well, as cold as it sounds, that kind of just means zarya is not for you
2 seconds is a very long time in a FPS
I don't think that's really cold....there are plenty of characters that I am bad with and plenty I am good with and they are different ones than somebody else, that's how this game rolls. Heck that is one of the reasons I dig it.
zarya's probably the middle of the road tank in competitive play
not as strong as winston and reinhardt, better than dva and roadhog
As far as I can tell the only truly unplayable characters in competitive play are D.Va and Zenyatta, although there are a fair number of characters that seem very fringe pick.
Terrible dps, weird reliability issues and one of the worst ults in the game.
Eh, an Ult that forces the entire team to reposition from range and can heal you for another 500 health ain't so bad. I find it a lot more useful than Pharah's ult, which almost always results in her being killed instantly.
Terrible dps, weird reliability issues and one of the worst ults in the game.
Eh, an Ult that forces the entire team to reposition from range and can heal you for another 500 health ain't so bad. I find it a lot more useful than Pharah's ult, which almost always results in her being killed instantly.
The problem is it doesn't force people to reposition in a lot of cases. The actual explosion is only active for a fraction of a second, so good players will continue to fight as normal and just duck behind cover for .2 seconds before it goes off in a lot of cases. There are definitely areas where it can be very effective, but by in large it's yet another weird only kind of effective thing on a janky character that already has other problems.
Terrible dps, weird reliability issues and one of the worst ults in the game.
Eh, an Ult that forces the entire team to reposition from range and can heal you for another 500 health ain't so bad. I find it a lot more useful than Pharah's ult, which almost always results in her being killed instantly.
The problem is it doesn't force people to reposition in a lot of cases. The actual explosion is only active for a fraction of a second, so good players will continue to fight as normal and just duck behind cover for .2 seconds before it goes off in a lot of cases. There are definitely areas where it can be very effective, but by in large it's yet another weird only kind of effective thing on a janky character that already has other problems.
Then you're not launching it from unexpected angles properly.
It's wayyyyyy too early to make definitive statements about tiers
though technically true, practically speaking this is the same patch we had at the end of beta and many competitive players were invited and have been able to already tackle the question of what is good in this patch prior to release
however, it is often the case that a competitive tier list would be very different from a "playing solo with randoms" tier list, such as with characters like Bastion, so it is also important to understand that a focus on competitive tier lists are not necessarily telling you everything about the game you personally play
+3
Options
HawkstoneDon't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things. Somewhere outside of BarstowRegistered Userregular
there are always tiers in games with multiple options
that does not mean those tiers cannot be very close together
This is an incredibly simplistic view to me that was given prevalence by fighting games. It is pretty clear they have gone out of their way to provide characters and interactions that present direct counters to methods of play and specific characters. and this ain't even considering that few engagements are ever one on one. Certain abilities magnify in utility in the presence of the right coworkers.
there are always tiers in games with multiple options
that does not mean those tiers cannot be very close together
This is an incredibly simplistic view to me that was given prevalence by fighting games. It is pretty clear they have gone out of their way to provide characters and interactions that present direct counters to methods of play and specific characters. and this ain't even considering that few engagements are ever one on one. Certain abilities magnify in utility in the presence of the right coworkers.
Yes.
But mathematically speaking, we can track winrates and see which characters are better.
To super-simplify it, if we have a 15 character game, and 5 characters have a 51% winrate, 5 have a 50% winrate, and 5 have a 49% winrate, there are very clearly 3 separate tiers of character there. Even though these differences are exceptionally minute, you are mathematically more likely to win if you pick a character in the highest tier.
Of course it's more complicated than that, but at the end of the day that's the core idea. Who are the characters that are most likely to win, strictly from a data-driven standpoint.
Terrible dps, weird reliability issues and one of the worst ults in the game.
Eh, an Ult that forces the entire team to reposition from range and can heal you for another 500 health ain't so bad. I find it a lot more useful than Pharah's ult, which almost always results in her being killed instantly.
The problem is it doesn't force people to reposition in a lot of cases. The actual explosion is only active for a fraction of a second, so good players will continue to fight as normal and just duck behind cover for .2 seconds before it goes off in a lot of cases. There are definitely areas where it can be very effective, but by in large it's yet another weird only kind of effective thing on a janky character that already has other problems.
See these sort of definitive statements drive me crazy, your mileage is clearly varying from others because she doesn't fit your play style but your making categoric statements that the character is weaker. There are tons of characters I am crap with that I see plenty folks rock house with and I don't think it's the character...it is just that they aren't a match for my methods.
Inside of a dog...it's too dark to read.
+1
Options
VivixenneRemember your training, and we'll get through this just fine.Registered Userregular
edited May 2016
I was on a 31-player kill streak with Symmetra while defending on Route 66
it was amazing, but partly because the opposing team had 3-4 Tracers at a time and I was melting them with my primary weapon; you don't need to be able to aim for the beam to latch on and it melts them pretty fast
the entire left side of Route 66 was shut down by me
4 turrets on the corners of the exit at the hollowed out train will catch anyone coming through the train or anyone using the side approach
then bury the other 2 along the route itself
my tips with Symmetra would be:
- 100% shield uptime on your teammates where possible
- always have 6 turrets up, even if they aren't all in optimal positioning
- have clusters of 3 turrets in at least one location; I find 2 per spot is a bit vulnerable and doesn't take the tanks down far enough for them to need to be careful in taking them out
- drop turrets during fights as well; I've gotten 2 down while fighting off enemies and that's saved my ass so many times
- your primary fire is fantastic for finishing off enemies and your secondary fire does a lot of damage, even through Reinhardt's shield
- always have a teleporter down when your ult comes up
strategically, you can opt to shut down an entire route (funnelling enemies through a reduced number of paths) OR be a delaying tactic (the more time enemies spend taking out your turrets, the less they are on the objective or attacking your teammates)
I find when I'm being an effective Symmetra, my teammates die less and not just because of the shielding you offer, but well-placed turrets and/or your own weapons will serve to finish off enemies faster as well and prevent them from pushing as effectively
I really think she should be a Defense class but I get why she's Support
also her, a Bastion and a Lucio on the same team can be a really hard combo to break; I spent a lot of my time protecting our team's Bastion from getting snuck up on
there are always tiers in games with multiple options
that does not mean those tiers cannot be very close together
This is an incredibly simplistic view to me that was given prevalence by fighting games. It is pretty clear they have gone out of their way to provide characters and interactions that present direct counters to methods of play and specific characters. and this ain't even considering that few engagements are ever one on one. Certain abilities magnify in utility in the presence of the right coworkers.
Yes.
But mathematically speaking, we can track winrates and see which characters are better.
To super-simplify it, if we have a 15 character game, and 5 characters have a 51% winrate, 5 have a 50% winrate, and 5 have a 49% winrate, there are very clearly 3 separate tiers of character there. Even though these differences are exceptionally minute, you are mathematically more likely to win if you pick a character in the highest tier.
Of course it's more complicated than that, but at the end of the day that's the core idea. Who are the characters that are most likely to win, strictly from a data-driven standpoint.
That completely throws out, team composition, player skill, game mode and tons of other variables. That is my point it only holds up under super simplification. I digress though...I really don't want this to go down the road of stupid internet argument.
That completely throws out, team composition, player skill, game mode and tons of other variables. That is my point it only holds up under super simplification. I digress though...I really don't want this to go down the road of stupid internet argument.
there are always tiers in games with multiple options
that does not mean those tiers cannot be very close together
This is an incredibly simplistic view to me that was given prevalence by fighting games. It is pretty clear they have gone out of their way to provide characters and interactions that present direct counters to methods of play and specific characters. and this ain't even considering that few engagements are ever one on one. Certain abilities magnify in utility in the presence of the right coworkers.
Yes.
But mathematically speaking, we can track winrates and see which characters are better.
To super-simplify it, if we have a 15 character game, and 5 characters have a 51% winrate, 5 have a 50% winrate, and 5 have a 49% winrate, there are very clearly 3 separate tiers of character there. Even though these differences are exceptionally minute, you are mathematically more likely to win if you pick a character in the highest tier.
Of course it's more complicated than that, but at the end of the day that's the core idea. Who are the characters that are most likely to win, strictly from a data-driven standpoint.
That completely throws out, team composition, player skill, game mode and tons of other variables. That is my point it only holds up under super simplification. I digress though...I really don't want this to go down the road of stupid internet argument.
Here is an example of data-driven tiering based on Blizzard's other game with team composition, player skill, multiple characters, and multiple game modes. On a literal level, some characters just win more than others. That is an unavoidable fact about character-based games.
This is data that you can form statements like tier lists from. I understand the desire to avoid the concept, but this is all tier lists are. Analysis of data to a strict standpoint.
The observation that "D.va is worse than Winston, Reinhardt, and Zarya" is not intended to say Don't Play D.Va. It is intended to say "In the current environment, with the current player skill, and the current understanding of competitive strategy, D.Va is putting up worse results in aggregate than these characters." It is not intending to say D.va is bad.
there are always tiers in games with multiple options
that does not mean those tiers cannot be very close together
This is an incredibly simplistic view to me that was given prevalence by fighting games. It is pretty clear they have gone out of their way to provide characters and interactions that present direct counters to methods of play and specific characters. and this ain't even considering that few engagements are ever one on one. Certain abilities magnify in utility in the presence of the right coworkers.
Yes.
But mathematically speaking, we can track winrates and see which characters are better.
To super-simplify it, if we have a 15 character game, and 5 characters have a 51% winrate, 5 have a 50% winrate, and 5 have a 49% winrate, there are very clearly 3 separate tiers of character there. Even though these differences are exceptionally minute, you are mathematically more likely to win if you pick a character in the highest tier.
Of course it's more complicated than that, but at the end of the day that's the core idea. Who are the characters that are most likely to win, strictly from a data-driven standpoint.
That completely throws out, team composition, player skill, game mode and tons of other variables. That is my point it only holds up under super simplification. I digress though...I really don't want this to go down the road of stupid internet argument.
Here is an example of data-driven tiering based on Blizzard's other game with team composition, player skill, multiple characters, and multiple game modes. On a literal level, some characters just win more than others. That is an unavoidable fact about character-based games.
This is data that you can form statements like tier lists from. I understand the desire to avoid the concept, but this is all tier lists are. Analysis of data to a strict standpoint.
The observation that "D.va is worse than Winston, Reinhardt, and Zarya" is not intended to say Don't Play D.Va. It is intended to say "In the current environment, with the current player skill, and the current understanding of competitive strategy, D.Va is putting up worse results in aggregate than these characters." It is not intending to say D.va is bad.
Attacking the defense point in King's Row seems so damn near impossible
Whoever sets up wall turrets can set up wall turrets in that room to the left, and if they have a Widowmaker or, god help you, two Widowmakers out in the clearing, they have that spot definitively covered
Posts
2 seconds is a very long time in a FPS
I don't think that's really cold....there are plenty of characters that I am bad with and plenty I am good with and they are different ones than somebody else, that's how this game rolls. Heck that is one of the reasons I dig it.
If they ever do more skins they need a Lucio skin with an orange beanie
Steam ID - VeldrinD | SS Post | Wishlist
not as strong as winston and reinhardt, better than dva and roadhog
Eh, an Ult that forces the entire team to reposition from range and can heal you for another 500 health ain't so bad. I find it a lot more useful than Pharah's ult, which almost always results in her being killed instantly.
i like to think i'm pretty good at Zarya
ineedmayo.com Eidolon Journal Updated
And yet for me she is the best/ most versatile tank by far, I like Reinhardt better for pure tanking but she is a great mix of offense and defense.
that does not mean those tiers cannot be very close together
The games not even a week old
It's wayyyyyy too early to make definitive statements about tiers
http://www.audioentropy.com/
Then you're not launching it from unexpected angles properly.
though technically true, practically speaking this is the same patch we had at the end of beta and many competitive players were invited and have been able to already tackle the question of what is good in this patch prior to release
however, it is often the case that a competitive tier list would be very different from a "playing solo with randoms" tier list, such as with characters like Bastion, so it is also important to understand that a focus on competitive tier lists are not necessarily telling you everything about the game you personally play
This is an incredibly simplistic view to me that was given prevalence by fighting games. It is pretty clear they have gone out of their way to provide characters and interactions that present direct counters to methods of play and specific characters. and this ain't even considering that few engagements are ever one on one. Certain abilities magnify in utility in the presence of the right coworkers.
that's true, I haven't seen you play Zarya! we should rectify that.
Yes.
But mathematically speaking, we can track winrates and see which characters are better.
To super-simplify it, if we have a 15 character game, and 5 characters have a 51% winrate, 5 have a 50% winrate, and 5 have a 49% winrate, there are very clearly 3 separate tiers of character there. Even though these differences are exceptionally minute, you are mathematically more likely to win if you pick a character in the highest tier.
Of course it's more complicated than that, but at the end of the day that's the core idea. Who are the characters that are most likely to win, strictly from a data-driven standpoint.
See these sort of definitive statements drive me crazy, your mileage is clearly varying from others because she doesn't fit your play style but your making categoric statements that the character is weaker. There are tons of characters I am crap with that I see plenty folks rock house with and I don't think it's the character...it is just that they aren't a match for my methods.
it was amazing, but partly because the opposing team had 3-4 Tracers at a time and I was melting them with my primary weapon; you don't need to be able to aim for the beam to latch on and it melts them pretty fast
the entire left side of Route 66 was shut down by me
4 turrets on the corners of the exit at the hollowed out train will catch anyone coming through the train or anyone using the side approach
then bury the other 2 along the route itself
my tips with Symmetra would be:
- 100% shield uptime on your teammates where possible
- always have 6 turrets up, even if they aren't all in optimal positioning
- have clusters of 3 turrets in at least one location; I find 2 per spot is a bit vulnerable and doesn't take the tanks down far enough for them to need to be careful in taking them out
- drop turrets during fights as well; I've gotten 2 down while fighting off enemies and that's saved my ass so many times
- your primary fire is fantastic for finishing off enemies and your secondary fire does a lot of damage, even through Reinhardt's shield
- always have a teleporter down when your ult comes up
strategically, you can opt to shut down an entire route (funnelling enemies through a reduced number of paths) OR be a delaying tactic (the more time enemies spend taking out your turrets, the less they are on the objective or attacking your teammates)
I find when I'm being an effective Symmetra, my teammates die less and not just because of the shielding you offer, but well-placed turrets and/or your own weapons will serve to finish off enemies faster as well and prevent them from pushing as effectively
I really think she should be a Defense class but I get why she's Support
also her, a Bastion and a Lucio on the same team can be a really hard combo to break; I spent a lot of my time protecting our team's Bastion from getting snuck up on
edit: which, to be clear, is what bahamut was asking about in the first place
That completely throws out, team composition, player skill, game mode and tons of other variables. That is my point it only holds up under super simplification. I digress though...I really don't want this to go down the road of stupid internet argument.
Agree to disagree
it *does* throw out things like player skill
the conversation was about the pro scene
http://www.hotslogs.com/Default
Here is an example of data-driven tiering based on Blizzard's other game with team composition, player skill, multiple characters, and multiple game modes. On a literal level, some characters just win more than others. That is an unavoidable fact about character-based games.
This is data that you can form statements like tier lists from. I understand the desire to avoid the concept, but this is all tier lists are. Analysis of data to a strict standpoint.
The observation that "D.va is worse than Winston, Reinhardt, and Zarya" is not intended to say Don't Play D.Va. It is intended to say "In the current environment, with the current player skill, and the current understanding of competitive strategy, D.Va is putting up worse results in aggregate than these characters." It is not intending to say D.va is bad.
Eventually! This week is kinda rough because I'm packing to move, but Soon!™
ineedmayo.com Eidolon Journal Updated
D.Va having lower win percentages and not being top tier, yeah. Blue Map's overselling it a bit, though.
Your teammates not knowing what the word "defense" means is still infuriating
His rivet gun doesn't have damage falloff, so feel free to hang out near your turret and spam away with it.
Learning that made me enjoy the character a lot more.
And yeah if you can hit people with the spikes you do incredible damage at long range.
Whoever sets up wall turrets can set up wall turrets in that room to the left, and if they have a Widowmaker or, god help you, two Widowmakers out in the clearing, they have that spot definitively covered
To be fair, this did win the game for us