Isn't 5v5 targeted towards Role Queue?

Which isn’t exactly an achievement considering that the only thing Open Q matchmaking needs to check is your MMR while Role Q also has to consider the roles you Q’d up for.

Open Q matchmaking being slower than the RQ Tank Queue more often than not actually speaks volumes about the size of the Open Q player base.

Let’s get rid of the Bribes , defatten the card and put Open QP side by side then we’ll talk

2 Likes

You mean the 3 Loot Boxes you can get every week for winning 9 QPC games? :stuck_out_tongue:

Also if the 25 credit “bribe” in Role Q really has as much of an impact as you think, then how is it even possible that there are still issues with DPS Q times? :wink:

The overwhelming majority of Role Q players want to play DPS and they don’t get any bribe at all and much higher Q times on top - yet they still Q up for Role Q.

It’s because it’s not much of a bribe at all. The real bribe is the priority pass. And that does help to some degree. But it’s more like a band-aid rather than a straight fix.

1 Like

But that doesn’t keep people from playing Open Q instead of Role Q.
It just moves people around within the 3 Roles of Role Q itself.

Yeah they took the easy way out when they could have just split tank queue into offensive and defensive tanks, allowing for 1 shield and one thick boy. Put rein, Orisa, sigma, and Winston in one queue for defensive picks. Then put zarya, Hammond, d.va, and hog in the other.

This would make balancing the roles easier.

The same could be done for dps so we don’t have double hitscan.

All evidence we have in our hands says otherwise, I’m afraid (except all surveys as far as I know whick have been carried out on Korean players).

For the rest of the world, we do have official dev quotes regarding the success of the mode and direct implication of the majority of the player base liking it.

Official use stats on the other hand show RQ as being the most played mode by far in all regions except the Korean one.

And finally, literally every single unofficial polls conducted either here, Reddit, etc. generally show at least 60% of participants preferring RQ over OQ.

We don’t have any solid numbers regarding Overwatch player populations and we especially don’t have any evidence of a casual link between RQ’s implementation and a potential decrease in player counts.

  1. No more problematic “comps” like 5DPS.
  2. A less chaotic, more organized playing environment.
  3. Much easier to balance (on paper)
  4. Flexing between roles is impossible, hence all the problems this playstyle introduces no longer exist.
  5. Everyone can pick whatever role they wish. No more pressure to fill during the hero select screen.
  6. Fixed a major prior fundamental design problem with the game, as Overwatch can now be played “properly” in all levels of play, as its mere function doesn’t rely anymore on the ideal and utopian scenario that the interests of 6 random people online will magically align so they can form an actually functional team comp.
1 Like

Because the balance is done around 222
This is also why nobody is taking open q seriously anymore since the game is balanced around 222. The same thing happen when the 1 hero limit came. No limits became a clown fest mode.

I wonder why blizzard only cares to ask Korean players rather than the rest of the world. Looks like they might value their opinion a bit more highly.

Actually when they released open queue they talked about how it was surprisingly popular and they had not anticipated this.

Usage not preference stats, for a single day with no guarantee of permanence and these stats are from over a year ago.

The only official poll ever conducted to my knowledge had a landslide victory for open queue.

1 Like

I think no DPS or Sombra+no DPS comps become dominant again when Blizz remove role lock in OWL. Tank/supps synergies are just too strong in this game, especially when two teams have about the same skill level. DPS are only good if you or your team is vastly superior than the enemy team.

Also, people don’t like playing tanks and it often leads to the opposite extreme way from OWL in competitive games : no tanks comps.

Ofc those things can be fixed, but it would touch the fundamentals, meaning they should build a new game from the ground.

Nah. People from all around the world received emails regarding this latest poll and some even posted about it on the Forums.

Reference needed, even though it doesn’t really change anything either way.

Never said otherwise. However, I would be lying if I said that there isn’t direct correlation between how many people use one choice out of many and how many of them also prefer it over the others.

Until they’re updated they’re the most official state we have, so there’s that.

I don’t exactly know the details of the Korean poll and whether it measured preference and not popularity.

However, we already know what’s happening in Korea and, even though this would sound as shocking to RQ haters, no one has denied this fact since the day the official use stats were released.

However, the point still stand that, for the rest of the world, every single piece of evidence we have available point to RQ as being the preferred mode. End of story.

There was an email sent out to people from all over the world? I am not aware of this.

Kaplan 1:36:

Whilst the validity of those pieces of evidence is open to question you mean NA.*

1 Like

Will find the post which referenced this and link it here.

Yep. I did look around and find this quote in the meantime.

Just like you don’t question the validity of the devs’ quotes praising Open Queue in the Arcade after such a short time of testing, I don’t want you questioning the usage statistics, along with official developer quotes such as this one:

Which, along with almost all unofficial polls carried out, prove RQ as being the preferred Competitive game mode.

Given the quote “Some people love the Role Queue, some people don’t.” is more recent I would give more weight to that, especially as at that time people were actually given a choice and the developers would have had more data to work with.

Not at all.

Official poll>unofficial

You don’t go around announcing a new feature by saying “The majority loves the alternative to this new feature we’re announcing, but for that minority of you who don’t, here it is”.

No wording here is used to imply a majority/minority, nor is the context appropriate, so no, it cannot rival prior dev quotes.

I guess you didn’t read this small phrase.

Both official and unofficial quotes prove the conclusion I previously talked about.

And honestly, actions speak much louder than words, and Open Queue is the game mode the devs won’t confirm as making a return for OW2, not RQ.

Unless this is just another part of the classic conspiracy theory of every single Overwatch dev wanting to sabotage their billion dollar franchise by not listening to the majority of the player base, but their own personal egos.

The same could be said of your dev quote regarding Role Queue.

Exactly. No implication of a majority or minority. Although they were actually surprised by its success and said it was popular.

Given the fact that they did not anticipate its success we can question the thoroughness of their previous research into the topic.

This also beats out prior dev quotes due to being more recent and more relevant data available.

Does the majority want 5v5/1-2-2 though?

any “evidence” I have heard to support this claim has been invalid

if you (or anyone) have any valid evidence to support this claim, please present it

Companies rarely describe changes they have made as failures - they want (and ergo tend to do) to present all such things as success

that said, no…such pronouncements do not then in any way even suggest that customers are happy about such changes.

There is no logical connection between the two whatsoever

the only such data I know of was produced over a year and a half ago, was for one single day, and on that day role-less queue competitive had just been introduced as a temporary mode a day or so before and buried in the arcade menu, such that few players were even aware it existed

as such, the data in question is apples to oranges in terms of being used to compare 222 to role-less queue

Not a single one of these polls - and I think I have seen all of them at this point - were valid.

The resulting data was (and still is) ergo invalid

I take role-less queue seriously

there are very, very many players like myself who prefer the freedoms of role-less queue mode over the stale metas, restrictions, and other severe problems inflicted upon the game by 222

many of these players have spoken out about this in these forums and in other internet media

not at all

this story continues, told and retold more times than I can count, as if it becomes more true with each retelling…tho it never does

given that all of the evidence that has been pointed to to support this stance has been invalid, the point does not stand, and the oft-told story remains entirely unsupported

not at all

there is no basis for stating that the devs “won’t confirm” this at all. They simply havent made a statement about it as yet.

The absence of an explicit statement is nothing remotely like explicit refusal to make a statement

that said, the change to 122 is in my eyes proof positive of the failure of 222

1 Like

Because most matches in the old system were either 2-2-2 anyway, OR they devolved into chaotic picks that just made the game feel horrible to play. Rarely would you get a coherent composition that wasn’t 2-2-2.

We need 2-2-2 for the baseline game to be just structured enough that you CAN work with random people instead of the horrific chaos it was once.

That said, I have no idea how they’re going to keep OQ in a 5v5 environment, which would be a shame to lose entirely.

222 was never needed, and is not needed now

There are and were folks who want 222, but it isnt actually needed

If it were needed, it’d be impossible for folks to play in the thousands of role-less queue matches that are taking place as I type this and as you read this

Also: I would never agree that 222 is the optimal team makeup given the many many many times I have seen non-222 teams handily beat 222 teams

I don’t know of any aspects of role-less queue that are more chaotic than 222 matches

I don’t see role-less queue matches as chaotic in any way.

I do tend to see people who want to deride/insult/attack role-less queue mode as a whole use this term on occasion…but given your earlier post I read I dont think this was your intent…and I hope it wasn’t.

1 Like

But it also gives you more room to carry.