The game will not be around in 5 to 6 years. They are finally making the right steps and bumping up Overwatch 2’s release while also fixing role queue… But that will not stop the bleeding.
1 Like
I hope they still consider it. If its expensive to do, it might be difficult to convince the financial management, but if they somehow can manage to pull it off i think this would go a long way of fixing the issues of the obnoxious long queue times.
3 dps might also have a positive impact on the dps meta, because more unconvential picks become more attractive since there is an additional spot to fill.
Pretty sure you have floated this same topic up at least twice before, same title as I recall as well. I understand queue time frustrations, but the balance issues that would arise, the technical question, not to mention the impact on game sense, etc is far more than people here think.
No no no don’t make the maps larger make the heroes smaller! You know like Torb sized
Which is laughable because the game can handle Bob, who is essentially a 7th player (for all intent and purpose - Jeff himself said this in an interview) so it’s a bunch of malarkey.
First time creating this thread. You got the wrong person.
the game has more chance of going 1-3-2 than adding an extra player. not only did they mention technical difficulties there is also the fact all maps were designed to be with 12 players.
High cost do not mean only high financial cost.
System performance, visual fidelity, and game balance all are affected by one extra hero in each side.
1 Like
There are hundreds of these because, well, nobody wants to wait that long. But I guess they try to make it seem like it is the same people to pretend that it is not a problem?
What has console to do with it?
Please point me to a link or quote where it says we don’t have it because of console, otherwise you’re just making stuff up.
1 Like
The game can handle it. After some experimentations last halloween with junkstein endless and some workshop rules (teleported the bosses inside the castle) the game was not having issues with up to roughly 30 bosses. Then the game spawns less and less zomnics but neither the server nor the game crashed after reaching the very last bonus resulting in me having more than 80 bosses on the map. I can understand optimizations would have to be made and that console performance is going to suffer but as jeff said its not impossible. Considering the switch runs the game with less than 30 fps already it cant get much worse x)
Console is an easy thing for the “master race” to scapegoat… though I’m pretty sure most of them need to lower the graphic rendering for the game to actually function relatively smoothly with it still only at 6v6… but sure, its console holding them back. Why not?
4 Likes
Sure but supports will need buffs to cover extra healing and defense from another ultimate.
Then buff all healers if we’re gonna have to heal an extra person
I completely agree… 1 - 3 - 2 wouldnt even be overwatch and you can scrap team mechanics in almost all ranks unless you majorly buffed the tanks and then gl trying to fight a tank one on one…
2-3-2 is the way to go and for console… put a bot in there who cares its console. Grow up and buy a computer.
sorry that was kinda harsh but ya console should never limit what the game is like on the computer – even if it always will cause of the $ tied up in console.
Any change to the current 2-2-2 format would require balance changes. But ideas such as 1-3-2 are more radical as you only get 1 main tank. Balancing and reworking tanks, so they become equally viable in the same role would end up being a way bigger nightmare.
Keeping 2 tanks keeps the synergy between main/off tank in tact and creates less issues.
fair enough
still better than 7v7
How exactly? Name one map that’s for specifically 6 players? What if there are 2 BOBs on the field?
I could get behind there being four queue lines: one for tanks, one for dps, one for supports, and one for flex players. So, 1-1-1-3.
The three flex players each get to choose one available role at the start of a round. If one of them chooses the DPS role then that leaves only Tank and Support as options for the other two flex players. They’re locked into that role for the round and can swap roles the next round if they so choose.
So the queue line may look like 1-1-1-3 to begin with and ends up being 2-2-2 before a match starts. Shortens queue times and allows some flexibility during a match for half the team.
sigh, when I said it everyone pointed out how wrong I was.
I guess as long as someone else says it, it carries validity.