Im kinda struggling with understanding the vision and balance of this game.
And over time there seems to be this weird need to build on top of changes instead of sometimes just reverting a change.
The dumbest example I can think of was the grav dragon fiasco. Graviton used not be an mostly universally good ult. Zarya on her own is one thing, but having a Grav is more often than not an extremely powerful and useful ult. In the long ago, grav was way weaker against mobile heroes, and Zarya actually needed to think about enemy cooldowns before using it, without the primary issue being ‘‘is there a diva with DM in my face’’. Simply reverting the cripple effect would give people more options in potentially countering the ult, isntead of nerfing gravs range and Mercys dmg boost on dragons.
Mercy rework resulted in such a mess, that resulted in about 15 nerfs over a year. Wouldnt it make sense to rewert and work on a more reasonable rework after? Sym has had multiple reworks and changes one on top of another and shes still in a weird spot.
Game is being pushed forward into counter pick meta. We have been getting more heroes ‘‘made’’ for countering, balance changes seem to be primarily decided around countering and specializing along with an increase of dmg and a general feel of spam nature of dmg, and yet ults are made into near insta win abilities, discouraging players to swap and utilize counters. Its completely contradicting.
The game (to me) feels so confused in its direction.
35 Likes
Reverts mean admitting fault
97 Likes
If you spend a lot of money planning things sometimes years ahead and then revert it after its a lot of wasted hours per employee involved
7 Likes
The details differ for each change, but as a general statement: They make each change for a reason, and those reasons don’t become obsolete as soon as there’s another balance issue in the future, even if the new balance issue affects the same heroes/abilities.
In the case of the Graviton Surge example, the ability was extremely strong at catching an entire team, but then it just depended on what characters were on that team. If they had a bunch of characters with dashes or teleports, it was useless. Disabling movement abilities but having a smaller radius means it’s not quite so easy to catch everyone, but it has a much more consistent effect when it hits.
3 Likes
I get it, and before a lot of other things got nerfed and buffed around the games universe, the cripple made sense.
Tho by the time of grav dragon, I really dont see why would a powerful ability like grav have basically no variable in its countering? The only thing is dvas extremely nerfed DM which is easy to play around. By that time removing the cripple would give the enemy team the option to opt for more mobile heroes and if you want to run Zarya and get more value you would need to pay attention to them, instead of just walking into the enemy team and pressing Q for profit. Thats the point.
“We must move forward, not backward; upward, not forward; and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom!” - Jeff
6 Likes
Blizz is ran by 12 yr old egotistical children who cannot accept defeat.
18 Likes
They don’t. They reverted the Symmetra changes. Reuse time was 1.5 when PTR patch came out, then it got reverted back to 1.0 and the teleporter cooldown to from 15 to 12
1 Like
This.
They’re way too prideful to admit they make mistakes.
Just look at all the mishaps at Blizzcon and you’ll get a clear idea where they stand.
20 Likes
Every change costs money and time for employees. So reverts means you wasted that. And you admitted to something being a problem and went back on it.
1 Like
Now that Mercy is in a good spot, it seems even dumber to revert her now than it seemed back when reverting her was the cool thing for nerds to cry about last year or whatever.
4 Likes
I didnt say she should be reverted now. but blizz ended up with a huge mess due to lack of play testing and refusing to ‘‘put a pause on the rework going live’’ with a temporary revert. The game was in an apsolute mess for a year because of this. its just an example of weird changes being pushed throught ‘‘no matter what’’ with slow reactions.
17 Likes
Sym should’ve been reverted to 2.0. No idea why they don’t, might be a pride thing?
2 Likes
I would say it still makes sense. It’s an ultimate with the specific goal of immobilizing enemies, an effect that most heavily disrupts the highly mobile characters whom Zarya is otherwise terrible at catching.
The most basic counterplay for it is to spread out, anyway, which teams full of mobile characters tend to do even when not expecting a Grav.
Balanced? Sure, but the road that led to has watered her down a lot. Especially since they’ve had to nerf her kit down and put penalty upon penalty just to keep Rez on E
13 Likes
I’ll still say to switching Rez to an ult again as Mass res with various tweaks and Valk as a E ability with again balance tweaks.
8 Likes
It’s a sin on their motto which I said in my thread. They don’t realize people would praise them if they admit their mistakes. They need to accept maturity.
3 Likes
Oh, is that why they nerfed her? Just to keep rez on E? 
You guys really need to stop thinking of Blizzard as an entity instead of a company. This game isn’t a hobby, it’s a product. Every change they make has to be brainstormed, approved, and playtested which all costs money, reverts mean all that time/money was wasted.
There are always numerous employees working for a new balance change. Imagine you are one of the dev working on a balance change for months and then your company keep reverting the stuff you’ve been working on, it’s only going to make you less motivated to work on the next task you’ve been assigned which will internally affect your productivity. As a company you want your employees to have faith in majority of the executive decisions to keep the morale going, which is why revert is the last resort if and only if there’s no other ways even they are suboptimal.