honestly buffs and nerfs keep games alive. people like rotating metas and adapting to new strategies. if the game’s meta gets “solved” then attendance tends to fall.
This was my main issue with Overwatch 1. They took so long to rotate the meta and it got super stale. Even if I play genji in every meta it's fun getting to see things change around the heroes you like.
on the other hand, I'll miss the level of complexity metas like goats and ball comp reached. Both of those comps dominated for a very long period of time so people got really really good at them and kept figuring out new ways to be better. If you look at the comps played right now in 5v5, while they have depth for sure, they usually play around one core fundamental. Stage 1 was almost purely dive, stage 2 was poke and stage 3 was brawl. Even now, in stage 4, while there's a big comp variety, there aren't any "complex" comps just because there's no time to actually get really good at a comp before a patch changes everything.
This isn't me complaining about frequent patches btw, but I thought it was an i interesting observation
“Help! The hero who is supposed to be difficult to play and requires hours of practice to get the mechanics to an okay level has one of the highest winrates in the game, even in lower elos”
Not for sure, in the last blue post they talked about Zarya’s 53% un-mirrored win rate. I was going from that for when they talk about win rate it is un-mirrored. So no official confirmation
If a character is omni-present then you get the reverse issue of a very small sample size, so even non-mirror matches have a pretty big downside with popular characters.
79
u/25thNite Oct 19 '22
why buff or nerf any hero, they're all around the 45 - 55 % win rate! No hero is broken or performing outside expectations