Do you think 3-2-1 will be implemented?

This poll has 462 voters and the majority of it is dislikes. I’ve also spoken with players in game and they tend to not like it.

On top of that, I’ve looked at what my reddit Syms had to say. Most of use disliked it because it made Sym weaker.

Also most of the comments I see about 1-3-2 are generally negative.

By the way, you are asking if I think it would be implemented. Not if others like it or not. Even if the majority like it that does not mean they would add it.

1 Like

I disagree.

I thin youre so used to dps having 0 impact in the game that in 132 where they have impact it feels overwhelming which you deem as overpowered

Hrmm that’s a poll, I wouldn’t say that’s a “pro-2-2-2 thread” which is what I was comparing, I’ve seen posts expressly against 1-3-2 which didn’t have nearly as many upvotes is what I was talking about. That said I (like most other folks I imagine) didn’t click through on the poll because 1) it’s against forum rules which is probably why the thread was reported to the point its content is hidden and 2) I don’t trust user posted links that aren’t to YouTube or Reddit.

That said I clicked through to see, if we consider the votes in that poll along with the pro-1-3-2 thread I posted then as few as 192 people and as many as potentially 313 are either fine with or in full support of 1-3-2. Those aren’t negligible numbers.

Of course, the fact that so many people reported in the poll that they don’t want 1-3-2 isn’t negligible either, it’s a good point. Judging this disparity offhand I don’t think it’s clear where the community in general really stands based on either strawpolls or random forum posts that come and go, this really calls for a more official and direct polling by Blizzard themselves through the game client, to really gauge general player opinion.

Though I agree, that might not be a major factor in Blizzard’s decision-making on whether or not to implement it, though I think it might be a helpful consideration, especially since they went to all the trouble to let us test it out. I wouldn’t be surprised if the devs are as conflicted and split about it as the community, which is why they probably made the experimental card in the first place.

that’s entirely untrue because heros like rien can completely negate anything a dps can do. skill based dps heros no longer have impact anymore

oh the did a reveal and it launches in the summer, haven’t heard about the beta yet

so in essence I don’t agree with how powerful tanks and supports are currently. everyone sees this as

“you want dps to rule the game” or "you want tanks and supports to be trash
and that just isn’t true, but I do want dps to be able to have impact on metas and the game, which currtently they don’t

second I don’t agree with nerfing the usable dps to make other dps usable when healing is whats keeping everything but burst dps out of the game. essentially its supports that created the issue, and dps are suffering for it and I don’t like that.

I don’t like the “casual catering” that balances based on feelings

and I don’t like that heros that take significantly more skill to use than the rest of the cast get worse the higher up the ladder you go. (meaning even if the players are better the hero is worse because other less skilled heros render them useless because of the state of the game.

every decision they’ve made along the way feels like its exactly the opposite of what I want, and 132 fixed a lot of that for me

I do not think a pro 2-2-2 thread is a good comparison truly. There are players who dislike 2-2-2 but hate 1-3-2 more. There are also players who dislike both 2-2-2 and 1-3-2 because they still impose a role lock.

Sadly I do not think threads are good either, since forum users are only a small portion of the playerbase.

It depends on what data they are after. Whether that be queue time lengths or who would be the most picked tank.

In the end Blizz will do what is best for OW, regardless of how many players like or dislike it.

I played Zen in the open during the height of dive.

I KNOW what over powered flankers look like.


I would think no, seeing how it warps the game into an unrecognizable state. Frankly if they do make the change, then the game just isn’t worth wasting time on, and this person who queues tanks and supports won’t be queuing any more at all.

I realize everyone’s used to seeing this sentiment, and no one probably even believes it, but if those of us who are against imbalanced team comps (meaning the literal number of players per role in this case), then it will go through and we’ll lose the game we love.

1 Like

Not quite…

That comment was from before 1-3-2 in response to someone saying they should do 1-3-2. There was one after its release indicating that feedback has been negative, largely, I believe on a thread saying that 1-3-2 was a good idea

Try using the dev tracker. Jeff outright said he didn’t think it was likely that 1-3-2 would make it to live because the feedback had been “polarized” but also very negative.

DPS are the least team-reliant role. If there’s synergy, most of them are less impactful because they don’t use it as effectively. Now, they just get to kill the supports easily to feel good about their skill. Solved!

I really didn’t know this was a problem for anyone, even before the healing nerfs.

By adding so much damage flying around that healers are useless. Solved!

Absolutely wrong. Supports can affect the meta heavily (look at brig and lucio in GOATS, or Ana’s synergy with Rein), and DPS can also have an effect. However, it’s a bit blunted because there are so many of them that there’s often a replacement, and they often don’t define team fights like tanks do. In fact, I’d say that tanks dictate meta even more now, because they end up feeding if you don’t keep with them all the time.

1 Like

It wasn’t unless you were in GM+ and playing the meta, and even there, it wasn’t really healing so much as the combined barriers, healing, CC, and escape abilities preventing singular heroes from landing kills (basically, kills required strategizing and teamwork). :man_shrugging: But, lotta folks here like to pretend that they play the meta and that whatever’s going on there impacts their gameplay, even though healing and barriers were realistically never big issues at the macro scale for people not playing the meta

its not going to and at this rate even if it was it wont save the game in how bad things have gotten aimbotters plague the game and pretty much taken over and i feel like they dont care about the QOL to be honest like 3/2/1 was alrady considered a major fail and they have gotten mostly negative responses

1 Like

I enjoy it but I don’t believe it fits the spirit of what overwatch has become.

Maybe if they had tried it in the beginning. I’d just rather them give the tanks some of the buffs seen there.

No it’s not… Damage have plenty of options depending on what the meta tank is (why the meta is dictated by the tanks).

I think we’ll need a lot more heroes available for tanks before that sorta thing comes in. The reason why shields are such a must is due to the enormous threat Damage as a whole pumped out.

As for toning down healing, sure why not. Personally I think that fully stacking healing is a significant problem. Removing/toning this down would enable individual high impact and remove troublesome interactions (ie goats). Just lowering healing however makes supports unimpactful as they don’t have the tools to apply their damage in the same way Damage heroes do as their entire kits are based around it. I’d like Supports to be more or less like whatever name is from Apex, just as threatening as the more damage oriented characters in a fight but not actually responsible for the initiation.

Anything specific? I still find it hilarious that Torb got his shotgun nerfed (I still think it’s cos Jeff got wrecked by some Tor smurf XD).

Who…? I thought it was the opposite in that the most difficult characters are only useable near the top.

I think that if they’re pushing it as an esport then everything should be viable at the very top (ie OWL). If some characters (ie reaper) are an issue anywhere below OWL then they can be tweaked so long as it doesn’t make them unviable at the top. This way the only excuse is you’re not good enough.

No, they can’t really make everything viable at the top anyway. Too many hero interactions, too few people and little time for experimentation after each change. Adding the restriction of keeping the lower ranks within sanity is definitely too much to ask for.

It’s ok if there are some heroes that are only really good at the top, or some that are superseded by someone else at higher ranks. As long as OWL isn’t just mirror match after mirror match, and most of the heroes are playable enough at most ranks, I’m happy with the job they’re doing.

Not in its current state but maybe if they really decided to try and balance the game around it.

Sadly, no.

I think it’s a good concept to fix a currently declining game from horrid queue times, but I feel like this was more just to try to appease players that, “they tried” over a legit effort.

Hi, my poll, so I got a notification for it being linked, here’s a thread heavily against 1-3-2 with no big objection.

1 Like

No heavy objections? What do you mean by that? That no response got more likes than the original post? That’s literally almost every thread created.

No that’s just creating pointless heroes that may as well be deleted. It’s never ending task of course (just look at Dota) but all balance changes should be done with this in mind otherwise it’s just picking favourites, forcing metas and deliberately creating imbalance.