ||
|
ZERG_RUSSIAN
10417 Posts
On June 15 2014 12:21 krndandaman wrote: edit: my god look at the top win % champs for the week in challenger http://www.lolking.net/charts?region=all&type=champion-winrate&range=weekly&map=sr&queue=1x1&league=challenger You should probably study some basic statistics For clarification, a week has (extrapolating the Braum number) about 4000 games played in challenger from all regions sampled. Most of those champs on the page have less than 100 games picked. So even if the top 4 are Nautilus, Galio, Urgot, and Olaf, even a visual check for validity can determine that the sample size is too small to mean anything. Like, seriously, just look at it. You can't even see a bar that has numbers with the amount of games picked next to them. It could be three, for all we know. And in the Galio case, I think that's literally what it is. | ||
| ||
