I don’t understand Tyrande either.
Half the time, she says things that, I’ll admit, sound beautiful, flowing and poetic, but I don’t actually know what the heck she’s saying.
…And on that note, can we get some subtitles for Jamuro? I don’t understand him either.
She’s really into birds. She hears lights of loons.
Thinking that a “good healer” is just a walking healing fountain that run around in the background smashing buttons to just refill health bar is a poor oversemplification of the whole role.
Tyrande doesn’t have the highest HPS of the rooster but she has a flexible kit that bring much more to the table than many others.
Each Healer have points of strenght and weak points, but in the right scenario almost all can shine.
ye, healing numbers aren’t all that makes one a good healer. uther is great (even if i stink at him myself) and he’s usually got low numbers because armor doesn’t show on the scoreboard
it’s a similar story for silences, blinds, stuns, etc. if a healer is providing utility, damage reduction, or even kills then they don’t need as much healing in order to help win teamfights. i hear kharazims in higher ranks like to take his damage trait for this reason
Tyrande is not a top healer, thats why you dont pick her for healing. You pick her for kill potential that is matched only by Uther. If he manages to get close that is.
I never said they were mutually exclusive. I said one of them is outright false.
Nice try though.
If the “best of the best” are consistently giving demonstrably false advice, maybe you should find another source, hmm? Like, you know, actual statistics?
Not to mention that their advice isn’t even always that consistent. Half the tier lists I see have heroes like Genji and Mal’ganis in “S-tier” and the other half have them down in C or lower.
So which of them should we trust? The guy who says his personal opinion is right, or the other guy who says his personal opinion is right?
Or how about we cut them both out and just stick with the objective stats?
Sure, let’s just ignore the fact that their personal opinions are rather inaccurate when compared to the statistical reality. Half of these people still think Diablo is “S-tier.”
Let me repeat that. They think Diablo is “S-tier.” Literally the worst tank in the game, confirmed multiple times by Blizzard, is consistently rated as one of the strongest heroes in the game by these “experts.”
Oh, and do you remember when Anub’arak had a near-60% winrate for two months? Every tier list I saw in that time listed him as C-tier until the devs explicitly mentioned how well he was doing in their dev comments when they nerfed him, and then, and only then, did he suddenly jump up to “S-tier” in every single tier list.
Seems a little slow on the uptake, huh?
But sure, continue to idolize and venerate them for their infallibility even when the evidence directly contradicts them.
Would it be safe to assume you vote based on party lines?
I could go in long details on how and why you are wrong, but what’s the point? I did it a ton of times already and you keep ignoring everything because you have some terrible sites to have “statistics” you can use to “prove” your own bias…
I dunno what tier lists you checked and what were their sources (I bet even you don’t know, just judged every tier list based on them, I also not sure if you checked the tier lists purposes, like there are different tier lists for pro play, masters SL, lower ranked SL and maybe there are some for even QM or the ones which use the overall winrates across every league together like you do when you look at “balance”, which is really dumb imho), but NotParadox is showed and proved mutliple times that he’s truly into something and we can give credit to his opinion and I’m leaving this conversation with you with this here.
Better that I consult statistics to inform my opinion than base it upon my own personal feelings and bandwagon like you openly admit you do.
It’s really a shame to see you go the way of HailFall when it comes to understanding balance.
It’s really shame that you base your understanding of balance around 500 games/Hero randomly uploaded by random ppl to a random site (HeroesProfile), quoting Blizz when it suits you, but also ignoring it when it doesn’t (you have the face to mention Diablo having one of the lowest winrates (while also ignoring that the devs in the same comment said it’s a surprise for them (why could that be?!..) but completely ignore the dev comments about Hanzo)) and discrediting tournament statistics because “that’s just 0.5% of the playerbase”. Well that 0.5% is still a lot of ppl and they proved to be better than all the other 99.5%, but sure, “balance” the game around the majority who proved multiple times they lack obtainable skills…
Also, it’s a shame that you are nothing more than a cherry-picking laic of statistic with a lot of pinch of personal attacks…
(And no, saying that you are a cherry-picking laic of statistics is not a personal attack when you say I sweked the statistics by using logical filters, but bringing up my assumed voting habits are pretty much that, the same with saying I’m similar to a person you think are bad).
Oh noes, I don’t have 100% of all the information! Guess I may as well just ignore the 50% I do have and just make up my own opinion based on my personal feelings or go find someone else to tell me how to think based on their personal feelings!
It’d be enough if you’d just accept that those can’t be used as facts…
You already did, and you use confirmation bias to legitimize them by “statistics” which can’t be named that thanks to low numbers and the questionable source of data.
NotParadox based his tier lists on what he saw on tournaments with those tournies’ statistics, or what he saw from multiple ppl’s SL matches since he coaches ppl (from every league from bronze to semi-pro), but sure, use the “50% data” you have as “facts” instead… that’s sounds mroe reasonable…
Hey, do you understand how polling and surveys work?
You do not get to decide what “statistics” are.
Just because they conflict with your worldview does not mean they are not statistics. Get over yourself and your idols.
Bonus points for continuing to ignore the fact that Blizzard has confirmed the reliability of those statistics.
You’re telling me that you think that a data set consisting of significantly less than a tenth of a percentile of HotS games played is a more reliable statistic than even ~50% would be?
Do you really think 0.1%>50%?
Are you really accusing me of confirmation bias and cherry-picking when you willfully and knowingly ignore the vast majority of statistics we have available in favor of a tiny, miniscule fraction of that data that just so happens to confirm your worldview?
Jesus, you really are doubling down on that HailFall mentality.
I thought most players/gamers were like this:
But it seems to be more and more: Skip step 3 and claim the hero is bad, not the player. I guess I was wrong.
I just dont understand why some players just claim certain hero sucks. Some players are good at some heroes, some others aren’t. Those that aren’t maybe better at other heroes. That doesn’t mean that that hero sucks. To which I think the OP is right with their thread title: “I don’t understand Tyrande”.
Do you understand how statistics work?
Yes, 100% correct! I’m not the deciding factor! HeroesProfile is not a realiable source and has no statistical value not because I say so, but because the number pool is low and the uploads are random and knowing human psychology, ppl usually upload when they did something outstanding (and a few ppl upload everything without cherry-picking).
Me, and probably most of the accounts registered on that site upload less than 100% of their matches (0% in my personal case), which leads to inaccurate personal data.
My personal Hero winrates on that site I could find are of with ±3-20%, so the statisitcs -thanks to the low upload counts- can also be off with similar results, making them useless.
Bonus point for not knowing the whole story of this either… What a surprise…
Blizz said that Hotslogs was close to their numbers on overall statistics, because it had tons of uploads, but even that was off by up to ±5% here and there (pretty big, especially when you specifically judge Heroes as bad because they are 5% below average). But Hotslogs is gone, and you use HeroesProfile which has mere fragments of the data Hotslogs once had.
Guess how big can be their spectrum of error…
And for the fox’s sake you are so pitiful now…
Disclaimer: She deals 0 damage.
Most players don’t want to be told what to do… Guides can be useful but guides of type = “don’t take X it’s bad” won’t make players feel rewarded by info but insulted rather
And frankly I tend to agree, build-guides should have explanations and reason behind, not just “X is better” which is the case for say AT LEAST 30% of the guides
Wouldn’t judge people for experimenting until they find out what/how works and stuff, but what IS judgmental though is saying X is bad without even giving a try
Ok, there are some heroes that are REALLY bad (and no = it’s not Tassadar this time)
Clearly better than you if you don’t understand things as simple as sample sizes.
And yet, you’re trying so hard to be exactly that, declaring that because HeroesProfile has incomplete data, it must all therefore be false data. Which is utterly ridiculous to anyone who has any idea how statistics work.
Also, you really should look up the Nirvana Fallacy. Your position is very similar to it.
We aren’t talking about your personal winrates. We’re talking about overall winrates, which is a vastly larger data set and sample size, literally tens of thousands or more times the size of your personal data set.
Of course data sets using a tiny fraction of the statistics are likely to have questionable accuracy. That’s why you don’t cherry pick such small data sets like you are doing.
Hold on, Pot, let me go find Kettle for you.
You just unable to realise how horrible your manner is and think ppl do the same wgen they point it out that you do a bunch of unnecessary personal attacks…
HeroProfiles has low sample size.
Using stats only from the ppl who are actually good at the game is not lowering the sample sizes.
I’m out. This is beyond ridiculous now, implying that the tourneys are inaccurate because they have zero data from Bronze matches and they use only 1-5% of the playerbase but with 100% upload, having all their games…
I agree. I find guides, especially build guides to be too: “chose this, don’t chose that, that sucks…”. Those feel uninformative. There are also videos (not all the explained ones) that are decent too. Not all information is golden.
Though games are partly about self progression: At least that’s how I think about them, perhaps not everyone does. As a game is played, you try and fail, you learn and grow.
For example, I know I’m a bad Guldan. I’m a good ETC. The logical conclusion is that I suck at Guldan, and I don’t at ETC. Not that Guldan sucks and ETC is OP. And if I were to open the later conclusion in the www.internet.world, where there are probably some decent Guldan players, they’d be like: “Pfft, what are you talking about?”
My opinion is that IF, only IF, nobody can look OP with a certain hero; then it means that nobody has found anything strong about that hero… so that hero sucks. Otherwise if there’s even one who is; that means I got to learn something if I still want to attain a higher level with that hero. We need to remember that some heroes are much more niche, and some have a much higher skill cap, which are both healthy for the game.