Spent some time away from League, working on personal projects and such, and now that I've returned, I am immediately back to thinking about the game's over all design and architecture with a fresh perspective.
First thing that leaps out at me, reading over patch notes from the last few months, is that I don't really see much talk about Gameplay Asymmetry. In fact, the closest any discussion about the subject has come, is brief blips about onesided/lopsided lane dynamics for current meta midlaners. More specifically, how Azir and Corki represent such a powerful presence.
Listening to caster's speak about them in drafts one of the points they repeatedly hit on each game is that their waveclear is exceedingly present. To the point so much, that I think it's safe to say that their priority in draft is higher as a result of the other, significantly more so than either of them would be vacuously. To be clear, this is not to say that "X Champion exists in proplay because it counter Y Strategy" _See example of Trundle being popular within tank metas_. Specifically, this is about two champions pulling eachother higher into meta than they individually merit.
Going back to look further into Spring split, I recalled a commentary by IWillDominate regarding the toplane state in pro play, specifically, that in so many matches, teams would just pick A'atrox | Urgot, and play both sides of that matchup. His sentiments were echoed by LS discussing the Sejuani | Jarvan both sides.
Looking at the Stats:
* Of the 15 Games Jarvan was picked in, Sejuani was present ~60% of the time.
* Of the 12 Games Sejuani was present in, Jarvan was also present ~75% of the time.
* Independently however, Jarvan has a 40% pick ban, and Sejuani only a 35%
It seems unusual that champions that are not either of particularly high priority in games, would be seen so often in game together, especially when it isn't a case of "They picked X, so we pick Y" as teams play both sides of the matchup, more than happy to blindly pick themselves into either side of the matchup. With Jarvan only having a slightly higher winrate against Sejuani.
Even further more, their CSs averages are as follows
-- -- --|Jarv | Seju
CS: | 173 | 172
C/m|5 .0 | 5.01
They appear to have no preference or priority in game length, farming, even clear paths in the 3 VODs I chose randomly. They gank with similar set ups, seem to have identical presence with ulti. They have near identical cooldowns on R, with Jarvan's being slightly longer, cancelled out by the CDR he picks up from Warrior enchant.
While perhaps a more in depth statistical analysis is warranted, I think there is enough statistical evidence, as well as professional anecdotes from experience persons, to open the discussion.
It seems that at present that, especially in ProPlay, players have little to no objection to picking champions blindly into one another, where their gameplay objectives and styles are borderline identical. Champions which are so close to overlapping, that the only serious details which vary between them are the mechanical intricacies of the kits, not even necessarily the positioning, cooldowns, rotations, and engage conditions for either champion.
The concept of Gameplay Asymmetry seems largely lost in the current meta, no circumstance where two players have competing but different goals other than the general "kill the enemy and don't die". I think this fact contributes largely to some of the more vague problems in the game, and that even if the game is at a (impressively) reasonable balance state as far as purely numeric and practical applications, I personally feel that the game lacks much in the way of nuance along this regard.
Perhaps Riot's efforts in developing the "Key decision points" and objectives could be improved largely in their feelings of impactfulness if there was more pronounced differences between which champions, and combinations of champions, value different objectives at different times. _(Additional note, consider addressing the RNG nature of dragon)_