Au contraire, simply the preference between the two. We’re always welcome to express our other ideas with free speech here except when we aren’t.
I’ve never played pre rework Tassadar.
I played him for the first time in 6 months to a year today and actually really enjoyed him.
He seems to have had a buff since I last played him. His Q movement talent used to just boost his movement speed after casting Q.
It now gives him 10% passive movement speed on top of that.
Felt good, could get in position for walls easier and felt more slippery.
They’re both problematic designs that don’t jive with my fantasy for HotS.
Tassadar was many things to many different people. Because of his storied history of changes, he was basically a Rorschach for whatever you wanted him to be. So the answer to your question will inevitably be yes. Complaints of course would return, but it’s important to distinguish who those complaints would be from, and they’re not likely to be from people who would “eat their words”. They’d be from completely different sets of people.
Imagine a cheese lasagna. People love the classic dish, but some people might want some more heft to it, by adding some spinach or mushrooms. Some of the flexitarians, might even want a ground beef option on occasion. Different people will say there’s no meat, and it must have meat, and there are a lot more meat eaters than vegetarians. So what’s Blizzard’s solution? Obviously, give them a burger, something completely different to the original, on a menu that already has dozens of burger options.
So of course, guess who’s complaining now? The vegetarians. And even the people who ate meat on occasion, didn’t want another burger. They didn’t eat their words, this is not what they ever asked for in the first place. If reverted, of course then who would then be complaining, the meat eaters. They’re not the same people.
This is where people get very unsophisticated about Tass rework grievances. They look at the reworks through the perspective of vague terms like change or better without really defining what change was expected or how you define better.
Statistically, win rate wise, Tassadar is now “better” and more popular. But it’s also important to note that Blizzard artificially hamstrung his win rate by refusing to buff Tassadar for the longest time, and even when they did, they STILL didn’t buff his level 1 shield talent in a meaningful way that would make it more than a trap talent. It was the same in his previous healing rework where they hamstrung his damage and archon talents. So, that’s where people like me who liked the healer supporty type play styles wanted more diversity in his builds.
But in terms of the very subjective feel and play style of old Tassadar, he was more fun for the few that loved him, and indisputably more unique. That doesn’t take away from those who love his current iteration, but it came at a huge cost of something we already have plenty of.
I don’t think he was ever that niche. He was quite flexible, he just had a higher skill floor to perform well. But I liked the solo healer version the most as well. However, that version did need an update too because of the lack of talent diversity. It was a trap to spec him as damage which is cruel, just like it was a trap to spec him as shield in the later rework. Blizzard didn’t have to seesaw the types of play styles, they could have simply balanced for both.
I meant specifically that Tassadar had a niche pick rate in ranked, this was explicitly stated by the then current Devs. I agree that could have been a result of player perception.
Are you sure? I was a consummate reader when it came to Tass. He was my second favorite hero. I don’t ever remembering that. On multiple occasions, and even in the patch notes, the main and primary reason for the rework was to satisfy the lore. A lot of people made up other “reasons” but can never seem to back it up.
I think you’re confusing Tyrande and Tassadar.
Tassadar was more popular than Tyrande in ranked, but still was considered to be a low pick rate. When I have time I’ll find the patch notes if I can, or it might be in his rework discussion thread.
Xeny, are you OK? I know you’re a big fan of Build the Wall of text but it seems like you went Ronnie Reagan and told Gorbachev to tear it down to a sentence.
Tass was good at enable auto attackers witth his shield and had his E to escape with good wave clear and was the best hero to pick for vision and forcewall could stop melees people from escaping.
Overall his kit was good but then ofc came the stealth nerf and the rework to tracer that forced him to be a range dmg instead and vision got nerfed.
They could easy buffed him to make him a stronger support hero but they took the lazy way and just made him into a boring dps. Its like they hate support since we only got 4 left now.
1 Like
In some ways, it’s not even the lazy way. It takes way more work to do a radical redesign and add new artwork and animations. I’m sure it took a lot of effort, which is why it took forever from when his rework was teased to finally coming out.
So it’s hard to disparage Blizzard on one hand for the effort, but on the other, WHY?!?!?! To add ANOTHER mage and fit the “fantasy and lore” of a high templar by adding arc lightning that wasn’t even added until the final SC2 expansion cinematic. If they wanted it to be lore accurate, they should remove the channel beam and archon and replace it by summoning Gantrithor the carrier and then suicide with it.
1 Like
I’d be more worried about your severe myopia
1 Like
I don’t see the point…
You’re right, but I remember them saying something along the lines of Tass enabling some heroes too much, so they weren’t fun to play against. He was sort of like Sylvanas with her old trait I gather.
It’s been so long I have whiffed on the talent name, but the life-steal on shields you could talent for at 4 was probably his biggest issue, I didn’t understand why they couldn’t make some adjustments and keep him a support.
As I got to play Tassadar from release strangely I was bothered less than others when he was reworked into a mage, I already had many years of enjoyment with him as a support. It’s not the same at all, but when I feel the need to scratch the old Tassadar itch, I just load up Zarya or Medivh.
People using me as an argument in Tassadar threads makes me a bit happy.
About alts - my only alt was Sadius. And it was made for multiple reasons (talking about how old Tass was cool wasn’t a main one).
And yes, as Volun said, I never asked for Tass being a main dps, like he is now. I wanted QoL changes and some talents changes to make him better overall for more players, who didn’t want to spend 100+ lvls on him to play him good.
Because let’s face it - to make old Tass good, you neeeded to spend more time than on others heroes. Plus you needed at least one assassin player, who knows how to play with you annd around your CDs.
I played with one random Tracer as Tass but he didn’t care about coordination at all and we lost.
1 Like
It’d probably be hard to convey unless we’re there at the test processes. Clamor for Tass reworks had been a staple from the onset, and a dislike of ‘healing’ or ‘support’ for powerful fantasies has constantly been met with strife. Part of the issue for our perspective is, as outsiders, we remember moments when a hero worked well at the time, but we don’t really consider how that’d work in the dynamics that have shifted the time that followed.
One of the goals that the devs had tried to keep is offering something ‘unique’ for each hero, so even if tass isn’t the only shielder, or only hero with shields that can heal, he was still set apart by the other options in a more polarizing way. The dev-team pretty much decide away from “multiclass” in the aftermath of varian, but tyrande and tassadar had already been problematic in the distinctions between low and high skill, so they are examples of heroes that are tuned to better suit an expected contribution for a team, rather than being a wildcard of uncertainty.
has some quotes from 2 blues ( 
) though it’s not particular to Tass, but considering how polarizing he had been until he was effectively nerfed to oblivion prior to the rework, it does get to a point where people want to step away and change the approach instead of just trying small things over and over again. It’s not like chen + mal’ganis teams have shot up in picks to enable like Tass would, nor was another replacement hero, like karax created to fill a similar gap.
It is ironic that ‘supports’ have shifted away from the variety they used to have while tanks have been reworked to pick up the difference: they can heal, debuff, waveclear, shield, and so on.
Some of the tuning we expect might have gone over better if HotS were more a “sport” that has a winner determined by the score at the end of a specific amount of time, rather than demanding a singular victory condition with an uncertain investment. If Towers was the principal design, then having more heroes to defend a point makes better design sense than a game that requires players to destroy either side in expanding battleground.
Ammo is a similarly underutilized design that works for capturing/fixing towers, rather than stalling the enemy invasion, so the game also had little support for ‘specialists’ and saw those get phased out in favor of shifting hero roles into allow bruisers to hold the solo lane. If other aspect so the game got revisited, then previous hero design might also hold up better, but at this point, you’d almost be better off trying to either make a ‘new’ game to sell, or brand it as a ‘classis/remaster’ instead.
1 Like
I think you’re conflating different things here. I think I vaguely remember them briefly responding about a question in a reddit Q&A response to enabling certain heroes, but again that was more an incidental side issue that someone asked when they had already decided on a direction of Tass when the crux and major reason for his rework, PEOPLE WANTED PEW PEWS.
I mean did people REALLY hate playing against a team because they had a Tassadar and X? I mean do you remember a deluge of Tassadar is oppressive posts the same way Garrosh was? Even in Xenterex’s post doesn’t list Tassadar as one of those examples. This is why I think people really just collectively fooled themselves why Tassadar was changed.
If anything, I think people got more pissed if a teammate chose Tasssadar. And again, that’s because of his low win rate (and high skill floor) that they arbitrarily kept lower than needed. I can imagine it might have been an issue in some pro level play for small periods of time, but for the vast majority of players, I think that’s again just more people trying to find problems post decision, and collectively inject their own “reasons” (many of which are just conjured and frankly just wrong) why he was “problematic”.
1 Like
Where did I explicitly or implicitly make such a claim? For the record I never said I, the players, or the Devs claimed Tass was “not fun to play against.”
The Devs noted Tass was hard to balance in pro play and mentioned his lower than average pick and win rates in Ranked. I can’t and won’t speak to their motivations, but as you say, those factors were probably not the sole reason they chose to go the direction they did with the rework.
I’ve already said (and agreed with you) many times that a vocal majority were asking for Tassadar to be changed to fit his lore status, which as I already said meant mostly likely he would no longer fit as easily into a role of support, so those people shouldn’t have been surprised when his role was changed to become an assassin.
Like you I would presume the Devs had already worked on and decided the direction they were taking Tass before they “consulted the community” and as for the player-base reaction to the rework, I summed up my feelings on that clearly above.
At least I believe I have been clear, but it would seem not from your replies, I hope this post straightens that out.
*Apologies if that sounded in any respects confrontational. My point is we agree on the fundamentals here, even if I have not stated so clearly enough prior. I don’t care for arguments of the semantic nature, they bore me and are mostly unproductive.
2 Likes
I know we’re in agreement mainly, it’s just the part where you “weren’t fun to play against” which is in my opinion just largely something people invented rather than being the main or even an actual reason.
We’re just beating dead psionic horses lol. I’m still bitter.
1 Like
Hello all "old Tassadar’ followers,
I’m only interested in one thing, and it’s actually, the main reason of this post.
Come on man, bring the old Tassadar back. It’s the reason I stared playing the game in the beginning. Had Raynor first, then I brought Tassadar, and Kerrigan, with gold. (I thing Starcraft has one of the greatest si-fi story out there and I played a lot with her as well, for a simillar reason as it follows). I played Tassadar from the beginning, having him the highest level. I must tell you, I see no point in playing with him anymore with this whole new lot of change. I don’t even know how, can’t connect with this…thing.
It’s not because I like Starcraft so much, but it’s how I connected with his character in this game, and it was the best connection between ‘Starcraft-Tassadar-The old gameplay in Heroes Of The Storm’, if you know what I mean. And of course, as i’ve reed in some of the comments, it is also about the playstyle that emerged in time. Where’s that time gonna be? Forgotten history?..
I really wanna play the old Tassadar again. Please have some way of doing this, please man, for all those that would like to play the old Templar again. Have made like a choice option, when you pick Tassadar, for anybody to play what they want. Surely some script can be done to add this into the Void. Please Developers, hear my plea. I’ll even buy this if needs be.
Cheers.
1-off post accoubts that necro-bump topics that could have just been a new post are not a good recipe for reading your concern, let alone acting on it.
Spouting off how much you don’t care is asking others not to care in return 
1 Like