Has there been any news on upcoming balance? - Page 2 — Guild Wars 2 Forums
Home PVP

Has there been any news on upcoming balance?

2>

Comments

  • Leonidrex.5649Leonidrex.5649 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @UNOwen.7132
    what are you on? you are comparing kassaidn who had a weakness -> weak early game, but OP as kitten in late, they removed his weakness. By reducing his ult CD from 6s to 5s, on top off buffing his W damage on top of rune changes, he was kitten dog kitten, there was SEVERAL changes that made him good, and he still isnt OP. Just toxic.
    Wont speak off azir, never met a good one, and the few challenger/gms that play mid never gave me opinion on him so i wouldnt know, and as a jungler I hardly ever meet azir, even after ~5k games I maybe played against azir 10 games, and small sample size winrates kitten mean jack kitten.
    And heimerdonger was alwas a good champion, just boring as kitten so nobody played him, I would know since GM toplaner that I play clashes with plays heimer plenty, hes just weird so nobody touches him other then some few one tricks, and as I said. Small sample size winrates dont mean jack.

  • UNOwen.7132UNOwen.7132 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Leonidrex.5649 said:
    @UNOwen.7132
    what are you on? you are comparing kassaidn who had a weakness -> weak early game, but OP as kitten in late, they removed his weakness. By reducing his ult CD from 6s to 5s, on top off buffing his W damage on top of rune changes, he was kitten dog kitten, there was SEVERAL changes that made him good, and he still isnt OP. Just toxic.

    I figured it would be obvious from my use of the past tense that I was talking about the past. A few years back Kassadin was the most broken champ the game had ever seen. 95% ban rate in solo Q broken. But his win rate? Only 45%.

    Wont speak off azir, never met a good one, and the few challenger/gms that play mid never gave me opinion on him so i wouldnt know, and as a jungler I hardly ever meet azir, even after ~5k games I maybe played against azir 10 games, and small sample size winrates kitten mean jack kitten.

    Again, past tense. I was talking about the past. A past where Azir had a 9% pick rate (so no small sample size) and a 44% win rate while being broken as hell.

    And heimerdonger was alwas a good champion, just boring as kitten so nobody played him, I would know since GM toplaner that I play clashes with plays heimer plenty, hes just weird so nobody touches him other then some few one tricks, and as I said. Small sample size winrates dont mean jack.

    Again, past. Way past. Were talking season 1 and 2 here, long before his rework. Where he was so bad that, as I said, troll tiers in tier lists were called "Heimerdinger tier". Still had a consistent 55+% win rate.

    But since you clearly dont quite get it, let me explain why win rate is a useless metric. The issue comes down to the fact that win rate is a metric that is influenced by multiple factors. And worse yet, power is not the strongest factor. Or the second-strongest. Its third or fourth. Its completely dwarfed by the main 2 factors, "previous playerbase experience" and "difficulty". An easier champion will have a higher win rate than a hard champion, even if the easier champ is way worse. A champ played only by mains will have a higher win rate than a good champ as well, even if that champ is worse (which it usually is).

  • Leonidrex.5649Leonidrex.5649 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @UNOwen.7132 its nice that you talk of "meta" from 8-9 years ago.
    back in the days where people play kitten ashe mid, and NOBODY was good at the game.

  • UNOwen.7132UNOwen.7132 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @Leonidrex.5649 said:
    @UNOwen.7132 its nice that you talk of "meta" from 8-9 years ago.
    back in the days where people play kitten ashe mid, and NOBODY was good at the game.

    Youre out of date again, ashe mid was prior to season 1. Besides, Heimerdinger stayed a troll pick with 55% win rate well into season 4. Yknow, when Moscow 5 came onto the scene and were undeniably good. Plus, yknow, that doesnt change the fact that win rate is, and has always been a worthless, useless stat that only people who dont know statistics pay any attention to.

  • Leonidrex.5649Leonidrex.5649 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @UNOwen.7132 said:

    @Leonidrex.5649 said:
    @UNOwen.7132 its nice that you talk of "meta" from 8-9 years ago.
    back in the days where people play kitten ashe mid, and NOBODY was good at the game.

    Youre out of date again, ashe mid was prior to season 1. Besides, Heimerdinger stayed a troll pick with 55% win rate well into season 4. Yknow, when Moscow 5 came onto the scene and were undeniably good. Plus, yknow, that doesnt change the fact that win rate is, and has always been a worthless, useless stat that only people who dont know statistics pay any attention to.

    sorry for not remembering specific " strategies" from 9-10 years ago.
    Im speaking off now, and far away past is not important as it holds no sway of how things are now, and now I play with challenger/gm/master players in flex/clash games and I dont see lee sins in any of their arsenals, sure they might overbuff the champ so its fun to see on worlds but thats about it, at this state the champs bad like many others.
    When you mention kassa, the first thing I thought off was R and W buff since its the most recent thing that made him over the top, not some random kitten buff from 8 years ago that nobody even remembers, as it has no bearing of how things are now. 8 years ago champions had NO mobility, it was a very different game.
    And if you think that winrates mean nothing that you are not worth talking to, as I said before many times again, live in your pink bauble of faulty logic and lack of self criticism, and leave others be in the real world.

  • UNOwen.7132UNOwen.7132 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 12, 2020

    @Leonidrex.5649 said:

    @UNOwen.7132 said:

    @Leonidrex.5649 said:
    @UNOwen.7132 its nice that you talk of "meta" from 8-9 years ago.
    back in the days where people play kitten ashe mid, and NOBODY was good at the game.

    Youre out of date again, ashe mid was prior to season 1. Besides, Heimerdinger stayed a troll pick with 55% win rate well into season 4. Yknow, when Moscow 5 came onto the scene and were undeniably good. Plus, yknow, that doesnt change the fact that win rate is, and has always been a worthless, useless stat that only people who dont know statistics pay any attention to.

    sorry for not remembering specific " strategies" from 9-10 years ago.
    Im speaking off now, and far away past is not important as it holds no sway of how things are now, and now I play with challenger/gm/master players in flex/clash games and I dont see lee sins in any of their arsenals, sure they might overbuff the champ so its fun to see on worlds but thats about it, at this state the champs bad like many others.

    "But thats about it". Thats precisely what we were talking about. Why are you saying "aside from the exact thing you were referring to, they dont do that" like it means anything? And if you just looked at those same players 2 months ago, you would have seen Lee Sin in every third arsenal or so.

    When you mention kassa, the first thing I thought off was R and W buff since its the most recent thing that made him over the top, not some random kitten buff from 8 years ago that nobody even remembers, as it has no bearing of how things are now. 8 years ago champions had NO mobility, it was a very different game.

    ... 8 years ago? "Nobody even remembers"? What? This was 5 years ago. And everybody remembers it. Its like one of the most memorable historic events, as its the only time a champion has had a 95% ban rate. And a 99.5% pick/ban rate. In SOLO Q. And 5 years ago everyone had mobility. You already had Lee Sin tearing up the jungle, but also most midlane assassins, most mobile bruisers, etc. etc..

    And if you think that winrates mean nothing that you are not worth talking to, as I said before many times again, live in your pink bauble of faulty logic and lack of self criticism, and leave others be in the real world.

    Ok let me be blunt here. You project your own mistakes on me. The simple objective, undeniable truth is that win rates mean nothing. This is something any self-respecting statistician and data scientists could tell you. I even explained to you (in brief admitively) why that is an objective fact. And despite you saying "oh you have faulty logic", you did not address that logic, because you know its completely flawless. You know its true. But the problem is you want win rate to be meaningful. Because its an easy solution. You dont have to think about it. And if the only real solution is a stat you dont even have access to and a critical analysis of the stats you do have access to, well that isnt easy.

    So no, the one living in a pink bubble of faulty logic and lack of self criticism is you. Meanwhile Im here in the real world, with the statisticians who can tell you with ease that win rate is a meaningless statistic. If you want to ever join us, feel free, just accept the undeniable truth. Oh and if you want to know how I know, just so happens my parents are both statisticians working in the field for over 20 years, I just happen to study a math-heavy subject, and I know a few statisticians and data scientists personally.

    Edit: To perhaps perfectly illustrate this, what youre doing is on the same level of statistical ignorance as assuming that, since nations that eat more chocolate have a higher life expectancy (look it up), that eating more chocolate must mean you will live longer.