I wish I knew what rank you played old sym at. Because you don’t seem to have a good experience with her. There is no issue with being bad at the old kit yet if you were bad at the old kit you shouldn’t try talking about how similar they are as you don’t have that experience
And if that’s the case why would you claim to be someone that knows how to play the old character?
You don’t seem like a good person for it you don’t sound like you have even a good understanding of how the old kit worked. And if that’s the case you really shouldn’t be here talking about how they are so similar.
Due to lack of lock-on beam and less turrets, Symmetra 3.0 would definitely be worse on defense, even with teleport. Lack of any self-sustain(no throwable barrier, no SG) makes it only worse.
I’ve shown you a top 500 old sym player experiencing all the problems and gameplay I’ve described in the previous youtube vid yet you still brush it off as “omg it was just 1 game” despite the fact you can look at more of his vids to see the same underlying trend of needing to be hard enabled by the team to get into effective range of where he wanted to be whether if that’s to aggressively zone or to damage.
like how about you show me a vod of high rank gameplay where none of what I described is present rather than just hopping on your high horse
like as it stands, only one of us has receipts, and it ain’t you.
Dude I don’t give a crap about what the other people are doing they already deserve their rank I am just wondering where you fall in the skill cap of sym 2.0
is that what we’re calling the logic of “you must be X rank to be able to say anything about hero kits” now?
the fact that you blatantly ignore hard evidence despite it literally being in the high rank environment and specifically want to know my rank instead, kinda says a lot about how you legit have 0 arguments left, you want 0 objectivity on the matter and you just want to indulge yourself because apparently you made it to GM.
because rank = absolute, end-all-be-all indicator of understanding of the game /s pro expC in how people didn’t know how long hack cast time was initially, or how mei ammo worked, or somehow thought +5min damage on junkrat mine or 15 more armor on winston would be either a wild fun idea or significant in balance, or somehow thought 175hp on tracer wouldn’t be OP, etc.
still waiting on substance here and not “I wanna see if this guy’s low rank so then I can just write him off irrespective of how much logic he has”…
except what rank I am doesn’t matter and doesn’t add to the discussion, nor should it.
everything I’ve pointed out exists even in GM top 500 player gameplay as shown in the youtube link. you legit haven’t shown anything disproving that nor shown how the differences between old sym vs sym3.0 without tp in her kit would make up a large majority of their gameplay to justify the claim that the 3.0 rework “completely replaced her with a completely different hero”.
instead you want to deflect onto strengths of the 2 kits completely avoiding the gameplay aspect despite how the whole point of contention is about gameplay or try to find some side, irrelevant avenue of undermining what I’m saying because you can’t come up with any arguments.
No the rank does kinda matter with the conclusions you draw. You looking at top 500 gameplay with no perspective on what those people are thinking at that rank is the issue.
I don’t think you have a good grasp of how each kit preformed especially the old one. It’s why you don’t balance around bronze players they just don’t know how to effectively use the hero’s they play. That’s sort of the impression I get from you when you describe the old kit you have almost no idea how to effectively get value with it or why the strats implemented by pros work
If you never effectively learned how to play the character who are you to say she’s the same now. Your perspective is the issue
it legit doesn’t take a genius to know that why they (the sym player) didn’t move in closer up to get into effective range in https://youtu.be/rIKQLbhNUCM?t=104 and only do so when the team either escorted him or hard distracted the enemy is literally because of all the problems I pointed out.
like legit, why do you think they didn’t advance further up to get in his effective range outside of being escorted or without a big distraction? or more importantly, why do you think they thought they’d easily die if they did so without either the team escorting them to be closer or without a big distraction?
and what makes you think sym3.0 without tp there would be any wildly different to claim “the 3.0 rework completely replaced the character with an entirely different one” in terms of gameplay?
strawmanning.
I said sym3.0 played as if tp didn’t exist in her kit would have gameplay that highly resembles old sym gameplay, of which shows that there exists a non-trivial overlap between the 2 kits to show that sym wasn’t “replaced with a 100% different hero” i.e. disproving the claim “the rework completely replaced her with a completely different hero”.
that’s not saying sym3.0 is exactly the same as sym2.0.
like do I need a diagram to show you the difference between claims?
I just seriously don’t understand how you can look at it that way. Like just looking at orbs the timing charge and utility is completely different the tool has changed and the applications of the tool will be different.
If you look at the primary the utility damage and range values have changed significantly the tool is extremely different in how you have to use it to apply pressure
Just the gun changes alone drastically change effective range and how the damage is applied and why it’s applied. The two guns are applicable in very different situations because of those changes.
She then has a personal shield that 3.0 doesn’t get. This is another tool that can be used for a wide variety of resources.
You are basically looking at a hammer and a sanding rod. And thinking because I can hammer in nails by slamming the sanding rod into the wood it’s not completely different from the hammer. No you are just not using the tools correctly. That’s why I really do believe you have a very poor understanding of 2.0s kit. It’s why I ask you about your time playing her because I want to understand how you thought to use her so out of place. Where you can’t see the differences
still the same unreliable spam gameplay when further away (which is most of the match time btw; if you think orb projectile speed gives them decent effective range now, think again and actually work out at what range are orbs dodgable despite perfect aim) and using the same angles, still shooting generally at where the team will be irrespective of their shields or not and shield pierce or not, etc.
still aiming to use them as burst damage before going in with m1 when in closer range
still the same characteristics of the projectile to abuse (e.g. shooting between tiny gaps)
the “utility” of old orbs simply wasn’t applicable for much of the game. they only really applied to static targets (legit only like 2 targetable things in the game at the time) or really narrow corridors (which whether she can even reach there when needed is highly questionable as explained before)
if you think they were good at “zoning” outside of that, then either you’re really stupid or you think everyone somehow is physically and/or mentally challenged because again:
they’re only 1m wide, heroes typically move 5.5m/s to dodge them outside of mobility abilities, the average reaction time to stimuli is 0.25s, they moved so slow that it literally took a few WHOLE SECONDS to travel far enough to reach the target AND could only fire 1 orb per 2.25s (i.e. hardly needed to worry about “multiple/quick successive” orbs at once).
when without mobility tools:
still need either team escort or a huge distraction by the team to get close and stay close and is pretty much not applicable outside of that given that
still short ranged
still sustain damage
still charged up through damaging over time
and no, trying to argue “it was an anti-flank tool” will be hypocritical of you because we all know that it’s only effective against bad flankers that can’t land their burst as we all know old sym (and current) had terrible ttk on others and that flankers can burst her down easily and subsequently escape before both turrets and old primary aim leniency can matter ( all your high horse ramblings before about “we should be looking at this from a high skill perspective” etc.).
of which was not sufficient to let old sym gap close AND stay close AND disengage to let her get as many opportunities in effective range to get value (whether damage or zoning) as various other heroes. of which is simply the same case as sym3.0 without tp.
like if old barrier really let old sym get so much uptime, explain why in the previous posted youtube clip, that a top 500 sym player only managed to get in effective range about 3 times (with the absolutely needed enabling of the team either escorting or distracting the enemies) in the span of literally minutes of the match in point A attack, despite the many barriers thrown.
poor analogy because you’re 100% neglecting the amount of persisting similarities.
This is why I seriously question how well you did with 2.0. You don’t seem like you understand how or why her kit was set up like this and how to use it in the context of the game.
It’s why I thought the tool metaphor was the best way to explain how I view such wild misconceptions about a character to form. If you don’t know how to use a tool in the first place you might have just been using it wrong from the start.
Sym 2.0 wasn’t a simple character playing her is different from most fps tropes. I just think you never really grasped how to apply her kit correctly because of you did you would understand how taking away pierce or lock on or even the shield are huge changes that really affect the neutral game.
you fail to see that effectively waiting around most of the match time is legit low value.
the fact of the matter is that whatever old sym could actively contribute was literally damage and zoning. both of which had low effective range to do, she had 0 mobility for, both were sustained in nature as opposed to burst, and in no way in hell did her old barrrier nor shield gen meaningfully enable her to get opportunities in their low effective range. that is simply objective fact.
all of what I said there was also fact supported by kit numbers and as shown by the gameplay video. yet all you do is just make claims with 0 evidence to back it up, and just because someone disagrees you rely on your final apparent card of “but I made it to GM” which is completely irrelevant to the discussion.
e.g. if you want to think old orbs were so good at zoning despite how their numbers show how bad it was even for back then, and despite how gameplay vids for a top 500 player even show it literally doesn’t zone as you claim, it is you who doesn’t understand.
But we aren’t talking about relative value it doesn’t matter if a hero’s weaker then you will just land at your effective rank. It’s about how the value is very different. In how it’s applied the ranges in which they are effective. That’s why the rework has changed the character so much.
The options you have and how you approach the game are very different because the tools you have are different.
None of our perspectives are foolproof we can very well be playing wrong. I could have been too good with 2.0 it’s why I thought she was incredibly self reliant. But I believe you are looking at it not from the perspective of the options available to the two hero’s because those options they can make are very different. I don’t think you have explored the idea of how these changes affect the options available to the two iterations and are focusing on the wrong things. A few videos doesn’t highlight the bigger picture on 2.0 and if you are making your judgement on just those videos without having the playtime with the character yourself that will be why you have come to bad conclusions
I had hundreds of hours on 2.0 and preformed very well with them. I also had plenty of experience on 3.0. From talking to you it really does seem that something went very wrong with your experience on 2.0
The developers really ought to feel ashamed of themselves for what they’ve done to Symmetra. There was 1.0 which was complete garbage, so then we got 2.0. 2.0 was so much better and lots of fun. But uh, she was still really bad. So then the devs said that instead of giving her any buffs, they’d just make 3.0- which somehow made her even worse than 1.0, even though the goal was to make her better than 2.0.
I mean, even with 2.0, the bar was set really low. How do you expend the effort of making three different versions of one hero, all with the goal of making that hero stronger, and somehow each rework ends up worse than before??
All I really care about was how fun they were 2.0 really captured that for me. And even 3.0 before infinite tp was a lot of fun they just made changes that hurt/deleted both iterations
My view is even if a character is weak if you still want to play them you will be fine you will just fall to an mmr where you can have fun with them.
But when you take away what made a character fun to begin with to balance them then you really destroyed the character
pro expC in how people didn’t know how long hack cast time was initially, or how mei ammo worked, or somehow thought +5min damage on junkrat mine or 15 more armor on winston would be either a wild fun idea or significant in balance, or somehow thought 175hp on tracer wouldn’t be OP, etc.
