how can one role be overpowered? It doesn’t make sense. Overpowered in what sense? Both teams get 1 tank 2 dps and 2 supports.
6v6 masters/gm meta is 2/2/2. FIRMLY. That’s the most objective and only real way to investigate “power level of roles”.
And it’s 2/2/2. Each role is equally necessary. Throwing the balance off for your team results in a lower chance to win.
Thus, no role is weaker or stronger than the others. Not that the concept even makes sense to begin with, because there is utterly no aspect of the game where roles are competing with each other (outside of exactly and only 6v6 open queue)
A lot of these are just opinions. Valid ones to have, and I share some of them myself, but the title makes it seem like you’re trying to present these all as facts rather than opinions.
The difference is that one player controls all the pieces in chess. If it were a team game where one person plays the queen and 8 have to play pawns, that’d be an issue.
No, the rule of the forum is that there will always be some smug know it all nerd with a PhD in OW Studies that will make some list of The Hard Truths that the lesser beings can’t accept.
Then once their ego has been stroked enough they will f off again.
I’m not interested in proving you wrong. I don’t even know how you would prove a subjective opinion to be wrong. Plus I said I agree with some of the opinions you expressed, so what, you want me to prove myself to be wrong as well? I’m confused what it is you actually want from me here.
No, that’s still tank role. It will always be the tank role until there’s a fundamental rework of the systems in Overwatch.
Generally correct. But there are times where some heroes really curve the balance of the game, Brigitte was one of them.
Damage role is the hardest. There’s a ton of evidence for this including the complete absence of the role from competitive play were it not for role queue. Not much has changed to prevent that from happening, unfortunately.
Because the limitations of the Tank role prevent any other composition.
This is subjective, as a case for tank (in 5v5) could be made for strongest and most important role.
This I agree with, but the balance team definitely deserves it’s share of criticism for the decisions they’ve made, especially concerning new character releases and the continued ignoring of the hitscan nonsense we have currently.
Then those characters you speak of aren’t broken, because we definitely have problem children in the game’s current state that certainly are broken.
Everything else on your list I agree with, especially the last one.
Absolutely. Zero weaknesses. Yet no one queues for it.
Too many alts foe this to be true.
True and false.
They balance their game for casuals around the top 1%.
The game isn’t meant to be competitive, balanced, fair, or fun. This isn’t OW 1. It’s nothing more than a cash grab meant to keep you playing long enough
I understand exactly why I lose.
49% of the time - it’s poor matchmaking due to alts and smurfs. The Genji with 100 hours rolls my team unopposed.
30% of the time - It’s me
20% of the time - My teammates
1% of the time - the match was balanced and the other team just played better.
I assume this won’t be popular, but I play in Plat. It’s a haven for new accounts. I check every match, and there is invariably one or two that are low hour, low endorsement, original icon accounts.
OW is just a casual game now. Once upon a time it was competitive.
I don’t know if you can say “it’s not close”. I agree it has a huge influence over the game, I don’t think it’s drastically out of line with other roles. And I also don’t think it’s a function of the role being overpowered as much as it is the purpose of the role. Tank is the same in that it has a huge influence on the match. No matter how weak you made support, it would still have a significant impact on the match flow unless you made the role entirely useless. I don’t see this as a balance problem with the role so much as a function of the role. It’s true in other games like this too.
Depends. True 1-tricking, yes. But some people also go way too wide with their hero pools which also holds you back. You can’t play everything well. You also need to play more than 1 thing. IMO 3 is the optimal amount of heroes to know per role. Not that knowing 4 would be bad, but if you know like 7 that’s probably too wide of a hero pool for most people.
I will add that most “broken” heroes aren’t actually broken. The ones that are truly broken aren’t always the ones people perceive as being broken. And this is a big reason why what you say is true here. Because sometimes people will look at a hero that is objectively fine or even underpowered and go “yeah that’s busted” when it is not in reality. People conflate broken and annoying A LOT (see Sombra).