you missing the point, sometimes I just like to play with a group of friends and have a chat, yes we like to win, but not the main function of what we are doing, The locked in character selection prevent us from have ‘fun’
I don’t agree with you, but I see your points. and I’m definitely not going to break you down point by point. but this quote … you have the same option. Once again, people will tell you, your way is still available to play the game you paid for. If you keep it populated, it becomes permanent like MH did. The reason no limits is rarely there is because nobody played it. It’s fine that you dislike 222. And I’m not going to tell you you’re wrong, you aren’t… but you also pretend that 5 and one didn’t happen that often. In Gold it does… maybe you’re higher in level than me… that’s fine, I care little about your anecdotal experience compared to mine… . All I want is a main healer, and a shield to hide behind… and because I can’t do both… I lost too many games. And now I almost always have that.
1 Like
Your personal anecdote is not a refutation of the argument.
They are. And they are banning all subsequent composition that abuse the same strategy
Laughably bad argument and not a refutation
People were forced to play the game a certain way before 2/2/2. This is what Overwatch has and probably always will be.
What’s the point of having a team-based shooter that relies on cooperation if your particular brand of cooperation is picking a 4th DPS and ignoring your team?
Your arguments can be easily used against you by just changing some words
So how is 2/2/2 different?
I assert this is true for role stacking as well
You being infuriated doesn’t make it go away. Many, many people see quickplay as this.
And who are you to say it isn’t? I say it is. Prove me wrong
Your arguments here are just bad. No need to go through them.
I think the word you are searching for is “bad” or “ineffective”
Every single patch is a “forced change”.
You have not shown how it is wrong. You merely stated your opinion
I don’t think you understand what you are talking about at this point.
You could say that hero limits killed what made it special. You are actually complaining about balancing being easier. You for some reason think this will make the game more homogeneous when we have no reason to think that
2/2/2 doesn’t get rid of this
It actually does. You just saying “it doesn’t” is the most laughably terrible argument I’ve read in awhile.
My games have had far, far more teamwork now. This is my personal anecdote, but many people agree with me too!
That happened before 2/2/2, not a valid argument
More terrible arguments. Not even worth going through
It’s the developers choice my friend. It’s not about what we think it’s about what the developers think.
It didn’t. Sorry but it just didn’t. It was pretty ineffectual
3 Likes
You cannot simply “leave” the game without consequences. Even in Quick Play, your Endorsement rating and earned XP are penalized for leaving repeatedly.
These are not as harsh as a ban like you would receive in Competitive Play, but saying that simply leaving is solution is dishonest at best. At worst, this is some kind of weird political agenda, as punctuated by the unnecessary mockery of “safe space”.
1 Like
You presume it will make the game more enjoyable for them, I’m telling you that this is only your assumption based on personal preferences. There should be enough posts on this forum containing “I only play support” “I only dps” and the like for you to realize this, that people are not like how you describe yourself.
Forcing people to accommodate? It is what has been happening since the game launched up until this very moment for most of us. It is an issue that role-queue ended for us. “Play-style” is a vague phrase you imply to make it seem that role-queue is bad, but what “play-style” are others ruining for you by picking a role they want to play?
I’ll ignore this since you concede the point I was making directly afterwards…
Again, the choices Overwatch presented was “play a role you don’t want to play” or “lose the match.” This isn’t a peer-pressure issue and it isn’t an issue agency. It is about choices the game presented you with that were not fun, choices that had a bad outcome for either decision.
In the end, it DID make me leave the game. I only came back for role-queue, I know it isn’t exactly what you are talking about, but it is the same suggestion really… that “if you don’t like it, get out” mentality is the same whether it is on the scope of a single match or overall. Especially since nearly every match was like this. And you wouldn’t feel all that great of you had a problem occurring daily in the game and I told you “well you should simply leave the game” or “you should simply leave that match and wait for the next one that will have the same issue.”
impossible…
irrelevant
I literally cannot think of another solution aside from the one they took. You literally don’t care to provide them alternative suggestions.
You realize I have to when your rationality for why something is bad for the game = how much you hate that thing, right? My response was me telling you that it is a bad argument
Because it didn’t go anywhere, it simply didn’t become the primary game mode. You can’t say the opposite was true before role-queue. We didn’t have another option, you still do. It makes a lot of this silly because you aren’t actually complaining that you can’t play how you want, you are complaining that the style of play you are describing isn’t going to be meta or viewed as the main playstyle, that you have been regulated to an arcade mode. It isn’t something I can find sympathy for. If role-queue always existed but only as an arcade mode, I might have went to play that instead of quitting the game. The point is that both options are available and I don’t really see the point in complaining that the one you like isn’t the main one that gets to be front and center.
Citation needed, on both claims.
Not where I was going, but I’d love to hear this, go on…
And you bring up politics and religion a lot for someone with this objection.
They aren’t when you have better metrics. I acknowledged this from the beginning and stated that it is the best we have and I would love to see examples leaning the other way. As I expected, they really don’t exist. When I tell you that you can’t get around this hole you are digging, all you say is “I can do what I please and you cannot stop me.” It is laughable.
The majority of the forum is against it? That is a claim I don’t agree with, but if I did it wouldn’t matter. It would be easily explainable. Forums are where people go to complain. The game literally tells you that any feedback you have is to be brought here and links you out of the client. When it comes to feedback, you get more response from people who dislike a feature than like it, no matter what the numbers point to in actual polling. That is because if you are content with something, you are less likely to feel a need to express that than if you dislike it. This is just proven psychology.
We call things like this “anecdotal evidence.” Threads are started by individuals. If you wanted to argue that an individual feels the need to start a thread about this every couple days, I wouldn’t disagree, but it doesn’t sound as good.
Gonna stop you there, because that isn’t the case here. Nobody is being seduced by the idea of queuing up for specific roles and can’t wait to try it. It is out now and we DO like it. That is where you are obviously objectively wrong. This isn’t some “you think you want it but you don’t” thing where we are seduced and will only hate it when we play it, your prediction is a few weeks late and we love playing it.
Now, implications? You haven’t shown anything that we can expect to hold true, you mostly say things like “bad for game” which people unsurprisingly disagree with.
You misunderstand. I know what logic is and how it does (or doesn’t) apply to this thread. What I was saying is a phrase like “laws of logic and rationality” doesn’t apply to anything we are saying and that it is a vacuous phrase you threw out thinking it would carry some weight in the discussion.
lulz
My point was that this can be said for ANY economic system because implementation is where people mess up, not the concepts. There isn’t anything wrong with the concept if it is shown to be implemented poorly or, in this case, stray from the concepts during implementation.
An economic system discussing how goods are obtained or distributed has never killed anyone. You are talking about authoritarianism, which is a separate subject and will and has existed in any economic system, capitalism included. We could have a long long discussion if I cared to about how those numbers aren’t representative of an economic philosophy and were largely committed by regimes that didn’t fit the definition of the term you are criticizing, as I could point out that this style of authoritarianism exists in other economic systems like capitalism because it is something that exists aside from an economic framework, not because of it. What would that get you for this discussion though? How would me having to get into an economics debate in anyway make your case stronger or weaker when the analogy is so freakin weak.
Again, you don’t really know what you are talking about. It is a self-inflicted set of rules not unlike the ones jews follow in regards to what they eat. When you ask the typical muslim about inflicting Shariah on others, it is going to be met with confusion because that isn’t how they see it their choice to live that way. I’m not really interested in the inevitable examples you have of authoritarian regimes taking a voluntary code far enough to apply it to others because that isn’t what you are describing when you say something as vague as “Shariah Law.” I’m as far from religious as it gets and even I know that. You are complaining about how it can be implemented, not the philosophy itself… again.
Insert another irrelevant claim. We got all the time in the world.
You think that makes one better than the other? That is just your framing, not an objective stance on how these things came about. In both examples, we have a ‘rule’ being ‘added’ to the game. This isn’t a removal vs addition thing. Both additions to the game removed some unique aspect, yes. You only really care about that in regards to the rule you dislike though.
You are the one who was discussing comp creativity as if it were an issue of player freedom. That is what I am doing in turn in highlighting the freedom role-queue brought us. It is no more sentimental than your rationality.
“Don’t play like you want, play like I do.” Another crappy response.
Thankfully Blizzard disagrees. And really they always have. That is why the select screen tells you when you need more tanks and supports. Just like it used to when you double selected the same hero before that rule change was added too.
Well I suspect Blizzard also disagrees with you that Quick Play isn’t a stepping stone to Competitive. It does make sense in that context.
Leave, every match where you don’t think you’ll get to play your desired role. If comp, take the -50 SR. None of this solved an issue like Role-Queue does.
You are conflating “pride” with “enjoyment.” I get that this isn’t the enjoyable scenario to you, that Blizz made a choice for the enjoyment of some players over others. We’ll just have to see how that works out. At least you have the Arcade option that I didn’t.
But you act like your personal experience is all there is, for the most part. When you talk about “mandatory playstyles” below this, it is always on how your play is mandated… as if it wasn’t regulated for others before this in a way role queue solves. I know you understand this, but you argue as if you don’t.
It isn’t a matter of being unable to stand ones ground, it is a lack of motivation to. You flex to a different role or you lose. There is no gain in being assertive in a lose/lose scenario.
Role queue gave us the freedom to specialize without guilt of letting people down or fear of throwing a match by standing our ground. And you can act like you don’t get it, but I know you do. You may not be able to relate or sympathize, but you do understand from a detached perspective. You can act like a narcissist, but I don’t buy that you don’t understand.
You are missing the “providing solutions” step in the feedback process.
Again, all if these arguments can be used to say that we shouldn’t have a hero limit on duplicate heroes. “Oh noes, my freedom, oh it isn’t always irritating, taking it away is extreme.”.
If you want it, custom games are fun. I spend entire days sometime only in custom with goofy rulesets. The arcade exists too. Blizzard doesn’t want your version of the game as THE standard ruleset, but it isn’t talking it away or your freedom to play it.
Can you just stop pretending like a hidden arcade mode is equivalent to the old competitive mode? Quickplay is for goofing off, those games are nothing like competitive mode. So stop pretending like that’s something we should be happy about.
Not really, but if you think that I doubt I could convince you otherwise.
Did you address the part where literally every quickplay game had 4+ dps?
The balance isn’t the best but quickplay has never been more enjoyable to me since 2016.
1 Like
I’m not gonna say it, but i’m gonna say it.
You insulted me multiple times, made several nasty assumptions about me and through all of this i’m supposed to be the entitled crybaby.
Now read again what you wrote at me (and others) and tell me what part of that wasn’t as condescending and mocking as possible.
You take things a tad TOO personally, are you sure you are fit for having discussions on the internet?
EDIT: huh you deleted the post. Must have struck a nerve.
1 Like
Fun fact: OPs post contains 2931 words, and 16,904 characters.
OP must’ve easily spent over an hour on this post, easily. If not much more.
aye, in re-reading the reply i realized tf2 is among the lightest in this regard. But still, in the competitive scene they do put some limitatons.
Not many, but there are.
uhh quick play classic was already basically confirmed as a permanent arcade entry…
So yeah, whole convo is kinda unnecessary, just go enjoy qp classic if you dislike role q, done.
3 Likes
I could easily say the same then. I think you underestimate what tracking capabilities were implemented from the very beginning.
This is what’s known as a strawman logical fallacy when you create arguments for your opposition usually because those are easier to argue against.
1 Like
No, I know what’s possible, I am not unfamiliar with machine learning tools. The point here is you cannot clearly segregate swapping roles and the impact on SR. I’m sorry, that water is just too muddy.
You are of course free to think otherwise, this is the official position and why its done the way it is.
I’m also no fan of role lock but it’s disingenuous to pretend that it has no benefits. There are pros and cons. More cons in my opinion, but nobody comes to me for development decisions so here we are.
It removes your ability to correct flaws of matchmaking. Players aren’t consistent and neither is matchmaking, so having extra DPS/tank/support can be crucial in balancing out team’s strength.
I’m starting to think the 5 minute plus wait for dps, is making some people lose interest in the game. its 1:30 in the afternoon, dps que is 5 plus minutes, and i keep running into games that dont have enough players, making me wait another 5 plus minutes to get into a game.
- No. 222 was never the “best way to win”. Goats was. 222 takes away extreme, broken comps.
- DPS stacks sucked for the single healer or tank. Its good they’re gone.
- You CANT remove yourself from a 5 stack when you’re in a comp game, your point is invalid. Also, if you find yourself in a 222 comp game and you dont like it, REMOVE yourself from it. QP classic ->
- They cant ban every single broken comp that turns up, they’d be banning comps every week. 222 fixes that.
- Yes, role stacking would still happen. Sometimes rules have to be changed so people “play nice”.
- No. Removing role stacks removes the option to abuse things. It doesnt add more, because the options were always there.
- Less options are good for game balance.
- QP classic is there if you CBA to try to win ->
- QP classic again ->
- The forums have also been flooded with 222 support. That’s how forums work.
- That has nothing to do with 222.
- QP classic will stay there as long as you keep complaining about it, Garry.
- Yes, forced change is hard. It makes you sad and angry, i get it.
- The game is still special. You can still play all the characters. The game was unable to sustain itself with QP classic picking, so they fixed it for the future.
- Yes, 222 DOES force people to work together, because they need to play their role TOGETHER. Healers gonna heal, yo.
- Things are seldom perfect, but 222 is at least a step forward.
- Flooded with support for 222 aswell.
- 222 is far better than i thought. The game has new life now.
None of your points were any good, but thanks for the long post.
I think this post summarizes the problem well:
1 Like