A lot of the time when streamers talk about tier lists they do so in a vacuum based on pure win rates
This can actually be highly deceptive because meta's actually refer to what people are playing not what is winning the most.
So here are the most popular lists in the game
1. TF, Aphelios - here we see the free boxer list and it's variants at top popularity at 9.5 percent play rate.
2. Viktor, Aphelios - people are playing for fun factor at 8.8 percent play rate but the winrate is below 50
3. Aphelios, Yassao - 8.3 percent play rate and an awful winrate but very fun
4. Discard aggro - 8 percent play rate and one of the best decks right now
5. Anivia control - 7.8 percent play rate and average win rate
6. TF Fizz - 6.8 percent play rate and a slightly above average win rate thought to be top tier but unproven so far
7. Fiora Shen - 5.8 percent play rate and the most reliable midrange deck in the game
8. Zoe Aphelios - A total mess of a list 5.6 percent and a terrible win rate
9. midrange Ash - 4.9 percent play rate still a solid deck but not exceptional
10. Temo Ez - a fun shroom list that has a 4.5 percent play rate and barely breaks even on wins
So what do we notice here, the most played lists are 1/2 meme's 1/2 meta that's a very good thing for the health of a game.
We also notice that a lot of the best decks in the game don't even break top 10 played.
Things like go hard, pirate aggro, these top meta decks aren't really being played enough to care about or tech against.
Let me know what you guys think, have we been examining the meta the wrong way?
Where is the data coming from, for those playrates? Just curious.
mobalytics, meta stats, region data. It's the only way to get to see top played lists, otherwise it's by winrate and the playrates are about 1 percent.
I was asking mostly because there is a site that reports the previous week, based on both winrate AND playrate. https://www.lorguardian.com/app/decks-library
If we sort for popularity on that site, the top played decks, in descending order are (rounding off some numbers):
1. Fiora Shen - 62% WR, 6% playrate
2. Anivia control (misnamed as having endure in there, when it doesn't) - 55% WR, 6% playrate
3. Discard Aggro - 60.5% WR, 5% playrate
4. TF/Fizz - 55% WR, 5% playrate
5. Go Hard - 59% WR, 3% playrate
6. Pirate Aggro - 58% WR, 2.5% playrate
7. TF/Aphelios - 56.5% WR, 2.5% playrate
8. Ez/Draven - 60.5% WR, 2% playrate
The rest after that are less than 2% playrate.
Yeah so a lot of that stuff is under 5 percent and that's kind of what I was talking about.
With the top winrate lists not being as over represented as people are saying
Quote From Nifty129Yeah so a lot of that stuff is under 5 percent and that's kind of what I was talking about.With the top winrate lists not being as over represented as people are saying
You do have to keep in mind that some decks are hard to play optimally, so their winrate is artificially deflated. Zoe/Lee is one example. TF/Aphelios is probably another. TF/Fizz probably also in that camp as well. Those decks have a lot of moving parts, and it's easy to misplay. In the hands of experienced players, those decks are absolute powerhouses, but in the hands of less-skilled players (or players new to the deck), they are much worse.
So, you can't really go by raw winrate. The top player on SEA has like 1800 LP and specializes in Zoe/Lee - just destroys everyone with it. But your average player could never do that.
Sure but what you're saying is very different than most card games. Like mtg a "meta" deck is objectively the strongest and the highest played by an overwhelming majority.
I also doubt that high level play is much different in terms of play rates.
Recently Mogwai was remarking on how everyone is playing Temo Ezreal, the meme deck that shows up as number 10 on my list.
Now maybe piloted by the best players it gets better results and is secretly amazing, but nobody actually thinks that.
The truth is this community is just really open to playing what they want and frankly I won't play a single meta list without heavily modifying it myself because I know these list are not set in stone and aren't "spectacular" outside of the very specific context in which they are played.
You must be signed in to leave a comment. Sign in here.