We're still discussing ways to make Tormented Souls better. Both of your ideas are things that have been thrown around, and align with the way that we're thinking about the Heroic. The team has been busy preparing for BlizzCon, but I'd expect to see some changes in the coming months to reduce the Heroic effectiveness disparity.

Thanks for the question, Zanzure. If you ever have feedback or suggestions, the Blizzard forums are the best place to post them, but we also read Reddit to pick up on community topics too.

The short answer is: We're always trying to update our tooltips, and work as a team to try and keep them consistent. We take note of irregularities that make a significant impact on player understanding when we see them, and typically fix the bugs in a batch.

In terms of specific responses, I'll do my best to tackle our perspective on them. Broadly, I know that players like knowing a ton of information (I'm one of them), but too much can feel overwhelming for people learning, and make the game feel cluttered.

• "Recently" versus specific numbers
  • We've decided to be vague for any delay or cast time less than .5 seconds. The idea is that often times these cast times aren't a huge part of the ability, and most humans won't make a distinction between .1875 seconds and .3125 seconds. Even then, you'll typically use that ability once or twice and figure out the timing (and giving that information rarely speeds up the process from the get go).
  • We've heard the community feedback that they'd like some way to toggle more or less information in these tootlips, and it's something that we've been discussing internally. There are pros and cons to maintaining a system like this, but it's something that we think is worth considering.
• Standardization of format
  • Overall, you're right that formats should be standardized between like-minded Talents. When we're making new Talents or Abilities, we try and maintain a similar format, though occasionally we decide that it reads better in a different format (or we make a mistake . . . it happens).

D.Va is due for a few updates to her Talent tree. We've started preliminary work on her kit to reinforce her role as a Bruiser. We're off to an exciting start, but it's likely that she won't be ready for release until maybe the middle of the next year.

She's not planned for a full fledged "rework" at this point, but incorporating something like Micro Missiles into her kit alongside some Talent updates is likely.

When Overwatch updates their Heroes, we're exciting to see what they've done and we draw inspiration from it if they've made changes to a Hero that already exists in Heroes of the Storm. But once a Hero has been released in Heroes we never feel required to mirror any changes the Overwatch team makes, as they've taken on a life of their own in the Nexus.

Thanks for your question, Dignitude!

We've made a pass alongside the Armor updates to address most of the Armor abilities. For the most part, it wasn't too time consuming, as we simply found any Armor value that was a lower amount or wasn't performing well, and increased it by 5-10.

That being said, the largest challenge with making Armor stack multiplicatively would be clarity for players. We find it easiest to display X Armor on the UI exactly equal to the amount of Armor that they have. Another similar option would be to have a flat Armor value that translated to effective mitigation with diminishing returns, but we found that requiring constant translation was harder for the vast majority of players to understand at a glance.

Another benefit from not stacking Armor values is that we can be aggressive with the values so that each can feel chunky on their own without worrying about them stacking together and completely shutting down incoming damage.

I can't give a timetable, but we'll likely expand the pass that we did on Spell Power to include all of these multiplicative modifiers in the future.

So you can expect anything that should be multiplicative to have its tooltip changed, and anything that should be additive to be fixed on the data side.

Hey Wozzki, thanks for your question.

I think that we've seen a variety of results of early game impact. Some games, a team can develop an early game lead and snowball that into an (almost) insurmountable advantage that makes every subsequent team fight disproportionately easy to win. Some games, a team can have a decent lead for the entirety of the game, but make a few big mistakes in the end game and lose suddenly.

Our goal with the gameplay changes was to reduce the frequency of snowball leads, while also providing teams that win the early game with a sustained strategic advantage (as opposed to simply a statistical one). We've also found it's more fun to play around a Catapult advantage than a level advantage, as it affects all your gameplay decisions (both with and against them), and makes your successful team fights with a lead still feel like they were earned.