I think going back would make the devs happy because they get the safety net for at least a year of saying they’re just trying to get the game balanced again. It’s a great excuse for content development even though it’s just balance patches.
I agree overall balance isn’t an argument for either because true balance has never been achieved nor will it ever be achieved. Overwatch isn’t designed to be balanced.
I’ve literally unsubscribed from most of the CC who’ve spoken so demeaningly to their viewers asking about 6v6 again. It’s never a good luck unless it’s something crazy/radical/harms lives or is something obviously political. I never thought Overwatch would become so charged in a simple format debate.
There are worst topics to have been discussed. Like how many skins need to come out revealing characters feet. That was a thing for awhile. 
I’m simply of the opinion at this point that we lost more than we’ve ultimately gained with this format switch. You see it in general sentiment, you see it amongst certain YouTubers that are sick of it.
Many people clamor on about Queue times being shorter being worth all of it
Well
1: Queue times are becoming an issue again
And 2: Does it seriously matter if we have smaller queue times for a game that less people enjoy and is making more and more players miserable?
Oh man… It reminds me of the Greeks/romans with their sandals, man. Sculptures and statues with feet showing. It’s a whole freedom movement. I personally don’t understand it, but it is what it is.
That’s what I’ve been thinking. It’s more important to have an enjoyable game than a game with poor quality but more matches (unless you’re speedrunning challenges for events and stuff, I guess with that goal in mind it wouldn’t matter much). Like the game is suffering because of this poor morale.
I think the largest take away here is that the changes to tank were to make people want to play them. Make them feel powerful. Make them feel like they’re doing a good job for their team.
The tank is most definitely in a position of power currently, with the damage mitigation buffs, and the overall power levels since the switch to 5v5, they definitely have a commanding presence on the battlefield.
This has it’s pros and cons though. They’re the main focus, because they’re one of the biggest threats. With the changes to healing from the DPS passive, it can feel like an exercise in futility to try to keep your tank standing. Add the nerf to healing to the already troubling ways healing is negated via shields, debuffs, etc, and it can certainly make the supports on your team feel useless.
Add in the fact that the tank is usually quite busy trying to fend off attacks, or secure kills, and they may not be paying attention to their debuff status, and simply don’t understand why they’re not being healed.
Bottom line: Be a good tank, use big brain tactics, not braindead ones 
Your healers will thank you, your DPS will thank you, and the enemy team will hate you for not dying.
Why do so many people answer actual numbers and math with this kind of toxic attitude? it’s like, you hate people who actually thinks and don’t just go around talking trash and making guesses.
The bad arguments would therefore be the long queues since the day Jeff Kaplan introduced the VERY stupid “ice cream logic” to justify them and the double shield in which at a certain point we nerfed Orisa so much… who had become good only and exclusively with Sigma, the composition with which you wanted to dismantle it?
everyone hated the long tail (and it was) and above all they hated how they systematically killed tanks in the patch notes in much more ferocious ways than today. 5v5 has problems, but 6v6… ALSO. 
and you literally chose the two most flawed arguments to defend it. 
Tank and playing against tank is miserable although winning and popping off… no more skill matchups, It’s just counterswapping or facetank everything in the game, no more fun, no more mind games. if the tank is near you, your already dead.
problem is the game is finally dying right now and by the time the devs decide to give up on 5v5 it’s probably going to be too late to make a swap back to 6v6 justifiable, especially from a financial perspective.
Solution #1: Upgrade the server hardware, and possibly the network too. (Very expensive).
Solution #2: Offload the hosting costs on to the players by releasing a dedicated server and an appropriate in-game browser that let players run and play on their own community servers. (Cheap, but unpredictable.)
Solution #3: Use collected data metrics to determine which hero abilities are costliest to run and seem to be consistently causing the crashes, and rework them appropriately so as to not be so heavy on the infrastructure. (Hard + slow + expensive)
.
.
.
Solution #4: (Guaranteed everyone will hate this one!) Reduce the tick rate.
It’s interesting that community who likes 6v6 had created there own servers although it’s overshadowed by position. I also decided to see it and the players were having fun and there was rarely mirror tank line-up. The conclusion is obvious: if community knows how to balance 6v6 ask them for instructions.
Developer Neglect and Balance Issues:
Key Balance Patch:
In October 2020, a balance patch was well-received, addressing many issues, but shortly after, development shifted focus to Overwatch 2. This shift led to minimal updates and balancing efforts for Overwatch 1.
The perceived neglect and imbalance, particularly with hit-scans becoming overly dominant, led to the rise of double shield compositions. Tanks had to adapt to these new meta requirements, making gameplay less enjoyable.
Many tank players left, anticipating that Overwatch 2 would arrive soon with fresh updates and balance fixes. This departure was a major factor in increasing queue times, as fewer players were willing to fill the tank role.
Transition to 5v5 and Current Issues:
Moving to 5v5 was intended to streamline the game, reduce queue times, and make tank roles more impactful and enjoyable.
Despite the change, queue times are again becoming an issue due to tank players feeling underappreciated and overwhelmed. The core issue of tank players leaving remains unresolved.
Origins and Necessity:
Hit-Scan Dominance: The dominance of hit-scan characters like Widowmaker and McCree (now Cassidy) necessitated a meta where double shield became essential for survival. Without these shields, tanks and their teams would be easily picked off from a distance.
Lack of Effective Counters:
Typical shield-busting heroes were not effective enough to break through double shields, making it the most viable strategy.
Stagnation Due to Lack of Updates:
Double shield, like the GOATS meta before it, lasted for an extended period due to the absence of balance changes as developers focused on Overwatch 2.
Complaints vs. Reality:
Many players criticize tanks for not playing aggressively or protecting their team adequately, yet the same players fail to adapt their own playstyles.
Non-tank players often neglect to use cover effectively or adapt to the tank’s playstyle, expecting constant protection without understanding the tank’s strategic choices.
Balance of Expectations:
Effective team play in Overwatch requires understanding and cooperation. When tanks choose heroes like Roadhog or Wrecking Ball, they are often making strategic choices that require their team to play differently, such as utilizing cover more effectively.
The responsibility for survival and effectiveness in matches is shared. Non-tank players need to adapt and support their tanks just as much as tanks need to consider their team’s needs.
The shift to 5v5 did not fundamentally solve the issues with queue times or tank satisfaction. Instead, it highlighted the need for ongoing balance and updates to keep all roles engaging and viable.
Double Shield Stagnation: The prolonged dominance of double shield was a symptom of developer neglect and imbalance, not an inherent flaw of the 6v6 format.
Player Behavior: Effective gameplay requires understanding and adapting to team dynamics, not just critiquing one role. All players need to recognize their responsibilities in supporting their tanks and using cover effectively.
In essence, the problems with Overwatch’s competitive mode are deeply rooted in balancing issues and player adaptation rather than the fundamental structure of the game itself. Addressing these concerns requires a holistic approach to game design and community understanding.
This is a myth. There was not a single patch that made “October 2020” magically great. This state was achieved through aggressive, fast patching cycle initiated earlier that year and, arguably, it persisted through to the end of Overwatch 1. The patches were small, often containing incremental changes to one or two heroes at a time, but they came every two to three weeks. The reason why October is cited in particular was due to Seagull’s “State of Overwatch” editorial, which came out at this time, where he proclaimed that the life of an Overwatch player is good. (I agree).
As far as the queue times during this period are concerned, they were around 10 minutes for DPS close to the median skill line in North America. Whether or not that’s good or even acceptable is subjective per individual basis, but they were never, from day one of Role Queue’s implementation, close to being equal to Tanks. That part was completely made up by Samito.
Much like above, this is rather mythologized. Sigma was put in at the same time as Role Queue and Double Shield came about soon thereafter, which was over a year prior to the period you’re referring to.
Custa is a lowlife, calling someone Ben Shaprio because you disagree with thier opinion on a video game tells you all you need to know about him.
And how Samito is evidently a ‘grifter’….
He says while taking brand deals from Blizzard and cozying up to the devs at the Prosche event.
That’s not even pot calling the kettle black territory, that’s leagues above it.
And that’s not to say ‘oh samito is so great blah blah’. Dudes obviously got issues of his own, but Custa doesn’t get the moral high ground on this particular point.
6v6 absolutely failed. If it hadn’t, Overwatch 2 would have been 6v6 instead of 5v5. If it actually was the superior mode, they never would have changed it.
If that’s true about the fast patches (I honestly don’t remember) we could theorize that, because the patches were so frequent, a hard meta was not allowed to fully settle.
And the game is most fun when there is no hard meta.
So to keep the game fun, we need to keep a hard meta from forming and settling via frequent patching every 2-3 weeks.
Perhaps, but my view on this subject is somewhat different. The patches and changes therein were fairly small to keep the meta from settling, as you suggest. Rather, the way I see it, these patches were akin to tugging on various threads from different sides until the picture – overall balance – came into focus. By the time they were done, or close enough to it like that October, almost every hero was viable to play and below the very top ranks with their hard metas, the biodiversity of Overwatch 1 was at its all time high.
Is it really a mystery to you that dps players vastly outnumber Tank players in any given genre, and this is a shooter to boost? Role queue with 2-2-2 would never work even if the game were at its most balance state.
Also we did see “balance”, and it’s not fun for Tanks.