Ok. The reason is dislike this whole entire movement is the way people use that she isnt fun as a reason to rework a character.
I have 200 hrs on mercy btw
Mercy as a character has been gutted. yes. everything is different. the problem is people are complaining that a cast res makes her unfun. Cast res makes mercy skillful and make decision and when you pull if off you get rewarded. No one complained with mercy res w/o cast, its because it was Over powered.
Valkyrie as an ultimate is NOT unimpactful. you can heal your entire team without worrying about death. You can kill a widow. you can damage boost rush them. So many possiblitys but people complain because people compare it to mass res. I have more feelings of carrying with valkyrie than throwing with it. When people complain that you dont feel impactful with valk itâs because you used it wrong. I screw up valk sometime and I realize it. Itâs not the ult that is unimpactful itâs the context you use it under. If you walk into a team as genji and ult a 1v6 you die. no one complains about it, yet valk gets called unimpactdful for the same reason.
If you dont feel impactful enough to counter a big ult. swap. thatâs what is so go about the supports, swap to zen to stop the zarya you cant out heal. If they give valk a very strong defense that just messes up everything mercy becomes op again because she has res and a strong defensive ult.
Everyone has different opinion I get that, but using the argument of fun for balance is irrelevant, Everyone has different opinion I will always think she is fun other think is is boring thatâs okay but balancing a character over fun is not a solution. If they brought back mass res, Iâd be mad. I dont like mass res, I love valk and what it does. So if they reverted it Iâd be saying she feels unfun to play. you canât balance like that because then it just makes other mad again and the same issue.
Yes valk could be buffed, but it really doesnt right now imo. the rework movement is not gonna work because everyone wants something different. more people like valk than I think some people think about.
If you do not agree that is OKAY, this is just my opinion on these unneeded hashtags
IMO I find that Mercy is impactful in more frequent, but more subtle actions.
Mass resurrect was so easy to identify its impact based on how many people you resurrected.
Mercyâs current kit is impactful based on when you perform certain actions, and isnât as easily noticeable.
I wouldnât discredit that argument because that argument is usually tied to, âIs Mercy fun? I donât think she isâ because that level of impact isnât as obvious. In that regards, I do think itâs a totally valid argument.
But overall for balance, I donât think fun or impactful holds as much weight as balanced, but should still be considered, you know?
I would never say itâs invalid. Ideal spot for any hero is fun/impactful and balanced. Together. Not one or the other.
Yet mass resurrection being âunfunâ to play against was a valid argument to remove it.
Not being impactful is very valid argument, because characterâs power lies in the impact. Nobody wants to simply get boosted by their team and not have any playmaking abilities of their own. Mercy doesnât even get on fire anymore.
That wasnât the main reason.
It encouraged a very toxic playstyle (no matter how much people deny it) that the developers wanted to remove.
(even though current Res has similar issues)
Quote from Vaneras from the Old Forums; âIt was frustrating to play against and incentivized Mercy players to hide away from fights.â Baring in mind, frustrating to play against (that is, the argument of âfunâ) is placed before an argument that was accepted by a vocal minority of the community at the time.
Itâs just the ability to heal the entire team without the worry of dying.When I valk I feel like I can keep everyone alive and I really feel a power decrease when valk ends. Thatâs why I think its impactful
So what he said invalidates an OFFICIAL developer video?
And no, I would imagine he didnât, just like most other Blizzard employeeâs giving different information (support staff are VERY guilty of this). They are very mixed up with opinions.
Iâm not taking anyone seriously on balance changes unless its from a actual developer, who are qualified to talk about such things.
Also because he said frustrating first that means its the main reason? okay lol
All we can say is that is was ONE of MANY reasons.
its what i was trying to get at a few weeks ago: Mercy bottom line ⊠itll never get anything changed because its simply not enoughâŠpeople dont understand the difference between the unfun argument that was used to change her initially and the one we have nowâŠbut its a BIG difference
When did I say it did? The words disheartening and frustrating to play against may as well be the same thing.
A community manager is just as much apart of the development team as any other person, and if you donât believe that, then at least accept that the community manager probably didnât even write what was posted and just copied and pasted something from an e-mail.
The placement of words in text indicate importance. If they seriously believed that hide and revive was the absolute main issue with it, they would have said exactly that. Saying that it was frustrating to play against first emphasizes that point moreso than the latter.
Using your own logic, can you give me quotes regarding why Mercy was reworked straight from a developerâs mouth that are not related to hiding and reviving or it being frustrating to play against?
I donât think this was the only reason why she got reworked.
Letâs take a look at the balance triangle, shall we?
Balancing is based on these 3 points:
Playerbase impression.
Developer impression.
Hero stats.
Now letâs see how Mercy 1.0 (with mass rez) fits in this balance triangle.
Mass rez wasnât liked by many players.
We all have seen the threads back then. The majority seemed to dislike it. Mercyâs ult had no counterplay other than dealing with Mercy before she ulted. (This couldâve been easily fixed though.)
The devs thought it promoted bad play, which it did. The hide and rez part of it. This is not how they wanted to see her played.
Mercy wasnât viable back then. Especially not after Anaâs release. I could be mistaken, but was she not even F-tier once before her rework?
And how does Mercy 2.0 fits in the balance triangle?
Players are divided about this. Some Mercy mains like her current kit and some donât. One thing is for certain and that is that the majority of the playerbase doesnât complain about Mercyâs ultimate anymore.
The devs have stated that they are not going to revert and rework Mercy anymore. The amount of changes she has received proves that they are trying to make the current Mercy work. In interviews during the Blizzcon did multiple developers even stated that they are satisfied with the state of all support heroes.
Her average healing is on par with other main healers and her pickrate is still healthy. It seems itâs better in low and mid ranks than in high ranks, but this could be blamed on the fact that Mercy isnât meta.
I have no idea what you mean by that.
In the developer video itself, Jeff says FIRST that a behaviour is encouraged by the design of the hero/ult, where you stop healing, tell your team to die, you hide and res. I canât be bothered to quote it as he rambles a bit.
AFTER that he says its wrong to tell a MAIN HEALER to stop healing and go hide.
AFTER that he says its disheartening when Mercy ults.
He says more after that but I donât want to watch it all again.