Preparing for my big third ban article (which you can see over on HeroesHearth) I reached out to James “Bakery” Baker for his thoughts on the matter. As an outspoken advocate of increasing the number of bans in competitive Heroes, Bakery shared way more insight than I could fit into the article. Because those thoughts still deserve to be seen, I’ve included the interview in it’s entirety here. Enjoy!
How would you respond to the concerns that there aren’t enough supports or tanks in the game yet?
I feel like most of the concern over Support or Tank chokes in a 3 ban system are at best exaggerated and at worst intentionally misleading. Theorycrafting a situation where one team uses both of their opening bans on Supports, and the other team saw that and thought they should also ban out supports, and then neither team picked a Support in the opening 5 picks, and then both teams banned out two more supports is pure insanity. Realistically you would need 4 viable solo supports, solo ranged damage, and solo tanks. This would account for two opening bans and first pick. Anything more than that is a welcome addition. Even if there were not 4 viable Heroes at times, I do not think that downside outweighs the benefits that a 3rd ban would bring. I believe that we do have 4 viable Heroes for each of those core roles, and I believe that now is the time where 3 bans can work for our game.
Why do you think a third ban is better at the start of the draft rather than mid-draft?
There are 3 main reasons I believe a 2nd opening ban is superior. The first is because I feel the first phase of the draft is where most of the improvements should be concentrated. If you read Twitter or Reddit, you’ll see plenty of people talking about how every game is the same Heroes. Statistically, that’s not true, we have high Hero diversity both in terms of % spread and number of Heroes picked. However, it is true that the first phase of the draft is very often the same from game to game, and even team to team. I feel that a 2nd opening ban would shake things up a bit. The second reason is about oppressive Heroes.
Right now I want to see Garrosh banned every game, he’s just too frustrating to play against and watch, but currently the tradeoff to banning Garrosh every game is that the draft becomes incredibly stale when it happens. I want to give teams the freedom to play around with bans against Heroes with Garrosh, while still being able to flex their other ban to a power ban, target ban, or just another annoying ban.
The third reason is related to time constraints. Heroes of the Storm has an issue where not enough of our audience and players are interested in the draft phase. Despite that, the draft is almost as important as the game itself. We also have the shortest game time of almost any drafting game out there. I believe the target of any draft changes has to be to shorten the draft as much as is possible. If our third ban was added in the middle, that has the potential to add another 60s of draft per team, as both teams will need time to discuss and adapt. If the bans are at the start, the chance of a team already knowing what to ban is much higher, and the amount of things that they need to discuss is much lower, which means we could shave up to 2 minutes off of the draft in some situations by placing the ban at the start instead of in the middle.
Do you think Blizzard should delay adding a third ban to HGC until they can also put it in the client, or is this important enough to move HGC drafting out of the client?
I don’t think the benefits of a third ban at this short notice outweigh the positives that drafting within the client bring, and the negatives of separating the competitive experience from the Hero League experience. We’ll have to see what the HGC schedule is like for 2018, but as soon as there is sufficient time for the teams to adapt and Blizzard are able to get it in the client I would love to see these changes.