Low impact Mercy Rework

General Discussion
22

Change 1: interesting. Not sure how necessary it is, or if it would be OP (I can’t imagine how it would be, but that’s my point, I don’t know how it would play out). I like the idea though because it capitalizes on a key part of Mercy’s kit and playstyle, rather than try to replace it. (Looking at you, people who want mercy’s heal to require stricter aiming rather than lock-ons). A good Mercy should be prioritizing targets, and zipping between them to save the day, so a small burst on GA isn’t an awful idea.

Change 2: Not really a fan. I like Rez the way it is. The slow is good, the cast time is good, the cooldown is fine. You shouldn’t be able to bring someone back to life without a risk. I don’t think we should be getting rid of Rez, and I don’t think she needs a huge burst heal either.

Change 3: Eh, mixed feelings. I certainly wouldn’t mind being able to cancel Rez, there’s certainly times when I wish I could have done that. But at the same time, like I said before, there needs to be a risk. Having to commit to the Rez is a good way to do that.

Change 4: I really like this. I’ve been seeing this proposal around the forums a lot lately and I think it’s brilliant. I’m not sure whether this is part of your proposal, but I’d like to see a similar change done to her damage boost during Valk. Don’t know what the numbers would be, but I feel like she’d be a little more interesting to Valk with if she had to choose who to prioritize regardless of which beam she was using. Let’s face it, your Lucio isn’t going to benefit from a damage boost nearly as much as your ulting Soldier will. During normal gameplay you’re always trying to figure out who needs you the most, why should Valk be any different? So strong buff on the main heal/damage-boost beam, with weaker chains to everyone else, to ensure that you’re never just sitting there mindlessly holding down mouse buttons.

Change 5: same as change 1. interesting idea, not sure how it’d play out. Not strictly against it, although I’m not sure how necessary it would be if we already buffed the main healing beam in Valk.

Change 6: Valk definitely needs to be more dynamic to be fun, but it also definitely needs to be much shorter in order to justify some of these buffs. I’m glad we’re in agreement there, because some of these changes would be disgusting if we kept Valk at its current duration.

Change 7: Eh, not sure about this one. There’s definitely something to be said about encouraging playing near your teammates, but at the same time you need to be able to put some distance in order to not die from some of the same attacks you’re trying to heal them through.

Side-note: I’m not entirely convinced that her base healing shouldn’t be buffed to 55hps anyway. I don’t think 60 is necessary, but I think 40 might have been too harsh. On most threads I advocate for 55, but most threads don’t include your GA heal proposal, and I’m still not sure how that would effect her overall healing output. It might negate the need for 55, it might not.

One more thing: it’s not in your proposal because you wanted to change Rez entirely (which I’ve already said I’m against), but I wouldn’t mind making Rez instantaneous only during Valk. As I said before, I love the slow down and cast-time for normal gameplay, that’s fine. But I kinda miss the Valkyrie swoop Rez. Having a cast time on Valk is ok for now because the ult lasts for so long, but if we were to cut the duration in half then I think restoring instaRez would be justifiable.

UPDATE: oops, didn’t mean to necro a month old post. Saw it in my feed and thought it was more recent.

23

I like this idea a lot actually

I think it’d be balanced if just this were added

24

I think you misinterpreted change #2 a bit.

It’s an either or sort of change. IF you use Resurrect on a dead teammate it functions exactly how it does currently. If you use Resurrect on a living teammate it does that Burst heal + 100 HPs channeled heal.

I’m not removing Resurrect… just giving options.

Edit: Also yeah it is a bit of a necro… but… in my opinion at least it is still a valid thread.

25

Well that’s a little better, and I apologize for the misunderstanding. Although i’m still not sure why we need a large burst heal in the first place. My understanding was that the strength of burst heals largely contributes to the GOATS meta that most people seem to hate. I like keeping Mercy as a good dps-enabling healer, I don’t want to turn her into something that contributes to tanks never dying, and in turn rendering dps obsolete.

26

No worries. It happens.

I completely understand that concern. I truly do. However, I am fairly certain these changes will keep Mercy as a healer who focuses on healing DPS heroes.

Take those mini burst heals on GA. How much would a tank want a burst heal of 15 or 30 hp? I mean they’d take it, but if said tank is DVa that’s only 2.5% or 5% of her max hp. Since she’s so large and not particularly evasive, she’ll lose it again in half a second. Compare that to giving those same heals to Tracer. Those represent 10% or 20% of her maximum health. That’s huge, especially on someone as evasive as Tracer. In my opinion, reliable mini burst heals is exactly what this game needs to get DPS in the game more. Who’s more likely to need a burst heal? A tank with 600 HP and potentially several reliable ways to mitigate incoming damage or a 200 HP target who at best has a way to dodge. Obviously the 200 HP target because they go from Fine to Dead way faster and don’t have great ways to mitigate damage… BUT it can’t be large burst heals otherwise using the heal on them stops being efficient.

I made the E heal the way it is specifically so Mercy can still use it on DPS heroes. A 125 burst heal is not overkill on a 200 hp target, then the follow up 1.75s of 100 HPs should keep them safe long enough to either kill or run from whatever hit them, for a total of 300 healing. Just imagine how much say… Pharah would love to get hit with this E heal when she’s in the middle of Barrage. Compare that to the old burst heal on Nano. 300 healing all at once means it’s kinda wasted when used on something that isn’t a tank.

27

Fair enough. I guess as long as you aren’t suggesting removing Rez I don’t have a huge problem with that proposal. Removing Rez entirely, bringing back mass Rez, and making her healing aim-dependent instead of lock-on are where I draw lines. Anything else I’m willing to at least consider.

28

Funnily enough, our list of deal breakers for Mercy changes is pretty much identical.

1 Like
29

Gotta say, your change ideas are getting to be a lot more elegant.

30

I think they’re the most controversial changes one could make.

If you suggest removing Rez, I see that as taking away a key part of her identity (akin to taking away Lucio’s music), and I assume you’re a salty sniper who doesn’t like losing their kills.

If you suggest bringing back Mass Rez, I assume you’re an early Mercy fan, and while I have sympathy for you missing the playstyle you loved, I also think you’re too biased to realize how problematic it was as an ult.

And if you suggest taking away the auto-lock, I assume you’ve never played Mercy in your life, because you clearly have no understanding of how she works or else you wouldn’t be trying to completely gut her utility.

I think that’s what I like most about your proposal actually. The chain stuff I’ve seen before, but I’ve never seen anyone suggest a tiny burst of healing for switching GA targets. It really gets at the heart of Mercy’s role as a mobile combat medic, and it makes a lot of sense while working with her kit and playstyle rather than against it.

1 Like
31

Thanks. I try.

Just curious, do you have any specific feedback or questions?

32

Mostly just to try to see if you could focus on just “one change” and make that it’s own thread. For instance the Rez used on living heroes. Give it a catchy/gimmick name etc.

Make the change part look like patch notes formatting, and put some emoji in the title.

33

I was with you right up until the end… why does everything need emojis?

34

Are you using Valkyrie in bot games? In as low as gold a Mercy using Valkyrie that is stationary is dead

1 Like
35

I have a better low impact rework

Leave her alone

1 Like
36

Nothing that you said was wrong, I just took the liberty of removing some unnecessary words :wink:

1 Like
37

Because :100:, the :v: goal :fire: is to make for post stand out. :triumph:

38

rolls eyes

I guess technically you’re not wrong. I hate seeing emojis clutter up what’s supposed to be a text-based discussion forum, but you’re not wrong…

39

Remember how a while ago the two of us were talking about how there’s two groups of Mercy mains, those who like her as she is and those who prefer her old version? Then I was insisting that Blizzard should at least try to make the second group happier without making the first group unhappy? This is me giving a suggestion to do that.

How about trying to be helpful and point out specific things you don’t like instead of just saying no? Be part of the solution and not part of the problem.

1 Like
40

Like Invigorate :slight_smile:

2 Likes
41

Oh yeah, that was part of your plan too, wasn’t it? Frankly I didn’t like it much then either, but I guess it’s starting to grow on me. Still not my favorite part of the proposal though, that would have to be the brilliant tweaks to the chain beams.
That might be the single greatest idea I’ve ever seen in these forums, and it’s so simple to implement. Huge improvement for people who are unhappy with the stale play of the ult, without really alienating anyone who likes Valk. Just objectively better I think.