Skip to content

[drafting-phase]: overhaul for smart ban logic, player requests, and flex-pick visibility #302

Description

@NicoRuedaA

Problem or opportunity

Description
I propose a comprehensive improvement to the pick/ban phase logic and UI to make drafting feel more realistic, tactical, and flexible. It combines three main areas:

Smart Ban & Pick Logic (Meta vs. Comfort): Ban and pick suggestions from coaches and players should strike a balance between the current meta and player comfort. Currently, players might request an out-of-meta comfort pick, or coaches might suggest a ban that is completely outside the current meta just because an opponent plays it well. The system should propose smart bans/picks that factor in both high-tier meta champions and actual player masteries.
Dynamic Request UI & Player Pivots: Players often change their minds during a draft. For example, my Mid laner requests Corki early on, so I lock it in. Later, they pivot and request Hwei instead.
Flex Pick Visibility: In the scenario above, I can easily flex the Corki to the Bot lane (ADC) and pick Hwei for Mid. However, when the Mid laner changes their request to Hwei, their new preference bubble takes over the screen and completely hides what my Bot/ADC player wants to play. The UI should never hide the preference bubbles of other teammates when one player changes their mind. I need to see if my ADC actually wants to play that flex Corki or if they prefer something else.

Problem it solves
Right now, the drafting phase feels too rigid and chaotic. If a player changes their mind midway through, the UI blinds the manager by hiding the rest of the team's preferences. Merging smarter, meta-and-comfort-based AI suggestions with better UI visibility for flex picks would turn the drafting phase into a true, deep tactical chess match.

Scope

Gameplay

Approval pre-flight

  • I searched existing issues and did not find a duplicate.
  • I understand maintainers must add status:approved before implementation starts.
  • I will branch from development using type/lowercase-slug if this is approved.
  • I identified whether this changes docs, release behavior, licensing, or data provenance.

Activity

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    status:needs-reviewIssue is waiting for maintainer reviewtype:featureNew feature or capability

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions