If Blizzard changed Garden because of pros...

General Discussion
Shouldn't they change/buff some heroes who are almost never picked at pro level?

On like 80 heroes total, maybe 20-25 max are often picked in pros tournament. We almost never see Artanis, Murky, Nova, Chen, Valeera, Gazlo... We saw some Butcher and Xul lately, and I felt like viewers had a lot of fun.

What do they need to be viable at pros level? Why is it so long before they become viable? (Raynor, for example)
09/28/2018 10:40 AMPosted by Draco
Shouldn't they change/buff some heroes who are almost never picked at pro level?
They seem to cater to what the pros want to play. For example, if they demanded to play Mei she would be here in a heartbeat, but only us common folk are demanding for her. Go figure.
Valeera has seen a decent amount of play in the HGC recently.
09/28/2018 10:40 AMPosted by Draco
We almost never see Artanis, Murky, Nova, Chen, Valeera, Gazlo...

....you forgot the Lost Vikings! *shame on you*
I think that if the changes were made for pros, then let these pros be the guinea pigs for their experiments, not us.
Because over time the more sophisticated the game becomes the fewer characters will be viable at high level play.

I think LoL is a good example to look at because it's had the most successful MOBA scene. In earlier seasons when people were newer to the genre it was really hard to know what's the most optimal way to play. This is probably why many (including myself) miss the early years because the game was fresh and unexplored. I have so many fond memories of hero setups that would never work today and mostly it came down to players being unknowledgeable and just plain bad.

So when the game is more analyzed and understood the developers can create more refined work that will coherently work within the game. However this causes flavor to diminish heavily because anything thats abuseable to your favor, be it talent in HotS or in LoL - items - is hotfixed rather quickly.
If you remember League of Black Cleaver or pre rework Kassadin that had a 95% banrate for an entire year you'd know what I'm talking about where as Maiev lost her passive armor within 2 days of release.

Character designs that were created very early tends to have incredible flaws but they can create very fun gameplay even if the character itself is poor. Chen is a great example of this, being an awfully designed character yet many players really love to play him.
Malphite, a tank in LoL has such a terrible base set of abilities that he mathematically cannot beat anyone in lane and his kit has barely changed in over 7 years, yet many players including myself found him absolutely hilarious to play because of his personality and incredibly fun ultimate that can be a gamechanger, not to mention that he had Mage level ability scaling so he could be played as a burst assassin giving variety to the character.

So the game will be more professional and sophisticated over time. In order for heroes to work in an environment where everyone knows how to play the game on a theoretical level your options has to be very versatile. You need to have great offense but you need to be able to retreat safely. You need a good mix of sustained DPS but also burst for a priority target. You need waveclear and good supportive abilities and a frontline able to peel off opponents or zone out a dangerous foe.
If our aim was to make everyone be able to do this every single character would have to be based off of Muradin, Malfurion and Greymane and just rename them to whatever franchise they come from.
We have to remember that us who do not play at a Pro level don't want this. Variety is important for the game to fulfill what it's original purpose is - Playing a damn game we enjoy.

Probably a better example would be if we'd play a game of chess and every piece has to be the Queen to be worthwhile. However to give flavor we have the bishop, knight and rook to create more interesting strategies.

This is why the pro scene is really stale and boring. It's not that they "want" to play X heroes but they have to play whatever is the strongest because the game is not about just having fun but it's about winning - just like any modern professional sport like soccer or hockey.
09/28/2018 10:43 AMPosted by Copypastable
09/28/2018 10:40 AMPosted by Draco
Shouldn't they change/buff some heroes who are almost never picked at pro level?
They seem to cater to what the pros want to play. For example, if they demanded to play Mei she would be here in a heartbeat, but only us common folk are demanding for her. Go figure.


I'm pretty sure we'd have Med'an if a Pro-Player requested him.. even though the common man wants Grommash, Deathwing, Vol'jin, and Reaper
09/28/2018 10:43 AMPosted by Werbs713
Valeera has seen a decent amount of play in the HGC recently.


And Samuro.
because they don't exclusively balance towards pro play.

the team is largely balancing around low skill players (nerfing nova and valeera, nerfing chromie into oblivion, nerfing Mephisto, nerfing genji CONSTANTLY, nerfing Hanzo near constantly, Diablo's initial rework being a huge nerf, Sylvanas' nerf, etc) and sometimes balances around pro play (finally buffing Raynor, attempting to make Azmodan viable in high level play, kerrigan rework, making GoT more pleasing to the esports scene, etc).

If they just balanced around pro play and maybe master league, the game would likely be in a pretty good, balanced state. however they listen constantly to low skill player complaints so the game is never able to completely move forward.
09/28/2018 10:40 AMPosted by Draco
Shouldn't they change/buff some heroes who are almost never picked at pro level?

On like 80 heroes total, maybe 20-25 max are often picked in pros tournament. We almost never see Artanis, Murky, Nova, Chen, Valeera, Gazlo... We saw some Butcher and Xul lately, and I felt like viewers had a lot of fun.

What do they need to be viable at pros level? Why is it so long before they become viable? (Raynor, for example)


No, because there are much more heroes than maps. So if a dozen or so suck, no one really notices.

When a map is never played competitively, people notice.
if blizzard listened to the players that play this game most, it would be in a better state trust me.
They've nerfed Valeera because she was free wins in QM but literally never picked in HGC
09/28/2018 02:12 PMPosted by Degaris
if blizzard listened to the players that play this game most, it would be in a better state trust me.
Nova, Valeera, Chromie, Cho'Gall, Hanzo, and stealth indicate otherwise.

Also, people need to understand Garden of Terror was not just changed "for the pros," but for years of consistent feedback from the playerbase, as stated by a post in the reddit AMA. Not every change is for "the pros." In fact, a large number of them aren't.
09/28/2018 02:22 PMPosted by FeralChaos
09/28/2018 02:12 PMPosted by Degaris
if blizzard listened to the players that play this game most, it would be in a better state trust me.
Nova, Valeera, Chromie, Cho'Gall, Hanzo, and stealth indicate otherwise.

Also, people need to understand Garden of Terror was not just changed "for the pros," but for years of consistent feedback from the playerbase, as stated by a post in the reddit AMA. Not every change is for "the pros." In fact, a large number of them aren't.


The stealth outline and other changes to make them more 'fair' was suggested by pros, (trying to remember which one from complexity did a big post on it) before 2.0 stealth rework came in. Pros are more inclined to ask for tools to deal with difficult situations and allow players to come up with interesting answers rather then "Hur dur, screw the playerbase that is also my viewerbase that supports my gaming"

The only time i think pros were vehemently opposed to an "anti-fun" change was Garrosh pull
The entire HGC format was beyond stale and boring, with the commentators trying to make drying paint sound interesting:-

"Ok, so it looks like they are going with Hanzo, what is your opinion for the reply, Gilly?"
"Hm, lots of choices here. They can go with Genji, maybe Tass and Tracer. We have seen Blaze come early a couple times - ok, it's Genji and Blaze."
"Wow, we were completely expecting that. Now, back to the first team. And here it is, Tass and Tracer."
"That's right, so exciting to see the other team playing the same heroes we saw the last 8 times."
"Alright, who are they looking to for heals, In your opinion?"
"So many options here. Deckard will support Blaze really well, Malfurion for the Genji dive. Here's the pick - and they went with Malfurion."
"Great! So the other team now has a difficult choice - do they pick Deckard now, or after?"
"I'd say they grab him now, then they have room to pick a solo laner - maybe Dehaka, or Dehaka. They went Dehaka!"
"And there you have it! We'll see how much of a carbon copy of last game this one is, stay tuned!"

If they needed to dumpster one hero to open up the draft for 60, I think it is a necessary sacrifice. They did it for Stitches, where he ended up at 37% winrate for nearly a year.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum