What would happen if every heroes and talents had a 50% win rate in Platinum?
Would the game be more or less interesting?
2 Likes
Less interesting overall imo.
1 Like
Forced 50 gang would go nuts
8 Likes
Would be utterly broken. Some talents would be extremely over powered in ways that platinum players would not comprehend.
I feel it would be more interesting.
Picking the over-tuned heroes wouldn’t be a thing anymore, thus mastering the hardest heroes would matter even more in high elo.
Maeiv’s example:
She has a very low win rate across low elo and a bit more than average one in high elo. Her win rate is close to be average in platinum, but not quite enough. Unless you’re one of the top 30 Maiev, it’s probably not worth picking her to rank up, unfortunately.
We wouldn’t have a 75% win from the start by having Cassia, Xul, Rehgar, E.T.C and Orphea. We would have a much greater diversity in team comp.
Do you have any reasoning for this?
It would likely mean the game would be quite stale.
It would mean that all heroes would be mastered equaly. Which in itself would be a problem since not all players have the same skills . for this to happen we would need to lower the skill set required to play said hero so low , that any players csn pick them up and play effecively.
This would essentially kill the originallity of most heroes.
To achieve that , it would need to adjust to the player base themselves since you have many different heroes for many tastes and play styles.
Not all players like being a dps , same for tanks or supports.
It would mean either 2/3 play styles would be whiped out. Or all heroes would somehow fit all play styles possible.
Statistically speaking , tanks and supports are usually played by the smallest amount of players while dps focused heroes are mained by a very large majority of the player base.
As for the talents.
Each talents have to be considered by the team comp , enemy comp , map , benefits , synergy , opportunity of usage.
There are plenty of factors that comes into play when picking a talent. ( although most people pick the same talent all day everyday lol ).
That would essentially mean that each of the possible scenarios that makes each talent to be picked optimally would occur on an equally divided basis.
Currently we have talents that works well in certain niche situation , when picked outside of that, they can mean very little. But when picked at the right condition , it can make an enormous difference.
But having all that at 50% , would mean that any scenarios you can think about happens at an equal rate in every game.
It would really depend on why they are balanced in Plat. There are heroes that are noob-stompers in low ranks, such as The Butcher, who are never seen in higher MMRs. This could be considered “balanced” for Plat, but is still an imbalanced hero design. On the reverse end, there are heroes that tend to be too difficult for Bronze/Silver to manage, but thrive in top-tier play.
So while balancing everything for a 50% win rate in Plat sounds like a good idea, it could mean that the more niche heroes might see more play, it all depends on how this is done.
Hmm, I don’t think so. If you took datas from every match played during a single patch, it would give you, let’s say 10k games on a hero. A talent would work well in a certain game, but not on the other. There’s a way to adjust the win rate of that talent to 50%, but it doesn’t mean it will be 50% every time. It’s just an average from the 10k games.
We don’t have as much data as blizzard internal data center, but we can look at heroesprofile to give us an idea.
I’m taking Falstad as an example.
See how balance he looks? It’s all around 49% to 52%. If your comp needs more wave clear, you get BOOMerang. If you need safe trade, you go Charged Up, etc.
But, if your team depends on you to wave clear, Charged Up won’t give you that 50% win rate.
That’s the difference when taking into account lots of games.
You’d actually be surprised how The Butcher is succeeding even in high elo. Crazy as it sounds, from what I’ve seen by switching Falstad to The Butcher, he would get slight nerfs.
Personal experience with how low skilled Platinum players are. To put it in perspective after under 40 PvP games I was achieving >50% win rate in Platinum during placements. I mostly play Versus AI yet was comfortably playing in Platinum…
In order to balance around Platinum players one would have to majorly buff aspects that they fail to grasp with their heroes. The result would be that when someone who has actual skill plays the hero it will become utterly broken.
I don’t have the quote handy (and a quick search did not find it) but they made a comment about Ragnaros talent pickrate for level 1, they were about the same (around a 33% pickrate for each talent) pickrate for each talent. At Masters, according to their internal data, Q pickrate went WAY up.
The talent goes from ~5% weaker than his talent for his Blast Wave, to about equal.
So now you’ve got a talent that is blatantly OP for Masters, or anyone who gets good at Rag/looks up how to use it.
You’ll wind up where half the ability to “get good at a hero” is figuring out which talents are the best. AKA use an online site to get the most powerful talents.
exciting. (not).
Nevermind monsters like Medivh, Genji and Hanzo… What are they gonna get, like 20% HP/damage/mana buffs across the board? XD
Q build wouldn’t get touched since it’s close to 50% at Plat, but E build would be nerfed. This means that Q build would be the best in master. He will not be the only hero that would profit of being mastered. You named him already.
Medivh would be stupid broken on the best players out there.
Thankfully, there’s only a phew that plays him. Also, the first 4 bans won’t be for the classic Cassia, Xul, Rehgar and Johanna anymore. It will be vs Medivh, Maiev, Ktz and TLV.
If you’d ask me how to buff Medivh to 50% in Plat, I wouldn’t know what to answer. Maybe there should be an exception for the top 4-5 hardest heroes and that a win rate of 45% would be acceptable.
Just saw a Masters game with Grubby and nubkeks on twitch, the enemy picked Butcher. The streamers got smashed hard and they didn’t even reach level 11 when the game ended.
Never say never…
1 Like
which would mean that there is basically no talent choices in Diamond and Master.
And if someone wanted to “get good at rag” they would be incentivized to only pick Q build. See the issue?
He is stupid broken on the best players out there, ALREADY.
Except he is sitting at ~39% winrate in Plat.
what’s the point of this idea even.
If you want everything balanced, balance everything.
If you’re going to pick and choose who should get balanced to what… DO THAT FOR EVERYONE!
Instead of “perfectly balancing” 90% of the roster to a single rank, and doing the other 10% “to a different rank”.
The idea is dumb, would make the game boring and essentially result in every hero having one talent path. With many a 2nd part for some specific maps.
Impossible unless you make every hero identical.
Which would be boring. No one would play that.
losing to butcher that early Yikes…
1 Like
The point is to balance the game so that it would reflect players skill and not being dependent on the meta heroes of the month.
Most of the top 10 heroes are on the easier spectrum to master. Master players would easily win right now if their comp was made from Cassia, Xul, etc even if they don’t master the heroes. It would be quite different with my idea of equality.
Why would it be boring? You wouldn’t like having the Locust build on Abathur as strong and viable as the other ones? Suddenly, because he would now be balanced, you would find him boring?
Leoric and Falstad are the definition of balanced heroes. Are they boring? Absolutely not, even if they haven’t being touched a long time ago.
The meta shift goes sour pretty quickly when they release OP heroes. It wasn’t fun to play vs released DW for months. The same goes for post buff Cassia. "Oh, we didn’t ban Cassia. I guess we lose haHAA "
If something’s stupid and it works… it’s no longer stupid.
1 Like
Why is platinum the point of player skills?
You know that Gold contains the most players?
If you want to aim for top end/top region of players, you pick either Diamond or Masters. Which, iirc, when they’ve shared stats, the development team has typically shared results for Diamond+. Indicating this is about the point they feel dictates general balance.
it is just as strong and as viable as his other builds depending on the map.
let your ignorance flow! Let is guide you to the dark side!
Not much else to say, the idea is bad. Especially once you take maps into account.
Setting to Platinum to have a common ground between the most populated elo and the highest one.
There’s filters on heroesprofile that let you chose specific maps. Locust build is systematically inferior.
It’s a compromise that sacrifices everything for no/little gain.
The issue with locusts is that you kinda have to tech into it at level 1 to get “high value” long term out of it. And it is hard to judge if your team is going to be okay with locusts at level 1.
But overall, locusts are in a fine spot. A tiny buff wouldn’t hurt, but it is close enough to be reasonable.
I’m a player who has been in mid-plat to mid-diamond when i did ranked (HL) with 65-70ish levels on Abathur.