Talk:Bard/@comment-33536623-20150903032545/@comment-4091261-20150919064127

I don't understand why you are trying to compare and. They are completely different champions despite having similar abilities and they serve different purposes.

Rather than comparing and, try contrasting them. has superior AP scaling and mediocre zone control. has stupendous initiations and mediocre bullying potential. Downplaying initiation tools and glorifying  zoning is simply bias. How useful these two are depends on what is required, because in the end, they both have their pros and cons.

I mean, if there is a team that didn't have any combos to follow up an initiation, then of course would be better with her consistent safe CC that's also considerably painful. Although, if there are enemies who were just bullies that nobody could initiate on, because the enemies would just kite away, then is better because he can close gaps and stop the enemy as if the gap never existed in the first place.

Outside of this, I do agree with your main points. Yes, is much more reliable in the laning phase. Yes, the portals are a significant part of kit. But ignoring initiation capability as unimpressive and comparing subtle differences in abilities that are essentially completely different is saying that  is a glorified alternative to  even though they serve different purposes. having more range does not undermine the usefulness of cc immunity.