And for the longest time it was just a meme. And it was proving to be true about how they act.
Now, they’ve made that “insult” look like a dwarf while they’re the empire state building.
And the main problem is, while they’re raining down on us, they’re being aggressive towards anyone that disagrees with their viewpoint, even those that are other Mercy mains.
I’ve made lots of threads in the past few weeks. Some of them are objective truths and others are my opinion about what I believe to be happening. Whether it’s how the community as a whole gatekeeps their favorite heroes or about how Jeff says Mass rez isn’t coming back, anything I’ve been posting has been trolled and effectively resulted in me being harassed by a select few Mercy spammers.
They take everything that hardly relates to them and turns it into a “Mercy vs the world” argument. With the gatekeeping post I mentioned, the topic was fine. Even other Mercy mains were commenting on it saying how they were ashamed their community was like that.
What did the post turn into when Mercys arrived?
Everyone that wasn’t with them abandoned and muted the thread. Everyone that was a Mercy spammer in that thread decided that it was about balance of Mercy or about personally attacking me.
Many of the Mercy spammers I’ve come across are more concerned about who is right and winning the argument rather than staying on topic or even attempting discussion.
I’ve seen users do nothing but aggressively listen to users (aggressively listen means to listen for gaps or overlapping statements in someone’s words or ideas and then point them out while ignoring the rest of what the person was saying) and they are Mercy spammers. I’ve seen other users do nothing but call others they disagree with out on stuff that’s not even related to the topic, thus derailing the thread.
It’s incredibly hard to have any sort of conversation about anything related to Mercy when all they do is just link titanium’s thread like it’s the end-all-be-all solution to everything ever.
We can’t have a discussion like this. They take everything personally. They link the same thing over and over to effectively derail threads. They act like they’re the only ones around.
So yeah, the mercy main stereotype comes from somewhere. And we are seeing it now.
If it means we enter the debate with some very strong counterpoints to your often unsubstantiated claims, then yes, we are aggressive as hell.
We don’t care who you are or what your favorite hero is. If we disagree with you, we will make it crystal clear that that is the case.
Like this one?
Your first assertion is objectively false, speaking as someone who never mained Mercy until season 3. Aaaand… what’s thread #1 of all time right now?
Taking that further, literally the only people determining what you are and aren’t allowed to say on the forums are the moderators. The assertion that you cannot talk about Mercy unless you have 100 hours on her or support X position is absurd.
The third assertion about us suppressing opposition is honestly hilarious.
Definitions of “suppress”:
- Forcibly put an end to.
- Prevent the development, action, or expression of (a feeling, impulse, idea, etc.); restrain.
- Prevent the dissemination of (information).
- Prevent or inhibit (a process or reaction).
- Partly or wholly eliminate (electrical interference).
- Consciously inhibit (an unpleasant idea or memory) to avoid considering it.
We cannot remove your arguments. We cannot prevent them from spreading (and in actuality, replying to your threads bumps them and allows more people to see them).
We literally cannot suppress your arguments. Do you know what we can do? We can shoot them down. There is a very big difference between the two.
Don’t like your arguments being shot down? Maybe you should take positions and make assertions that you can actually back up; the flak isn’t going to end just because you’re crying about being “suppressed”.
Which he literally has never said.
Well, when you open a topic directly attacking a group and/or their positions, you can expect said group to appear and retaliate. The “us versus them” mentality is initiated by the first post, which carries that mentality itself.
When your first order of business is to make a thread labeling the opposition as “spam” because you disagree with them, that doesn’t necessarily inspire any emotions short of hostile in those you accuse of “spamming”.
Which is to say, they were supporting you, which was “fine”.
A thread that no longer supported you, which was no longer “fine”.
Does it say something about how sturdy your position is when a handful of people voice disagreement and everyone else abandons the thread?
If your position was defensible, people would have kept defending it rather than abandoning the thread; it started off as your echochamber.
Sorry, but generalizing and labeling the opposition as “spam” doesn’t exactly inspire discussion.
Translation: “They’re kicking the support out from under the argument without directly attacking the argument.”
When kicking the support out from under an argument is how you undermine an argument.
Because if you want to know what our arguments are, or if you want to shoot them down, that’s where you ought to start. Everything is has been laid out for you to take potshots at.
The problem is that very few people are who disagree with us are willing to read half of the thread’s contents, so they walk into the conversation ignorant and then they stay ignorant.
Of the few people who both disagree with the positions presented and who read the full post, even fewer of them are willing to try shooting it down, and the people who do try to shoot it down fail when they realize the arguments they presented have already been dismantled in the post they are trying to shoot down.
People link that thread because it has everything on our positions in regards to Mercy. It is the end-all-be-all.
When you outright admit to attempting to silence us via flagging, and when you have arguments partially comprised of or founded upon generalizations, labels, and personal attacks, you can expect us to take it personally.
I have yet to see you actually take a position in regards to Mercy. Everything I have seen from you is more of an attack on us than it is an opinion on the issue at hand.
If that were the case, we wouldn’t be replying to you, would we?
But just a second ago, you were complaining about how we were being too “aggressive”.
The only thing I don’t understand about “fun Mercy” vs “not fun Mercy” is that it all ends up going back to the Q. How is pressing Q one time and not doing anything afterward more fun than (even if you consider it boring) free flying around doing whatever for 12 seconds? Base Mercy is the same…cept Blizzard turned her post-rework mobility bug into a feature.
Basically, how is Mass Rez more fun than Valkyrie???
Because you feel like you have made an impact on the game and mass res is something different from your base kit.
Valk is “press Q to do what u were just doing but with flight”
Case in point:
Deal, we’ll stop being mean if you stop being unreasonable and selfish about your character
Deal, we’ll stop being “unreasonable” when she has an impactful ult and is fun to play.
She already has both of those, so stop?
I’m detecting another opportunity…
She is not fun and her ult is the 2nd least impactful ult in the game (after widow. t scales with her skill)
In fairness, there is Photon Barrier.
In all honesty I, as a symm/mercy main, find photon barrier much more play-making and impactful ult than valkyrie
Kettle, meet pot
I mean you sound exactly like I did when you called photon barrier boring, the other guy doesn’t and now you see why fun is subjective
do i search “fun” in that thread or something idk what your reply means
Oh no, don’t misunderstand me. I think it’s one of the most boring ults to use alongside valkyrie. The difference between the 2 is that photon barrier actually has impact
which is also subjective because pros and a ton of streamers have stated how impactful valk is
Yep. It’s very impactful for a basic ability.
Hello, Amp It Up.