User blog comment:Commander Marko/Diversity: Is it dying out?/@comment-1330314-20150315160739

People have been claiming the death of diversity for years now, but I think diversity has improved significantly over time. Unlike in the previous seasons, we're no longer stuck with a holy trinity of each role and nobody else to compete with them, and while some champions are still heavily overpicked or underpicked, the list of best champions is a lot more varied and a lot less binary (i.e. there is no single criterion determining the viability of champions in each role, unlike season 4 where junglers could only succeed if they had strong early ganking).

We're definitely not out of the woods yet, though, and there's a lot more that needs to be done if we want true diversity. A lot of it I think boils down to champion design: is the most popular marksman because he can do pretty much everything a marksman can do, junglers like,  and  also get to generally do more than their counterparts, and some older champions still tread on each others' toes enough so that one cannot be viable when the other is ( and , for example). Riot's been trying to fix this via changes to itemization, but I think most of these issues can't be fixed without changes to the champions themselves.

Ultimately, though, a perfectly diverse game would still have a meta. Some champions and comps have an innate advantage against others, and are themselves beaten by other setups, so even in a game where every champion were fully unique and properly designed/balanced we'd still have flavors of the month. We'd cycle through them a lot more organically, but we'd still see some champions get heavily picked over the others at any point in time.