How about a purely data-driven Experimental, based on statistics from the Master/Grandmaster ranks?
Ignore OWL entirely - we’re balancing the live game here, let the Pro cards fall where they may. It’s not going to ruin the game for low ranks, it’s just an Experiment, after all.
Buff the heroes that need to be buffed. Nerf the heroes that need to be nerfed.
Blizzard have all the information they need. They know who is strong. They know who is weak. There’s no uncertainty about private profiles or margin of error like there is with Overbuff - they have all the data.
False. The goal was to balance the game, not memes. That was the excuse they fell back on when the community noticed that the majority of the changes were hilariously bad.
Classic example of the “It was just a joke” defense.
I didn’t suggest that anywhere. I suggested Blizzard try an Experimental card solely based on the data they have from the Master and Grandmaster competitive ranks, ignoring lower ranks and OWL entirely.
This patch was just for a fun tournament, and not to go live. They said it wasn’t going to go live and this was the case when they announced the panel and had no idea what the changes would be.
Given that the tournament was announced at least a month before the patch and it was said that the patch would be for the tournament only… I think you are just trying to justify something you didn’t like.