Put hero bans in quick play

General Discussion
1

This feature has been a resounding success. It allows high ranked players to prevent toxic meta picks from becoming overbearing. It allows low ranks to mold the casual experience to their liking. Most players ban for casual purposes. The only reason you would ban a hero like Sombra or Mercy is because they make the game anti fun, not for competitive reasons. These heroes are clearly not over powered or even strong, one could make the argument they are quite weak and need buffs. However they are hated because they ruin the casual aspect of the game.

What is quick play if not a casual experience? It makes just as much sense, maybe even more, to bring hero bans into the casual playlist to create a more casual experience. The only counter argument against this is by not allowing one tricks to play certain heroes it ruins the casual aspect of the game. Again, many hero bans especially in low ranks are done for casual purposes, not competitive ones. I’ll point you to several threads documenting hero bans.

In this post out of a sample of 51 matches the top 5 bans were Mercy, Sombra, Zarya, Sojourn and Ball. Out of these you can argue only one, maybe two are meta picks. Mercy, Sombra and Ball are banned due to being antifun heroes.

This post has a sample of 20 matches with popular bans being Sombra, Ana, Ball, Sojourn, Zarya and Torb. Again we see a similar pattern of heroes with only a couple who are actually considered op.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Overwatch/comments/1k5ofgo/i_played_25_games_already_and_these_were_all_the/

This reddit post has a sample of 25 games. The most banned heroes being Widow, Mercy, Doom, Ball and Sombra.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Overwatch/comments/1kicdyx/hero_ban_stats_after_100_ranked_matches/

Here’s a sample of 100 matches. Most banned heroes are Sombra, Mercy, Sojourn, Widow and Cass.

We see a clear trend based on the data the community has been able to compile. Hero bans are not exclusively strong/meta defining heroes. They tend to be heroes the community deems to be anti fun or an impediment to the casual experience. Being that quick play is a mode in part made to act as a more casual version of ranked it makes sense to allow players to curate the hero pool to fit into that casual form.

17 Likes
2

No. Play comp if you want to ban something.
People who want to play any hero they like can do so in quick play. Anybody that doesn’t want to play against said hero can stick to comp.

46 Likes
3

You did not contend with my argument. Hero bans are being made to create a more causal experience. Quick play being the more casual mode makes sense to bring over the feature being used for such purposes.

1 Like
4

Ok. Remove the bans from comp then since it’s for the casual experience

15 Likes
5

You missed the first paragraph of my post. High ranks are using hero bans for more competitive reasons. Low ranks use bans for casual. They have a dual nature and the casual aspect cannot be ignored. Thus bringing the casual buffer to the casual playlist is only logical.

6

Sounds good to me bc bans would make qp so much better. But if they allow bans in qp then what would be the point of comp? In the eyes of the wider community, of course?

2 Likes
7

The difference is a more balanced game modes with attack/defense phase and a number to indicate your skill.

2 Likes
8

You’re ignoring a big aspect of the casual quick play experience which is being able to play and practice any hero you want.

14 Likes
9

I like bans - but keep it in competitive.

I only support bans on the premise that there is an alternate mode where players can experience the game without them. Bans are a competitive tool, not a casual necessity. You want bans? Play comp, imo

14 Likes
10

You have conflicting ideals here of picking anything you want vs not playing against anti fun. The data clearly shows players choose to ban anti fun even in the “competitive” playlist. It’s reasonable to assume this trend would only be amplified in the casual playlist.

11

It’s reasonable to expect said casuals to stick to comp and go about banning their casual picks for the casual experience. Like they’re already doing.

1 Like
12

I would have agreed with you a few weeks ago but the trends show players don’t ban for competitive reasons. It is logical to assume that such casual reasoning behind hero bans would only increase in the casual playlist which thus explains why hero bans are not simply a competitive tool. They are just as much a casual one.

13

I don’t think this is true. Unranked is its own thing.

Two of the IMO more important uses for QP that contradict your idea are:

  • get into a game quick with no hassle
  • practice a hero you want yo learn.

QP is not the gamemode where Blizz should add more barriers before players can start shooting.

8 Likes
14

This is debatable. I’ve seen some people describe ranked this way as well.

This is a much better argument. Hero bans would make quick play not as quick :slight_smile: however blizzard did a good job making this version more streamlined or efficient than what we see in Marvel Rivals for example. It depends if players are willing to wait an extra minute to create the casual experience of their choice. My counter argument would be that given players in the ranked playlist already ban for casual purposes it’s reasonable to assume players in quick play would do even more so.

15

Its bad enough that this awful feature - which no, is not proven as a success here - is in the game at all

Pleas dont let it infect other modes like QP

16

If you already dislike the feature is irreverent to the logic of my argument. Assuming you were neutral to the feature then what would be your counter? I laid out my reasoning with data that hero bans are made for casual purposes even in the competitive playlist. It follows from this that the feature would also be used for this purpose in the casual playlist.

17

I get what youre saying - But I dont agree. Id actually argue that they are banning for “competitive” reasons.

Just because players arent picking bans based purely on “strength” or meta, doesnt mean theyre not picking bans for “competitive reasons”.

What players are doing frequently is picking bans based on what they find frustrating to deal with. Maybe its frustrating to have that hero on their team, maybe its frustrating to have that hero on the enemy team - The point is theyre frustrating, and theyre curating their competitive experience around those perceived frustrations.

Sombra is obviously banned a lot, despite not being “Strong” at most appreciable levels of play. But thats the thing- I know a LOT of players who ban sombra because she isnt strong, and they dont want to risk having a sombra on their team. Or maybe theyre banning ball not because ball is “too difficult to deal with”, but because they dont like how they have to play with a such a solo-oriented tank. Or maybe…

Id argue thats a very valid “competitive” reason to ban these characters, regardless of strength.

Bans are fine in competitive where you have the stresses of a rank on the line to me - Giving players some tools to help mitigate some frustrations in that environment doesnt bother me. But players need a place where “bans” arent a thing as well. “Non competitive” where you have no rank to worry about is IMO the ideal place to allow all heroes to be up for grabs.

8 Likes
18

what I stated was entirely relevant, and I stand by every word

it is a horrificly bad feature in competitive

it would be even worse in qp

so no

19

How many people have stopped playing though compared to gain? If its a increase then its a win. But what if its a popular main?

20

The thing is that all these nothing burger differences (except longer games) were already there, and yet nobody gave a f about comp. But now with bans, we actually have a good mechanic that acts as bait for players that would otherwise not even touch comp. Players like me, kinda. So, if they put bans in qp, then they would lose potential comp players imo, which is why they wont do it.

2 Likes