People Play Symmetra Wrong

You are right, Blizz didnt have any expectation of Sym working as a dps hero at all because they didnt design 3.0 was one lmao

No, it required no such change.

It was a direct nerf to personal TP while keeping team TP intact for OWL memes. There were no benefits to Sym gameplay as a dps hero at all with ITP.

The first one is true, the second one isnt.

Sym WAS trashed, but not because Blizz ‘‘doesnt know’’ how to Sym plays. She was trashed because they dont want Sym to be played as anything but as a taxibot, and they have nerfed everything but the ability to team TP your team into point. It wasnt out of ignorance, it was an intentional awful change to a hero that barely qualifies as a dps hero.

You don’t decide this.

False conjecture with no evidence.

Yes, I do, because I actually have 400 hours in Sym. You make it sound like it could have been a giant buff when it was self destructing after a few seconds already.

False conjecture that she was trashed in aspects aside the one thing that OWL uses her for? When thats literally her patch notes? Being nerfed for still being worse that Genji when he was ‘‘trash tier’’?

How about you stop commenting on Sym threads. You’ve got that fake “I pretend I’m smart” manner of typing which is extremely grating and your points are consistently wrong and bad to boot.


By the time you charge that beam after hitting an orb you’ll end up in spawn so I guess you have to ?

here are the receipts:

the expectation for sym to be able to do that WAS THERE.

August 13 patch notes:



  • Now lasts an infinite duration until destroyed
  • Players can destroy their Teleporter with the ability 2 input
  • Cooldown now starts when Teleporter is destroyed
  • Maximum range increased from 25 to 30 meters
  • Teleporter is destroyed if the entrance is more than 40 meters from the exit

Developer Comment: Symmetra’s Teleporter is an interesting tool but often felt too restricting to use. Making the Teleporter last indefinitely opens up new opportunities for how Symmetra is used in various maps and group compositions.

they spiked up the down time without changing how it’s interacted with and called the blatant nerf as “less restricting” and “have more opportunities of use” when it has literally the same use cases but can’t be used as often since it’s much less available. it’d be like giving rein’s barrier a 12s cd that only starts on deactivation or destruction then saying “it’s less restrictive now and you can use it in more comps and have more opportunities to do so”.

please explain how a hero low effective range, low sustain, low mobliity and very low access to burst (whether for heal or damage) wouldn’t be trash…

when they actually had something functional (sym3.0 before infinite tp) and then they neuter the core tool that made that functional (what infinite tp did) while also claiming the literal opposite of what such a nerf entails as the goal/purpose of the change, then either they don’t know their design well or they’re just biased against it.

>turrets and wall pretty much untouched for like the ~2yrs across various meta shifts from sym3.0 release and sym was underperforming.
>1 particular meta shift props her up and suddenly they gotta nerf them despite how their unnerfed states not being an issue for all those other metas and despite how other heroes got powercrept further since then

that itself wouldn’t necessarily be an issue if the power was redistributed to say her weapon (e.g. orbs and individual use of tp) BUT IT WASN’T. it was a net nerf on a hero’s individual balance (i.e. balance independent of meta) who legit was shown empirically to underperform in their individual balance (by all those metas she was underperforming in prior).

when such blatant detrimental changes are made, those are the logical conclusions. you dismissing my logical arguments is not entitlement from me.

which defense is better:

  1. is completely static and has to wait for intruders to move into that static space before the defense can trigger to ward them off which inherently gives the intruders much free ground to have more options of attack from valuable positions? or
  2. a dynamic defense that achieves the potency of option 1 and be more fluid in where it wards off (i.e. can prevent more valuable areas from being taken and earlier too) and can even be used offensively to claim new areas?

obvs option 2. esp when teams in ow move around A LOT.

not to mention framing it in terms of defense only isn’t even very valid because half the game is attack.

:cow: :poop:
when you play widow (remember she was a defense hero), or any hitscan actually, do you just stay in 1 spot waiting for the enemy to walk into your los and effective range? or do you, yourself actually wasd and use mobility abilities to get yourself into effective range of enemies and to get good angles past enemy cover for you to contribute kills (getting opportunities to contribute; hero uptime)?

OBVS the latter. why? because you get more opportunities to actively contribute rather than camping somewhere for long periods of time where you’re not adding value. i.e. you going out to get opportunities to contribute is more efficient design than being forced to be served up opportunities. esp in an environment where teammates are chosen via rng and players are rewarded individually.

this logic applies irrespective of whether you’re on offense or defense. it applies irrespective of role.

>you: she’s supposed to be really static
>devs: here are all these game modes with non-static objectives
>devs: “so we’re going to nerf the hell out of static play by redistributing tank power from their shields to other parts of their kit to make them move around more” x2~3 to kill goats and double shield
>me: points out how devs doing that inherently makes purposely designing heroes to be that static not fit in the game (in the sense that it’ll be designing them to be bad) and goes against where the game’s heading which leaves those heroes behind
>you: “iReLevaNT”

until infinite tp.

area and spacial control sure, but not to be statically anchored down.

them talking about regrets does not mean that the 3.0 rework wasn’t meant to make her “used more commonly” because there wouldn’t be a rework in the first place if they didn’t.

and saying “it’s possible they can try reworking her as a support” is not the same as “she’s supposed to be a support”. no promises have been made. and heck, even if there was, it further adds to my point of they don’t know what they’re doing.


She has multiple combos like tp + turret + orb + punch.
But some people simply whine until the hero gets reworked, and then they will whine again.

If they want her in melee range most of the time, she needs some changes.

Maybe some dash move.

And get rid of TP, its a garbo cheese ability anyway. Give her another builder power.

You have anything better to do outside of that range?
You’re stuck with your tank, either the tank is close enough for you to use the beam or you’re stuck with the secondary.

Depends on the situation.
I mean, it’s true that fat tanks and deflect Genji are the only heroes that the beam is good against AT FIRST. but if you manage to charge it up to level 3 anything goes. Level 3 is absolute madness being the 3rd strongest primary fire in the game after Bastion & Reaper. 156.29 damage per second if I add reload to the calculations!!
And that without the turrets who do another +120 damage which makes her the 2nd strongest hero in term of damage when all of her abilities are at use.

Usually enemies would run the tanks infront and the dps and support behind so Symmetra’s beam can charge on big targets, if the enemies don’t react fast enough Symmetra turns into a big problem- a glass cannon.

So yeah, right now the all protective comp of her is pretty dead considering Orisa-Hog state, and how weak all the other stationary heroes not to mention her beam is pretty short, but Symmetra got amazing potential at level 3

Why play a hero that needs the teams chip damage when I can just play a hero that can rely on themselves

That’s just the counterintuitive nature of syms gun. It has bad synergy with her kit. Her tp can’t be fully utilized because her gun is short range and high charge up.


No way in hell

Her combat changed dramatically from 2.0 to 3.0. Her effective range was greatly increased yet all of the old utility of her gun was removed. So she can no longer pierce lock on and such.

Alongside her major gun changes her instant access combat ability was removed. Removing photon barrier changed almost every one of her matchups in this game.

Her combat has been greatly altered with every rework she received. If you think her combat didn’t change I don’t believe that you really learned the other versions of sym.

1 Like

I agree level 3 beam is quite good. The issue with Sym is that a level 1 beam and a level 3 beam have too much of a DPS gap to even be considered on the same ballpark.

That’s the main issue with balancing Symmetra numbers. Everyone assumes she will be walking around with a max beam full time, and balance her around that. So in the 90% of the time you do not have a level 3 beam in the most important moments of the fight, you are just too weak to do the job they expect you to do.

If they want Sym to fight with her beam primarily, they need to either remove the ramp-up mechanic (which was a mechanic to balance the autolock, in the first place), or tight the difference by a big margin, so that she isn’t required to hope to survive for over 2 seconds before she deal actual good damage.

I’d set level 1 beam to 120 DPS, and set level 2 at 150 DPS. Those values are on par with your average DPS values, and level 3 would be a (still sizeable) 50% damage boost, not a 200% damage boost.

Realistically speaking, you would never have a level 3 beam at the same time an enemy is being hit by three turrets. It may happens in certain situations, but most of the time? You need the enemy to move into your turrets while you are beaming them with a max level beam or close to that, which rarely happens outside of overtime.

If you need to set the turrets in reaction to them engaging you, by the time your turrets are set, either you already melted them with your ramped up beam before the turrets set, or you have to start from scratch the ramp-up and the turrets will kill them before you even reach level 3.

So no, adding turret DPS on top of max beam DPS is as much a fantasy as the 100% headshot red Widowmaker that always wreck your team.

I will say, at least sym players actually use her orb now. way back when sym 3.0 dropped veteran syms kept complaining about not being able to secure kills with her new beam, and looked completely passed her orbs. I was always ignored whenever I tried teaching them to use orbs instead

sir it does 60dps for 1.2 seconds, why go for that when you can do 120 burst damage every second. Im not a great symm, however, ive found that beam is only worth when you can find a shield or tank to charge on otherwise youre better off just going for orbs unless you have REALLY good tracking

1 Like

I remember someone doing the math assuming 100% accuracy on both, and pure beam would only surpass pure orb damage after ~8 seconds of fighting. Which pretty much makes the conclusion that beam is only better than orb if you can milk charge from a big shield while being at a safe distance, because outside of barriers, you don’t need over 1k personal damage before the teamfight is settled.

Because a target can easily come in front of your ball and block it. A shield or a body can easily stop it. I am not saying to do not ever use the balls. I am saying you need to consider the situation and adjust accordingly. Its much easier to follow up with a beam in certain scenarios that would block the balls from hitting the target.

No expectations there. The discharge time was also increased to the point that you don’t sit nuking a single target for 4 seconds or more. So, again…

That’s your opinion in conflict with theirs. You can disagree with them and that’s totally fine, however, that’s not reality.

Symmetra has neither; low effective range; low sustain, low mobility (although it is limited), and low access to burst. None of this is true.

They know their design better than anyone else here, they have access to loads of informational data which no one has here. They are unlikely to be biased against anything, since they created the character and the kit in the first place. The is specious reasoning.

Evidence to back this up?

They’ve been clear on this bug fix, noted that there was going to be a huge shift in damage, and made subsequent changes. Believe it or not, patches take weeks to prepare and test, they’re more aware of how the changes are going to effect the game better than anyone else (usually), and created subsequent patches in follow-up to inevitably tweak the results.

A 40% to 70% increase in damage output needed to be adjusted. If you cannot fathom basic understanding of game balance, I don’t know what to say, but you aren’t qualified to be making arguments to the contrary. Also, lacking evidence to indicate she was underperforming.

They aren’t logical conclusions. Blizzard designed the game, the character. the kit, hired the voice actor to perform the role. Re-tooled the kit, and continues to pour development resources and time and energy into the design. Logically, that does not indicate a bias against Symmetra. The fact that they’ve continually change, and re-tool Symmetra also indicates that they have a very strong understanding how Symmetra is supposed to work.

You’re making assumptions here about static and dynamic defenses which I never stated, nor implied. An active, aggressive defense is generally welcomed in Overwatch. Think of it like North American Football.

Except in the case of Widowmaker vs. Symmetra. The two don’t play in anyway similar. You need to compare Symmetra to Torbjorn, builder to builder.

Childishly irrelevant.

No, however, Sentries are a limiting factor to how much Symmetra can actively go after targets. Teleporter also limits how much space you can control and deny; similar limits are placed on Torbjorn.

No, that makes no logical sense.

If a character isn’t performing to their vision, they are free to change it so that it more closely matches it, and then fine-tuning it so that it performs well. This has nothing to do with whether or not the character’s usage or popularity is high or low. There are cases where a character can be reworked to be made more popular, sure, but that’s not a contributing reason for a specific re-tooling or re-work.

Never mentioned or implied. It was something they thought they could try internally again. They had tried it before and it didn’t pan out very well, and it sounds like something to try again, but in a more controlled and off-the-wall experiment. Nothing to be guaranteed, but just for discovery and as a small project with little consequence… for not at least.

It has nothing to do with whether they know their character or not.

She still sets up sentries to guard space, she still pokes, threatens and suppresses with Orbs. She still nukes faces with the combined power of sentries and her primary when close enough.

The biggest changes come with her utility, and it has always been her utility that’s seen the more radical changes.

When you have no argument worth to argue, insult the person, and belittle them; because that will show them that you have no merit worth considering to the point that only insults are your only retort.

Flagged and reported.

Then change it right now. Do it. Show me that you have the decision-making power at Blizzard and change it right now.

Hyperbole with no basis in fact.

You think that her beam pierces targets or what.

Dont even bother Yin is obviously a contrarian internet tough guy that only wants to make you write text walls to reply with ‘‘no thats not true because I say so’’.

There is no discussion to be had there. Just mute him.


Not true with Ashe. She had to have her reload sped up and more ammo before people seriously picked her up.

There was a long time when she was not even used in OWL. It wasn’t about muh skillz