Trying to understand the concept of nerfing

Unknown

So you ask why nerf the best when someone else will take his throne.
My question is why would we not want this to happen all the time?

Why should sentry remain the number one guy for all time, or only be knocked down a peg when someone even stronger gets released? It would be awesome for the meta to shift regularly and there be new "Best" combos all the time. So my complaint about the nerfing/buffing of characters is that they don't do it nearly often enough, they should make changes often and if someone looks too strong, tone them down (a little at a time) and if someone seems too weak turn them up a notch (a little at a time) commit to making regular small changes and everyone can be made Good, and no one character will stay the "Best" for long.

People absolutely love figuring out what works best for themselves. If everything is stagnant except for when new characters are released there is almost no figuring out to do. Right now strategy is figuring out who pairs best with Sentry and that is severely limiting to the endless possibilities out there. And as long as that is how the meta is, new combos will be meaningless if Sentry will always burn them down before they can make their first move.

HailMary

Lerysh wrote:

Eh.. Even Mawkeye was more of a lateral move at best. Sure speed shot is great when paired with MNM, but outside that his damage potential actually went down. If anything he went from Good to Good or OK to Good at best.

You gained the ability to place his CDs, which was huge, and Speed Shot is one of the best passives in the entire game. I'd call that a significant upgrade.

Unknown

If Sentry was a normally powerful character at the top of tiers, you would be right. The problem is he is not normal. He is abnormally strong, allowing players to exploit him and inflate all scores across leaderboards.