From where did you just quote this?
I can’t click anything.
Edit: From the competitive section of the forums. Got it, sorry.
Thank you @Andough
Post showing the quote
My Mistake sir. An utmost apology
No, it’s real.
Oh wow, plot twist…
I thought is was fake, as my dev tracker didn’t have this post, but now it’s just updated. Once again. Apologies to OP!
big deal
most people who hate it are in masters/GM
encouraging diversity by restricting hero choices? are these blizzard employees trolls… do they even play the game?
maybe if the heroes were balanced people would play other ones… but no… need to keep adding dumb hero after dumb hero and forgetting about the old ones
I’m a little bummed, honestly. I liked hero pools, although I fully understand why others didn’t and why they’re restricting it to Master+.
It’s the only way to get breaks from certain heroes that are consistently the most picked heroes, and you can rarely ever get a game without them. Reinhardt, Moira, and McCree are the biggest culprits, at least in plat and Diamond. They’re pretty much mandatory in every match, and so having them banned was a breath of fresh air because that was the only way we got any variety from these.
Balance decisions rarely ever focus on those ranks, though. It’s (rightfully) heavily weighted for higher ranks and OWL. So we’re sort of an afterthought. Hero pools gave us a little break from it, although playing “off-meta” is more acceptable in our ranks.
I’m just kinda bummed because I don’t see their being any break from these heroes, and I doubt any balance changes will be made because these heroes are dominant in lower ranks and not so much in higher. 
Probably just me. Fully supportive that they want to remove it because I know it likely is a damper on other people’s enjoyment. I actually enjoyed it, so…c’est la vie. Back to always having a Rein vs. Rein, Moira vs. Moira, and McCree vs. McCree, every match again. :<
Also hero pools is based off OWL pick rates
Much would’ve preferred a Pick and Ban System but even then I doubt we have enough heroes in the game for it to feasibly work and there’d have to be some way to dictate who gets to ban and when, or maybe just have the Devs be proactive and get rid of Meta Defining heroes quickly if they prove to be broken, which is probably what should’ve been done with Brig 1.0 and GOATS from the beginning.
Just one more reason for higher rank players to buy new accounts and play in lower ranks…
But they will be based on ladder when OWL finishes this year.
I presume they will alternate, while OWL is up, they will base on it, when it’s down it goes back to ladder.
Hero pools just don’t make sense with a roster this small. For comparison LOL has a roster of 148 with 6 available bans. It’s ridiculous no matter how you spin it. Overwatch hero bans 1/6th of the roster from play. Which would be like LOL banning 24 characters from play. Just think about that. Please correct my math if i’m wrong because i didn’t spend a lot of time on it but i’m sure it’s close.
Edit: It’s 1/8th, my mistake. Still though.
The amount of smurfs about to run rampant on the ladders, its just… you do not even know. I cannot even imagine how bad the lower end of the ladder is about to get.
Well, some people want variation on the ladder, and watchers on OWL, specially because of stale Meta reasons.
They combo’d it to include “Top tier play” of Ladder, and OWL pickrates
It’s why despite Moira being used more overall before she was banned, it showed Ana as the most used because of Masters/ GM being thrown into the numbers as well
And there are fewer OWL players than Master/ GM, it changes the numbers by a large margin
OK then keep it for OWL, but it’s one sixth of the roster dude, is it really okay to do that to players on ladder?
Edit: Oh pardon me, my math is wrong, it’s one eighth. Still though it would be like league banning 19 champions. It’s crazy.
I’m not GM or Masters, so it’s not like my feedback maters now, but keep giving Devs feedback, maybe they could make it optional through a voting system or something, like if 6 or more players in the match agree with it, go with it, if less, then just don’t go with it.
I mean if it has to stay it’s just too many, no matter how you look at it. The math says its immoderate.
I’m not worried about it anymore since it doesn’t affect me. I think it was cooler to watch when it was based on OWL picks indeed.
I’m more concerned about balance changes now.
But from what I read people say that GM/Masters are also meta slaves, so maybe they find it’s okay to have variety at the cost of restrictions, or maybe not, I can’t tell.