Why was it neccesary to nerf Hammond in OW1?

General Discussion
1

He barely had any impact, and now he is in the dumpster. Give him his knockback back, like in OW2.

2

ball was amazing what are you on about

4 Likes
3

I dunno. He became harder to play for me especially after the hitscan fall-off revert. I remember I used to be able to take out squishies easily with my gun before the fall-off nerf. Maybe I was playing hammond wrong all along by being a hammond sniper LOL.

4

Lol i like to mirror enemy widows position with my hammond. :wink:

To OP Honestly hammond is still super strong, even pharah mercy doesnt force counter picks as fast if you play him right, and your team understands how to play off him. You cant force him into comps and you gotta play strategically, meaning scouting, target priority, and tracking of both teams positions as if you are a support.

5

Yes? Did you forget when he was S tier after a lot of other heroes got nerfed

6

Ah yeah ā€˜barelyā€™ any impactā€¦ only for the fact it was one of the most played tanks in GM for months. I still think heā€™s played alot currently.

Just another dumb, mistake hero that should have never made it into the game.

7

What are u talking about , he was the best Tank in the game .

8

Uhhā€¦

Hammondā€™s fall-off has never been nerfed.

Years.

Hammond has literally always been top 3 tanks in GM+
I think thatā€™s perfectly fine though, heā€™s a very high skill floor hero, Iā€™ve yet to see someone below Masters achieve even a basic amount of value on him.

9

Because he was tonally breaking for the game, and generally bad in the context of FPS style game. I am sorry.

People blame Brig for a lot of leavers and forget how many people tired of CC left because of WBā€¦ truly, that year a lot of people said he was the last strawā€¦

Yes, he takes a lot of skill in all three areas, mechanics, gamesense and positioning. This still doesnā€™t mean the kit was good for the game as a whole. Donā€™t worry though, he is fine in OW 2.

10

You mean the hero that was constantly seen as a throw pick and complained about for most of his existence, who suddenly became good after all the other tanks were nerfed, needed to be nerfed? Or is it simply that the entire tank roster didnā€™t need nerfs when there was already a shortage of tank players to begin with.

11

WB was always good after the first three monthsā€¦ he was never ever trash after people figured out the kit. Maybe below Diamond perhapsā€¦

12

Quite the revisionist history you have there. Good thing we have historical accounting of the metas which coincides with my recollection exactly as someone who mained ball and took the brunt of verbal abuse for playing him.

Season 11 meta report, first season with Ball in 2018.
https://www.esportstales.com/overwatch/ranked-hero-tier-list-meta-report-august-season-11

Season 12 meta report, 2nd season with Ball.
https://www.esportstales.com/overwatch/ranked-hero-tier-list-meta-report-october-season-12

Season 13 meta report, 3rd season with Ball.
https://www.esportstales.com/overwatch/ranked-hero-tier-list-meta-report-november-season-13

Season 14 meta report, 4th season with Ball.
https://www.esportstales.com/overwatch/most-played-heroes-by-competitive-tier-january-season-14

13

Yesā€¦?

If every other tank but ball got trashed, then obviously he would be overtuned compared to everyone else

I agree tanks didnā€™t need nerfs at this time

14

I was there, people all over the place complained and he did well once people knew him. Nice try though. No one gives a crap about Just metaā€¦ four season is as I said, about three months to the point people started learning to play him. After that his uptake was upward and continued on from the end of Season 14. Facts.

15

Lmao you even revisionist history your last post, let alone history from 4 years ago. But facts are facts and I have posted them above. Feel free to educate yourself, or donā€™t. I know you will choose the latter.

16

Fact is after three months of his release, he was trending up, wasnā€™t meta till later. Simple facts, no revisionism, where have I contradicted myself on this exactly? Waiting.

17
  • Hitscan damage now scales to 30 percent at maximum falloff range, down from 50 percent for the following heroes:
    • Ashe
    • Baptiste
    • Bastion
    • McCree
    • Soldier: 76
    • Widowmaker
    • Wrecking Ball

Hitscan heroes, or those with weapons that experience no delay from shot to damage, will now experience lower damage when aiming from farther distances. If a McCree attempts to shoot a hero outside of the Peacekeeperā€™s intended range, for example, heā€™ll only inflict 50 percent of the weaponā€™s damage in the current patch. With this update, that damage is dropped to 30 percent.

ā€œThis change may be difficult to notice immediately as it scales damage over a range slightly more than before, but it will lower the impact of hitscan damage outside of their intended optimal ranges,ā€ the developers said.

18

When was that? Thatā€™s trash bro. I knew Cree and Soldier had gotten damage falloff nerfs, I didnā€™t realize it was all hitscan.

19

Like 5 months or so agoā€¦ it hit McCree especially hard.

20

Yeah, I think it hit McCree and Ashe the hardest. Widowmaker was given a compensation buff so her effective range wasnā€™t changed much. I think thatā€™s why OW streamer wanted was unhappy with the state McCree was in because only soldier:76 was viable now thanks to his slightly longer effective range. So he was eventually forced to switch to soldier in OW1 to win games.