and man is it way worse than open que. Nothing but toxic players. I thought open was bad, but it is nothing compared to role.
4 Likes
Question now, is toxicity only the fault of players or are there underlying strings of frustration that could be link to system constraints other than role queue?
6 Likes
perhaps, toxic players are more drawn to role que? i honestly dont know, but that awful experienced turned me off from that part of competitive mode.
1 Like
Really? I found the exact opposite. Hated playing open queue. Always 4 dps games and complain about heals lmao but thats probably just my open queue rank
9 Likes
when you over-constrain player role channels (roles) you:
- always force a supply/demand mismatch (queues)
- decrease the number of viable mixed strategies
- reduce player agency in solving win conditions
- lower the skill ceiling (combinatorial expression)
in any well-formed game structure this will reduce the chances of players finding equilibria, and efficiently playing them. not having access to efficient equilibria leads to frustration which leads to toxicity.
over-constraining is basically a cardinal sin in game systems design.
open comp never has a supply/demand mismatch, it has a self-balancing meta, higher real-time skillcap, more expression and agency.
open comp has “lower quality matches” (subjective) for terribles that 1. can’t use LFG to trade quality over quantity, and 2. think they should be able to get by because someone is shielding THEM and healing THEM. no place for it in fast fps. 222 spoonfed people bad gamplay, crutched their progression, scripted every engage, and led to bribed roles and tossed games for the sake of those bribes.
5 Likes
Self serving much my guy?
The mode I play is the best guys, it’s where all the skill expression and talent is…despite all the best OW players avoiding it like the clown fiesta it is.
Spent plenty of time in both modes, both modes have loads of “toxicity” and self important angry little fellas who feel the need to control the actions of everyone around them.
Open queue matches are much more likely to de-evolve into shouting matches when the 4+ DPS strategy fails and people start shouting about needing tanks and heals despite no one wanting to actually do them. Half the time multiple people spamming WE NEED A HEALER as they run out of spawn as Genji to go feed.
7 Likes
And that isn’t inherently a bad thing in any way. RQ was rightfully implemented in the first place because of the players having no idea how to properly play the game after all…
Nah. Even before RQ’s implementation 222 was the most - played comp, so there’s your “equilibrium”.
It doesn’t. Just like pre - RQ Competitive didn’t before it.
“open comp has “higher quality matches” (subjective) for terribles that”
Two can play this play this pointless game.
If LFG was a functional system, RQ wouldn’t had been needed in the first place. It isn’t though, and that comes from someone who used to use it for 2 whole years, so let’s drop this argument already.
You are mixed up, I’m afraid. Default Comeptitive isn’t Deathmatch. Overwatch is a team - based shooter.
“Bad gameplay” is OQ’s speciality… RQ wouldn’t want to claim that. Needless to say no one’s progression was “crutched” and there are still mathematically millions of comp combinations possible in RQ, so no “scripted engages”, unless you want to label an actually organized, sustainable (in relation to the average player profile) playing environment as such.
4 Likes
Open Queue is okay. When I feel like aim training or playing chill games and not trying very hard.
3 Likes
I’ve seen toxic people in both RQ and OQ
8 Likes
Both modes are pretty toxic. I prefer OQ where the toxic players can switch roles instead of just throwing the match. No Limits is still the best mode, imo, even as the meme it’s become.
1 Like
I cant help but feel you went into it ready to hate it.
open q back in the day wasnt as bad as people try to make it out to be, but role q has increased match quality imo.
2 Likes
there was never anything “rightful” about it.
Games were running just fine without it, and many many players wanted no part of it
the game does not need to be played as 222 for players to “properly” play it
there is nothing more “proper” about 222 than any other arrangement
LFG was and still is a fully functional system
RQ has never been needed
never
the game runs just fine without it…better, in my opinion
I personally find I get much higher quality matches in role-less queue than in 222
Many other forum members have stated the same in many other similar threads
2 Likes
I too found openque to be the better experience
1 Like
it’s funny because even if you cancel out all the subjectivity i.e. match quality and experience and personal tastes, ruleset facts can’t ever be denied. They went ahead and locked everyone down for all time everywhere before even trying to improve with LFG2.0 or checking the math.
facts: open queue will always have better supply/demand ratios, faster queues per volume, fewer constraints, higher combinatorial skillcap, real-time flex agency, potential for lower or higher ttk/tempo, more futureproof and meta-diversity, etc etc etc.
they’re raw, objective byproducts of the game-mode. downside? harder to force a specific and restrictive narrative for balance. My guess is there are more non-transitive metas and self-balancing effects in open. So open probably balances itself better than lockdown 222, if not from direct subset inclusion arguments and dominance relations.
Sometimes it’s not about how someone “feels” about something lul. “x feels better than y” debates rarely close. x can do more y than z will close.
1 Like
17min Queue in Top 500 Open Queue, yeah that is definitely faster than 1-10min queue in Role Queue =]
2 Likes
normalized per volume > you
1 Like
Most of these can be grouped together and/or are debatable (such as how future proof OQ is) and/or are not necessarily advantages of the game mode, but inherent characteristics.
After all, RQ still rightfully replaced OQ despite all these characteristics and, since you want to talk “facts” so much, well according to the only usage stats we have RQ is played much more than any OQ game mode, all unofficial polls we have available claim the grand majority of players prefers the former and, most importantly, RQ is confirmed to be a main - stay in OW2 and beyond, while the devs officially said OQ may not return for OW2.
If I were you, I would quit overanalyzing stuff, all the while having a completely partial perspective and actually put that energy in making sure the “objectively superior” OQ game mode makes it in OW2.
Well, RQ objectively allows anyone to play whatever role they want and provides a comp template than ensures more stability and organization. That’s as many objective arguments as I need. I can now break them down and overanalyze them and there you have it: a perfect counterpart to your stance.
2 Likes
Obviously if you are playing RQ for the first time and you are not at least a gold standard player then you run the risk of your teammates being disappointed in your performance. This is more likely to lead to abuse as you have seen.
Play some more and once you are at the right rank you’ll find it a lot more enjoyable.
1 Like
RQ is literally a subset of OQ.
stability and organization is subjective, and certainly restrictive.
you’re implying having fewer degrees of freedom is “better”.
OQ has more DoF and can subsume anything RQ can do via LFG and other factors.
cooperate for “stability and organization” w/e moving definition and subjective interpretation that means, or don’t…OQ lets you do it, or not. it’s going to be more futureproof for that reason.
more choice and compositional diversity is more survivable over the longrun.
not to mention all the queue time reductions and less “handcuffing” effects.
it’s going to be more futureproof for those reasons, as well.
1 Like
They aren’t. RQ provides a general, static template, while OQ doesn’t. It’s as simple as that.
Yes, because for every person that used to switch to another role pre - RQ with positive results, there was another one that did so and handicapped their entire team as a result.
We already talked about that mess of a feature and how it doesn’t in any way replace RQ. Let’s not repeat ourselves.
So you say OQ is more future proof because of its potential as a game mode, well I can argue RQ is more future - proof because of the average experience is provides and how it’s better for the average Overwatch player solo - queuing.
Either way though, the fact that OQ may not return in OW2 at all according to the devs doesn’t really help your argument.
3 Likes