I mean, the limit of 2 is pretty dang low, but the reasoning behind it makes sense. Having 10 or so avoid as player slots in higher tier comp where the pool of folks that can play together is far more limited than say gold or silver could make it impossible for people to find a match, whether its the person that’s flagging all those people to avoid in matches or the people getting flagged.
It does def seem like a really low number, but the logic behind it at least makes sense.
Limit it based on rank, couldn’t possibly be that difficult to implement.
Limit based on rank would be nice, but im sure people would complain about that saying it’s not fair to only have 2 avoid slots in diamond/gm/whatever and allowing bronze/silver/gold to have 10 or whatever number. No matter what you can’t please everyone ¯_( : / )_/¯
A limit of 2…is that a joke for the game that has 30 million and counting players…?
No more off-meta OTP terror
Finally I can dodge that Torb main
You have to admit it is better than nothing, and with only 2 slots it reduces the amount people can ‘game’ the system.
ie. Imagine if in general I have a good Overwatch experience, but I want to climb SR. If I rarely encountered trolls or toxic people, without a small limit I could just keep adding who I perceived to be the worst player on my team, if I did this theoretically I’d end up being on a team of awesome people and just roll my way up the ranks.
This is 1 of the reasons why too many slots would be a bad thing
With a 2 person limit you’d really have to start to think how to use your slots. Sure some people will likely try game it anyway, but as soon as the first troll comes knocking, that underperfoming genji 1 trick will be swapped with ToxicTroll99 and the system will start to be used as intended.
Realistically such a system will ALWAYS be gamed, however by limiting the slots it will:
It may not be perfect, but is is DEFINITELY a lot better than nothing.
Here’s the thing they had one that was permanently based and they said they would never bring back the features
The thing for me is that it is usually someone who deserves to be avoided as a teammate is in a premade and they’re griefing as a whole unit (I honestly lost count of bads overly exclaiming how they’re a premade and every solo/smaller premade should revolve around them “IMAPREMADEDURR!!!” ). Does avoiding one person make me not deal with that whole nonsense from the premade or does the premade yet again supersede everything and got to tolerate them all? I would assume I don’t have to be paired with said premade, but you never know with how these guys code nowadays.
Yeah ,the system can’t put you with that one player in the premade ,yet the premade can’t leave a member behind and go into a match (unless they leave or get kicked ofc) so if you avoid a single player in a pre-made ,you basically avoided 5 people
I don’t understand why it’s only 2 people.
I don’t care how long will it take to find a game, but it’s better to play with nice people.
I have no desire to play with the rest of those 2 avoided only for a week players - there should be entire blacklist feature, like friend list, but opposite.
There are too many players I wish to avoid!
I feel for you Perebor, but being able to avoid some people is better than not being able to avoid any and having to log off because you aren’t in a 6 stack.
I think everyone would have to admit it is a hard problem to solve, do one tricks have a right to play who they chose potentially at the cost of their team-mates? Just how bad can queue times get? Can people just game the system as per the example I gave above?
It may even be that a 2 player limit is the ideal solution to the avoid player problem. It is a hard feature to balance.
I’m happy that at least now I feel I have a little more control over my Overwatch experience, and I think many others likely feel the same. I think one of the contributing factors to toxicity is a feeling of hopelessness and I believe that avoid player in one form or another at least gives us a tool to address that somewhat.
There can be some pretty toxic cowards online but if you honestly feel that there are too many people you wish to avoid, try work a little more on befriending the type of people you do want to play with. Even a 3 or 4 stack of people you get on with can make all the difference and if someone else is being a fool, you can all stand up for each other and in some cases just carry through that person’s incompetence.
Stick with it, things are getting better and having avoid player back is better than the alternative.
I think this is a great step forward, but I would like to be able to avoid for long term and for more than 2 people. This will definitely be a good fix to the top 1% in gm who don’t have as many people to queue with, but for someone like me in plat, I could just as easily run into someone just like the person I just avoided in the next game.
And so these players should be punished because people have preconceived biases about the characters they play?
Dude the one trick debate is over, theyre justified in playing the character they want, they bought the game, it’s borderline consumer fraud to ban and punish players for playing one hero.
You get to avoid 2 of them every 7 days.
citizen_kane_clap.gif
If only we hadn’t abused that feature.
I’ll bite, it appears you contradict yourself?
On one hand you suggest:
So one tricks are ok?
Then:
Are you suggesting that its borderline fraud what happens to the one trick’s 5 team-mates in a team game being punished for the one tricks sub-optimal choice (when they are hard countered) or worse not being able to choose their one trick because someone else selected it first?
You will note in my OP I asked a question, I didn’t pick a side, it was more so some general observations as to how people’s perceptions may differ and some of the issues which need to be considered for avoid player (people’s perceptions differ). How about we leave it at that?
What’s fraud is for them to say “You can’t be banned for playing a certain hero” and then banning players for doing just that. They’re lying to consumers, that’s consumer fraud. I’m not the first person to make this observation.
What if it ain’t a group? Sometimes I’ve had 4 or even 5 (basically full team) of toxic people and all of them had solo que’d. Luckily those games are not that common but games with at least 2 toxic persons seems to happen quite often. So what you gonna do when you have one game with 2 toxic persons, you put them in avoid list, then you have a game with also 2 toxic persons?
I feel a simple solution to that scenario would be to have matchmaker de-prioritise the chance of being matched with someone you’ve avoided instead of guarantee it. If after a few minutes matchmaker still can’t create a match then include the avoided players.
Two slots might be fine for the higher ranks where there’s far less players, but for platinum or even gold I believe it could be quite ineffective and some players will still end up reporting regardless.