Beware of What You're Asking

General Discussion
Steveo, who has mained Sym since season 1 and definitely knows how to play her agrees that she is terrible.

In fact, anyone that plays her frequently knows this. Can you guess who doesn’t? People that don’t play her.

The only people that don’t know what they’re asking for are people that ask for buffs/nerfs/reworks when they don’t know the first thing about how that character operates.

Example: Mercy. People that didn’t play her wanted her to be different, and now she is a flying demoness that is commanding the current meta while her usefulness is slowly being eroded by the development team.
Still waiting for a reply.
01/16/2018 02:08 PMPosted by Heavy
01/16/2018 02:02 PMPosted by TwixSnickers
If she regularly fails, why do most of Symmetra one tricks in ladder have insane winrates? I don't think she regularly fails really.


One, many Symmetra "one tricks" actually swap a lot, a bit more than what I would consider a true one trick to be. Most Sym pros understand when it's time to switch after at least giving her a try, and that can be enough to count as a win for Symmetra, even if it wasn't Symmetra herself really earning the win.


That wasn't my experience with Symmetra one-tricks. Most of them would have 95% of playtime on Symmetra and that's pretty much it. Usually with insane winrates. Also, I think I lost only a single game when I had an attack Symmetra on my team. And won like 10.

Also, winrates in OW are not affected by switching. If she played Symmetra for 1 minute then swapped off to something else and proceeded to win the game, she won't receive a whole win on Symmetra. She will receive a fraction of the win proportional to how long the game lasted. So, if she played Symmetra for a minute in a game that lasted 10 minutes, she will receive only 0.1 games won after that game for Symmetra. Games won and Games lost are actually decimal numbers. But the decimal is omitted. But it's used for calculating winrate.

If you were referring to the fact that sym will swap if she's being countered, how is that different for any of other heroes? It's in no way specific to Symmetra. But in my post, I was specifically referring to people who are real one-tricks.

Three, we can look at the OWL to see that Sym has 0% playtime. This represents the highest level of play, and should be considered with a grain of salt, but it is telling that the best of the best players competing in the most serious setting of all can't seem to find any situation where Sym would be workable.


Because Symmetra like Torbjorn is countered by coordination. Something that pro teams have and what is usually lacking in ladder. If you have only a single player trying to destroy the shield gen or TP of course that Symmetra is going to win. Which is what often happens in ladder. In pro-play, she would get her constructables destroyed instantly. Same thing with Torb. No one would actually feed the turret unlike what happens in ladder. The professional pickrate argument is mostly meaningless.


Two, if you really put in enough hours and work on any single hero, yeah, you're kinda bound to eventually find a rhythm that works. But by and large, your average player that just wants to pick up Sym isn't going to get nearly as positive results as they would if they were to pick up, say, McCree or Mercy.


So, you're saying that it's possible to actually be good with her if you know what to do? Doesn't that kinda disprove your point about her being underpowered? If a hero is legitimately underpowered, it would be impossible to climb with him above certain point. But it's not impossible with Sym. People climb regularly to T500 with her.

In fact, Korea did use her once. On Horizon. They nanoboosted her for the team wipe.
01/16/2018 02:16 PMPosted by SnareToxic
Example: Mercy. People that didn’t play her wanted her to be different, and now she is a flying demoness that is commanding the current meta while her usefulness is slowly being eroded by the development team.


People wanted resurrection nerfed, not buffed. To blame the horrible direction that Blizzard took onto people is pretty ridiculous.
I want her to be more versatile. It sucks that heroes cant be as versatile as genji tracer or soldier. And they get the situational picks nerfed cause of it. They nerf strengths without compensating. They nerfed symmetra without compensation but heroes like D.Va they gave a new ability. Its not fair and it sucks tbh.
01/16/2018 02:18 PMPosted by Acestial
Still waiting for a reply.
Oh I can give you one. You ask a loaded question. In Bold no less. To ask "It's a simple yes or no question about if your view has any biased opinion in it or not due to individual heros" is to completely disregard that everybody is always to some degree biased upon their own experiences - ergo that's not a yes or no question.

The OP does make some good points though. Sadly, you forgot to adress those, and attack the person who made them, instead.
01/16/2018 02:29 PMPosted by Qube
01/16/2018 02:18 PMPosted by Acestial
Still waiting for a reply.
Oh I can give you one. You ask a loaded question. In Bold no less. To ask "It's a simple yes or no question about if your view has any biased opinion in it or not due to individual heros" is to completely disregard that everybody is always to some degree biased upon their own experiences - ergo that's not a yes or no question.

The OP does make some good points though. Sadly, you forgot to adress those, and attack the person who made them, instead.


It was not an attack. It was a question and obviously it has become subjective now. An attack would be obvious and with a statement not using a closed-ended question, but instead using an open-ended question while using offensive language (adult language) against the target.
01/16/2018 02:16 PMPosted by SnareToxic
Steveo, who has mained Sym since season 1 and definitely knows how to play her agrees that she is terrible.

In fact, anyone that plays her frequently knows this. Can you guess who doesn’t? People that don’t play her.

The only people that don’t know what they’re asking for are people that ask for buffs/nerfs/reworks when they don’t know the first thing about how that character operates.

Example: Mercy. People that didn’t play her wanted her to be different, and now she is a flying demoness that is commanding the current meta while her usefulness is slowly being eroded by the development team.


If she is terrible, how does stevo have 68% winrate on Symmetra this season? Why does he consistently have extremely high winrates on her? Even in periods where he 100% one-tricked her? There were no changes to Symmetra in last few months. Yet, he climbed to T500 on at least one account while maintaining extremely high winrate playing Symmetra 95% of the time without using any voice comms for quite a while?
01/16/2018 02:26 PMPosted by TwixSnickers
01/16/2018 02:16 PMPosted by SnareToxic
Example: Mercy. People that didn’t play her wanted her to be different, and now she is a flying demoness that is commanding the current meta while her usefulness is slowly being eroded by the development team.


People wanted resurrection nerfed, not buffed. To blame the horrible direction that Blizzard took onto people is pretty ridiculous.


She never needed to be reworked for that the occur. People (at the top of the ladder, mind you) complained about “hide and seek” being annoying as well as her personal invincibility.

Those at the top of the ladder that are commanding Blizzards esport nonsense are just as at fault for recommending things about a character that only a fraction of them played, if at all. Is Blizzard at fault as well? Of course. But the simple fact remains that players complained enough to spark a completely unecessary change.
01/16/2018 01:54 PMPosted by Acestial
cognitive thoughts
01/16/2018 02:31 PMPosted by Acestial
It was not an attack. It was a question and obviously it has become subjective now. An attack would be obvious and with a statement not using a closed-ended question, but instead using an open-ended question while using offensive language (adult language) against the target.
(1)Mate, you should read this:

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the argument.

(2) as far as adressing the actual poinst made by the OP, to quote you:

Still waiting for a reply.
I play her a lot and never thought she needed a buff.
01/16/2018 02:36 PMPosted by Qube
01/16/2018 02:31 PMPosted by Acestial
It was not an attack. It was a question and obviously it has become subjective now. An attack would be obvious and with a statement not using a closed-ended question, but instead using an open-ended question while using offensive language (adult language) against the target.
(1)Mate, you should read this:

Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a fallacious argumentative strategy whereby an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the argument.

(2) as far as adressing the actual poinst made by the OP, to quote you:

Still waiting for a reply.


This isn't even an argument. Why are you trying to make it one?
01/16/2018 02:31 PMPosted by TwixSnickers
Steveo, who has mained Sym since season 1 and definitely knows how to play her agrees that she is terrible....


If she is terrible, how does stevo have 68% winrate on Symmetra this season?
... it might have something to do that he's very very good with her?

I can rack up a 90% winrate vs some of my collegues with 1 hand behind my back - yet playing with 1 hand behind someones back is still sub-par.
01/16/2018 02:32 PMPosted by SnareToxic
Those at the top of the ladder that are commanding Blizzards esport nonsense are just as at fault for recommending things about a character that only a fraction of them played, if at all. Is Blizzard at fault as well? Of course. But the simple fact remains that players complained enough to spark a completely unecessary change.


Pre-rework Mercy was played as much if not more than Ana in Grandmaster. She also had much higher winrate than Ana in GM. So, to say that Mercy wasn't present in high-ranked ladder games is mostly a lie. They were regularly playing with that hero and against that hero.

This whole mess started once Resurrection received an invulnerability buff. That's the point when Mercy's pickrate started drastically increasing and she started to replace Ana. It removed all counterplay and enabled the swoop in and rez playstyle. People wanted 4-6 man resurrections gone. Or at least, if it's going to happen, that Mercy at least has to be present for a while prior to resurrection and that she could be killed. Meaning, something that prevents the hiding playstyle. What happened after that is 100% Blizzard's fault for taking an extremely questionable approach to solving the problem. Average number of people resurrected with pre-rework Mercy per game was 6. With post-rework Mercy, that number was 15. After the res CD reduction in valk was removed the number was 12. After the slow on resurrect was increased, the number is 9-10. Blaming the players who complained about resurrection hiding (which I actually think is a legitimate complaint since that playstyle was the optimal playstyle to get most out of resurrection) and not blaming Blizzard instead for making a horrible balancing change is pretty ridiculous.
01/16/2018 02:38 PMPosted by Acestial
This isn't even an argument. Why are you trying to make it one?
point 1 adresses how your claim that you didn't attack the person, is factually incorrect. Just because that's not a use of the word 'attack' that you're used to, doesn't make it any less true. When arguing (in a non falicious way), one attacks the argument. You did no such thing.

2. You still not adressing any of the points the OP made, is very much noted. It's almost like you actually don't have anything to say - which begs the question why you want to be part of the discussion.
01/16/2018 02:47 PMPosted by Qube
01/16/2018 02:38 PMPosted by Acestial
This isn't even an argument. Why are you trying to make it one?
point 1 adresses how your claim that you didn't attack the person, is factually incorrect. Just because that's not a use of the word 'attack' that you're used to, doesn't make it any less true. When arguing (in a non falicious way), one attacks the argument. You did no such thing.

2. You still not adressing any of the points the OP made, is very much noted. It's almost like you actually don't have anything to say - which begs the question why you want to be part of the discussion.


Your definition of attack obviously differs from the realism that is actually stands for.

P.S. The follow up to the answer was to address the points made in the topic, but there was no answer, so thus no follow up.
Even a slight increase in damage could easily make for Op. So I feel like the only option would be to have a better support kit maybe? And if we are going with that then that's basically a rework.
...

If she is terrible, how does stevo have 68% winrate on Symmetra this season?
... it might have something to do that he's very very good with her?

I can rack up a 90% winrate vs some of my collegues with 1 hand behind my back - yet playing with 1 hand behind someones back is still sub-par.


But that's my point.

If she was truly underpowered, no matter how good he is wouldn't matter. It would simply be capped by the power of hero's kit. He would never climb to that rank with that winrate if she was truly underpowered.
I don't necessarily want a flat buff. I want a boosted skill ceiling.

Then again, I have no idea how to do that without completely changing her niche. I really do not envy the devs on this.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum