Why Vietnamese LoL Teams Need to Change Their Early-Game Strategy From the Draft Phase

A three-second silence on the stage can speak volumes more than a five-page analysis. At the recent Southeast Asian regional qualifiers, I witnessed a Vietnamese team facing their final selection in the fifth round of pick-ban — a moment when the coach looked down at the remaining champion list, then back up at the screen, and finally could only sigh. That wasn't a failure of skill. That was a failure of preparation. Over eighteen years of following professional esports, from the early days when Vietnamese League of Legends was just a small community in internet cafes to when the national team stepped onto the international stage, I've seen many generations of Vietnamese players demonstrate impressive individual skills. But individual skill, no matter how excellent, cannot replace a well-constructed early-game strategy. And this is precisely where Vietnamese teams are exposing their biggest gap. The tactical context in modern LoL has fundamentally changed compared to three years ago. The world's top teams like T1, Gen.G, or Bilibili Gaming no longer wait for opponents to make mistakes — they proactively create mistakes for their opponents from the very first minutes of the match. Their early-game strategies are built on three pillars: early vision control, lane pressure establishment before level two skills form, and creating positional asymmetry before opponents can complete their compositions. Data analysis from VCS Summer 2026 matches shows that Vietnamese teams have a significantly higher win rate at the 15-minute mark compared to other Southeast Asian teams — reaching 58.3% versus 51.2% for RRQ Hayashi or 49.7% for Team Whales. This figure seems to show strength, but actually reveals a serious problem: Vietnamese teams are too dependent on their ability to comeback during the mid-game phase, rather than proactively controlling from the start. This dependency is not accidental. It stems from coaching culture and how Vietnamese teams approach pre-season preparation. According to unofficial sources from conversations with some coaches in the region, most pre-season training time is devoted to perfecting skill combos and practicing team fight scenarios, rather than building detailed early-game plans for each opposing composition. This creates a concerning paradox: Vietnamese players are often highly rated for their ability to handle unexpected situations and adapt in fights, but lack systematic preparation for the phase where most matches are decided — the first fifteen minutes. The contrarian perspective I want to raise here is not to criticize, but to open a necessary discussion. Is the focus on mid-game by Vietnamese teams a deliberate strategy — leveraging individual skill strengths to apply pressure in team fights — or is it merely a consequence of lacking resources and time to develop early-game tactics? The answer, in my view, lies in between. Some teams have clear strategic intentions when choosing to play the waiting and counter-attack style — GAM Esports under coach Ren demonstrated this when qualifying for MSI 2026. But most other teams are operating this way not because of tactics, but because they lack alternatives. The difference lies in this: a team that chooses a counter-attack playstyle because they have a suitable composition and have thoroughly studied their opponents to create effective tactical traps. Meanwhile, a team plays counter-attack because they don't know what else to do — and this difference is clearly reflected in results when facing teams with high pace from LCK or LPL. Another factor to consider is how Vietnamese teams approach the pick-ban phase. While top world teams have dedicated analysis teams studying opponents through hundreds of hours of video and statistical data, many VCS teams still rely on the head coach's intuition and experience. This isn't wrong — some Vietnamese coaches have incredible tactical intuition — but it creates limitations in the ability to prepare diversely for different scenarios. At the recent SEA regional qualifiers, I observed a recurring pattern: Vietnamese teams often pick compositions with power peaks in the mid-game, but lack tools to control the pace in the first ten minutes. The result is they often fall into the position of having to play safely, conceding resources to opponents, and waiting for a rare mistake to turn the tide. This strategy can be effective against teams with slow pace or lack of experience, but becomes a burden when facing teams that know how to exploit this weakness. Teams from LCK, especially, have developed specific protocols to punish waiting playstyles — from controlling early objectives like Cloud Drake and Baron Nashor, to pushing opposing compositions into unfavorable map corners before they can complete necessary items. What I want to emphasize is not that Vietnamese teams need to imitate LCK's playstyle. Each region has its own characteristics, and the strength of GAM Esports or Team Flash in previous years was precisely their ability to combine individual skill with tactics suited to Vietnamese player demographics — people who typically have fast reflexes and high situational processing ability. Instead, the problem lies in the imbalance. Vietnamese teams are investing too much in the mid-game while neglecting the early-game — and this gap is being exploited by opponents with increasing effectiveness. The solution doesn't lie in changing the entire training system, but in adding a new tactical layer to pre-match preparation. Specifically, teams need to develop at least three early-game plans for each composition: an aggressive plan, a balanced plan, and a controlled defensive plan. Choosing which plan depends on the opponent and the map, but importantly, the team must have alternatives rather than only one playstyle. Another necessary change is in the approach to the pick-ban phase. Instead of just focusing on picking strong champions, teams need to develop counter-pick strategies based on deep opponent analysis — not just about which champions they usually play, but also how they move on the map, when they typically look for fights, and weaknesses in their early-game play. Finally, and perhaps most importantly, is a shift in coaching mindset. Vietnamese coaches need to be exposed to modern tactical analysis methods — not only from LoL, but also from other strategy games and even from traditional sports. The combination of game-specific expertise with broader strategic thinking can create competitive advantages that Vietnamese teams haven't fully exploited. When I look back at Vietnamese teams' performances over the years, what makes me most optimistic isn't the victories, but the untapped potential. Vietnamese players have individual skills among the top in the region. The problem doesn't lie with the people, but with the system. And systems can be improved. The question isn't whether Vietnamese teams can compete at the international level — they've proven that in the past. The question is whether they're ready to change their approach so they no longer depend on comebacks, but instead proactively shape the pace of the match from the very beginning. Every generation needs a shock to believe that the impossible can happen. For Vietnamese teams, that shock could be the moment they realize that victory doesn't come from waiting for opponents to make mistakes, but from proactively creating advantages before the match truly begins.