In short, how do you guys feel about the game being balanced for the 0,1% of the players instead of the majority? Do you believe this is the best way of balancing? Do you think there could be different balance patches for the league vs core game? How do you feel about other pro-oriented games having specific tournament rules like banning heroes/champions? That’s something OWL hasn’t done, should it stay that way?
I have no set opinion and this is all hypothetical anyway. Overwatch devs don’t seem to have resources to balance the game enough at the time, not to mention balancing it twice anyway. Just curious of how people feel about balancing for professional play.
No, they should disband OWL until it contains a healthy dose of Junkrat
I fell like every hero should be balanced in pro play, but it is ok if a hero is underpowerd in low ranks, such as widow.
should there be different balance patches between the main game and OWL? No. I want to watch the same game I’m playing.
3 Likes
But you’re not watching the game you’re playing.
OWL’s usually a patch behind us lol
Not always. They play on whatever patch is live at the beginning of that stage. The one exception to this was stage 4, where new Hanzo was not allowed due to a massive bug.
1 Like
Well not seperately but owl kinda destroys ladder balance still. Sombra will never be a good pick on ladder for example because contenders
1 Like
And Blizz want it too. The whole Contenders shabang is based on this. If you git gut, you might be noticed by senpai and become PRO. It is in their intrest to OWL and causal be “same” game.
1 Like
It’s really good that heroes are balanced by the top 1% because at that level of gameplay the balance dictates games and picks more than in anywhere else. They’re the perfect testing pools of a heroes’ reasonable potential. If a hero is objectively relatively weaker enough when compared to other heroes of the same role they suffer in high tiers.
In lower tiers the balance has little effect on the gameplay itself since there most players don’t play the heroes to their fullest potential and all heroes are almost always viable. If balance issues were addressed according to the majority of players they’d have to look at statistics in about 2350SR. This would mean that heroes like Widowmaker and Tracer would be buffed through the roof even though they’re already some of the strongest heroes in the game and heroes like Symmetra and Torbjörn wouldn’t be reworked but just blatantly nerfed and that’s a fact. It sounds unreasonable because it is unreasonable.
Then there’s balancing just so heroes wouldn’t see highest tier gameplay and that’s complete BS. Sombra is one of these examples. She was used in contenders but dropped out because they nerfed her after that. If the nerf would’ve been done just because the hero was overtuned then fine, but if it was done just so Sombra wouldn’t be that strong of a pick there it’s just dogchocolate. The only subjective opinion that should be allowed to effect balancing is whether some ability is “unfair” like Hog’s hookcombo or Hanzo’s scatter that were nerfed.
1 Like