In a recent post, Jeff Explained that Heroes were designed originally to allow hero switching to be more common and that recent game changes have been made in lieu of “maining” heroes.
I have multiple issues with this statement and would like to explore the nature of “niche” heroes both past, and present.
[I will clean this post aesthetically later when I’m not on my phone. ]
Let’s Discuss.
Niche in the past
“Niche.” Its term as used in Overwatch is meant to describe a specialty. This term has also been used to explain away why some heroes are often weaker than others. But notice how this is always… the same Heroes? Symm, Mei, Torb… They’re Niche. Orisa, Brig, Sombra… They’re niche. “It’s not that they’re bad. They’re just niche .” Well… As far as the past is concerned…
No. They weren’t.
If they are going to be bad in every other scenario outside their niche, then in their niche, they have to be excessively OP. That is, in order to use any other hero outside these heroes in their niche, you not only have to overcome the inherent OP-ness of the kit, but the extent of which the enemy player can utilize said kit.
For example, If Symm 2.0 was supposed to have a “niche” of being “First point defense,” in this function, Her turrets needed to be shorter in range, stronger, but maintained being multiple. That is, Symm 2.0 needed her 3.0 Turrets, but 2.0 turret number and flexibility. In order to pass this wall of turrets, you would have to not only overcome the death beams at any point, but the symm herself. She’d still be less viable on more open maps, such as escort maps, but getting past her on that first point would be nearly impossible. But that would have been fine since that was her “niche.”
the problems with old niche
Moreover, this Is an extremely narrow niche. And one that didn’t apply to any other hero. Genji isn’t only good on attack 2CP second point. Tracer wasn;t only good on escort mid-point. So to have such a niche for symm to be reasonable, this niche hero would have to be so OP in this niche, that it justified being weak elsewhere.
Except that wasn’t how it worked. Symm was fine-ish on 1st 2CP, but she wasn’t “the best.” And this was never the case. There’s an argument that she was good in lower tiers, except she wasn’t . Symm’s pickrate wasn’t high in lower tiers where she was some oppressive monster to overcome. And her pickrate in higher tiers was very similar. So why was this the case? Why was she so constant? Well, it wasn’t her kit’s power, so much as her players just being good with her kit’s function. That is, Symm 2.0, and 1.0 had a specific skill set and playstyle that was their “niche.” The niche wasn’t kit, or power, just plain playstyle. These specific people were just good at Symm. She wasn’t niche. Her playstyle was.
Let’s remember this as we go forward because today Symm 3.0 is praised as being some high success of a rework. But she’s still considered “niche.” Well… how? Not only was her original post from Jeff indicative of a goal of making her applicable to more situations, He recently said she was reworked to favor “one tricking” her more viable; i.e.- Symm was redesigned to be less niche . Therefore, if you think she was properly reworked because she’s good but only in her niche IT WAS A FAILURE OF A REWORK. She was not meant to be niche anymore. She is supposed to be just as viable as any other hero at any given time.
So… If you Think Symm is a “niche hero” versus having a “niche playstyle” SHE HAS FAILED. Symm was literally supposed to be just as viable as a Genji, soldier, or Rein main in every single situation.
Now this isn’t to discuss a rework or specific idea of how to improve symm alone. This is to point out the flaws in logic of how we approach certain heroes to be reworked and Where they stand. My point is, that if every hero is to be viable, it is not “niche scenarios” that they need to be viable, but niche “playstyles” is. Balance needs to accommodate and support a structure of strengths and weaknesses base on kit potential, realistic output, to comparisons of other heroes.
Let's look at Healers
A good place to look at this is in our “main healers” (I will exclude my moira, Mercy rants for the sake of not writing a full dissertation). Ana and Mercy have been in a constant state of “over and under” powered between them. But for the purposes of this argument, let’s look at base kits and put Mercy back to 60hps because of how she was originally buffed for healing when Ana overshot her.
So we have Mercy, Ana, and Moira at 60, 75, and 80 hps. Does this mean Moira is the best healer? Is Moira flat the best healer in the game because She has the highest healing output? Is Moira healing soooooo strong that Mercy and Ana cannot compete? Of course not. There are checks and balances put in place that keep these high healing heroes’ healing outputs fairly similar in output (again, just want to talk healing here. Let’s not discuss dmg, utility for teammates etc and specific balances).
who is better? Lucio or Zen?
Well, why is Moira not the objective “best healer?” Well… why are we even asking that? Who is the better support… Lucio? Or Zen? There’s no right answer, right? Lucio and Zen both bring different utilities and outputs. They suit different needs. This applies to our “main healers” too.
So the thing is, Mercy, Moira and Ana should all be equally viable. What makes them better than another shouldn’t be flat numbers. It should be numerous things and there are numerous variables that tie to their hero limitations to output. That is, Even if Ana has 100% accuracy. She’s a straight up aim bot, and will never miss. Well, she still might not be the best pick in every scenario. Even with 100% accuracy, she can only hit what she sees, and one hero at a time outside of her nade. And that nade hits enemies too. So even if you are literal Aimbot Ana, a Winston, genji, DVA and Pharah, all collectively diving you might make your healing output limited. It’s not in your control that a bubble, matrix and genji’s body is in front of you. Your healing output isn’t limited by your own abilities, but by your own kit’s limits. In this situation, you have to weigh whether Ana is your best choice as a healer. Maybe your utility isn’t enough. So you switch.
Switching to Mercy shouldn’t be a step down in healing your team . You need a way to get past barriers and still provide strong healing. Mercy should be just as viable as Ana. But maybe Mercy’s style is too passive for your team. That is, you had Ana Lucio to keep up your moderate dive team yourself. With A Rein DVA, Reaper and genji, your team was mobile and Lucio’s speed is what you as a team were going for: Fast bursts and coordinated picks. Maybe Mercy, is not giving the individual player the desired playstyle output needed for the team. Moira should be just as viable . Her healing should be equal to mercy or Ana in use for the team. Being able to help with Kills as moira shouldn’t come at the pure risk of healing output.
Pros and cons are what should weigh to a hero choice. Ana isn’t inherently bad on defense, Moira isn’t inherently the go-to for Oasis. Mercy shouldn’t be the only choice for Hanamura. Each hero should bring a basic output fair to any other hero and the kits should give a number of pros and cons that the individual player can control. Ana can’t heal flat as much as moira in numbers, but in mechanics, Ana can heal from afar instantly. Moira cannot. Moira can outheal Mercy with heroes directly in front of either with her high numbers and multiple targets, but Moira doesn’t have a resource meter like Mercy, Etc.
So the “niche” isn’t that Mercy is only good on 2CP, moira isn’t only good on attack, and ana isn’t “only” good on capture points when the enemy doesn’t have a Winston and Jeff Kapplan wore purple that day. No, instead the “niche” comes from hero output in relation to play abilities. “I might struggle on ana against the enemy Winston, but I think I can manage that since it’s much easier for me to heal dva on ana than Moira.” “I might struggle to outheal burst, but Mercy is more consistent and I need that more than I need burst healing.” “I might need to heal from afar but the enemy is killing me too much on mercy and I am not good on Ana. Moira seems manageable.”
Output and Niche
And output has to be considered in relation to potential. Zen can potentially give 180% dmg boosted at any given target. Does mercy get 180Hps to compensate? Of course not. But it also speaks to where you have to give practicality in numbers and balancing. If Mercy’s mobility is her only niche, and justifies a low healing output, well, why give her 50 Hps? Is 40 hps enough? It’s still more than zen, she’s still mobile, and still more consistent than ana. And this is where we have to consider the reasonable output. Where is the power going? How is it being applied? Mass Rez wasn’t broken but you spread out the instant rezzes across the map, for any hero at any time in 20 secs, and it’s OP. Why? Because of functional output. Would Mercy still function the same with 35hps base kit, and 95 hps in valk? Her healing output would still potentially be similar right? Yet, it’s not the same in functional output.
Ana isn’t “niche” in her power to a map, position, or output in specific areas. It’s in function, output and potential. And this is how every single hero should have originated.
Reimagine widow to be past Niche- She Bad
Because if we were to use the justification of “niche” of Symm level restrictions to other heroes, it would make them too, underpowered. Consider this: If Widow on release were to be the only person in the game to be able to headshot any hero including tanks down, that would be incredibly powerful. So to compensate, you make her have one shot per clip. That is, Every shot widow takes would need an immediate reload before you shoot again. Congratulations. That’s the level of “niche” symm was put at. So she would clearly have a low pick rate even if her players had good aim and decent win rates. So in order to combat this, Blizzard “Buffs” widow to Widow 2.0- She can now shoot TWO shots (symms turrets were Doubled), She now isn’t hurt by her own venom mine (an equivalent of symm being able to hold 6 turrets), hook cooldown lowered and Infrasight gives her a hook reset (shield gen took away base shields). Well… yeah she’s better. But it does it make her good now? This is where Symm 2.0 was put. And then let’s go to 3.0. Widow now can hold her hook and snipe from the walls (symm throws her turrets) but her cooldown is reversed (Symm lost her count of six). She also now loses infrasight’s utility for her team, and can freely hook while using it for herself (sym lost TP and shields for barrier). Well… she’s different…. Is she more powerful than Widow 2.0? No. She didn’t need a power shift. She was flat underpowered. Is it fine though? To be able to one-shot any hero in the game is “extremely powerful.” She isn’t bad right? She’s niche.
Thing is… this Widow 3.0 isn’t “niche.” Her constraints aren’t similar to any other hero. Why pick Widow, when damage boosted Ashe is fine, more reliable, and less restrictive? McCree? Literally anyone else?
We have to “rethink niche” and how it applies to heroes. No hero is reasonably going to be okay if we use “niche” in the way of the past. “Niche” simply should apply to the strengths of a hero, not the situation around them.