That’s entirely subjective. That opinion immediately changes once your favorite character starts getting perma-banned out the gate. It doesn’t even guarantee that they game will be good because even if you ban one cheesy character, another one will just take it’s place and it will always feel like you never have enough bans.
No. The solution is to balance the game by removing things that are objectively unfair. Things with zero counter-play or limited counter-play (limited counter-play like Suzu being created to counter Anti after Anti had already been a problem for so long with practically 0 counters).
true. but like hawkeye she is losing her dmg buff soon anyhow. Might change breakpoints for her on certain heroes.
OW is the living proof that waiting for devs to fix a hero isn’t a good idea. How many seasons was sojourn busted in high elo? 9?
So far the only heroes that have been semi perma banned in MR are hela and hawkeye, but guess what, that then forced everyone to try different heroes and so now you’ll see wolverine bans, even ironman bans etc.
Exactly the point I keep making. Trade one problem for another, then the banned heroes will get nerfed, and the cycle repeats itself with other heroes. But some people are clearly incapable of understanding that.
I think you’re deliberately missing a fundamental point here, I can’t tell.
The problem heroes are still usually banned, they’re not trading one problem for another.
The alternative is a game that DOA when every lobby has a hawkeye and hela in high elo. In what world is that preferable? Those heroes would have oppressed the lobbies so much that other dps heroes dont get as much playtime, and it would be a scenario where ironman would be considered F tier because he would be always deleted.
Just tell me you don’t play MR at high elo so I can understand you’ve no experience here with it.
All these people here who are against hero bans are hypothesizing scenarios that aren’t reality. I don’t get it, where do you get the confidence to say these things when other games actually have this mechanic and it doesn’t pan out how you say it would?
even if a character did get ban because that hero counters their main. they’ll be another hero similar to also be a counterpick. like if widow gets banned and then reaper runs the match. you can still go ashe or Hanzo.
so as long as it’s only like 4 heroes in total who gets banned it’ll be fine
here’s the thing, you’re right that is the best solution nobody will deny that but that just isn’t going to happen and we’ve all accepted that sad fact. so we’re talking about bans because that’s more practical and realistic.
When talking about enjoyment of the game it’s always going to be subjective. it’s pointless to argue using your own personal feelings, because the otherside will too and you’ll get nowhere, instead you should argue about how the majority feels
is their a possibility that your favorite may get constantly banned absolutely. but am i going to feel bad for those players? no. if you’re character is getting constantly banned, then you should take the hint that no one likes your character and try another one. and if you can’t play another hero in a game that they’ve most likely been playing for years, then that’s entirely on you.
and will people always have that one character they’ll have problems with, yeah but it won’t be nearly as bad as the one they hate the most, and I’m sure if you ask players, they’d only name off like 4-5 heroes they genuinely hate, and only like 3 of them would they want to ban.
for example for me it’s:
1.Widow
2.Tracer
3.Mauga
4.Ana
do i have a problem with any other hero in the game, not reeeeally closest is hog but more of he’s bad design not sm a i want to remove him kinda feeling
Of course it is, everything is subjective, but some metas are enjoyed by a larger amount of players than others, those should take priority.
Like who? Widow? Mercy? Ana? I guarantee you more players would enjoy those games vs people being angry they can’t play their main.
I mean this is true, but that would hopefully be reduced with balancing, but ofc we all know how the OW team does balance, so i doubt that would happen even in a world with bans unfortunately.
You’re saying the solution is better balance, in a perfect world that’s probably true, but we’re in this reality where we’ve had this dev team balancing this game for years and look where it’s gotten us.
The answer isn’t just more balance because it hasn’t worked.
Exactly this. They’ve tried balancing this game for years, it really hasn’t worked and in most cases has done more damage.
Why keep attempting the impossible? Just let all heroes have their wow factor, their strength, their identity, their fun. And let hero bans in Comp at high elo help with the rest/competitive integrity.
Banning only happens if all the player in the match have rank of diamond or above.
You start the match by picking heroes so that your team see what you want to play and how the team comp is. Now starts a democratic vote on what get banned. Both team vote at same time. After that you get 5 seconds to see what got banned. Shorty after that a second vote starts for the second ban.
All votes are decided by majority. If the votes are a tie then one of the most voted heroes get banned at random. It can happen that both teams ban the same hero at the same time. Ban time is 20 seconds if no one votes for anything in that time then nothing gets banned.
Bans have very strong impact on the meta and lead to more variety of picks.
And if a hero can run amok because there is exactly ONE hero that counters them to a sufficient degree, maybe that hero should have their design looked at.
It’ll make a difference for hela- but it won’t change much for Hawkeye. It won’t change how he plays. He’ll still have his 1 shot.
Hela will still likely always be banned even though the damage nerf affects a break point. Her kit is blatantly busted and does way too much. Easily the worst designed character in the game.
It’ll be interesting to see if the devs see ban rates and whether that influences the speed at which they nerf / deal with problematic heroes.
I feel that’s been a large problem for the OW team - the response time has been problematic for most of overwatches existence.
Hero bans aren’t an excuse to avoid reworking heroes. Pre-rework Pharah would have to be perma-banned, resulting in you still being unhappy. A hero who is perma-banned would have to be reworked, or restrictions around bans would have to be put in place.
No. Absolutely not. Hero bans would negatively affect the metal ranks, and do more harm than good. Hero bans should be for Diamond+, because at least there the players understand you want to ban meta picks rather than banning heroes that they just don’t like playing against.
Players in the metal ranks struggle against Moira because they’re incapable of panning their camera 180°. They’ll cry that Genji is weak, after they’ve just burned dash up mid, and right into the enemy team. They’ll say Sombra is overpowered, but do nothing to make it harder for her to secure elims. They’ll ignore the Widow who’s making it impossible to play the objective, because of a ‘someone else will do it’ mentality. The list goes on and on.
Metal rank players have so many things going on that keep them from climbing. It’s not just that they struggle against certain heroes. They’re still learning the fundamentals. Hero bans don’t do anything good for players below Diamond.
Why is banning heroes based on dislike of playing against them less valid? Genuine question.
These all sound like perfect reasons to implement hero bans at all ranks. Different heroes are going to be different strengths depending on the skill of both the player and their opponents.
I don’t think it’s less valid that low ranks struggle against Moira than high ranks struggle against Tracer.