A Fair, Symmetric Drafting System for BG
Clyneva
Member Posts: 78 ★★
There's been a lot of talk about the unfairness of having to draft first in BG, and a lot of skepticism regarding how the order is decided. But I actually have a more central question: why is the drafting system in BG asymmetric at all?
Asymmetric drafting only makes sense in games where both players are drawing (and eliminating) from the same pool. If both players are drawing from individual pools, a symmetric system is both more fair and faster. An argument I've seen is that it somehow would be less strategic, but let's dig into that and consider the steps in the two systems.
The current system looks like this:
1) Both players - Blind bans
2a) Player 1 - Blind pick 1 champion
3a) Player 1 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 2 picks
4a) Player 1 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 4 picks
5a) Player 1 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 6 picks
2b) Player 2 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 1 picks
3b) Player 2 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 3 picks
4b) Player 2 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 5 picks
5b) Player 2 - Pick 1 champion, have information on opponent's previous 7 picks
A symmetric system would look something like this
1.) Both players - Blind bans
2.) Both players - Blind pick 1 champion
3.) Both players - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 1 picks
4.) Both players - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 3 picks
5.) Both players - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 5 picks
Can you see the similarities? The symmetric system has the exact same number of strategic steps (5 steps for each player). In fact, the only difference between a symmetric system and what Player 2 is doing in the current system is that their final pick gets moved to the front, into a blind pick. Otherwise, they're making the exact same strategic choices as the current system.
I would argue that removing that final pick actually adds to the overall strategy of the draft, because player 2 doesn't just get an uncounterable pick using full information, which is a tremendous advantage. To top it off, since both players are picking at the same time, the drafting process now takes half the time.
The advantages of symmetric drafting seems pretty clear: it's faster, more fair, and retains the same strategic elements. It is unclear to me what advantage asymmetric drafting adds to the process.
Asymmetric drafting only makes sense in games where both players are drawing (and eliminating) from the same pool. If both players are drawing from individual pools, a symmetric system is both more fair and faster. An argument I've seen is that it somehow would be less strategic, but let's dig into that and consider the steps in the two systems.
The current system looks like this:
1) Both players - Blind bans
2a) Player 1 - Blind pick 1 champion
3a) Player 1 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 2 picks
4a) Player 1 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 4 picks
5a) Player 1 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 6 picks
2b) Player 2 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 1 picks
3b) Player 2 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 3 picks
4b) Player 2 - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 5 picks
5b) Player 2 - Pick 1 champion, have information on opponent's previous 7 picks
A symmetric system would look something like this
1.) Both players - Blind bans
2.) Both players - Blind pick 1 champion
3.) Both players - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 1 picks
4.) Both players - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 3 picks
5.) Both players - Pick 2 champions, have information on opponent's previous 5 picks
Can you see the similarities? The symmetric system has the exact same number of strategic steps (5 steps for each player). In fact, the only difference between a symmetric system and what Player 2 is doing in the current system is that their final pick gets moved to the front, into a blind pick. Otherwise, they're making the exact same strategic choices as the current system.
I would argue that removing that final pick actually adds to the overall strategy of the draft, because player 2 doesn't just get an uncounterable pick using full information, which is a tremendous advantage. To top it off, since both players are picking at the same time, the drafting process now takes half the time.
The advantages of symmetric drafting seems pretty clear: it's faster, more fair, and retains the same strategic elements. It is unclear to me what advantage asymmetric drafting adds to the process.
7
Comments
It makes thw strategy more complicated and we will have hundreds of whining threads on forums.
But what you suggested is a good idea but should've been implemented from the start
Current system:
Round 1:
1a) Player 1 - Placing defender, has 7 choices, opponent has 7 choices
2a) Player 1 - Placing attacker, has 6 choices, opponent has 6 choices
1b) Player 2 - Placing defender, has 7 choices, opponent has 6 choices
2b) Player 2 - Placing attacker, has 6 choices, opponent has 5 choices
Round 2:
1a) Player 2 - Placing defender, has 5 choices, opponent has 5 choices
2a) Player 2 - Placing attacker, has 4 choices, opponent has 4 choices
1b) Player 1 - Placing defender, has 5 choices, opponent has 4 choices
2b) Player 1 - Placing attacker, has 4 choices, opponent has 3 choices
Round 3:
1a) Player 1 - Placing defender, have 3 choices, opponent has 3 choices
2a) Player 1 - Placing attacker, have 2 choices, opponent has 2 choices
1b) Player 2 - Placing defender, have 3 choices, opponent has 2 choices
2b) Player 2 - Placing attacker, have 2 choices
Symmetric system:
Round 1:
1) Both players - Placing defender, has 7 choices, opponent has 7 choices
2) Both players - Placing attacker, has 6 choices, opponent has 6 choices
Round 2:
1) Both players - Placing defender, has 5 choices, opponent has 5 choices
2) Both players - Placing attacker, has 4 choices, opponent has 4 choices
Round 3:
1) Both players - Placing defender, has 3 choices, opponent has 3 choices
2) Both players - Placing attacker, has 2 choices, opponent has 2 choices
Again, if you compare the two system, you can see that under a symmetric system, both players have the same strategic choices as what at least one of the players have to face in the current existing system.