If you are being bullied, you are losing XP because the globe range is shorter than the old soak range. There was a reason why TLV could easily stay in a bush and soak that way.
Heroes that do not involve strong waveclearing capabilities also arent able to quickly go out, burst the damage and move back to safety. Those heroes suffer and lose some XP as they usualy are going to depend on the weaker globes. Usualy those are heroes like nova that are more PvP suitable.
Dont state that people lie if you dont have a clue about the change in mechanics and its effective result.
The biggest MVP factors are staying alive and getting takedowns. Brawling makes you more likely to get the takedowns for this. And then only staying alive matters.
XP is only a modifiers similar to the highest damage or siege. And each of those is already beaten by 2 takedowns (both count as 2 on the algoritm).
There was a post on this forum once with all the MvP criterias, it is a LONG list of points.
So no, rewarding incorrectplays is not how things work.
It promotes activity, littearly TLV was the only one hit by it, or Aba aswell, but they fixed the issue for Aba, and TLV doesnât in all reality actually have an issue with this.
Good TLVs got no problem with the XP soak AT ALL, which is why we got plenty of TLV mains in Master and GM.
Not all heroes are bloody buildt to clear a whole wave, thatâs why we got comps, and different heroes for different occations and jobs.
You donât just pick a team full of Novas and then go âWell this game sux, we canât make a team full of Novas now because waveclearing is an issue, XP globes clearly create an issue hereâ.
As if they could that previously, if you got pushed to pieces previously, then your gonna get pushed to pieces now equally much.
Like i said last time to you, before you post these things, you should show up with your rank.
Tried this previously aswell with others on this forum, and they oddly go quiet afterwards, your giving out tips on something i am 100% sure is incorrect, as i consistantly rank up my accounts, and i would refrain from ALL these âtipsâ that you give out, as that is how i played when i started out in this game, learning eventually how NOT to win.
So if your gonna have this discussion, post your rank to me, put me in my place by actually sitting in master or grandmaster, and i will shut it, and say âWell then clearly two tactics works, thought it oddly didnât work for me and nobody does it at a high rank, and it is HIGHLY frowned upon from D1 and up, it clearly works for some then in some wierd magical way.â
Yes, and each takedown is 1 point. where getting the highest of the game in the categories (siege, hero damage, xp) is 2, and highest on team is 1. Death timer reduces your score based on time spent dead, where this is applied percentagewise.
As a game can easily have 30 takedowns on 1 side. This dominates all the scoring together with time spent dead (which in the late game does affect quite a bit as 1 minute dead in a 20 minute game is already 5% - or 1.5 takedown in the 30 kills example).
They got hit the hardest. But werent the only one. All low waveclear heroes currently suffer as they become very incapable of proper soaking when it turns into a 1v2. And yes, this is less than 10 heroes. But that doesnt mean it isnt negative. Soaking should be rewarding towards all heroes.
Going QM as nova and facing horrible teammates is a very common thing.
then again, you went nova⌠which might be considered equaly horrible
But still, QM should be decent for all heroes, and having some flexibility in tasks is therefor nice. Even if suboptimal. Soaking is however one of those things that just should be rewarding in order to get players to do so.
This is a complete nonsense comment. Because it is irrelevant to the issue. Soaking should especialy be rewarding on lower ranks, as thats where you want to teach the importance of soaking.
And although to a certain degree it still is, popular bronze heroes should generaly not suffer as much (these are the typical heroes that are bad at waveclear and only work for PvP).
I could even say that master/GM knowledge is counter productive towards understanding bronze/silver. Because those players play a completely diffirent game, just because a lot of skill aspects simply do not exist there.
Rank doesnt say anything for everything. And i had personal experience at balancing mvm missions in team fortress to get an idea of how diffirent skill levels are. In my map it was extremely difficult to make missions for the easiest mode, just because you need to balance towards the clueless. And to a certain degree that comes down to guiding them, and not overload them with stuff that they just cant follow. Again, at the lowest skill levels they play a diffirent game.
And on a side note, the last change in which XP stays longer is to me the positive change it needed in order to push those players to soak. It could still be better, but at least it provides the teaching aspect. So its not too bad entirely anymore. Its now more of a factor of which benefits do you consider more important.
So before you misunderstand me here. I do like that they tried changing it, and the current approach is an improvement. Its however currently not as optimal as it could be. And thats because of those situational cases.
I couldnât care less what you think is counterproductive.
Been smurfing those ranks more than enough times to know exactly how to play and get out of them.
And yes rank has ALOT to say, because your giving out tips and tricks on matters you donât get, and when your faced with someone who knows they donât work and that knows what works, you go up against it.
If your gonna go against something that works, then you gotta put your claims in a place.
Once you start handing out ways to play, your litteraly giving players insentive to play like you suggest.
Hence why my teamfight post was for education, not for arguments sake on how you âfeelâ about the subject, because i couldnât care less how you feel on the matter.
What works, works.
Laning shouldnât be rewarding for all heroes if your faced vs someone whos good at it.
A nova shouldnât be dominating a lane vs a lane bully of equal skill.
You might aswell turn every hero in the same hero for the sake of balancing the game then.
Plz stop, your being counterproductive and encouraging players to play like baboons for 20mins.
I wouldnât be able to get MvPs straight if what your claiming here is true at all, there are so many criterias that if you fight 24/7, your losing out on all the other 30 or 40 points on the list, just stop.
The only part we agree on, because XP was confusing before the changes, nobody had a clue, i saw several posts about camps giving XP and camps not giving XP, range of soaks and all kinds of posts that was just missleading to a point wher enobody knew what was true.
Watching players picks âjunglersâ was even a thing in the first seasons, til they realized how silly that was.
A GM is in general bad at giving tips towards bronze, because they simply dont understand the bronze struggles. A gold player is generaly better at doing that, because they often still face similar issues regarding some of the higher macroplay, but at least are often better capable of giving lower difficulty improvements, because they faced those themselve.
Dominating is not what i ask. I only think that its not worth it for a nova to get less than a minion worth of XP per wave while defending at the wall against a hero she cant face. She might aswel not be there at all. Getting some sort of compensation for at least being there is quite essential at making it rewarding to still stay there. Thats what the XP can do.
At Diamond+ takedowns become a lesser factor, because there are less takedowns in the first place. People are much better capable of staying alive. And thats when the other factors do matter.
But in lower level games, a lot of takedowns happen because people do not retreat early.
Anyway, as long as the MVP status is considered useless by many, thats at least something. But i do see plenty of people that purely care about MVP, and instead of trying to improve, they simply refuse because âi get MVP, i am betterâ-mentality.
This is about getting an idea of how far skill levels can be apart, and the mindset that goes along with it. And what sort of struggles you can face at balancing that. And because i have been doing level design for that, i used that as example.
Balance is not a simple thing. Even if you are a GM in this game, it doesnt say anything about knowledge about balancing either. Balancing games is a skill on its own.
Overall, yes, but mostly because you left out the second change to his E, which is that you no longer self-root while channeling it. This means that while the channel is a bit longer, he can be moving while channeling, giving him more mobility (which he sorely needed) and somewhat unintuitively, he has a longer range on his Q+E combos. I notice this the most on reverse swaps, but the godswap is buffed, as well as the standard non-comboâd swap, as you can be moving towards your target as it channels.
He feels a lot more fluid to play in general, between the E changes and the extra range baseline on W.
Still not included Valeera, Zarya, and Abathur as recent Balance patch without any of Melee Assassin and Support heroes, as I waiting for weeks to taken as Yrel and Nova also big rework, in this patch Jaina have good one.
Exaggeration. Zagara is indeed a powerful assassine, but I wouldnât say she is âunbelievable brokenâ. Her only escape is still her movement speed that comes from her trait and her wide range, but if you can catch her, sheâs dead. There are more than enough mobile heroes to achieve that. It seems itâs an l2p issue.
Considering sheâs over 60% win rate currently with a 66% popularity, I think itâs safe to say sheâs busted and itâs not an exaggeration. Who woulda thought looking at the patch notes?
Isnât it too early to tell, if thatâs actually the case? But even, if youâre right, then she will get the nerf bat sooner or later like Valla or Falstad. At least I like to face more Zagara in the meta.
EDIT:
Donât get me wrong, Volun. I donât want to defend Zagara, if she is really op, but I just dislike the way how RobotRob critizise heroes he donât like to face, itâs just whining and not a fair way to discuss his point of view.
I already knew Zagara was going to be broken when I saw her patch notes and it was all buffs⌠They didnât even fix the fundamental design flaw that actually hinders her from getting any buffs in the first place
Ironically I played a finished game some minutes ago, where I played Genji vs Zagara. I killed her multiple times, but we lost it, because enemys had more ranges and weâre more melees, including Murky vs the Butcher. My team end up feeding too hard. But I wouldnât say Zag was the problem.
I hope someone at Blizzardâs reading this topic.
Can you, please, fix this or at least address it not being fixed since the firs report? Is macOS support frozen? Based on the patch notes, some work is being done for HoTS. Can the development team take a look at it again?
back in 2017, Overwatch announced it wasnât going to get a mac version. While there hasnât been an explicit statement detailing the particulars, the âtechnical reasonsâ stated seems to have been more prophetic than not as other games since then had to announce dropping support for mac versions of their games (paladins, some games through steam, etc)
It probably should have been fairly telling that the blue responses in that topic shifted to asking if any updates from Apple were helping resolve the issue. Iâd venture that you, and others in that topic, havenât been reading tech articles about some of the x32 support dropping, OpenGL depreciations, and other things that have happened since 2017 since itâs a whole lot easier to just keep repeating the same blame game in that topic for months to years on end.
Since Apple announced theyâre going to transition away from Intel components (in 2020) that can frustrate attempts to reconcile issues with 2012 and on machines for ones that will be using Apples own chips instead, esp since the change could/should make it easier to bridge the development gap between iOS and Mac OS. While support for intel-based machines can continue for a few years, for stuff thatâs already having problematic support as isâŚ
