Hero pools:
-take away agency from players
-reduce number of viable comps (meta is not as heavy in lower ranks!)
-Actually promote mirror comps
-no rank based hero bans that are op in that rank and throwpick in another
-no input from players to adjust heroes that repetitively get banned in certain elos
Hero Bans:
-give agency to players
-increase the number of viable comps by banning *op heroes
-Actually promote comp diversity from game to game
-give you a way to “ban” heroes that are op in your rank and require teamwork to take down, and are the root cause for toxicity in solo Q.
-clear statistical input from players that indicates what heroes are problematic and the scale of the problem
Hero pools are a much worse option than Hero bans. The only scenario in which they are better is OWL. Lets examine this:
-Blizzard says they would do more aggressive balancing targeting meta heroes that would naturally cause the meta to shift
-At same time they force hero pools that force the meta to shift? (uh redundant maybe?)
Why would they do this if not for OWL?
By forcing hero pools onto OWL they make OWL games “mandatory” to watch for plebs trying to figure out this week’s “flavor of the week meta comp”. While this in itself might be fun during OWL, it means that the rest of us are STUCK with hero pools when we could have hero bans instead. Hell, doing nothing and doubling down on aggressive balance changes is a better idea than introducing hero pools.
Kaplan explained why they don’t think bans resolve the stale meta issues. The logic was sound, and uncontrolled bans that rotate sound like a fine way to hinder dominant metas.
It’s oh so convenient that this change directly benefits OWL then? I don’t buy into Jeff’s narrative that hero pools are somehow magically better than hero bans, when hero bans are tried and tested option across multiple games.
The only thing you need to do - to not play a meta is form a large-ish group and vote to ban the hero the meta revolves around.
It’s redundant that the Devs say they are going to balance more frequently to shift the meta around, but then the Devs are also going to be banning heroes for us, which is another way to shift the meta around.
a ban meta dependent on the rank you play is a good thing! The only thing you need to do to avoid it in Overwatch is form a somewhat larger group of like minded players and ban a different hero, or alternatively introduce the concept of “voting to keep this hero in game”. It worked well enough in Jane’s games, and it’s only a matter of logistics to introduce it - which could easily be done before the match even starts.
It doesn’t benefit OWL exceptionally more than a hero ban system would.
Also, and I can’t stress this enough, I do not trust this playerbase with agency at all. Every time the devs have tried to maximize agency the playerbase either optimized the fun out of the game or left the tools for agency to rot.
A ban meta is more likely to occur in an organized scenario, than the chaotic ladder (ergo it takes longer to form). If they are already pursuing more aggressive balance, it is redundant.
I trust the playerbase a lot more than the incompetent dev team that has failed at balancing the game repeatedly. What is true at one rank, is false for another rank. You have to give players agency to balance their own rank. A lot of toxicity is produced from Tank’s inability to counter tank busters such as Mei without the help of their team. This is same for supports who can’t deal with doomfist or flankers who can’t deal with Moira. By giving players a chance to ban heroes they can’t deal with effectively without a team you make a solo Q ban meta vs team comp ban meta which is a good thing, since it allows you to play Overwatch the way you want to play it as a player.
If they introduced hero bans, it’d only make a ban meta. Hero switching during matches guarantees this. You would have to remove hero switching, and that wouldn’t even be Overwatch at that point.
I oh so love that in every topic about how “Hero bans are the best options!”, we always go from the hypothesis that players are somewhat these flawless beings that know exactly what is OP and balanced, and that they would always use their ability to ban with the best of intentions, and not all in a biased, selfish or petty manner.
I also love how y’all keep glossing over the little fact that we’re talking about two team of random 6 people agreeing about who to ban before someone gets bored and quit.
You keep going about how “all you need is a large-ish group” without addressing the obvious drawbacks of NEEDING a large-ish group in the first place.
Does Hero Pool need a large-ish group and several minutes of preparation to work, and to rely on all players being meta savvy, strategically minded, and not petty cornsniffers to work? No, which makes it, de facto, the better option.
ofc a ban meta would form. But there would be a different ban meta for solo Q and team Q, and different ranks as well. But ban meta takes time. If they are pursuing an aggressive balancing that targets the meta heroes, it’s not needed. MEta will still exist with hero pools, you’re just limiting diversity and promoting mirror comps otherwise for most ranks that are not thevery top where running something else than meta is still viable.
You guys will find any possible reason to demonize the OWL, anything that may even remotely help it is horrible, no matter the positive impact it has on our own games. It’s amazing.
Not if your goal is to climb, which this community has an obsession with.
Just think about it. Say you and your teammates can’t handle a Gold-tier Pharah, so you all agree to just perma-ban her. Then you end up being the only one to climb to Plat. Great. Now your new teammates just laugh at you for wanting to waste a ban on Pharah. Now you’re stuck trying to beat a Plat Pharah when you couldn’t even handle a Gold one, all the while being surrounded by tougher opponents helping her out.
Makes the whole experience much more miserable if you’re allowed to just purposely avoid what’s giving you a problem until you can’t anymore.
You put more thought in this post than what needs to go into player banning phase. Just copy what DotA did. Each player per team picks a hero to ban, or don’t pick anything. A hero chosen multiple times gets banned and if everyone picked something different, then let a RNG bot pick 2 and the game starts.
And get real, no one is pretending this playerbase is flawless.
And you’re a fool for it. We have actual, solid PROOF, that the community abuses EVERY single mechanics in which they have agency. Custom games with XP, LFG, report, endorsement, Workshop.
The simple fact that people uses Mei’s wall and Sym’s TP for griefing should tell you not to trust the community with ANY amount of power.
