Ana’s winrate is 6.5% lower than Brig’s. Ana’s is below 50% while Brig has the highest WR in the game. That ain’t “very slightly lower” by a mile.
The game isn’t balanced around bronze - plat though. If it was then Ana would need buffs. Widow and Tracer would have needed buffs all throughout Overwatch. And Mercy wouldn’t have needed a nerf.
Ana should probably have higher pick/win rates than Mercy in higher ranks. But the difference between them shouldn’t be anywhere close to what we’re seeing now. A 1-2% difference is reasonable. A 3-5% difference is not.
I don’t actually know if its as bad as people claim it is, but if it is, it shouldn’t be. We need balance, not hierarchies.
1 Like
I like how you play victim and condemn someone for “elitism,” and then immediately go to condescending and pretentious. Nice.
9 Likes
I think 60hp/s on her ult would be interesting. And it might make it feel a bit more impactful. Most complaints from the Mercy player base comes from her ult.
Or having 1 instant Resurrect during Valk maybe. I do believe that she needs something But i would agree that she doesn’t need anything big.
As for the reason i think Ana might need a nerf…
The nano heal brings the same midfight swing value Resurrect did.
A Reinhardt or Winston dives in the enemy team, they slowly die and Bam. They’re full health again with 50% damage resistance now.
Hey GreyFalcon -
you and I don’t usually agree on Mercy issues, but I know you like using Overbuff stats quite a bit. I wrote a post today about the confidence levels we should have in that data that I think you might find interesting. I’m linking it, as a shameless act of self promotion.
1 Like
Winrate doesn’t mean a whole lot above Plat. People switch all the time. It’s why old Symmetra had like a 60% winrate in GM. When a character is not working a large amount of GM+ players will switch to someone who is more meta.
So true. I’d rather have Moira so I don’t have to take that chance, but no, Ana every time
Win rates mean do mean a lot beyond plat, as long as you’re not looking at characters with marginal win rates or characters whose pick rate is almost 16%. They’re the main metric you should be judging a character’s success by.
So if that’s your opinion on the data, why do you focus so much on winrate, which also has the confounding aspect of winrate going down when both teams pick the same hero, and up when only one side picks a hero.
Except according to a couple posts above, Brig’s winrate is the highest in the game. If that were true, why would she not be played more in GM?
I’m not GreyFalcon, but that was a very worthwhile read. Do you have a background in statistics?
I’ve gotten some flak for using Overbuff to support my opinions – I generally agree with your points in the post and found the nitty-gritty interesting, but as someone with only an undergrad-compulsory level of stats under his belt I’m generally not able to argue it as confidently as that. Just that, intuitively, the claims that need to be true in order to discount Overbuff as a semi-reliable source of meta knowledge are spurious at best, especially given the nature of the site and its data collection.
He said nothing about Mercy
Why do you feel so victimized?
3 Likes
YES THANK YOU 7 charac
Yes, I too am tired of the Ana meta. The game may as well be decided as soon as it starts based on Anas accuracy
1 Like
I’m not sure where you see a reason there to not focus on win rate.
I focus on them because in my eyes they’re the most natural metric indicating whether or not a character is good - whether or not they are winning games. Pick rates are a secondary metric. That’s not to say that pick rates aren’t important. I’ve incorporated them into all of my analyses. Win rates cannot be understood without them, and I said above they become less important when the pick rates get too close to edge numbers.
You have the confounding factors of win rate wrong. They get closer to tier averages when the character is on both sides, and further from the tier averages when the character is only on one. When Mercy is below the tier average, that means that her win rate on matches when she’s only on one side are actually lower than the number you’re seeing.
Just because win rates require some thought to speak of intelligently, doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t be considering them as a primary metric. We just have to be careful about what we say. The same goes for pick rates.
1 Like
The problem with winrate is that it only focuses on the win or the loss. for instance, if a player switches last minute to Hammond to stall a payload and loses, Hammond is charged with the loss, not the hero that player was to begin with.
I believe playtime would be a better metric to viability. The problem is that Overbuff (to my knowledge) doesn’t track playtime.
1 Like
My guess - because she’s a specialized character. Her win rates are only high when she’s played in her niche, and that niche reaches a saturation level.
You can’t view win rate or pick rate in a vacuum, they both feed into each other. But they’re both important.
But if we are talking bell curves, winrate can get even more distorted than pickrate, and you’re focusing on the the smallest population sizes on the bell curve.
If there’s any data errors, they would be highly magnified, by focusing on winrate at the highest ranks.
It is kind of fun nading a Rein and watch him charge in and get focus hard then all of a sudden, he gets nano’d for 450 health.