Supports and Tanks are WAY stronger in GM, because they have a lot of team co-ord there. You nerf them down to DPS levels of power, and they would be total trash in lower ranks where there isn’t anything like the same levels of co-ord.
Eh, I think they should rework when “frustrating to play against” is too high.
But again… this shows how different the targets of balance can be. We have 3 people and 4 different targets they should aim for. (I’ve got AT LEAST 2 I think could work).
I wouldn’t say that tanks are stronger. Generally they just match each other and cant make plays unless it’s a mismatch and they massively outskill the other tank or their team are diffing the other team. They’re still controlled by their own and the other teams supports.
If you polled gm+ I’d wager that most would be ok with tank buffs. Most would want additional support nerfs. Most would want no dps changes. Support is not the role struggling for players.
The devs have messed up on this for both top and bottom ranks.
Only because they buffed the hell out of them.
You revert those and people will be off support crazy fast.
And you will be back in Blizzards position of having to buff them again.
How do you propose tank gets fixed without addressing support?
Literally buff them directly.
I mean, I’d do something about sleep dart and/or nade. But I would give her other defenses to use, not ones so good at wrecking tanks.
But that is literally the only support I would get in and “fix” since I don’t see Kiriko / Bap as a problem for tank players.
But then supports cry because monkey/ball/doom do their job.
Monkey and Ball can do their job. Supports players historically not really minded them.
Especially in the mid ranks.
We haven’t been on the same forums 
Supports hate dive tanks.
Support players have a whole have always minded them what are you talking about lol. They are the single biggest crybabies when anything moves faster than a snail
They hate dive, there is a VERY big difference.
They don’t like SMALL things which move faster than them with high damage output.
Well yeah, but lower the pickrate until that time.
And with some heroes that time, is never.
Not in mid/low ranks there isn’t. Dive as a comp doesn’t exist until you’re in at least masters.
Right, in mid / low ranks the issue has historically been heroes like Genji, now Sombra.
Because they bypass the mid lines, and attack the supports directly. As long as you make sure the supports have good defenses against those type of heroes, they don’t really mind.
Ball / Winston you can mobility out of, and the Ball / Winston players in low / mid are not… well… good.
Buff Winston, I dare you. There would be a flood of tears.
Happy to try.
Low / Mid has never really had a problem with him, or Rein.
And as Blizzard is the master of - “It doesn’t matter how much they cry, or how many tears they flood, as long as they keep playing and queuing”
They can cry, it is the role subscription Blizzard will keep an eye on.
And this really cuts to the heart of it. If you can come up with changes which keep that subscription, Blizzard is MUCH more likely to entertain that as ideas.
Well also, let’s say almost everything the devs do, there’s never going to be anything the devs can do to make GM use more than 5 DPS, 3 Supports and 3 Tanks for 90% of the pickrate per role.
So in terms of a numeric count of “meta viable” heroes, what’s the point of trying to push that number higher?
And if the count isn’t going up, then shouldn’t they choose who those 11ish heroes are, based on how Fun+NotFrustrating they are?
I mean, Blizzard I think has given up on it, but change which heroes they are every now and then. I could be wrong, they could still be tilting at that windmill.
They have it for tanks though. People are complaining that there is Rock / Paper / Scissors going on there, so you have 3 viable tanks 
That is at least something. I see people complain about it all the time, but I’m like “hey, they actually managed it, rather than one tank to rule them all”
I feel like they are just removing stuff out of the meta that people complain about, but not really handpicking what the choices should be.
I.e. Subtractive, not Additive
True. But that is functionally the same.
It’s not. Because they aren’t really focusing on the qualitative stuff, beyond who complains the loudest.
But that ignores the people who are happy and don’t complain.
It’s basically a Survivorship bias
https://www.deanyeong.com/article/survivorship-bias#:~:text=With%20that%2C%20the%20holes%20in,to%20crash%20and%20be%20lost.
And even if they are getting less complained about stuff, if they are just cycling in stuff that is a problem, but isn’t getting complained about NOW.
Then it’s still a problem, and can spoil a lot of beneficial picks.