The point is tho, ttk for burst dmg is fixed. Nerfing sustained healing would reduce the ttk for sustain dps and therefore make the average ttk faster and make them more competable with the burst dps.
Thatās a big part of it, also for the fact that at higher ranks where people have higher accuracy burst damage will always do better because your time to kill if you land burst damage is practically instant.
More importantly though even if burst damage is just better because of tanks and healers, that doesnāt mean tanks and healers should be nerfed into irrelevancy. Every role needs to be impactful and rewarding in the game. Tank and support players arenāt playing to boost DPS players ego, they want to be part of their team winning the game, and they should be, they are the majority of the team they shouldnāt be at the mercy of the DPS. So even if sustain is bad because of healing and tanking, it always will be because a support should be able to clutch save a team mate just as much as a DPS should have the chance for a clutch pick. Same for tanking. Thatās why Iām suggesting we think about ways that sustain damage can be as good as burst without making two thirds of a team irrelevant and at the mercy of whose team has the better DPS.
1 Like
Not only higher rank players have better aim, they also have better evasion technics lol.
Hitting anything with Hanzo or Mei is challenging, or Mcrree, unlike Soldier who is very simply to use. If Hanzo misses in 1v1 duel vs Soldier, he has 90% to lose it. Whatever you try, you gonna die before you have chance to shot 2nd arrow.
Well, Hanzo, widow, mcree and doom have been consistently highly picked and successful heroes at GM over the last few months. Soldier, sombra, symmetra and tracer less so. So Iām not sure how many duals the hanzos are actually losing against soldiers at that rank.
And now we are back to heals and tanks, the reality of forced 222 
healers and tanks should be as impactful as dps This isnāt DPSwatch. Itās a team game. Healers should be as important as DPS. Tanks should be as important as DPS. Tanks donāt queue to be ULT batteries for DPS ults. Supports donāt queue to be easy picks for DPS and to top their DPS up between fights and damage boost them during their Ult.
Every role should feel good to play and have opportunities to carry, opportunities to win fights. For supports this SHOULD be seeing that your DPS is in a fight and intervening to sway the fight in their favour.
Again, supports saving people is not the problem. Tanks Saving people is not the problem. The fact that Burst damage forces higher healing, and is less effected by the higher healing it forces than sustained damage is is the problem. The whole point of the thread is to look at ways that sustained damage could be made more relevant by being stronger against certain heroes than burst damage would be which would make heroes like tracer, sombra, soldier stronger without nerfing other roles into the ground.
1 Like
Iāve been a fan of this idea since the armor debate started and people concluded burst would always be better than sustain. YES, this is exactly the kind of balancing mechanic we need to properly balance the two kinds of damage paradigms so that we have an additional layer of options when trying to counter someone. Double sniper giving you issues? Swap to something with shield HP. Then if Blizz ever adds a hero who can give shields to alliesā¦
And on the opposite end, introducing such a counterplay to 1 shots(epitome of burst) means burst heroes donāt have to be tuned down so hard.
1 Like
exactly. This contributes to heroes with one shots/ high burst being so hard to balance. Doom often feels disgustingly OP or trash tier with little middle ground for example. More options like this would allow for heroes like him, hanzo etc. to have powerful kits without completely outclassing other types of heroes just by existing.
1 Like
Sym 1.0 was panic nerfed during the beta because of how powerful she was, and the devs didnāt had enough time to fix her before release.
Sym 2.0, on the other hand, was a great non-healing support that had a bad reputation in the community because she had no representation in pro teams, despite being winrate queen in the whole period from her release to her deletion.
The only reason she had to be moved from support is because Blizzard chickened out of their previous motto that āsupport do not mean healerā, and feared healing would be mandatory in role queue.
This is just nostalgia and rose tinted glasses making her appear better than she was. Sym 1.0 was game breaking prior to her nerfs and sym 2 was picked in 3 support comps and on defense exclusively.
Both versions (if placed in the support category) would not work in 2/2/2 as with a 1/4/1 comp it puts too much pressure on the single healing support as the single most valuable pick.
My personal 60% winrate with Sym 2.0 disagree.
I was never a person with fast reflexes, but I consider myself really good at strategizing. Sym slow paced kit that rewarded preparation and positioning was perfect for my player profile, and since she got deleted, I have no other hero with an equally engaging kit for my tastes.
Which is why I started playing a lot less since Sym 3.0 arrived, and I completely stopped playing since role queue got implemented (for separated reasons).
I have no problems with the game moving into a direction that donāt cater for players like me. But I will correct any misconceptions on Sym 2.0 because lots of people never played as her and like to speak out opinions with no personal basis.
BTW, Symmetra was my support of choice when I occasionally get the fabled ā5 DPS and meā teams. Mostly because Shield Gen was stupidly good when your whole team is made of squishies. They could complain that they would prefer a traditional healer, but we would still win the fights, and thatās all that matters.