Why hasn't Diablo been nerfed yet?

General Discussion
61

Hm, you know you can quote things right? If I said powercreep was a good thing. Go find my sentence and quote me on it.

I didn’t. You’re creating a strawman fallacy.

1 Like
62

If you dont think powercreep is a good thing, why you justify it?

1 Like
63

Kay, now you’re just trolling.

Kinda pathetic that you result to trolling cause you can’t find a shred of evidence that I said powercreep was a good thing. Yet I’m the reason that threads turn bad.

1 Like
64

Diablo doesn’t need any nerfs.
A bit more intelligent team won’t position themselves next to walls and voila, Diablo suddenly lost half of his power.
Positioning is the key. But well, asking people to learn how to position themselves in this game is useless. You can tell them 100 times a hero is balanced, not a problem, etc, they refuse to improve, staying at their potato league, calling for nerfs

3 Likes
65

Do you get paid $50 by blizzard every time you derail a thread or something?

66

I haven’t derailed anything. I stayed on topic and Wombat pulled a strawman fallacy and said I justified powercreep but some how unable to quote me on it. :thinking:

You’re more than welcome to try find me saying I think powercreep is a good thing.

67

Is this good enough proof? You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what power creep is based on your posts. “Buff everyone up to the level of an op hero” is power creep. People define words not whatever moronic definitions you find via Google. You’re arguing semantics at this point.

An example of power creep would be what’s happening to overwatch, where heroes who used to be top meta like McCree and Reaper are getting buffed because the general power level of the game has been ramped up such an absurd degree

1 Like
68

Do you two have like… a disability or something that you can’t grasp definitions correctly?

Powercreep is when a NEW aspect is brought into the game that outstrips OLD aspects of the game.

Simply buffing heroes is not the definition of powercreep

I have stated this multiple times and you accused me for having reading problems?

You accused me of derailing threads but clearly, you two can’t understand simple definitions of words and phrases.

69

Funny grumpykitten said something extremely similar in another thread but totally not your alt ecks dee you just have the same mannerisms and vocabulary.

This is BECAUSE the old things are getting buffed to the power level of new things. Also as I said, you are arguing semantics again based on an arbitrary definition you found on google. You don’t understand the concept of power creep if you don’t think “buff everyone else up to the level of an OP hero” is power creep.

70

NEW content. Do you understand the definition of NEW?! As in a NEW hero comes out and outstrips an OLD hero.

Okay, this isn’t an

This phrase has been used in card games since the original Magic the Gathering set and has been used in MOBAs since the original DOTA.

Just because you didn’t know that doesn’t make it arbitrary.

Don’t ever tell someone they don’t understand what they’re talking about just because you simply lack the knowledge to understand what they’re saying.

It’s pretty silly.

71

The concept has existed for a while duh. It really is pointless trying to argue with a brick wall like you.

I’m saying your DEFINITION of power creep is ARBITRARY, and you are using it to ARGUE SEMANTICS.

Is that clear enough for you?

72

Actually, you and Wombat are doing that. Also this isn’t semantics. It’s very clear and very defined.

It says NEW content outstrips OLD content. That is very precise

And you can’t cry “muh semantics!” simply because you refuse to accept the very definition that’s been around for decades, Hailfail.

Once again - your failure to accept that you’re wrong is your biggest hubris. You really should just get over it.

2 Likes
73

The definition of power creep to my acknowledge hasn’t changed in the past 25/30 years since it was first used back with Magic the Gathering. (It might be older, but I ain’t that old yet.)

You can’t say it’s arbitrary just because you want it to be arbitrary in order to gain ground in an argument.

Do you not know how definitions work? Did you not go to grade school?

I just tried googling different definitions of powercreep and every single link came up with the same definition.

I got countless threads and links to back my case. Where’s your evidence that’s it’s an arbitrary definition besides in your head?

So no. Your definition of phrase is wrong when I can google and pick a random link with the same definition of the last and the last before that and the last one before that.

Edit: I can also throw in youtube videos in that mix of evidence.

3 Likes
74

I bet hailfail won’t respond to this because he probably just tried googling the definition only to come up with the same definition over and over again.

Beat me to it.

2 Likes
75

A definition made for TCGs where cards never get buffed is going to be different from a MOBA. Raynor is a good example of power creep, where he’s just better valla now. You know exactly what im talking about and the constant appeal to “well the DEFINITION…” doesn’t mean jack. It’s logical that “new content” would include buffed/reworked heroes. Power creep is initially caused by new content that makes other things obsolete, but it can be continued by ramping everything else up to that level. That is what you are suggesting. This isn’t rocket science. All definitions are arbitrary and they cannot convey the nuances of a term, or how the usage changes over time or based on the scenarios the word is used in. Basic critical thinking will get you this far, and the constant argumentum ad dictionarium suddenly seems very meaningless.

You are dodging the main point again and again because you absolutely refuse to listen to reason. This is why every single argument with you in it is so awful. There is no opportunity for productive discussion because you will fixate on ANYTHING you can find flaw with and focus the discussion on that instead of the actual subject so you can argue about the minor issue for an eternity and never let it drop because eventually your opponent will get sick of talking to someone so stubborn and then you’ll get the last word and think you won the argument, when in reality you’re just so infernally unable to have a productive discussion that people get sick of talking to you.

Back to the actual point at hand: Buffing everybody up to the level of an OP hero is impractical. Furthermore, if a hero ends up overtuned, you can make the exact same argument that “Everyone needs to be buffed up to the level of (insert overtuned hero x).” This can go on and on until everyone one shots everything. It probably wouldnt (I feel the need to say this since you’ll be sure to hone in on any hyperbolic part of the argument to make 5 paragraphs about how that proves I’m terrible at the game or something), but this is what we mean when we talk about “power creep” in this context.

I’m not responding to this post any more if you continue on with the semantics nonsense because I’m tired of it.

76

Mate I’m not the one who made a guide thread and got told that they’re wrong by most of the posters.

Mate I’m not the one who constantly gets told that I’m wrong in almost every thread I make.

In fact, if you go to my goodbye thread. You’ll find a poster saying he liked me because I was **WILLING TO ADMIT THAT I WAS WRONG. **

Well… if you stop being wrong all the time and admit that you’re wrong. We could’ve gotten to other points in this discussion. But no you and Wombat made 10+ responds trying to say I was wrong about the definition of powercreep.

You’re at fault here. You. Are. At. Fault. How many responses have you made trying to argue that’s an arbitrary definition?

No they are not. How do you fail so much at basic concepts? Did they not have English classes in your school?

This is VERY rare.

Since when is a below 50% winrate “OP”

Stop incorrectly using phrases. How about that?

You just got proved with constant links from google to prove that’s it’s not semantics… and I’m the one who refuses to listen to reason?

It’s not my fault you are using a definition that has not changed since it’s usage as something else.

2 Likes
77

… Hailfail… I just proved to you that it’s not semantics. You are factually using a term incorrectly.

Use a different term for what you’re describing. You have no right to tell anyone that they’re not willing to listen to reason. Look at your forum history dude. Look at your reputation.

3 Likes
78

OP, I agree that tuning down Diablo a little bit would be fine. I would at least like to see his damage reduced a little bit.

79

So we’re nerfing heroes with a below 50% winrate just… because? His damage isn’t the highest among tanks. Lmfao.

All his damage is in walling someone and that damage doesn’t even kick in until his level 16 talents.

Diablo has been tuned enough - he has constantly been balanced over, given a full rework. It’s time to give it up kids and go find something else to cry about.

Diablo will always be a A tier hero and nothing is going to change that unless you severely nerf him into the ground and that type of balancing will destroy this game further

The are other heroes who need a lot more attention than a hero that has a 47% winrate.

3 Likes
80

Gonna quote to get things back on track.

1 Like