I have perused these forums for ages now, and not many of the arguments I have seen that are pro-quickplay role queue hold up to scrutiny. “What do you mean?” I hear you say? Welll! I’m glad I pretended that you asked! Let’s go through every single one and shoot it down!
Also, I feel the need to say that this is going to be a LONG post. If you haven’t the stomach for a good few paragraphs, I recommend avoiding this one. You have been warned.
"The 2-2-2 composition is the best way to win."
Perhaps, but metas change and “the best way to win” isn’t always on everyone’s mind. To me, you could literally make this same argument about GOATS composition, and everyone would lose their minds. But, somehow, with the 2-2-2 lock, it’s held up like the holy grail? Not everyone plays competitively, and thus a team composition that’s considered the most efficient way to play shouldn’t be forced on the entire playerbase.
"Well, the alternative is having DPS stacks. Want that?"
I’d take DPS stacks over Blizzard literally forcing a team composition, yes. If people DPS stack, just find a way around that. I’ve been in plenty of quick play games where teams that DPS stacked got annihilated.
I recall several games where the enemy team were too aggressive, and all chose a DPS, so we switched to tanks, went behind them and annihilated them. Flanking, tank stacking, forcing the enemy team into a chokepoint. There’s more to tactics than JUST the role you play, or are you gonna tell me that Junkrat and Widowmaker serve the same purpose because they’re both DPS?..
"Well, playing in a DPS stack as a support character is hard, too!"
Then… just leave the game? Yes, I can understand why that would be irritating but, for God’s sake, you act as if you have absolutely no agency in your own life. If you find yourself in such a situation, REMOVE yourself from it. Some people enjoy DPS stacking and find it fun or even hilarious. If you don’t like playing that way, just find another game where it’s not happening. Who are you to tell them how to play the game?
Also, all these comments that just say “better than dps stacking lolz” act as if DPS-stacking happens every single game. You see more DPS players on teams that play more offensively, and less on teams that play defensively. I speak as someone who’s played this game for at least a year, and DPS-stacking doesn’t happen as often as you think it does. Even when it does, they aren’t totally unbeatable and, I’m sorry, but anyone who thinks they are is just a bad loser.
"Hey, role-stacking is the reason we have GOATS comp!"
Indeed, and here I will give credit to the pro-2-2-2 crowd. GOATS comp did seem to be annoying and genuinely impossible to defeat, so I can understand why having a set team composition would prevent that issue. But, instead of forcing a team composition on the rest of the community, why not just ban that particular composition in the league and in competitive? It’s not like that’d be difficult for Blizzard to do.
"Role-stacking would still happen, though, and it’s still abusing the game mechanics.
Is it? Is it really? Let’s analyse that for a second, because you could say the same of people who play Doomfist or Brigitte, making use of Brigitte’s disruptive potential and Doomfist’s general irritating… well, everything. When such mechanics are abused, said characters are eventually nerfed or altered when enough people complain about it.
The 2-2-2 lock is not comparable to this, because there’s a difference between changing something so it cannot be abused and literally forcing people to simply stop doing it. The 2-2-2 lock is on the same level as just removing Doomfist or Brigitte from the game. Blizzard knew that they couldn’t change something as fundamental as the role system, so instead they just forced players to interact with it a certain way. If you don’t see the issue with that, I pity you.
I genuinely do not believe that role-stacking is abusing the game mechanics. Sorry, but it just isn’t. The hero limit makes it so no role is too repetitive and, even if role-stacking occurs, there’s ways around it. I found the best way to get through a role-stack was to reverse-role stack. DPS-stacks don’t fare well against tank-stacking, especially if you pull out a mix of off-tanks and main tanks. There’s more ways to get around an issue than just banning it completely. If anything, that just causes even more issues.
"Wait, how would removing role stacks cause more issues?"
Because, now, people are being forced to play the game a certain way, which is not at all what Overwatch is nor what it should be. What’s the point of having a team-based shooter than relies on cooperation if your particular brand of cooperation is Pigeon-holed from the get-go? Players will no longer win based off of their own skill and wits, but because the composition made it easier for them, and some people will lose their preferred compositions and strategies altogether, which extends far beyond the realm of GOATS and role-stacking.
"Look, everyone hated it when the one hero limit was implemented, and they eventually decided that it was a good idea."
I’ll grant you that, imaginary voice in my head I’m pretending to argue with, because it’s true. The no hero limit was ridiculous, and limiting the amount of each hero on a team to one was a smart move that encouraged players to use teamwork more efficiently. The difference is that was a fundamental part of the game that was, from a technical and practical perspective, bad. The fact that team compositions aren’t set allows for flexibility. The ability to switch between roles so your tactical approach can shift on the fly.
Having your tactics severely limited by a composition lock from the get-go destroys that, and so basically gives you less options. You could argue the same was the case with the no hero limit, but the difference is that every single hero in Overwatch is designed to be played a different way, meaning that a Reinhardt player is gonna be doing a different thing than an Orisa player, even though they’re both tanks. So no. The 2-2-2 lock and the hero limit are not comparable at all.
"Wait, what’s all this talk about tactics? I thought you said not everyone’s playing to win?"
Yes, imaginary voice who I’m having a a strange urge to call “Garry”, so perhaps I’ll re-phrase that statement. Not everyone is playing COMPETITIVELY. Hence the reason that quick play and competitive play are considered separate modes. Everyone likes to win, and plays the game to do so, of course, but competitive mode actually has penalties for not winning, and there’s more tension. The mode is literally designed to require quite a bit of dedication, whereas quick play does not.
Quick play is more for casuals, who don’t have the time to dedicate to competitive play and might be doing other things between their Overwatch gametime. Look at me. I play Warhammer II, Killing Floor 2, Oxygen Not Included, Halo Reach, House Pa-I mean nothing. Not everyone wants to play to compete. They play to win, sure, but would you approach a friendly football match with your friends with the same mindset as you would approach a professional game?
"Maybe you should get good enough to play competitive, then?"
Piss off, Garry! I’m perfectly skilled!
"Look, isn’t quick play just a training grounds for competitive?"
No, it’s not, and players that think this way infuriate me. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but a majority of Overwatch players don’t usually touch competitive play and would rather play no-sweat games where their rank isn’t on the line, and before you say “the forums are filled with competitive players”, I’d remind you that a staggering majority of Overwatch players probably don’t use the forums because gaming is a hobby, not a bloody sport, and they’re probably doing other things. Like, y’know, working? Or going to school? College? Masturb-Nothing…
"But… the forums ARE filled with competitive players."
Well, now that 2-2-2 and role queue have been implemented, they’re actually not. The forums have been flooded with people complaining about how crap they are and voicing their shock at finding out their game has had a gigantic, fundamental part of their games altered. For what it’s worth, that statement is incorrect.
"Look, trickle-down balance has been proven to work, so why-"
Uhh, no it hasn’t. Trickle-down anything has been proven to be a terrible idea. Even trickle-down economics, which is what the phrase is based off of, has never worked. The idea that the playing-style of the most skilled competitives should somehow be used as a mechanism to find out what needs changing and what stays the same is like calling a democratic vote and removing nuclear reactors because one fifth of the actual voters said it was evil. How on Earth is it a good idea to make decisions for the entire community based on what the minority wants?
"Because the competitive players push the characters to their limits and show their maximum capabilities! They’re the most extreme example!"
Okay? An anti-armour tank is the most extreme example of a motorised vehicle. Does that mean all motorised vehicles should have titanium armour so bullets don’t go through them?
"…That was a really odd and abstract example."
It was, wasn’t it?.. Look, the point is, and car and a tank might fall under the same category, as do competitive play and quick play. But adding titanium armour to a car would make it too heavy to move because it’s DESIGNED for a different PURPOSE. Yes, quick play has the same characters, the same mechanics and same assets as competitive play, but they’re being used for different things! The same rules should not apply because competitive players and casual players work within a different atmosphere, with a different overall goal and a VERY different play-style. Trickle-down balance doesn’t always work because the players at the bottom will be playing differently than the ones at the top.
"Why are we even having this discussion? Quick Play classic is in the arcade, go play that."
Why? Why you ask, Garry? Because I’m insane. Because I’m balls-to-the-wall insa-Oh, you meant the discussion about the 2-2-2 lock. Right…
Yes, quick play classic is in the arcade, but for how much longer? No limits was put in the arcade and it slowly disappeared. Yes, again, those two aren’t comparable, but nothing that’s in the arcade stays in the arcade forever, and Blizzard has given us no confirmation that classic quick play will be there permanently. Admittedly, I think it probably will be there permanently, but plenty of people hate the new quick play and long for the old days, so “probably” isn’t good enough. Wanna alienate a huge portion of your playerbase, Blizzard? 'Cause this is how you alienate a huge portion of your playerbase…
"Look, I get it. Change is hard."
Change is hard, yes. Forced change? That the community was pretty divided over? MANDATING a certain play-style? That’s harder, because it’s silly, poorly thought-out and flat-out WRONG.
"How is it wrong?! It’ll make the game so much easier to balance!"
Yes, by KILLING what made it special! The balance used to be based around the fact that every single hero was designed to be played differently, so Blizzard had to make adjustments to them individually that would generally apply well to them regardless of who’s playing them or how they’re being played! Now, all Blizzard has to do is balance each hero based around how they’re played in a 2-2-2 composition, meaning that every tank, every healer, every bloody DPS could eventually end up being played the exact same bloody way because the composition WOULD STILL WORK!!!
Don’t you see? That uniqueness, the fact every character has their own variables, is what makes Overwatch special! The fact that every single hero has a different set of abilities and a different overall function! Tracer’s meant to blip around and harass enemy players, Reinhardt is meant to stay with the team and protect them, Genji’s meant to flank and pick players off, Orisa’s meant to provide both suppression and shielding, Mercy’s meant to heal her teammates and buff their damage, Lucio’s meant to give his team more mobility while also building up their health.
Every single character was unique and special! That’s why they all had to be balanced individually! But, now? Blizzard can just alter them depending on how well they fit the composition, instead of looking at each hero on a case-by-case basis. Genji might become faster ‘cause he can’t separate from his team without leaving the only other DPS behind alone. Mercy might be nerfed because she can heal the entire team and doesn’t rely on the other healer. Reinhardt might have his shield’s hit points lessened because two DPS’ aren’t enough to destroy it.
I could go on and on and on some more, because Blizzard had the hang of it when they were balancing each character around their own personal function and play-style. Now? They’re gonna be doing it within the confines of the composition. They’ve set themselves a crappy rule book, and trapped each character’s unique qualities in it like an annoying Fly.
"Listen, if not anything else, the 2-2-2 lock encourages players to work together."
Of course it doesn’t. Even with it implemented, players will still run off on their own. They’ll still chase down enemies relentlessly. They’ll still separate from their teammates and just totally ignore them. How does the 2-2-2 lock encourage teamwork? Because the composition works well when players DO work together? Alright, but what if they don’t? Because, believe it or not, that happens.
People will choose healers like Brigitte or Lucio and just go after enemy players and leave their comrades without healing, Roadhogs and D.Vas will just abandon the players they’re meant to be drawing fire from, players will leave their healers unprotected, players will let their snipers get left behind, they’ll leave the game, they’ll do their own thing, they might just find one of those twirly bins and screw about for the entire game.
The 2-2-2 lock won’t change that. But it will make it so that players can’t change role when someone in said role isn’t playing it properly!
"Right, okay. Yes, 2-2-2 and role queue aren’t perfect, but it’s still a good idea."
Is it, Garry? If one person finds that fish fingers are tastier than potato chips, wouldn’t you call him a knobhead if he demanded that everyone else eat the same way? If someone who read Lord of the Rings thinks it’s the best book series ever, would you not say he was crossing the line by forcing his attitude on someone who’s read A Song of Ice and Fire or Harry Potter? Hell, every politician believes that their view of running the country is more efficient than anybody else’s, but we refuse to let them force it on the rest of the nation, don’t we?
But, somehow, when it comes to this particular discussion, people who love the 2-2-2 lock act as if the way THEY think the game is best played should be mandated, but see no issue with that attitude? Well, bollocks to that, I say! I may have received this game as a Christmas gift, but someone in my family payed money so I could play it, and I’m sure there are many people out there who payed for it themselves! What right have you, Garry, to tell myself and any others to play it a certain way solely because that’s how YOU play it?!
"Because so many people agree that it IS the best way to play…"
And those people have learned that they are the minority. The forums have been flooded with people who demand to know why the fundamentals have changed, why they are being FORCED into a certain playing style without any say-so! Why they now must wait ten minutes to play a six-minute game! Why their agency has been snatched from them! And what if the majority agreed upon it, I ask? Is freedom of thought and speech not important?! Are the choices of the supposed minority to be ignored?! There is neither an excuse nor a reason to force such change, and I shall not, as long as I play, accept such an idea!
"Wow… alright. I guess the 2-2-2 lock isn’t as good as I thought…"
There, there, Garry. No human concept or action is without fault. If only everyone could admit such a thing. However, Garry, you are simply an abstract idea to represent the opposing side of an argument. With all these bases covered, Garry, you will now cease to exist… mainly because you never existed and your supposed “existence” was within my head! But nonetheless.
Oh, you’re still here. Well, if you made it to the end of this MONUMENTALLY long post then you probably deserve a medal! So congratulations and thank you! Those that didn’t, and have rushed to the comment section? Stick to your jokes, jests and cherry-picking 'cause it’s all you have left. 
Either way, hopefully this has shed some light on the anti-2-2-2 crowd’s main grievances with this whole mess, and has explained why the lock is a horrible idea.
