Originally Posted by
Skizzify
It doesn't matter how often you get an ult. Ults are game changers. One ult can win the game for your team if done correctly. You're not going to rely on just their normal abilities for the whole game.
Without ults, Lucio has the advantage. With ults, zenyatta has the advantage. They can still both be destroyed by D.Va. See? Game changer. It doesn't matter if you're dominating the game and you're close to winning. Enemy team does a well placed ult, and the tables are turned. That's why I compare heroes with ults. They're the core of the game.
That's not true at all. If ults decided games, then it would be based on who has the strongest ults, but the strongest ults in the game are on some of the weakest overall heroes in the game. Symmetra's ult is one of the most powerful ults in the game on defense, but she's still a garbage tier pick because she can't do anything on the majority of maps with her kit. McCree's ult is pretty bad without some sort of setup, yet he's one of the strongest picks in the game because he has a strong basic kit. Pharah's ult is arguably the weakest part of her kit since it's essentially a guaranteed death for her, yet she's one of the strongest picks in the game because the rest of her kit is so good. Roadhog's ult is pretty shit without some sort of supplement, but he's a terrifying pick because of his base kit.
Ults have the potential to be game changers, but they aren't what decide matches because the vast majority of the match will not see an ult being used. You have to look at both the base kit and the ultimate, and see how effective they are with either of them up. You need a solid base kit to justify picking a hero because your ult won't be up for the majority of the map, and ults are frequently countered by basic abilities.