Yeah, I mostly meant that a good number of people up in Challenger do it, not necessarily pros. That probably won't be the case anymore, though. Still, it's weird that the thing actually displayed TP in that game. Maybe make it so the system draws data exclusively from ranked games (Not sure if that's already the case or not)?
Credits go to The_Nameless_Bard for the sig!
Just to be clear, the problem is that on supports who diverge (don't all buy eye of the oasis or eye of the watchers) since those items are split they are more like the 3rd most bought item, which is why they're not in Core since Core is only the 2 most popular. I discussed this with the devs but it will require a bit more thought on how to implement properly without just forcing sightstone on everyone always (in case the meta changes).
Thanks to Minho for my sig!
I just noticed this seems to be backwards. It's saying Ashe is strong against [the highest winrate ADCs], and weak against [the lowest winrate ADCs]. I'm pretty sure it's meant to say they're strong against Ashe, not Ashe is strong against them.
On that note though I would personally just remove the counters section entirely or try to have a man-made system rather than a stats-based system, because every stats site does it and it's very misleading. Ashe doesn't counter the lowest winrate ADCs and is countered by the highest winrate ADCs, she wins against the lowest winrate ADCs because they're bad and loses against the highest winrate ADCs because they're good. There are ADCs from both groups who she is both weak and strong against in lane, so trying to analyse who she's good/bad against just from winrates is useless. The same goes for every champion in the game, which is why I really hate stat sites that do this.
Lucian is a more extreme example of this since the champion is in a very bad spot but he's still really strong in lane because that's where the champion shines. Most of the matchups from both columns are meant to be heavily Lucian favoured, but supposedly he's countered in lane by the highest winrate champions (which because of the meta are actually pretty weak laning champions). Caitlyn is in the same boat where out of the 7 champions meant to be strong against her, she actually stomps 4-5 of them in lane, while at worst being even against the remaining options and realistically probably still being favoured against them.
And meanwhile Twitch is shown to be strong against both Lucian and Caitlyn; which are 2 of his top 3 hardest counters! And even if I'm somehow wrong about the strong against/weak against thing being backwards, then it still shows him as being strong against Draven, who is also a top 3 hardest counter to Twitch (and since Draven is also one of the highest winrate ADCs it just reinforces what I said about the system having them the wrong way round, since it should therefore logically be showing Twitch as weak against Draven).
Using statistics to determine lane counters is just a system that really does not work.
Ashe is strong against [the highest winrate ADCs], and weak against [the lowest winrate ADCs]. I'm pretty sure it's meant to say they're strong against Ashe, not Ashe is strong against them.On that note though I would personally just remove the counters section entirely or try to have a man-made system rather than a stats-based system, because every stats site does it and it's very misleading.
Ashe doesn't counter the lowest winrate ADCs and is countered by the highest winrate ADCs, she wins against the lowest winrate ADCs because they're bad and loses against the highest winrate ADCs because they're good. There are ADCs from both groups who she is both weak and strong against in lane, so trying to analyse who she's good/bad against just from winrates is useless. The same goes for every champion in the game, which is why I really hate stat sites that do this. Lucian is a more extreme example of this since the champion is in a very bad spot but he's still really strong in lane because that's where the champion shines. Most of the matchups from both columns are meant to be heavily Lucian favoured, but supposedly he's countered in lane by the highest winrate champions (which because of the meta are actually pretty weak laning champions). Caitlyn is in the same boat where out of the 7 champions meant to be strong against her, she actually stomps 4-5 of them in lane, while at worst being even against the remaining options and realistically probably still being favoured against them.And meanwhile
Twitch is shown to be strong against both Lucian and Caitlyn; which are 2 of his top 3 hardest counters! And even if I'm somehow wrong about the strong against/weak against thing being backwards, then it still shows him as being strong against Draven, who is also a top 3 hardest counter to Twitch (and since Draven is also one of the highest winrate ADCs it just reinforces what I said about the system having them the wrong way round, since it should therefore logically be showing Twitch as weak against Draven).Using statistics to determine lane counters is just a system that really does not work.
@ Vapora Dark Do you think it would be more helpful if you could sort matchups by who wins early game as well as the option to sort by overall win rate? I don't think we'd get rid of the win rate since a lot of people expect that from a counters tool (as you said, it's very commonly used on other sites). I believe we already have the infrastructure to determine who gains an early lead, so we could have an option to judge matchups by who fairs better in the early game.
Also I agree those counters seem reversed.
Also I agree those counters seem reversed.
Thanks to Hoppermh for the sig!
Well, first things first, its not working for my region, sooo im gonna use someones data for testing. I used PsiGuard's, hope he doesnt mind.
For champion stats.
In items, wouldnt it be unfair to pick the top 8 items that have the highest pick rate+win rate? While its ok for core items to be selected from the highest pick+win rate, i saw a 1% pick rate but 72% win rate.
Theres also no trinket slot.
And to summoner page.
On favorite champs.
Early lead comparison is kinda broken. Average early lead are usually in 55 to 65, but he's in the hundreds upto thousands.
And in insight, how can someone that has better with everything(kda, de/warding, and gold) lost?
For champion stats.
In items, wouldnt it be unfair to pick the top 8 items that have the highest pick rate+win rate? While its ok for core items to be selected from the highest pick+win rate, i saw a 1% pick rate but 72% win rate.
Theres also no trinket slot.
And to summoner page.
On favorite champs.
Early lead comparison is kinda broken. Average early lead are usually in 55 to 65, but he's in the hundreds upto thousands.
And in insight, how can someone that has better with everything(kda, de/warding, and gold) lost?
You need to log in before commenting.
Not sure if that's what you meant, though. I assumed you were generally commenting on so many players not buying
As far as my original example (
I was specifically referring to that fact and that it seems misleading to not include it when it's the second item being finished in basically every game on probuilds. And even if that's true on utility supports, it doesn't explain why