Why has HAZE not been nerfed yet?

[Clanky]

Seen so many others get nerfed, but never haze... a bad HAZE player can just destroy... a good HAZE player can win the game all by themselves... Do they not look at their own game?

[Zigor]

Seems like they look only at high skill games, where haze not that strong. Like Paradox, literally worst hero for low and mid siill lvl games, got nerfed, cuz it very strong hero in high lvl lobbies.

[Clanky]

Doesn't make sense if the majority of people are not playing in high skill games though.

[gurrenbuster]

Because she's "easy to counter" they let her keep being insane. The issue is it's really easy for Haze to counter her own counters, like buying Unstoppable so her ult can't be interrupted.

[Stellar Fox]

probably the same effect that happens in war thunder whenever a vehicle is better than average but so popular that everyone plays it, making it look like it has a worse win rate than similar vehicles.

haze basically has a 100% pickrate, the vast majority of haze players are noobs who farm 24/7, jump into a team fight to ult, and die to return fire/metal skin within 0.5 seconds, without even knowing you can destroy ANYONE from mid range my holding mouse 1 the entire game and barely even using your abilities.

on top of that it seems the lead dev is one of those people that balance around top players, which means pubstompers are never gonna get nerfed even if they need to be, and overall trash characters that rely on coordination to do anything like paradox will get nerfed every patch

[Cynical Jester]

She doesn't need to be. There's PLENTY of other characters that legit need tuned before anyone touches her. Pocket, Abrams, shiv, just to name a few.

Shiv can roll around instantly 1 shotting people when they're at full health. But SOMEHOW Haze is the problem lol. Nobody at valve should take anything you monkeys say seriously.

[Stellar Fox]

Originally posted by Cynical Jester:

She doesn't need to be. There's PLENTY of other characters that legit need tuned before anyone touches her. Pocket, Abrams, shiv, just to name a few.

Shiv can roll around instantly 1 shotting people when they're at full health. But SOMEHOW Haze is the problem lol. Nobody at valve should take anything you monkeys say seriously.

if you think pocket and abrams are on the level of current shiv you might be bad at the game. after the last patch shiv is one of the best heroes in the game in every phase from laning to late endgame and he's 100% gonna get nerfed. if you're decent at the game both pockets and abrams get hard countered by a single 1250 item (slowing hex, decay) and they literally lose the only thing that makes them worthwhile everytime they fight you and they're basically feeding if they don't retreat immediately at that point.
a decent haze that doesn't just spam ult 24/7 isn't hard countered by return fire and metal skin, she's still gonna ♥♥♥♥ you up with her gun after a couple seconds

[{disaster} Take]

Originally posted by Clanky:

Doesn't make sense if the majority of people are not playing in high skill games though.

It actually makes perfect sense. A game should be 'balanced' around the highest tiers of play, but it should be 'designed' for all players.
As you play, you'll get better, and you'll appreciate the things you've learned and see the rationale behind the stuff you thought was bad from a new angle.

[Stellar Fox]

Originally posted by {disaster} Take:

Originally posted by Clanky:

Doesn't make sense if the majority of people are not playing in high skill games though.

It actually makes perfect sense. A game should be 'balanced' around the highest tiers of play, but it should be 'designed' for all players.
As you play, you'll get better, and you'll appreciate the things you've learned and see the rationale behind the stuff you thought was bad from a new angle.

dumbest take i've heard in my life. people at the highest level spend their life playing video games 8 hours a day to participate in tournaments and esports and live off that. the game should be balanced around the vast majority of players, not the top 0.01%.
i swear to god some people forget games are supposed to be fun.

[oldirty`]

Originally posted by Stellar Fox:

Originally posted by {disaster} Take:

It actually makes perfect sense. A game should be 'balanced' around the highest tiers of play, but it should be 'designed' for all players.
As you play, you'll get better, and you'll appreciate the things you've learned and see the rationale behind the stuff you thought was bad from a new angle.

dumbest take i've heard in my life. people at the highest level spend their life playing video games 8 hours a day to participate in tournaments and esports and live off that. the game should be balanced around the vast majority of players, not the top 0.01%.
i swear to god some people forget games are supposed to be fun.

"Fun" is very subjective. I like learning a game, how good I get at it is a different question. No game or even sports has been "balanced" with noobs in mind.

I like to play chess sometimes. I will never learn all thhe openings and moves etc. For me it would be good if thhe number of openings was reduced to 10 or less. For the game it would be very bad.

[Stellar Fox]

Originally posted by oldirty`:

Originally posted by Stellar Fox:

dumbest take i've heard in my life. people at the highest level spend their life playing video games 8 hours a day to participate in tournaments and esports and live off that. the game should be balanced around the vast majority of players, not the top 0.01%.
i swear to god some people forget games are supposed to be fun.

"Fun" is very subjective. I like learning a game, how good I get at it is a different question. No game or even sports has been "balanced" with noobs in mind.

I like to play chess sometimes. I will never learn all thhe openings and moves etc. For me it would be good if thhe number of openings was reduced to 10 or less. For the game it would be very bad.

i'm not talking about noobs, i'm talking about the vast majority of players, aka the average at a medium skill level. you genuinely can't balance about noobs because they don't know waht they're doing, but there are plenty of pvp games that haven't balanced games just around the esports scene.

i also don't know how you brought semplification of game mechanics into this discussion about balancing, on top of talking about a board game that has been solved for decades and comparing it to an fps moba in complexity?

[oldirty`]

Originally posted by Stellar Fox:

Originally posted by oldirty`:

"Fun" is very subjective. I like learning a game, how good I get at it is a different question. No game or even sports has been "balanced" with noobs in mind.

I like to play chess sometimes. I will never learn all thhe openings and moves etc. For me it would be good if thhe number of openings was reduced to 10 or less. For the game it would be very bad.

i'm not talking about noobs, i'm talking about the vast majority of players, aka the average at a medium skill level. you genuinely can't balance about noobs because they don't know waht they're doing, but there are plenty of pvp games that haven't balanced games just around the esports scene.

i also don't know how you brought semplification of game mechanics into this discussion about balancing, on top of talking about a board game that has been solved for decades and comparing it to an fps moba in complexity?

This discussion happens in every pure competitiv game and the answer is always the same. Learn it or accept that you cant or dont want to.

PS: Chess solved? Lol no, the game is considered solved up to 7 pieces, any more and even computers dont know.

[Alt]

Originally posted by Clanky:

Doesn't make sense if the majority of people are not playing in high skill games though.

Make sense if you are planning to make game with a focus on esport. Riot balance their League Of Legends same way. They only look at high elo matches.

[SharkPlush]

Originally posted by oldirty`:

PS: Chess solved? Lol no, the game is considered solved up to 7 pieces, any more and even computers dont know.

pretty sure they built a computer that could compete with the world champion and beat him on at least one occasion without any machine learning at all, just brute forcing future moves after each turn.

Anyway, in the realm of marketability they need to pretend to be serving the "pros" but really use that clout to pull in microtransactions/sales from average people.

[Ponyeater]

Originally posted by Stellar Fox:

probably the same effect that happens in war thunder whenever a vehicle is better than average but so popular that everyone plays it, making it look like it has a worse win rate than similar vehicles.

haze basically has a 100% pickrate, the vast majority of haze players are noobs who farm 24/7, jump into a team fight to ult, and die to return fire/metal skin within 0.5 seconds, without even knowing you can destroy ANYONE from mid range my holding mouse 1 the entire game and barely even using your abilities.

on top of that it seems the lead dev is one of those people that balance around top players, which means pubstompers are never gonna get nerfed even if they need to be, and overall trash characters that rely on coordination to do anything like paradox will get nerfed every patch

Say it with me boys.

"Balancing after winrates is a bad idea, both in execution and concept."

I was really hoping Valve would stop that behavior from Dota 2. Some buffs and nerfs make zero sense.

[{disaster} Take]

Originally posted by Stellar Fox:

If the game were balanced around the majority of players, you would have even less fun, because the game would be objectively more shallow and less fulfilling. This is a fact of the matter, not my opinion.
In my opinion, a game doesn't need to be high skill cap to be fun, but in a game with other players played to win against one another, the game must have a level of depth and competitive edge to be satisfying beyond a couple of hours of play.

Originally posted by Stellar Fox:

Balancing a game around the highest tiers of play makes a game what it is. If it isn't balanced for the highest skilled players it isn't balanced for anybody. The idea is that there's always a level of play higher than where you currently are, and success and growth is satisfying.

Originally posted by Alt:

Riot games do not balance their game like this. Unless something has changed in the last two years, they've actually done the opposite. They said as much to a lot of content players who hoped to get a job there in fact, that they focused more on the casual experience than the pro experience.
It's why Ahri was the best Champion in the game for years and years. Not to take away from Faker's achievements, his favourite Champion was Twisted Fate, technically a weak Champion but with a skillset that rewards map awareness, which is something League of Legends rarely gives it's players reasons to care about.