“The complaints of Overwatch fans and players are some of the least important complaints in the world”
Ok. So lets keek these Widow changes and ignore all the complaints from the Widow players.
1 Like
I see it as physically impossible not to alienate portions of the playerbase with literally any significant change to the game.
Therefore, the guiding principle is gaining more players than you lose.
I don’t care if they buff her other skills, or even give her a new one, but 1 shoot has to go, just like Hanzo.
I think we’re at the part were you guys just ignore me for your own argument. You use the tanks for cover, or natural cover, only as long as it takes for you to be close enough to adequately flank a sniper. I was going to type more, but really that’s all there is to it.
I don’t agree, and we’ve been down this road before. Its unironically “We made a huge mistake by removing barriers, so we’ll make a similar mistake by removing one shots.”. When that fails, because it will, the next thing you guys will remove is whatever burst damage counters.
I know what you mean, but understand people will complain anyway. Here, I’ll do it too.
“So you deliberately decided to do nothing to counter widow and she killed you. How’s that unfair?”. Yet you have people proudly saying “I should do nothing to counter widow. Instead, she should be nerfed so that I won’t have to worry about her as much”, and you guys treat that as an adequate argument.
I’m at the point where I think some people are just bad faith about widow. Like literally pretending they’ll be satisfied with one shots removed, but in reality any burst damage would be next on the chopping block.
Are you willing to bet that people would still complain? Because I am.
This is known as a “false dichotomy”. These are not the only two options as you can flank her, move with a barrier and shoot her to force her to move, dive her with a tank, countersnipe, or choose to not have fun because you’re willfully not countering her.
You guys misrepresent Widowmaker, and then say “That’s why she has to change!”. I’m not joking when I say a good game designer will ignore most widow hater ideas. And that good game designer must be someone at Valve because they kept the sniper in for the reasons I describe.
You’ll notice I’m not considering the feelings of Overwatch fans when I make my suggestions. Everything I say is for the game to run smoothly, so if they kept garbage changes that ruin the game, it would be a bad idea. Ignoring Overwatch fans is still the smart choice, but you can’t ignore the fact that the game is worse.
Basically, fix the game for the game. Overwatch fans unironically cry for nerfs because they’re being countered. They think a hero shouldn’t be good because they’re being countered. Then they’ll refuse to learn how to beat the hero countering them, and say they shouldn’t HAVE to learn to counter them. They should be ignored.
4 Likes
Then Blizzard should turn this into a Match 3 mobile game. If we are reducing the number of unique mechanics, which is the entire point of the game, then we might as well go all the way and turn it into whatever gets the most players. Right?
2 Likes
- Hide behind a wall or barrier 90% of the match
- Ignore the main objective and play sniper-whack-a-mole the whole game while probably throwing
Aren’t terribly Fun options.
And yeah, you could CounterSnipe, but that’s just self perpetuating more frustrating gameplay.
Is it really such an outlandish idea that “videogames” having unnecessary and frequent “anti-fun” game mechanics is bad for player retention?
Like it was technically possible to burn through layers and layers of stun spam, and barrier spam in OW1, but they drastically reduced that, because it was an unnecessary and frequent “anti-fun” game mechanic.
The mere existence of an “anti-fun” game mechanic doesn’t automatically justify it’s existence or frequency that it exists.
Move up with a tank or barrier, or move along a wall to get closer to widow.
That main objective might as well not exist if people are preventing your access to it.
You’re misrepresenting your options and calling it unfun.
You’re throwing in a third option as just a side thing. I think that’s a bad faith thing to do.
A good answer isn’t self perpetuating anything. If you have an option to win, you should try it, or hold your complaints when you struggle.
Yes, actually. I’ve explained this before, but sometime annoying mechanics are needed for the game to run smoothly. Literally name a game, and I can explain how. Multiplayer, single player, turn based RPG, first person shooter; literally every game has a mechanic or two that’s not fun, but needed for the game to run smoothly.
You’re entirely correct! But its not the “mere existence” that justifies Widowmaker’s one shot. It’s the fact that she keeps other heroes in line due to inherent game mechanics. We all know what its like to remove interactions like that from the game. Nerf stuns, flankers overperform. Nerf barriers remove a tank, snipers overperform. I’ll agree that the answer is probably a nerf to snipers, but I think outright removing the entire concept of a one shot will be a mistake we all come to regret.
And for most people, they’ll regret it while honestly saying “Who would have thought that would have turned out wrong!?”, and I’ll answer “Me! And YOU, because we’ve been here before!”.
2 Likes
“Everything I say is for the game to run smoothly, so if they kept garbage changes that ruin the game,”
Every change could be considered “garbage” by the player base.
It’s only garbage this time because you don’t like it. You sound like a hypocrite.
You’re right, but not every suggestion works like this:
“Concept A keeps these characters in line. We can’t just remove concept A because it will be a huge indirect buff to these kinds of characters.”. You’ll notice that I don’t have any particular love for Widowmaker, but I do know simple logic. And when you consider Overwatch’s history, the sentence above looks like this:
“We have seen what happens when you remove or harshly nerf entire concepts in a game. Why will we do it again?”.
I don’t believe you can say that in good faith. I’m serious.
Flanking Widow isn’t always viable as she can sit in spots normally unavailable to you thanks to Grapple. Diving her requires a lot of effort, because she can just get pocket from support at it’s infinitely easier to heal Widow than to dive her on let’s say Havana 3rd point or even closer maps like 3rd point King’s Row. Sending tank to deal with her isn’t enough, you need more damage than that. And who can go in on high highgrounds with dive tanks in a quick manner that doesn’t allow Widow to get few shots before you get to her? Genji only comes to mind, someone else? Tracer can’t access many spots where Widow likes to sit. Sombra needs to use translocator which makes her really easy to kill after Widow gets peel. Reaper gets headshotted during cast animation. Fliers are at disadvantage against Widow.
So realistically people choose to outsnipe Widow on those maps, because getting to her is too hard and even when you can close the gap (which takes a long time) all she needs is one support pocketing her during dive. It’s not like game doesn’t have countless ways of preventing dives. Pick Baptiste, throw a lamp for your Widow and spam heal when she gets in the trouble. If dive doesn’t succeed then they die instead, since they go all in deep in the backline.
Play shield - and? Sigma can shield her sightline and she only has to move few meters + now Sigma gets shot a lot by rest of the Widow team. Rein can’t protect people well from Widow due to awkward angles + you do nothing by just holding shield 24/7.
2 Likes
I think I could probably give a variety of solutions for any “keeps other heroes in line due to inherent game mechanics”.
And just in general I favor the “Nerf Tracer, instead of creating LaunchBrig” approach.
Overall de-escalating the more extreme and limited access counterplay.
If you end up in a situation where you need very specific and few heroes to deal with a common gameplay scenario. Then they shouldn’t double-down on that.
And either make the counterplay more broadly accessible, or remove the existence/viability/frequency of that scenario.
3 Likes
Fun in the sense that you can literally just ignore her 99% of the time bc her impact is hard countered by the normal healing that is applied anyways in team fights.
3 Likes
Well, no plan should be ALWAYS viable. If it was, widow would actually need a buff because she’d just die as soon as she was flanked.
Is that a bad thing? You’re diving widow and another person, so unless you bring help, why shouldn’t Widow have a greater advantage? Do you want to play an Overwatch where you can plan and get help, and then still have the same chance of losing as a person who’s fighting two people alone?
I…don’t think you’re correct at all. Technically speaking, a tank like Winston can dive and shock two people at once, and we’ve seen what Wrecking Ball does to widow. Maybe on paper, their damage isn’t enough, but I’ve been diving widows for years. My biggest issue isn’t that the tanks aren’t capable of it. Its that now, with one tank, its more risky for me to do my job.
Believe it or not, this is also why I don’t want Widow’s one shot nerfed. Its kind of ironic, but I’ve seen first hand what its like when a whole concept just gets nerfed. Its more weight on the back of the tanks. If we remove the one shot from widow, everything she counters will be able to play with less stress, while she’s playing with more stress to land her shots. Really, she’ll just be a worse Ashe, so she’ll need a bunch of buffs that likely won’t matter anyway.
And the worst part? People will STILL complain about burst damage! People will get what they want, and then say the same complaints.
Play shield and provide moments for your team to take pot shots at widow and either kill her or force her to move. You can also cart your team between cover.
You really shouldn’t be holding shield 24/7. I’m talking literal seconds of keeping your team safe; even a mildly accurate Zen can kill widow while he’s being protected. And again, the awkward angles should be a thing. There shouldn’t be a “perfect” answer to any situation.
2 Likes
You just linked one thread complaining about Mercy pocket on Cass and it only got 8 upvotes. Not the own you think this is. lol…
She was a problem even in OW1. See: Havana, Junkertown, etc.
One tank does make it worse but it is not why she’s so horrendous to play against. She’s always been this way.
I’ll say it again. On multiple maps in high ranks if you don’t have a Widow player to contest their Widow along with a Sigma to allow some form of movement then you basically auto lose the game. It’s exactly the same situation we had on Havana in OW1. It’s cancerous to play and nothing short of extreme imbalance.
The options really are rework all long sightline maps to drastically decrease the sightlines or to rework Widow. Those are the only realistic options as 6v6 will never come back. Out of those two I view reworking Widow as the most likely.
5 Likes
I say viable, not “auto win”. Getting successful flank is your only win condition when you are not choosing to snipe back. At range every single hero in the game has disadvantage outside of Widow herself. So you need to close the gap without entering her LOS aka flanking. And if flank doesn’t work because you can just heal Widow with many instant burst heals in the game and abilities like Suzu/Lamp then… what do you do exactly?
Because Widow doesn’t need help to get her kills against 1v5 if she snipes from range. Winston needs help to kill pocketed Widow (same with Ball or D.Va) but Widow doesn’t need help to kill pocketed Cass or whatever squishy. So she doesn’t play by the same rules as you. I need help to kill pocketed Widow, but Widow doesn’t need help to kill pocketed me.
Winston is easy to force out when people start shooting him. Let’s say you get help from Bap. Bap can sustain both Widow and himself for a big chunk of time, even if you cleave both at the same time (and it’s not hard to just play few meters away from Widow and still help her. She leaves bubble, you press shift and start healing. Or throw lamp when monkey dives and heal after leaving bubble)
Yeah, with one tank in the game, if you commit to chase Widow around the map, enemy tank can just run your backline over. Who’s gonna prevent him from doing that? Especially if you want to commit more than one person to dive.
There is nothing in this game that requires one shots on primary fire to exist imo. Burst damage should cap around Cass/Ashe level imo. They still two tap people, but it’s infinetely more fair than one shot. You can nerf main heals of Bap or Ana, I really wouldn’t mind. I would much rather reduce insane amount of heals if it means that one shots don’t exist. Heals like Bap are annoying on their own. They require you to basically kill someone two times in a row, because instant 100 hp is just soooo much.
Depending on distance this does nothing. Projectiles are easy to dodge from far away and hitscan deals 10 damage at sniper ranges.
Only if she isn’t aware lol. Projectiles can be dodged. At range of 40m or more you can just sidestep and dodge on reaction. It has nothing to do with Zen being good, it has with Widow being bad enough to not react to Zen who charges his volley.
Hence why supports’ heals should be nerfed and they should have their entire kits powershifted so their ults act like ults and their cooldowns are…well…cooldowns.
The entire support role.
2 Likes
I agree with that. But even back in like 2017 Widow was played a lot during dive metas because she was bigger threat than Genji lol. And those were the times without massive heals and cooldowns that reset fight to square one.
Disagree. Burst damage of many heroes is good enough to kill things. Headshots of Cass Torb, Junk/Pharah/Echo, shotgun heroes up close, high level beam of Sym or Zarya, burst of tanks like Sigma rock, D.Va rockets. Many ways to kill things in 1-1.5 second. But they aren’t one shotting you and not from insane range.
Nerf only outliers like Bap, Ana. And cooldowns should be on shorter cooldowns but have less power than Lamp, Suzu or Sleep Dart/Anti-nade.
Nerf widow or rework her, then we can talk about nerfing supports. It’s not like people will stop picking Widow because sustain options would be a bit more viable - why would you bother when you can just instakill even more?