Power creep, specifically in regard to higher numbers skews the need to outdo yourself with the next iteration of changes.
People will gravitate to the path of least resistance…always. If Blizzard made a new damage hero, who had 400 health, and dealt 500 damage per weapon attack, everyone who plays damage would want to play the new hero. Blizzard would have 2 options in this scenario.
Change the hero to be more in line with every other damage hero.
Bring ever other damage hero to the level of the new hero.
The number 2 is called damage creep. Soldier 76 is a good example of damage creep. When Blizzard originally changed his weapon to fire at 20 damage per bullet, this was deemed to strong and was replaced with 19 damage per bullet. Now, after all the new heroes and old ones were buffed, Soldier 76 is still considered to do too little damage at 20 damage per bullet.
Can hit a player into a wall for 250 damage, which one shots most of the cast, and gets a shield for doing so. Widowmaker gets no benefit from landing a 1 shot kill, except for getting the elimination.
Sorry but you are drawing on slippery slope fallacy and it is nonsense. I can’t even be bothered to explain because it’s a waste of time. Also I’m waiting for something so I can’t go into too much detail but I might explain properly in a while.
Not sure about Mei because her advantage is her Freeze which is more counter, but I agree about Orisa with Bastion, because they have grown extremely OP and oppressive now that armor got a buff (which ironically is a defensive buff that has added to power creep)
Good god. Again, wrong. I drew a conclusion about a hypothetical hero that doesn’t exist to show you that if this hero did exist Blizzard would have to choose if they wanted to power creep every hero to equal that of the new hero, or reduce the damage of the new hero. So far, Blizzard has been creeping damage closer to their new heroes. I used Doomfist versus Widowmaker (your example) to prove this.
There was no fallacy. Stating there was, is your way of opting out of a discussion. In other words, you aren’t smart enough to make an argument to validate your position.
There was never a meta defined by DPS heroes apart from Widow and Hanzo (for obvious reasons), well maybe bey blade meta too. People do not understand how strong and meta defining are supports and tanks in this game.
People will play the playstyle that suits them. They won’t play the hero you described if they do not like the playstyle or if they can perform better with a less powerful (on paper) hero.
Firstly, they wouldn’t introduce a character so wildly out of proportion with the others. Secondly, damage heroes aren’t balanced against the power of other damage heroes, otherwise all DPS heroes would have the same TTK as widow.
Terrible understanding of balance. That isn’t damage creep at all. His offense is balanced against opponent defense. He was nerfed because he did too much damage vs enemy survivability, then buffed to be in line with enemy survivability. If anything, that is survivability creep…
If that were true, blizz would buff his damage further (the same “power creep” you are crying about). Literally contradicting your own argument.
Not from the other side of the map and not without a lengthy cooldown. Not even comparable.
TBH I regret replying to this now, at first I didn’t have time to read your post but I figured it would be at least somewhat smart. It was a total waste of my time so thanks for nothing.