I think the games balance could be better.
I also think the game should be biased towards playstyles that are generally more fun. ✅ [Game Design] Fixes before BlizCon
The problem is that rules are objective, while whether or not a “way to win is boring” is entirely subjective. You can’t reconcile the subjective with the objective without providing specific limitations on the subjective component, or by introducing inconsistency into the rules.
Some people consider Bastion, no matter what, fun. Other people consider him the most boring hero to play.
If they added a hero that could instantly one shot any hero without aim skill and would kill all 6 members of a team in under a second it would still take them a month to “analyze data” and nerf them.
Seriously. Hotfixing needs to be a thing. Make a minor change. Make another one. Keep tweaking until it works perfectly.
A good example of this imbalance is present in Starcraft with the Zerg race. Although the Zerg race units are more or less balanced by cost compared to other races, they are much easier to produce and use in terms of player time. In large part due to this characteristic, the Zerg race was the dominant race in tournaments and competitions for roughly 6 months following Starcraft’s release.
Here’s something from that article that I was talking about. Why easily executable strats/mechanics, should be “punished.” On paper “to Zerg” is balanced, but when you look at the real world implications, it all goes out the window.
That’s why, for 97.999% of balance changes should be around “win percentage.”
Does it really matter if Reinhardt has a 50000hp shield? No, not if he’s only winning 20% of his games. And I actually think they do mainly look at win percentage when balancing. It’s really the only way to do things.