More like having to play WITH it, as for me.
But theyre right though.
The “selfish” one is someone insisting on playing a hero no one wants to deal with.
Heres the important thing in these ban situations: Its a democracy. Players are VOTING. Its not just “well… this ONE person doesnt want me to play MY hero…”- Its the group. Its the players in the lobby. Multiple. Everyone is voting that hey- This hero isnt fun to deal with.
I agree- If you dont like a group of people voting and saying they dont want to deal with your hero of choice- You should just deal with it. Wanting to be able to play what YOU want regardless of how the lobby feels, is the literal definition of “Selfish”.
As a fellow doomfist main that knows doomfist will be banned because of how frustrating he can be for other players, Im totally fine with this- Because my “fun” on doomfist doesnt trump the fun of all the other players in the lobby.
But end of the day, this is a powerful tool for the community to use to address balance issues they perceive more promptly. If a hero is exceptionally frustrating, or just plain overpowered, and the community wants to annex it - its great to have a tool that lets them deal with it immediately and directly, over having to wait for the developers to do something, if anything at all.
9 Likes
I agree with this sentiment.
Metal Rank players haven’t learned their fundamentals yet. Allowing them to ban heroes they don’t like to play against is actually a crutch and setback to them improving.
What happens if the ban is not successful? Will the metal rank player who can’t deal with the hero they tried to ban rage quit? So rage-quitting because you can’t ban a hero you don’t want to oppose becomes a thing in Comp?
Tanks have a much smaller hero pool than DPS, and Supports have 2 players fighting over an even smaller hero pool. Banning a tank or support hero makes it worse for them - if and when their hero pools were doubled a ban would be less obnoxious.
4 Likes
Think of it more as community policing of problem heroes before Blizzard can actually take the nerf bat too em.
7 Likes
Yeah.
In general, I’m not a fan of removing content from a game (even if only temporarily from match to match).
To me it’s just a sign of weakness of the game and that there is a bigger issue that isn’t being addressed and this is a work around that comes with consequences.
Every Hog/Mauga player will ban Ana.
Every support will want to ban dive heroes.
Every dive player will ban cc heroes.
Even the concept leads to a problem of rather than learning how to deal with a character that you don’t like playing against, rather than improve and get better against said character, just let the game solve the problem for you. No skill required. Just click a button and now you don’t have to deal with that hero.
Then inflate the ranks until the hero they have trouble with isn’t the most banned hero and you get kicked back down to the rank you were before. Over and over, never learning how to deal with the characters they have problems with.
4 Likes
Rivals has all of 8 healers. 2 of them can be banned at any one point.
It still works amazingly.
Overwatch has 11.
Overwatch will be fine.
6 Likes
marvel rivals bans only are for the most high ranks, not every rank, even when they copy something from a better game they find a way to ruin it, lower ranks have nothing to be asking for about bans
1 Like
I expect that will change once it is in place.
5 Likes
I think the answer is place the selection pre matchmaker.
This way you get to say what you don’t want to face, but you also get to play what you want.
queue times will sort out the rest.
Id honestly be happy to see it for lower ranks. It has a huge impact on how the game feels to play, in a very positive way IMO. I cant imagine playing without bans at this point, and having access to bans is why i predominantly play competitive on rivals.
A lot of players, myself included, feel it needs to be accessed sooner. If they dont want it for the absolute lowest ranks, hey - fine. But at a MINIMUM, it should be available for plat -But personally id be fine to see it in gold+
Bronze/silver, ya fine - The game is wonky as heck in those ranks as it is. Anyone doing decently on any hero can be “frustrating” - And game balance means little.
Bronze/Silver are by all means fairly low skill tier buckets. “Gold” is where players start to have an understanding of how the game is played and get over a lot of those learning skill humps (which is why i feel bans should start there)- But by plat? Thats where you get when youre starting to be “competitive” (by all means, still a lot to learn - But you have to try to get into plat, at least compared to people just starting / learning who are down in bronze / silver), which is why i feel at the LOWEST it should be there (but still would push for gold).
IMO the benefits of bans drastically outshine the “down sides” of “but i cant play the one hero i really like!”. Letting players choose what do deal with makes the game feel so much better for the majority of players.
Bans also tend to naturally lead to dynamic meta shifts far faster than anything the developers can realistically do. “Meta” heroes (and to acknowledge: every rank has “Their meta” to contend with) tend to be the ones banned the most. This paves way for “new metas” with the remaining roster. These lead to new strategies dynamically forming, which result in new metas- and very commonly lead to new picks/bans- All with zero adjustments by the developers.
Weve seen this in a LOT of games that have bans, and were unsurprisingly seeing it in Rivals already. Hero bans are amazing.
4 Likes
Will be bans be bad? Probably for people who don’t have a large stable of characters to play.
But the game was/is stale, and I’m willing to give it a shot.
1 Like
I’m not a fan of the idea, but enough people seem to want it we are going to find out if it is a bad idea or not.
I try to play whatever the situation demands, so it isn’t likely to have that much impact on me personally.
However, there are a lot of players who prefer to play specific characters, and this is probably going to add one more thing for them to get aggravated about.
1 Like
Marvel Heroes doesn’t have Role Queue so a healer who can’t play his banned hero is free to switch to other roles. OW Role Quene is hard-locked. Not even a sane comparsion.
4 Likes
Youre talking about how the supports will have an even smaller pool to pick from.
In rivals above silver youll basically always have 2, sometimes 3 healers, despite having an even SMALLER hero pool.
Even if “well they banned MY hero, so ill flex to another role…” is your argument, youre STILL going to have 2-3~ healers per team, all picking from that smaller pool.
It still works fine.
3 Likes
Nope. If a MR player has his preferred hero banned, the team can rearrange and a teammate who can play another hero in the same role can sub in.
OW RQ is hard locked. Teammates can’t switch around. If both supports have their best heros banned, their team can’t sub in.
4 Likes
if you need bans this means overwatch 2 sucks and developers failed to balance it, they only limit players for no reason, people will be frustrated the characters they want to use banned because literally skill issue, players couldnt deal with them
4 Likes
I understand that.
But regardless of that, youre still going to have 2-3~ healers on your team in rivals from a smaller pool.
5 Likes
Im personally banning weaver as much as possible. Not just because playing into weaver sucks, but also because i dont want a weaver on my team. Im happy i can finnally make that happen.
1 Like
“Balance” is ever occurring but ultimately unachievable goal. No game with asymmetrical assets is ever “perfectly balanced”- Let alone balanced in a way that is ultimately suitable for all skill brackets. You can have the BEST balance team in the world, and there would still be benefits to picks/bans.
Not to mention its not even always about banning the “best” or strongest picks. Sometimes its just banning crud you straight up just dont want to deal with.
Hero bans give players a democratic means to have a higher degree of control over their match to match play experience
6 Likes
I really don’t care either way. I think this will pretty much only affect one tricks.
Not to mention it will affect one tricks positively and negatively. One trick can attempt to ban their stronger counters but simultaneously may get their own main banned by others.
1 Like