Because it’s still possible to get… You’re acting as if it’s impossible just because in your rank, it’s highly unlikely. We have to think about everyone ![:stuck_out_tongue:](https://d74zh8edaijub.cloudfront.net/en/overwatch/images/emoji/twitter/stuck_out_tongue.png?v=5" ":stuck_out_tongue:")
Weren’t you on the “don’t balance around bads” train not too long ago 
Except balance will be a concern if Blizzard decides to create Mercy 3.0 or bring back Mercy 1.0. Besides this, “Player One” can be anyone that plays Mercy. This means that anyone from the other communities that have played her are relevant in the discussion of Mercy’s “future”.
Indeed but this is just plain stupidity. He’s acting as if it’s impossible to pull of a 5 man Ressurect with a 1 second cast time…
Sure they do. Her overall winrate is not much worse than heroes like McCree or Tracer.
Stop saying it’s just unlikely. As Titanium said, a 5 man Resurrect rarely ever happened. The rate was once every 80 hours or so.
I’m sorry, but if the rate with invuln is once every 80 hours, the rate without invuln, with a cast time and with LoS is never.
Valking Mercy is invencible because of her OP regen, just remove it and make her regen normally, like outside of her kit. If stronger beams are OP, then just make her beams like they are outside of Valk.
Is not because you don’t like Mercy that she gotta be left in this state.
Your post just reminded me of this point. The Mercy Community is outnumbered on this subject. And ironically, apart of the “self-support” they lean on is the volume of posts that want Mercy to drastically change.
The “Mercy Community” is better off making arguments that are not centered on making a “fun” Mercy. After all, they are outnumbered on this topic. For many, a fun Mercy is a Mercy that does not “drive them nuts”. For others, it’s that she can get the job done as a healer.
Bottom Line: The platform the “Mercy Community” should build off of is one that aims for a balanced Mercy and not what’s subjectively “fun” for an entire player base.
Mercy has been OP for months and she was D-Tier before the rework. The rework has been nothing but good for Mercy.
Why are we trying to make Mercy so ultimate centric?
My most played hero this season on my main is Mercy.
Why not have a Single Target Resurrect ultimate that costs ~1500 and a Valkyrie E ability?
What’s the problem with that?
This legit just proves that It’s unlikely. Not impossible. Also, let’s not forget that good Mercy’s usually always tempo Rez and as you’ve already put it, 5 mans can’t be tempo rezzes.
That would be worse than Titanium’s suggestion and we would have the problem of there being no counterplay.
Tracer’s Pulse Bomb isn’t reactable either.
A Single Target ultimate forces Mercy to stay in the fight while also allowing her to have consistent value.
And because it would be an ultimate, it could have some of the QoL changes that were too OP for Resurrect on cooldown, such as a longer range and no cast time.
And no, it wouldn’t be worse than Titanium’s suggestion. Valkyrie would allow Mercy to have better utility and survivability than Pacify, and Single Target Resurrect at a reduced cost would simply be more valuable than a “Mass” Resurrect that would only be useful on a low number of targets anyway.
And it still does that with these changes.
Any form of healing that is applied to a wounded target is reactive. Is it a bad thing that abilities have reactive traits?
If that were the case, we probably would have seen a sharp rise in Mercy’s other stats… but we didn’t. Mercy’s healing just before the healing nerf was around 12,000. Pre-rework? 11900. Damage amplified? 700. Pre-rework? 500.
In increase in stats by that little of a magnitude cannot explain Mercy going from “mediocre” to “must-pick” for nearly a year.
As for the GA bounce, that was already partially functional prior to the rework. The rework only amplified it, but compensated for that by adding it to GA’s use, effectively increasing GA’s cooldown. It wasn’t a flat buff.
Except most of those resources run on short cooldowns, so most of them will be available right after the enemy uses Resurrect. Combine this with the fact that a 5-man Resurrect gives a competent enemy to inherent advantage (positioning and first-shot), and a 5-man Resurrect is taking a much larger risk than a 1-man Resurrect.
And then there’s possibility that the Mercy might not be able to get all 5 players in the first place due to staggering, adding even more unnecessary risk.
A mass-Resurrect is far more risky than a tempo-Resurrect. That is why players preferred to revive 2 players with a single Resurrect rather than waiting for a 4-man revive.
Mercy 1.x is the only version of Mercy that had that decision. Mercy 2.x doesn’t need to ponder the optimal time and placement of Resurrect; it’s the same every time.
That risk wasn’t hard to mitigate and wasn’t the driving force behind choosing to revive 2 players rather than 4. The post-rez disadvantages were.
It makes it so that there is a decision to be made in the first place again.
But opens up an entirely new use for Resurrect.
A numbers advantage doesn’t matter if the revived players come back staring down the barrel of a gun they have no chance of evading.
Let’s just ignore the fact that killing 5 players grants enough ultimate charge to give the enemy 1-3 more ultimates.
That’s because they toned down the rest of Mercy’s kit enough for an ultimate to fit as an E ability.
Another copy/paste incoming.
Thought Process and Usage Reward:
Remember when the cast time was placed on Resurrect and how a lot of players responded with “Now Mercy mains will have to think before using Resurrect”?
Do you also remember that this is how I introduced this section the past two times I made this thread? I’m bringing this up again because I thoroughly enjoy irony.
Anyway, there is a very clear difference between the complexity of using Resurrect now, and the complexity of using Resurrect prior to the rework. Stemming from that difference in complexity, there is a big difference in the thought processes for the two abilities… namely that ult-rez had one, and E-rez doesn’t.
Before delving into the thought processes, I’ll go over the differences in complexity.
Currently, Resurrect has a restrictive numerical value, allowing for only six possible combinations of Resurrect targets:
- Solo-rezzing allies 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5. 5 combinations.
- Not using Resurrect. 1 combination.
Ult-rez, on the other hand, had far more possible combinations of Resurrect targets:
- Solo-rezzing allies 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5. 5 combinations.
- Duo-rezzing allies 1 through 5. 10 combinations (5 choose 2, for you math freaks out there).
- Trio-rezzing allies 1 through 5. 10 combinations.
- Mass-rezzing (four-man) allies 1 through 5. 5 combinations.
- Team-rezzing all allies. 1 combination.
- Not using Resurrect. 1 combination.
That is thirty-two possible combinations of Resurrect from Mercy 1.x, making it more than five times as complex as the current iteration of Resurrect, and that’s from a numerical perspective alone.
Resurrect currently has a 5 meter radius, a 1.75 second cast time, and a 75% movement speed reduction, narrowing the parameters in which it can be safely used. It is less flexible due to safety concerns.
Resurrect used to have a 15 meter radius, no cast time, and post-rez invulnerability, allowing it to be used in a variety of situations. It was very flexible.
Resurrect currently is not an ultimate ability. It is on a 30 second cooldown, making its availability predictable and reliable. On top of this, its limited power range does not allow it to contest other ultimates.
Resurrect used to be an ultimate ability. It had no guarantee as to when it would be available again, making it more difficult to gauge when it could next be used. It was not only an ultimate, but a support ultimate, rendering it a scarce resource. It was capable of matching the power of other ultimates, and its expense counted as an ultimate expense.
As a result of lower numerical complexity, usage inflexibility, downtime predictability, and a basic-ability status, E-Resurrect also has a consistent optimal use scenario. That optimal time of use is always to reverse the first pick prior to a teamfight. This is the case for several reasons…
First, there is safety. With Resurrect’s incapacitation upon cast, it is clear that Mercy could use all the help and protection she can get while casting; she already has the biggest target in the game on her head. The more living allies nearby to protect the Mercy in the first place, the more likely it is that using Resurrect will result in a successful Resurrection and a living Mercy. Using the ability when there are only two allies to protect the Mercy is typically suicide.
Second, the realistic impact of Resurrect is greater the earlier it is used. Its numerical value remains the same (one person), but that numerical value means much more when used earlier in the fight rather than later. This is because of how teamfights typically snowball.
Both teams start out facing each other at a dividing point in the map. Six players on each side. One team gets a pick (or a first kill that grants an advantage and a prompt to engage), and then pushes into the opposing team. The team of five players is at a one-man disadvantage, a weakness their enemies capitalize on with their engagement. The team of five loses another player, dropping them down to four. Then they lose another. Somewhere in there, they may have gotten a kill, bringing to fight to a 3v5, but it doesn’t matter. The team that got the first pick has too much momentum and too great of a numbers advantage for the losing team to fight back with any success. The team of now three players crumbles, and the last three living players are killed off.
What point in that fight would be the best time to use Resurrect?
Using Resurrect when it’s a 3v5 or worse would probably mean not being able to get Resurrect off in the first place… but let’s cast that aside (no pun intended) and say that the player somehow manages it anyway. Okay, great! You got that ally back, and chances are that another ally is in critical condition from the damage they sustained over the past 1.75 seconds of you not healing them. That is, assuming they didn’t just die in that time.
But you know what? Let’s ignore that second flaw too. Let’s suppose that miraculously, Mercy pulled off the Resurrection and every other ally that was still alive was left unscathed during that 1.75 second cast time… It’s still a 4v5. Mercy’s team is still at a huge disadvantage.
Okay, let’s try using Resurrect earlier… How about on the first pick?
When trying to revive that first dead ally, four other teammates are there to cover for the Mercy; she has a good chance of getting Resurrect off, so that’s a good start.
What about Mercy’s other allies? Well, the enemy doesn’t have much momentum yet and there are four allies to spread damage among rather than only two, greatly reducing the chance of more allied deaths or even the chance of them dropping to critical condition. Both flaws presented in the late-fight Resurrection are heavily mitigated when using the ability earlier.
Not only that, but a successful Resurrection means the fight is back to a 6v6; the enemy no longer has the numbers advantage, and has likely backed off because of that. Teams typically want to engage with an advantage.
It is easier to stop a snowball before it starts than it is to try to stop it once it is rolling. Rather than using Resurrect to little or no effect later in the fight, it is best to prevent the scales from tipping in the enemy’s favor in the first place. Therefore, using Resurrect as early into the fight as possible is always the best option.
Resurrect during Mercy’s 1.x versions, however, was a different story. It had greater numerical complexity, it was more flexible in how it was used because it had no activation safety restrictions, its next use was unpredictable, and it was contending with other ultimates. As a result, it never had a consistent optimal execution. Its best-case scenario varied from fight to fight.
For example, if the Mercy waits to use Resurrect on four or more players every time, she’s reviving her team into an uphill battle every time; the enemy has the momentum, the positioning advantage, and the first shot. Furthermore, waiting to revive a bunch of players at once runs the risk of staggered deaths, risking a numbers disadvantage on top of those other disadvantages.
On the opposite end of the spectrum, using Resurrect to revive 1-2 players every time ran the risk of blowing Resurrect without depleting enemy ultimates first. Considering that “Helden sterben nicht!” was practically a green light for the enemy team to start activating ultimates, using Resurrect early in the fight against a loaded team without a plan B wasn’t really a good idea.
How was the best execution of the old Resurrect determined? That is where the difference in thought process between the two ability versions begins. The optimal time of use is predetermined for the current Resurrect, while the optimal use of the old Resurrect needed to be discovered on the fly for each individual scenario.
As for how the best execution of old Resurrect was determined… It depended upon a lot of variables. For starters, here are some variables and questions considered before the engagement begins:
- Living allies prior to the teamfight. Are we a full team, or are some allies dead/walking back from spawn?
- Living enemies prior to the teamfight. Does this put us at a numbers advantage/disadvantage? Is it possible that additional enemies will join the fight late?
- Ultimates held by present allies. Are there any allies I should prioritize when it comes time to Resurrect because of their ultimates?
- Ultimates held by present enemies. How many ultimates does the enemy team have at the ready? Does this put us at an advantage/disadvantage in primed ultimates? Are there any ultimates I should be weary of in particular?
- Missing enemies. Are there any enemies I cannot see/have not accounted for? Are they flanking? Where might they attack from? Am I their target?
- Allied positions. When things get hot, who can I fly to for safety? Will I still be able to heal the frontline from there, or will healing the tanks require another reposition?
- Mercy’s position. How can I place myself in a way that still allows me to support the team, but minimizes the enemy’s ability to shoot at me? If I am directly attacked, could a reach a position that gives me an advantage in that fight? Are there nearby healthpacks that I could take advantage of?
- Engagement patterns. Will the enemy get a pick and then engage, or will they fly through that choke point, ultimates blazing? If we are the team initiating, which pattern will we follow?
During the engagement, here are some of the variables the player might consider in the heat of battle:
- Midfight numbers. Are we at an advantage/disadvantage in this category? Will Resurrect give us a numbers advantage? Is Resurrect even necessary to win the fight?
- Enemy activity. How aggressive are they playing? Are they slowly gaining an upper hand, or has all hell broken loose? How aggressive is each one playing? Do the aggressive ones have their ultimates ready? Are they prepared for me to use Resurrect, or are they too blinded by their tunnel vision to realize I’m still here?
- Death locations. Are my allies close enough to one another to be revived in a single use of Resurrect? Is there a specific position I should attempt to reach to revive them all? Would reviving a particular ally provide our team with an advantage due to their location in relation to the enemy?
- Midfight ultimates. What ultimates are active? What ultimates do we still have? What ultimates does the enemy still have? How can I bait out those ultimates? What ultimates do our dead allies have? Are they in a position to use them?
- Respawn timers. Will more allies die before that first ally respawns? Should I revive that first ally now, or should I hold onto resurrect until more allies are down?
- Resurrect priorities. If I am forced to choose between reviving one ally or the other, which do I choose, based upon their hero, skill, and ultimate status?
- Enemy positions. Where is each living enemy? Are any flanking around in an attempt to kill me? Am I in the sights of any enemies?
- Safety/practicality limits. Is it too dangerous for me to have a presence in the fight anymore? Would healing my team even be useful at this point? Is it time for me to pull back and supplement healing with pistol fire?
- Post-rez outcome. Given all of the above variables, what are the chances that my team will win the fight after I resurrect them? If the chances are not in our favor, how can I tip them in our favor? Who should I try to finish off with my pistol while taking advantage of the invulnerability frames? If the post-rez fight will not be in our favor, should I bother using Resurrect at all?
There was a mind game that centralized around defining the best way to use Resurrect. It was a mental puzzle in a race against time. The mind game brought an additional layer of player engagement to a mechanically basic hero.
In contrast, Resurrect currently has a static optimal execution. The only real thought that goes into the ability’s use is safety, and its optimal execution serves to mitigate its hazards anyway. Rather than a series of questions, hypotheticals, and planning that require close attention to the fight, quick thinking, and refined awareness skills, Resurrect now only requires a check for a few specific parameters based upon the positions of visible allies and enemies.
“Will doing this get me killed?”
If the answer to that question is “no”, then it is clear to use Resurrect.
Analogy time! Who’s ready for an analogy that I totally haven’t used before?
Go outside and stand in front of (what I am assuming is) your friendly suburban neighborhood street. Now cross it, but don’t be an idiot about it. Be safe. Do what your parents drilled into you twelve-thousand times: Look both ways before crossing the street.
Look left. Are there any cars coming?
Now look right. Are there any cars coming?
If the answer to both of these questions is “no”, you may cross the street. Otherwise, you should wait for those cars to pass before crossing. Simple, isn’t it? The most difficult part of this entire “mental exercise” is remembering to check both ways in the first place, and that isn’t a concern anyway; it’s common sense.
Are you able to do this on a regular basis? Yes? Congratulations! You have mastered the art of not getting yourself killed while using Mercy 2.x’s Resurrect. The train of thought and mental demand between the two scenarios are the same.
Resurrect’s complexity was lost through the rework, removing its mind game and a layer of engagement. Resurrect hardly requires any thought to use anymore, and there isn’t any variation in how it should be used.
Players used to claim and complain that Mercy was a Resurrect bot… Mercy became more of a Resurrect bot because of the rework. Resurrect has been reduced to nothing more than a bot-like function.
Except the variation in optimal execution dictates that 5-mans, 1-mans, and anything in between are all valuable in different circumstances.
If you remove the ability to Resurrect 1 player, you cripple a possible use of Resurrect.
If you remove the ability to Resurrect 5 players, you cripple a possible use of Resurrect.
But is it really a net loss of resources if the enemy gains 3 more ultimates in that time?
5-mans were typically used because it was the Resurrect usage that best fit the circumstances. Those circumstances were rare, and thus, 5-mans were rare.
No, the second fight was the reason not to go for a 5-man.
They are not impossible.
Going by that logic, players shouldn’t be able to pull of the current Resurrect at all, given that it’s cast time has nearly double the duration, much harsher cast penalties, 1/3rd of the range, a LoS requirement, no self-heal upon execution, and no invulnerability.
That is incorrect. I can think of several ways to be sneaky and still pull off a 5-man.
For example, you can begin the cast on high ground and then drop down within range and LoS of the dead allies when the cast is nearly complete. There’s your 5-man. GA is off cooldown, so there’s your escape/evade until your team can assist you.
Nice 5-man.
Valkyrie isn’t nearly as good as you think it is.
A +10 health/second healing buff to Mercy’s primary fire and a 33% hostile damage output reduction on a 10 second cooldown is a lot more powerful than chain beams for 1950 charge.
Yeah, that happens when you put an ultimate on an E ability. Taking power away from Resurrect allows you to put more power in the rest of Mercy’s kit; hence the E ability and 60 health/second again.
Effective invincibility doesn’t mean anything if the person being invincible isn’t really contributing more to the fight than they normally are.
Mercy doesn’t heal at a rate of 50 health/second in Valkyrie.
An instant 150 HP AoE heal is enough to mitigate that last second of focus fire, refreshing Mercy’s HP back to full. At that point, she has GA to delay long enough for her team to help her.
.2 seconds longer.
I have never heard of this pencil composition.
Did you play Mercy during season 3?
Because living after a 4-man Resurrection was far from impossible if you played it right.
Drop in, rez, GA. Done.
“Encourages it” in that it heavily punishes doing so.
Right.
Here, go back to holding this:
Moving onto “Hide and rez”…
“We think it’s wrong to tell a main-healing character to go off and hide somewhere and stop healing for some period of time.”
But it is fine for a main-damage character to go off and hide somewhere and stop dealing damage for some period of time, like many heroes currently do in preparation for an ultimate?
In actuality, you are right; just not for the reason you think you are. You are correct because hiding was maladaptive for the team’s chance of victory, and therefore was a bad way to play her. Allow me to explain this in an even more elaborate manner than my past few megaposts.
The success of a mass-Resurrection (4+ revived players) depended upon several factors:
- The Mercy’s ability to survive and execute the ability in the first place (the obvious one).
- The number of players alive on each team after the Resurrection.
- The number of available ultimates held by each team after the Resurrection (but primarily the enemy team).
- The shock value of Resurrect against the enemy (by far the most important factor for the post-rez fight).
The last factor is more important than the other two post-rez factors because it determines what other factors need to advantage the Mercy in order to have a good chance at a successful Resurrection. As the enemy team is given time to reorganize and fire their first attacks at the newly Resurrected team, they would already have a positioning advantage and the first shot… that is, if the team was expecting the Resurrection.
If the enemy team is expecting the Resurrection, they will have the post-rez advantages of the first shot and additional positioning time. Of course, this is a very bad situation to be in for the newly revived team, requiring some very strong advantages of their own to compensate and have a chance at winning the fight. In this case, they would need both the numbers advantage and the ultimate ability advantage.
If the enemy team isn’t expecting the Resurrection, then the Mercy could probably get by with either the numbers advantage or the ultimate advantage and still have a chance at winning, as the enemy team might not capitalize on their positioning and first shot opportunities as well as they should due to the shock value of Resurrect.
How does “Hide and rez” fit into all of this, you might ask? Hiding before the fight removes the possibility of having enough of those advantages against the enemy team in the post-rez fight, and therefore any chance of a victorious post-rez fight against any team of similar skill.
Hiding leaves the initial fight to a 5v6, the missing hero on the Mercy’s team being the main healer and primary source of sustain. Obviously, this is a huge advantage for the team of 6 in the first fight, allowing them to steamroll over Mercy’s team with likely zero casualties, and ultimate expenditures used only to counter any of the opposition’s ultimates. On top of this, the team of 6 also now collectively has 2000-3000 more ultimate charge from killing 5 players in addition to any healing dealt over the duration of that fight. Thus, it hands the ultimate ability advantage to the team opposing the Mercy.
The opposing team, assuming they are paying even the slightest attention to what is happening around them, would notice that the enemy is crumbling very easily for a supposed 6v6, raising suspicions as to whether or not the fight really is a 6v6, quickly leading to the realization that the enemy Mercy is missing from the fight. From this, only one conclusion could logically be drawn; she’s waiting to use Resurrect. There goes the ultimate’s shock value.
At this point, even if the team of 6 somehow managed to sustain 2 casualties in the initial fight, it won’t matter. If both teams entered the fight with the same number of ultimates, the team that does not have the hiding Mercy has at least two more ultimates than the other team (2000+ ultimate charge, Mercy’s team used Resurrect). One or two offensive ultimates is the absolute maximum a team needs to wipe a freshly-revived team when they are expecting the Resurrection, resulting in the revived team staring down the barrel of a gun they have no chance of avoiding.
In contrast, a Mercy who stays with her team keeps the fight at a 6v6, granting her team more sustain and forcing the enemy to expend ultimates to overpower them. Once the ultimates started firing, the mercy would distance themselves from the fight, evade, or take cover, laying down pistol fire or amplifying damage rather than attempting to heal those for whom healing would be useless. As a result, the enemy was less likely to realize that Mercy has Resurrect (the enemy was comparatively difficult to kill, removing the prompt to think about why they were crumbling easily in the first place), Mercy’s team was more likely to pick off a few enemies, and Mercy has successfully baited more ultimates from the enemy team. As a result, her team has more advantages and fewer disadvantages in the post-rez fight.
The only cost to staying with the team was an increased chance of being picked off before being able to revive the team, which just follows the same risk choice explained in the Resurrect section; if taking more controllable risks now helps to mitigate the high risk later, then taking those smaller risks now is safer than not in the long run.
Consequently, reviving a team after hiding typically resulted in a second wipe, while staying with the team until it was unsafe to do so was more likely to yield favorable results. That is why it was “wrong to tell a main-healing character to go off and hide somewhere”. It was a bad tactic, as it usually backfired.
Rather than letting the issue resolve itself by fixing the SR exploit that ultimately led to the tactic’s rise in the first place, the developers decided to remove Resurrect as an ultimate entirely. They changed the thing that wasn’t the problem, and ended up pissing off the playerbase.
Sound familiar?
Anyway, I’ve used this example many times before, but removing Resurrect as an ultimate because some players abandoned their team leading to a second wipe is equivalent to removing Rocket Barrage as an ultimate because Pharah players too often blew themselves up with it. There’s no need to intervene; the tactic will die out on its own, so long as the ranking system isn’t feeding it.
Except subjectivity and emotion is the entire reason videogames exist. Their job is to make the player feel good; that’s why people buy and play videogames. They like how the games make them feel.
Another copy/paste inbound…
Unless the hero is a balance concern, Player 2’s perception of Player 1’s character isn’t relevant. It is given that Player 2’s perception of Player 1’s character is likely negative when playing against Player 1. On the other hand, Player 1’s perception of Player 1’s character is not a given in any videogame. For the videogame to be successful, Player 1’s perception of their own character, or how it feels to play their own character, needs to be positive. If that perception is negative, players will stop playing. As a result, Player 1’s experience with Player 1’s character is infinitely more important than Player 2’s perception of Player 1’s character.
In short, a player needs to feel empowered by their own actions. The player does not need to feel empowered, and in a PvP game, should not and will not feel empowered, by the actions of their opponents.
Player 1’s experience with Player 1’s character was breached and disregarded when Blizzard tried to make Player 2’s perception of Player 1’s hero positive… which they also failed to do. By attempting to change that which neither needed to be changed nor could be changed, the balance team tampered with something that should never be altered.
Pulse Bomb doesn’t revive dead players.
If you say so
If it has a longer range, how would you able to chose who to Res if someone dies in a pile?
Does she really need more survivability though?
I disagree
Sure it is. I’ve hit fade and dumped it on the floor loads of times.
Never try to blow up a Moira
I mean, you can, you just gotta catch her on cooldown.
That’s an interesting comparison. I’d say we probably need to share a definition of what “in a horrible place” means (and to be fair - maybe a less loaded term than either “in a horrible spot” or “slightly subpar”). I’d settle for the following: that the character’s win rates in most tiers indicate that using this character is likely to lead to deranking, that the other characters that fill the same role don’t have the first property, and that the previous two properties are not likely to go away unless changes are made. I think this definition works better for characters that are relatively consistent and low variance, since we’re looking at averages and those describe low variance characters better than high variance characters.
Personally, I’m also adding in the game feel of the character. She feels really off right now, she doesn’t feel like she’s filling the main healer role properly, and it makes the game play experience highly frustrating. I can understand if you don’t want that last one in the shared definition but I think that many Mercy players feel that right now and deserves some attention from Blizzard.
I think that Ana was in a horrible place for the longest time and needed changes to bring her back. Mercy’s current stats are worse than what Ana had for the past six months.
Tracer is at or slightly above tier average win rate in masters and gm, and slightly below it in diamond. This reflects tracer being a very high mechanical skill character. She’s also a character that has a lot of variance. She can be useless and she can carry a game. It really depends on the player. I’d say Tracer is much harder to understand using general averages.
I think McCree is in a bad spot. His win rates at most tiers have been consistently abysmal for a long time, his ult is pretty bad, he’s too easily countered, and the people he counters are not meta. He’s not likely to be picked unless changes are made.
GM from seasons 4-6. Haven’t played competitive since.
2 Likes