20 damage is way too much

General Discussion
41

This is not how math works AT ALL.

If you change the bottom of the curve, it changes the relative damage at every point in the curve except the very top.

Let me make you a handy chart to help explain it

  1. 0 Energy
  • OLD - 95dps
    • NEW - 75dps
  1. 20 Energy
  • OLD- 110dps
    • NEW- 94dps
  1. 40 Energy
  • OLD- 125dps
    • NEW- 113dps
  1. 60 Energy
  • OLD- 140dps
    • NEW- 132dps
  1. 80 Energy
  • OLD- 155dps
    • NEW- 151dps

Notice that there is no point at which it makes “no difference”.

As far as practical damage?

If you cut 10 dps off soldier 76’s weapon, for example, he would immediately become the worst DPS.

If you cut 10 dps off Orisa’s Gun, she would become a throw pick (for those who do not already think she is).

Given that maintaining >85% charge is not feasible in any regular teamfight situation that has gaps in between engagements, this effectively lowers her damage across the board.

Now, I don’t think it makes her unplayable. She still has a role that she fills, and as long as she has cleanse, she will always be useful in a 2 tank format.

But to suggest it is not a massive nerf suggests that you do not understand how math works.

2 Likes
42

Rien zarya still wins kings row and Havana plat and below

43

idk just don’t be bad? the only time zarya should have 0 charge is when she’s coming out of spawn

44

No. This isn’t what I was saying.
At about 20% charge she will be doing around 95dps, same as the base damage, pre-nerf.
Only needing 20% charge to get back to where you started isn’t that big.

45

This nerf doesnt change her at all lol, just hurts the bad zaryas

46

Outside of the DPS that are meant to not have high damage (widow SMG mei primary etc) who

1 Like
47

This is kind of a rude way of saying it but it is true

1 Like
48

There’s legit no reason to ever have zarya on 0 charge soooo

49

it doesn’t matter if she is at 0 charge or not
you changed its base damage so all damage numbers are changed except the top

50

You are a champion of strawmanning.

You took from TWO SEPARATE PEOPLE “not that big of a nerf” into “no nerf at all” and tried to argue against that rather than “not that big of a nerf”.

By your own metric at 80 energy she loses 4 DPS or it is a 3% damage nerf. That is not that big of a nerf. I adjusted to it pretty quickly. In no world is a 3% damage nerf a huge deal especially when it does not really affect any breakpoints (breakpoints being the key to balance in Overwatch).

Also your examples are terrible. “If you nerf the worst heroes in the game by 10% they become even worse”. Well ya, but Zarya is not and was not bottom tier. Zarya was the best hero in the game though and they did not nerf her by 10% they nerfed her by 3-4% in terms of real fight damage. Also regarding Soldier there is a specific break point that happens at 20 damage that causes him to be very very strong hence why the difference between 19.5 and 20 damage is larger than the difference between 19.5 and 18 damage for him because Overwatch revolves around breakpoints.

51

not a really massive hitbox… i have easier time hitting mcree and doom compared to hitting zarya…

52

The point of doing the math is to demonstrate that it does indeed change her damage at ALL energy levels from 0% to 99%, hence, it is a nerf to her overall average damage output.

You do not respawn at 80% energy.
You do not maintain greater than 80% energy in a losing situation.
Energy is harder to build and maintain when playing against better opponents.
Arguing based on fictionalized ideal scenarios completely misses the point because that is not how real games against skilled opponents plays out.

No, I am summarizing posts made by people who demonstrate the same lack of understanding on why changing the curve makes a difference at all energy levels, and not just at the bottom of the energy curve.

As you can see, it is intended as a time saver. :arrow_heading_up:

I can address your argument individually, if you would prefer.

Obviously, 100% energy performs the same before as it does now. That has very little to do with whether it is a large reduction in her average damage output.

Pointing out that the top end of the curve is less of a nerf than the bottom is meaningless because that is not how averages work. Especially since you, like so many others, have claimed that it only matters at the lowest energy states when simple math demonstrates this is not the case.

My examples are of two other sustained-damage heroes that are critically dependent upon their actual damage per second to secure eliminations, because that is how their kits work.

Even without considering breakpoints, it is very relevant, because altering DPS output by 10 (or more) significantly impairs the ability of sustained-damage to overpower healing.

Changing damage per second does not weaken a burst-damage weapon nearly as much.

For example -

  • Taking 10dps off McCree’s revolver is a significantly less impactful nerf than taking 10dps off Soldier 76’s rifle.

Another example -

  • Adding 10 damage per second to Winston’s gun would be a massive buff.
  • Adding 10 damage per second to Sigma’s hyperspheres is no where close to the same magnitude of a change.

It is not a nerf to just “bad Zarya” players.
It does not make her unplayable.
But it is a sizable nerf to her overall effectiveness.

Pretending this is not the case helps no one.

With that said, unless you have some new argument to make, and since so many people appear to be missing the point even when it is demonstrated for them directly, I do not feel as though any further discussion on the subject is productive.

53

Zarya it’s fine, her overall damage it’s really fine. Just know she needs to keep someone sharing damage more often than before. Like old brig/new brig.

I really in the past ran as zarya and killed a complete enemy backline while I bubbled a fight of 2 reins and killed 5 heroes behind that fight. Her damage above 70% was bonkers she gets energy really fast. So they increased her decay. After that I could still do somewhat the same but with less kills like 3-4. With this nerf you mostly will do 2-3 which is fine, but will be more reliant than before to keep farming energy. Her duo with rein will be fine, with winston too, with wreckingball too, with reaper too, even while she bubbles her sups receiving divers while she kills damage and sups on the opposite side.

Her killing potential it’s in there like any other tank, she got way more rewards than most of the tanks because part of her health regens and she can avoid any kind of debuff with bubble, increase her damage and avoid instadeaths ults. Only Bap, roadhog, mei, reaper and moira has that kind of potential to avoid lethal damage requiring only LoS and gets value from it. That’s why she is fine with this change, she only will need to focus a bit more on ther team position to keep bubbling them.

About damage potential, some folks forget how crazy the damage numbers are and how much each hero can do in the perfect scenarios. The highest healing in the game would heal 300hps(Zen) and the second would be 250hp(ana), both are ultimates. Not considering Winston primal rage. After that would be Moira’s ult with 140hp.

Those are the highest healing output in the game. Could be affected by ana nade to improve a bit.

Now considering zen 300hps, there are at least 11 heroes with capability to deal the same or higher amount of damage than that value. The highest healing output can be matched or surpassed by 11 characters, we have 31 heroes.

Heroes with 300damage or more in one sec interval :
Pharah’s ult(2100)
D.va’s ult1000)
Roadhog’s ult(896)
Junk’s ult(600)
Reaper even with his nerf would be 480(before was 560)
bastion(450)
roadhog hook+shot+melee combo(360)
tracer’s ult(355)
tied widow’s headshot, rein’s charge,doom’s ult,hanzo’s ult at 300.
*Sigma would be max of 300 considering half of roadhog’s hp.

If you compare with the second best healing that would be the nano, only holds because the damage reduction. Because we would have at least more 5-10 heroes meeting that 250hp threshold. When you consider moira’s ult then you only not bypass the healing from like 9 heroes from those 31, at least 7 of them are on support role and the other two would be wreckingball and winston.

54

Summarizing requires you to give an ACCURATE reprsentation of a larger segment and you did not. You lied about what both of us were saying and argued against that lie rather than the broader point overall. You did not try to argue against the actual point of "not that large of a nerf instead you changed that to “no nerf” and argued against that which is a strawman argument, but by definition strawman arguments are dishonest and fraudulent.

And yes your example of Soldier and Orisa are trash right now because they are not even remotely similar. Solider, and Orisa to an extent, rely on breakpoints. Soldier was great at 20 damage per shot because it allowed him a breakpoint with which he could get kills faster. There is a reason that 19 damage per shot and 18 damage per shot DID NOT MATTER AT ALL. I will reiterate that. There was ZERO difference in the viability of Soldier when he did 19 damage per shot versus 18 damage per shot because Soldier relies on breakpoints. Orisa relies on breakpoints.

For non-beam DPS breakpoints are EVERYTHING. Zarya is about pure TTK because her damage ticks significantly faster than a Soldier or an Orisa. You are not worried about 2 headshots and a helix (or 4 body) to get a kill on Zarya.

Now onto the more pressing point. The low end DOES NOT MATTER for Zarya because if you are in fights and are at sub 60 energy you are playing Zarya well and should get off the hero. Yes your average energy should be in mid-to-high 40s because of run backs and between fight moments but IN fight you should consistently be between 60-100 energy or you are doing something wrong. Therefore the damage we have to look at is how much of a nerf it was at the average point of a fight and you are looking at a 3-4% damage nerf which is again, as someone who is a pretty good Zarya, fairly inconsequential. It certainly adds some time to killing people when you factor in healing, but its even less consequential than what I am saying because you SHOULD be right clicking more anyway and when you factor in right clicks you are looking at a much smaller overall damage nerf.

Basically this is a nerf to people who do not Zarya well. If you play Zarya well the nerf is fairly inconsequential and THAT is what the Math shows.

That is how you make an honest argument based on how things actually work and some theoretical place where Zarya is just as likely to be in a fight at any energy point.

55

Yeah turns out leaving the tank role was the right choice. She feels so bad to play right now

56

Mercy pistol can do it too, its just never happens in game. Zarya has low range and bo mobillity, nearly every Hero can easiely beat her in a 1vs1 if she is low energy

1 Like
57

yes massive hitbox
she is a tank
if zarya doesnt have personal she is super easy to punish

58

A week ago her average damage on Overbuff was 15.2k.

Now, her average damage is… 15.2k. Can’t wait to see what it’ll be next week as even more of the average gets rooted in her post-nerf state.

59

sorry your comparing the stats of millions of players
of course its not going to change much like that
it doesn’t change the fact this was a bad and unnecessary nerf

60

Ill give you a better example, Since this does not nerf her max damage, I want you to think of it like fall off damage. Lets say mccree has fall off which he does, he will do less damage at farther ranges. Its very similar except its not fall off. If zarya has less charge it the same punishment that mccree has in a different way. Overall this nerf does not affect really good zaryas, it only affects the ones that are not great at her.