Legend (im)balance - General look

I think it doesn't come to a surprise that we always come across people who say "Buff this" or "nerf that" - Rightfully so, because everyone has their own approach to the game, and everyone sees content differently. So saying that someone's complaint is invalid is a weak move to do. Anyway, I want to talk about the general legend (im)balance.

Over the course of the many games I have played, I have used a lot of legends, but also played against a lot of legends. And in several situations I thought to myself "hey, this legend feels underwhelming" or "hey, that legend is pretty good!" - So for instance, I found Bangalore and Crypto to be very underwhelming, while I found Bloodhound and Pathfinder to be absolutely great. Funnily enough, despite Crypto being more of the legend I would be playing due to his spy-nature, I still found his skill set to be vastly different from what I usually would like him for.

And while playing or playing against all of those legends, I found that some are way more commonly seen than others. The reason for that usually is because those legends that I did see a lot of in every match were much more versatile and usable during a game compared to others which were conditional or straight-up useless. Which brings me to the misconception of balancing and versatility. Someone being used a lot does not automatically mean that he is overpowered. It could also be that his general area of use is much wider. In a fast-paced game about getting to a ring fast and surviving, the best legend to have is one that is fast paced that can get to a ring fast and can survive well.

Balance problems are kind of difficult to point out. Is Caustic truly bad? was Pathfinder truly overpowered? How do you find that out? (tip: Testing, scenario comparison, value and math, you'd be surprised how high up there Caustic truly is)

Let's explain those above stated points with a recent event.

Pathfinder was nerfed. so his tactical cooldown went up from 15 seconds to 35 seconds, which a ton of people were upset about. Both rightfully so, but also not exactly rightfully. There is a reason why Pathfinder is a popular choice. His overall skill set is a healthy mix between mobility, utility and combat compatibility. His grappling hook can be used for a variety of things, such as grappling onto ledges to get a higher ground, a quick escape behind an obstacle, or grab onto enemies to have an easier time aiming. His hitbox gives a good amount of 'mid-combat evasion', and his ultimate serves as a good travel ability, utility but also escape ability.

And due to the majority of the time you are in open space where getting shot at isn't all that uncommon, having a set of abilities that helps traversing said area is of course a LOT more useful.

So what made Pathfinder interesting to play is his overall versatility. In other words, he may not have been overpowered. But in a grand scheme perspective, he has something that others don't have: Adaptation. For the squad he is an overall great choice due to the abilities. And a skilled pathfinder player can easily shred a whole enemy squad without breaking a sweat. That is a useful addition to the squad. His tactical is also great. It gives precognition and foresight, which is a useful trait to have.

For comparison, let's look at a different legend. How about Bangalore? So, here is the thing (and truth): I rarely see Bangalore players. And those that I see are either newbies, or some that just made her a main. But generally, I see far more Wattson/Wraith/Gibraltar than Bangalore. The reason behind that is that Bangalore's skill set is overall lacking. For instance, smoke is obviously a very great ability, and good for defense. The problem behind that is that it puts both teams on an equal position. They cannot see you, but you cannot see them either unless you have a synergizing team (Crypto/Bloodhound) - That puts the team into a spot of where certain combinations have to be made in order to make use of the ability. At the same time, her ultimate is equally lackluster.

It's area denying, and makes sure to suppress enemies. But the time it takes to actually arm this ability is already a death sentence, and can already be a waste before it's even used. I don't argue that this ability is still good in it's own way, but quite frankly the only advantage it really puts onto your team is a potential escape in a tough situation, or potential suppression. Her passive helps with that in some degree, but is specific to her.

So Bangalore compared to Pathfinder is a lot less versatile. This is of course also a matter of perspective. But to be honest, I take Pathfinder over Bangalore simply because he offers me more in comparison.

All in all, and that is really something I have been looking at for a while: Look over the legends and figure out how versatile they are. It can go one or the other way. Either everyone is specialized and only good in certain scenarios, or everyone is good at most of the things and are prismatic with their abilities. Having a mix obviously overshadows those who are more specialized with those who are way more universal and open.

Let's actually discuss this.

Kind regards - Peri