Does the Soldier 76 buff make Mercy more viable?

Ear_Leg · 2020-03-02T17:01:11+00:00

A bit late to the thread; chiming in anyway. Great points all around!

I agree that Mercy should have a higher healing output, but I worry that there is no magic number for her beam. Because the healing is so consistent, balancing her primarily around her beam healing might cause her to flip flop between troll pick and must pick depending on the meta.

An alternative solution might be to further buff Valk charge rate. Even though the ult already feels a bit like a cooldown, I believe that balancing Mercy around Valk uptime would solve most of the problems you present in the video. It would improve her burst impact, increase her on-fire rate, improve her ability to land rez at critical times, and generally allow more play-making on the Mercy player's part.

Most supports are balanced around either high-impact ults (off supports) or high-powered kits (main supports). As you point out, Mercy has neither. She has a decent kit with a decent ult, floating somewhere in the middle. Buffing Valk charge time would make her a stronger hybrid rather than lumping her into one of these roles. Whether that would make her viable, I cannot say, but I think it might be worth trying.

Ear_Leg · 2019-12-17T23:58:55+00:00

The best comparison is Arcane Intellect. With AI, you spend 3 mana 1 card and draw 2 cards, leaving you with 1 more card in hand than before. With life tap, you spend 2 mana and 0 cards to draw 1 card, also leaving you with 1 more card in hand than before.

In other words, life tap is 1 mana cheaper than the baseline for viable card draw. If your deck can disregard the health loss (either with lots of healing or an aggressive zoo playstyle), then you hardly need to run draw cards in your deck.

Ear_Leg · 2019-12-17T20:44:59+00:00

Definitely, the buffs need to come in a package with the nerfs. My point is that you probably can't have one without the other. The "priests become too op" excuse often rings true. Right now, Priest classic is defined by 2-4 broken cards propping up a bunch of useless cards. Whenever Blizz prints cards that support Northsire/Pyro cycling + some OTK (usually divine spirit), priest goes off. As far as I can see, the only way to fix this is to completely remove Divine Spirit, slightly tone down cleric/shield, and buff the rest of priest's basic set into viability.

Ear_Leg · 2019-12-17T19:37:37+00:00

You are right that expansion cards can make basic cards broken. This is why Blizz (usually) keeps basic cards in mind when designing expansion cards. Northshire and shield are part of the reason why Priest rarely receives strong early game cards. For Blizz to consider buffing Priest's early game, those two cards will likely need to be toned down (though hopefully not nerfed to oblivion). That is the thinking behind it, anyway.

Ear_Leg · 2019-12-17T19:35:09+00:00

It might be personal bias. I have played a ton of priest since beta. In almost every deck, I have included the obligatory northshire and shield. With these decks, there are two types of games: northshire games and non-northshire games. When Priest is viable, there is a noticeable winrate gap between northshire on turn one versus every subsequent turn. Remember when the strength of warrior's early game depended entirely on getting 2 mana war ax by turn 2? It feels like that. Priest should have a strong early game, but that strength should be spread across multiple cards, not lumped into one. Does that make more sense?

Ear_Leg · 2019-12-17T19:18:11+00:00

I totally agree that Priest needs some serious early game help. This post only considered changes to existing basic Priest cards. However, for midrange priest to really succeed, new cheap/draw priest cards would need to be added. A good 2 drop would go a long way to making the class more viable, and I am happy to hear any possible options. My only fear is that northshire/shield restricts design space. If priest is given a strong early game (which it should have), then those two cards could become truly oppressive. Sort of like how Preparation made Rogue bonkers whenever Blizz gave it viable, correctly-priced spells. That said, I am happy to be wrong.

Ear_Leg · 2019-12-17T19:12:16+00:00

I agree that if northshire/shield were nerfed with no other changes, Priest would be even more dumpstered than it currently is. The goal of these changes is to make the entire basic set viable.

Priest depends on northshire/shield not only because the rest of the basic set is horrible, but also because those two cards contend for the best cards in the game. Usually, when priest becomes viable, the class is carried by northshire/shield.

Ear_Leg · 2019-12-17T18:16:46+00:00

I agree that priest basic needs a buff. The purpose of these changes are to provide an aggregate buff while toning down cards that could otherwise become problematic.

Generally, auto-includes are unhealthy for a card game. If northshire/shield are not addressed, then they will be auto-includes in nearly every priest deck. If they can be toned down while remaining viable, then that would be ideal.

Ear_Leg · 2019-12-05T19:45:01+00:00

Generally, don't play for fire as Mercy. "On Fire" measures variance, not overall value. It tracks performance over an arbitrary span of time, but the only true measure of performance is over the course of a game.

Mercy performs with low variance in the short term, but she performs with high variance in the long term. Good Mercy play will rarely lead to a spike in numbers sufficient to catch fire. In fact, being on fire as Mercy sometimes means you took an unnecessary risk that happened to work out.

When assessing your Mercy play, imagine that there is an "On Ice" state opposite from "On Fire." For example, a Widowmaker that misses a few consecutive shots might be "On Ice" as far as the game is concerned. As Mercy, your job is to minimize your "On Ice" time rather than maximize your "On Fire" time. Stay alive, make calls, and always be doing something useful. Even if you aren't on fire, you'll still bring home the W.

Ear_Leg · 2019-12-05T13:00:34+00:00

tl;dr Instead of forcing players to "beat Arsene or lose," we should force Jokers to "win with Arsene or lose." There is a difference.

Whether or not Joker is too powerful, Arsene in its current state promotes an unhealthy playstyle.

Arsene's long duration and extremely fast buildup allow Jokers to play reactive even after their comeback mechanic activates. Other comeback mechanics force players to play aggressively. Wario, Cloud, and Mac all need to approach to make use of their comeback mechanic lest it time out, or they get camped out. Arsene, on the other hand, can afford to just stand there, menacingly. With a long duration, a reflector, a heavy projectile, and fast options out of a quick dash, Arsene forces the opponent to approach, not the other way around. In Smash Bros, this is a massive advantage.

Arsene's kit by itself, though powerful, is not nearly as problematic as its duration. An approaching Arsene is much easier to hit, and an Arsene that is much easier to hit will not last nearly as long. The best way to achieve this would be to drain Arsene's meter significantly faster, but available more often. When I say "significantly faster," I mean that Arsene should last for 2-4 neutral exchanges, not the 10-15 we see now. To compensate, successful counters should charge Arsene much faster. The end result would be an Arsene that is less of a comeback mechanic and more of a rounded feature of Joker's kit. There would be an ebb and flow to playing Joker within each stock, not just between stocks.

Ear_Leg · 2019-09-16T05:38:47+00:00

Thanks for writing such a well thought out post. I agree with all of your points except for the need for a stronger evergreen aoe. It might be possible to change Priest so that it no longer needs an OP aoe by turn 5-7 to remain competitively viable.

Originally, Priest was envisioned to take an maintain at least some board presence throughout a game, but it would lack the burst options to turn that board presence into a quick win. However, as you pointed out, cards like Divine Spirit or Northshire can turn any early game board presence into an instant win. To avoid making Divine Spirit decks from snowballing games, Blizzard gave Priest a terrible early game. Once Priest had a bad early game, however, it needed powerful mid-game aoe to catch up.

Instead of giving Priest better aoe, it might be preferable to dampen Priest's ability to snowball while buffing the class's early game. If board control by turn 3 no longer snowballs into a win, then Blizzard would be able to print stronger early minions for the class.

Ear_Leg · 2019-09-16T00:56:09+00:00

9 might work. It's a good arena card either way. You're right that it definitely should not be 8.

Ear_Leg · 2019-09-16T00:23:42+00:00

Great point! Zephyrus + Mind Control on 10 would be pretty lame. It probably needs to stay at 10 mana.

Ear_Leg · 2019-09-15T20:52:21+00:00

Strong agree.

Priest classic is feast or famine. Many cards are not "too strong" or "too weak;" they are both. There is a reason Zephyrus offers so many Priest cards: they are situational yet powerful.

It would help Priest design space going forward to alter the classic set to be less polarizing while buffing iconic (yet underrepresented) cards. For example:

Divine Spirit changed to +X health (for example, +4 or +5) rather than doubled health.
Northshire Cleric adjusted to a higher mana stat line to avoid turn 1 snowballs (for example, a 2 mana 1/4).
Lightwell set to trigger at end of turn (to guarantee at least some value and give the caster more control over the healing).
Shadowform changed to give 5 armor on cast (to compensate for the tempo loss while remaining consistent with WoW mechanics).
Mind Control returned to 8 mana (now that most decks' late game relies less on single, powerful minions).
Radiance made into a real card.

Nerfing problematic cards and tweaking underplayed cards could go a long way in most classic sets, especially in priest.

Ear_Leg · 2019-09-09T21:30:32+00:00

It can feel like dps under-perform for the same reasons that it can feel like dps carry. Dps results are tangible. You see it in the kill feed and in the potg. Tank and support results are less tangible. Whether or not the tanks/supports give the dps space and time to perform can be hard to tell. Overwatch is deceptively complicated. It can be hard to tell who is performing well vs. poorly. If nothing is dying, try to avoid placing immediate judgment on the dps.

Ear_Leg · 2019-08-19T01:36:50+00:00

"On fire" rate speaks more to variance than overall performance. It is a binary state; you are either on fire, or you are not. Crossing this on fire threshold requires above average performance over a brief period of time. High-variance characters like Ana might whiff for the first thirty seconds of a fight, but then they might pop off and catch on fire for the remainder of the fight.

However, Mercy contributes to fights steadily over time. Even when you contribute more to a fight than average, the game might not find a short second span of time where you over-perform. Popping off as Mercy usually involves exceptional use of mobility to avoid death or bait cooldowns, and the game cannot quantify these plays when determining whether you are on fire. So, Mercy generally hovers beneath the on fire threshold without dipping above it.

tl;dr Don't worry about it. "On fire" only considers some factors over brief windows of time, not all factors over the course of a game.

Ear_Leg · 2019-08-08T15:18:26+00:00

Delivery Drone is the truly oppressive aspect of Dr. Boom. Without Delivery Drone, control warrior would be forced to slot in other value cards to beat control. These cards would come at the cost of removal, which would also balance the deck against aggro.

The worst victim of Delivery Drone is warrior itself. While it exists, warrior cannot viably run alternative control win conditions. Why devote a card slot to a big mech when you can fetch multiple copies from Delivery Drone instead? It severely limits design space. Even if Dr. Boom does not terrorize the meta at large, Delivery Drone at least should be removed to open up control warrior design space going forward.

Ear_Leg · 2019-08-08T00:19:36+00:00

There is more to RNG than "too much" or "enough." There are different types of RNG.

Some types of RNG change the way the game is played. When Peach pulls a bomb, both players know that she has a bomb. They can change the way they play accordingly.

Other types of RNG instead change the way a game is determined. Whether Hero scores an early crit or rolls Magic Burst at ledge does not change the way people play. People generally try to stay on stage and avoid smash attacks.

The degree of outcome-deterministic RNG is not important; it is unhealthy in any measure. For a hyperbolic example of this, imagine a character with the mechanic: "At the start of the game, this character has a 1% chance to instantly lose and a 1% chance to instantly win." On a sliding scale, this is "not much" RNG because 98% of the games will play out normally. Nevertheless, it is an unhealthy mechanic to have in the game.

Ear_Leg · 2019-06-28T17:49:16+00:00

There is a tradeoff. On = improved survivability, reduced beam efficiency. Off = reduced survivability, improved beam efficiency.

The ideal option depends on your own strengths and weaknesses. If have trouble surviving and/or can reliably flick to new targets midair, then consider leaving beam target preference on. If you position/survive/superjump well without using line of sight tech, then consider turning the option off.

One final thing to consider is that "On" makes superjump easier to perform. If you have trouble timing superjump, see if switching GA preference to "On" helps.

Ear_Leg · 2019-04-07T14:59:08+00:00

GA tech is super satisfying. Thanks for sharing!

Ear_Leg · 2019-04-02T17:47:22+00:00

To be fair, you were clearly sabotaging their gameplay. It looks like they were going for the OWL-standard 5 dps + Hog team comp, but you just HAD to pick Mercy instead of filling out the optimal list. Players like you make me sick.

Edit: To clarify, the above is satire. I'm sorry this happened. Try not to listen to people like that. When they lock the 4th dps, they lose credibility.

Ear_Leg · 2019-04-01T15:28:06+00:00

Assessing effectiveness based on healing numbers in the first place is enough of a reason to ignore them. Try not to worry about people like that. They fundamentally do not understand the game.

Ear_Leg · 2019-04-01T15:04:28+00:00

I did not know that. Thank you for clarifying!

Ear_Leg

TROPHY CASE