Let’s see, how did I put it in the Boldur thread?
Ah, yes. Quoth myself:
"Nine times out of ten, it’s going to be more that the player they were competing against had better tactical knowledge / more knowledge of the map / a better understanding of their own character / an overall superior comprehension of the meta (whom they should fight versus avoid) / better team composition to support them / a higher level of skill at playing Battleborn.
“And that’s basically, nine times out of ten, what causes nerf politicking. It isn’t that they actually want the opposing character to be nerfed, it’s more that they want to be better at the game which they believe in their mind they will be if the character is nerfed.”
And to paraprhase myself: You need to provide hard evidence as to why a character needs to be nerfed. ‘Oh no, they beat me!’ is not hard evidence. You need to actually play the character, gain an understanding of how they work both generally and in the meta, and then provide a detailed explanation of what’s broken. Often, actually playing as a character someone thinks is OP will completely change their perspective.
Also, finally, paraphrasing myself once more: Yes, because all of this nerf herding is so intelligent. Let’s nerf Battleborn! It will be the best when everyone does 1 damage and 1 healing with their base attack, special attacks, and ultimates, unaffected by their helixes or gear. Certainly that would make for a much more enjoyable experience!
I don’t mean to sass, but Gearbox tends to jump the gun with nerfing, so this needs to be said in every ill-considered, undetailed thread about nerfing.
Edit: Fixed typos.