Well, why to force, when you can use preferences to form 2-2-2 teams? Why limit, when you can just tell matchmaker who to queue with who?
I’m strictly against any limitations in roles, as they are an unnecessary evil. Locking down the roles won’t make the game balanced, won’t banish throwers, and would kill all role-heavy comps.
If you really want that 2-2-2, there’s another way - preferences. You choose from one to all roles and one-two of your signature heroes in these roles. Bam! Matchmaker now has info to queue you in the role you want, in the team with 2-2-2 setup, and it does not limit the number of comps, lacks an issue of a whole role leaving/throwing as you still can pick any hero in any role, and helps to form a team, as you already know what your teammates want to play when you get to preparation stage!
lol.
SoloQ is nice to have… but please… don’t balance a team game around it.
Lol…
- no guilds,
- no stacks above GM,
- awful que times for 6 stacks (because hardly any other stacks are playing)
Blizzard made this team game catered to solo players from the beginning.
I’m absolutely fine for creating useful tools for soloQers.
I’m absolutely not fine to force them to actual teams who play the game at its full potential.
And thats why role queue is a horrible idea.
No need to read further.
Talking of horrible ideas
Found the dps main who only cares about his own experience
Thats a nice ad hominem…
And actually, if you ever want to play Overwatch again, you don’t want role queue either.
If it takes too long to get games, people will quit, and the game will die.
Take a cookie my dude, that a great post.
222 will for sure be a good thing for the game and enable an easier balance work for all heroes.
and the earth is flat i know…
It won’t. That’s nonsensical. You will queue on roles together, if anything it will be faster for DPS in groups.
If the game is balanced for 2-2-2, shields/shield tanks can be balanced around the limit of two dps. I.e. you wouldn’t need more dps heroes to break the shield in a reasonable time, although different dps heroes could still put you at a relative advantage.
Imo this goes for most scenarios that people use as a reason for flexing to 4-1-1 or other ‘weird’ comps: it’s usually a response to something that wouldn’t exist with a properly balanced 2-2-2 in the first place. I.e. 4-1-1 to counter GOATS.
Remember, both teams will be locked to 2-2-2, so it’s not like one can stack roles while the other simply folds over because they can’t pick extra dps or whatever. A lot of people seem to forget this when they mention flexing to other roles.
I’m sorry I liked your post. You had 69 likes and now you have 70 so I ruined it.
Only really happened for about 1-5% of players.
Uh yeah!
That is how people play the game and how the game is set up to work! I’m not talking full stack vs randoms scenario, I’m talking full stack vs full stack.
If you don’t think it’s a bad thing that part of the playerbase is going to get the shaft in favor of another part of the player base, then you’re part of the problem that got us into this 2-2-2 mess.
But it forces players and teams who purposefully stack because they flex between roles.
It hurts players like me who’s only really proficient on Pharah in the DPS role but can flex a tank or support well when she isn’t working.
It means that players like me will most likely not get to play the roles they excel in because it means that if we get countered, we can’t adapt in that scenario in a meaningful way.
Hard role lock is on its way, full stacks need the option of soft role lock.
Handily posted in a separate thread instead of as a reply like how a forum is supposed to be used!
I think that the primary argument FOR 2-2-2 is the meta.
But here’s the thing: literally nobody, will give a straight answer as to what meta should be there. Unironically answer that, and don’t you dare be biased towards your own hero pool. And everyone will still have a wildly different answer.
There will always be a meta that will be more effective. And the mid-level players will generally always try to copy the meta of the higher levels because they (falsely) believe they can do it too, or think it’s the key to growing in SR.
We have 31 heroes, 25 of which will not be used in whatever meta will arrive in 2-2-2, aside from on certain maps where some of those lesser heroes will be more valuable.
So there will always be complaints about the meta. 2-2-2 won’t solve a meta from occurring. And, quite frankly, certain 2-2-2 metas would not be overpowered if there was a 3-2-1 or 3-3 or 4-1-1 counter to it.
Secondly… a lot of heroes would need to be reworked/rebalanced to become viable in 2-2-2. Or to be less overpowered in 2-2-2 with no 3-2-1/4-1-1/3-3-0 counter to it.
Have you also seen how incredibly slow the OW team is with rebalancing?
If 2-2-2 is introduced without a serious dedication to constant tweaks and rebalances for at least several months afterwards, then 2-2-2 WILL do more harm than good.
And then I’m talking about direct tweaks. Not put them on the PTR for 2 months until the next competitive season.
And because of these rebalances, perhaps even entire reworks (or, dare I say: reverts?), there is a serious chance of reinforcing and strengthening the current powercreep, and CC creep that is already in the game.
I mean time and time again, the OW team has shown they do not know how to balance the game. Their changes, more often than not, are completely out of whack with reality.
I simply don’t think we can trust them to be able to drop something like 2-2-2 and then do a good job at balancing it afterwards.
At best, if we’re using their performance of the past year, it will take another few years before 2-2-2 is anywhere close to actually balanced or fun. Meanwhile, the game as it is now does have some bad things in it, but it is reasonably balanced and often only needs a few nudges here and there. Creating a forced 2-2-2 will undo all of that and stuff will be wildly imbalanced for a significant length of time.
OKay - lets address this line of reasoning:
2-2-2 is not perfect; this theoretical case because some 6-stacks have cross flex role members is not a strong enough argument to preclude 2-2-2 adoption over all. Lets be honest, this is for the better part an outlier in terms of real impact on the player-base.
The other aspect is guess what? You learn to do more characters within a role. Now its possible, maybe and I think there’s a strong chance this might happen that two players on a team could swap roles and thus allow character flex in that manner while keeping a strict 2-2-2 composition. The argument against this is that it violates the tracking of MMR/SR per roles, so then again maybe not.
Regardless, there will always be arguments for and against something, the question is are the sum of the arguments in the case against 2-2-2 strong enough to override the tuning benefits of 2-2-2… so far, I don’t believe so.
Limiting comps will make the game incredibly boring, and nothing will bring more canceled matches from people leaving.
222 will break the way OW was meant to be played, as a 6 man communicating all the time. It will kill the creativity and only allow 3 comps, (dive, bunker, death ball) while dissallowing comps like quad dps, all versions of goats, anything with ball, brig, 3 dps bunker, triple support, and some others that i cant think of atm. If you solo q, you should know that you wont get perfect comps, so why complain about it?
QuOtInG YoUr oPpoSotIOn liKe ThIs to belittle them is very immature. They can have their opinion and not be mocked, even if you think it’s flawed.
This is why the devs don’t take these forums seriously anymore.