I dunno why people are fixating so much on the ban system element.
Scratch that. I can see why people are fixating on it.
Anyways, in the context of Jayne’s pugs etc it’s a very interesting element. It’s interesting to see the choices behind the bans, how the game plays out with such things in place, etc, all of which illuminates more nuanced ways of balance, how people perceive balance, and how people play the game.
It’s a controlled experimentation and discussing the results can have a lot of positive benefits potential for this game’s community.
Fixation on any singular element of this game is detrimental to the goals. This game is incredibly complex. Arguing over if there should or should not be a hero ban system is, imho, a lot of wasted effort. Discussing how hero bans would influence the game, and trying to understand why it’d influence the game in those ways, is definitely worth while discussion.
I wonder what heroes would be banned in plat. Consider console players hate pharah I wonder how often she would be banned. As a plat, I don’t mind pharmacy
I don’t think so either. I think it’s a lot of missing the forest for the tree. Fixating on the ban system, instead of discussing the results of it. How it effects how games play out, who and why people ban what, etc, as it’s a good experiment in that sense.
Good questions. Tbh it’d be really interesting to see the differences between the ranks, and also the platforms… Could be REALLY illuminating in the differences between them, and give us a better understanding to work with when trying to adjust heroes balance on the ladder.
According to Scott Mercer, the only effect grouping have in matchmaking is that the system tries to match you with a similar-sized team. You are still playing against a team with around the same MMR as your own team.
A bunch of vocal players, I agree. Being the vast majority of the player base is debatable. Even in this very forums, you can see every thread that talks about the state of the game you have people arguing for multiple sides.
It might be a consensus between pro players and high profile streamers, but they have a perspective on the game that clashes with how the average player see Overwatch. And just like anything worthy discussing, there are people that think the game should cater to the pro players, and people that think they should cater for the majority of the playerbase (ie, silver~plat players).
Please, don’t make statements that bold unless you can back them up.
I believe it’s worthy discussing the ban system. As I said in the OP, I think Jayne is doing a great work coordinating those scrims.
I’m just saying that because something looks like a good idea at first sight it might have unintended consequences that people excited about the idea might miss until they give a longer thought about that.
Jayne himself is refining the system as the days pass. He is considering a “pick” phase that can’t be banned. He expressed that this system might only work in the pro tier, but not in ladder. It’s all there in the video GreyFalcon linked.
I’m just asking for people to consider everything before advocating for something because it looks cool.
The idea was that they could enforce picks only on certain categories, and a lot of people were forcing 2-2-2 comps with no flex slots. Then eventually people got tired into being forced into always play the same role all the time (most LFG had enforced roles by default), and then the system imploded because people stopped using it.
I understand why people thought LFG would help in the game, and I still think it is a good tool to have in the game. The community broke the tool themselves by discouraging people from joining random teams because 90% of them were either 6 flex anything-goes or rigid 2-2-2 with role lock.
The issue is that it sets a precedence that OW will not be able to come back from. I never really liked the ban system when other game does it, and having it in OW is not what I like.
Not to mention I feel like it’ll side-step and leave the elephant in the room instead of addressing it. Like if a hero is imba or OP, Blizz should work to fix it. While I agree that in a pro environment, it works, I do not think the system itself should be implemented on the ladder since it will choke out a lot of things.
The results of this is one thing, I just do not like the future implementation and what it’ll bring to the health of the game. I agree that it’ll solve an issue, but that brings other issue. That’s my opinion on it though.
I’m not saying Jayne shouldn’t do it, but rather, I just don’t think that the results should be taken as word of law (Which, I think others will.).
For sure. People will run with it and say all sorts of wild stuff. Just how it goes with anything. We’re powerless against those people, nothing we can do.
All we can really do is just make sure they don’t distract us from the things we should be discussing, and the implications and such things like Jayne’s experiment expose.
I don’t think a hero ban system for the ladder is something even remotely considering at this stage of the game. However, I do find the data in a sense coming from what Jayne’s doing VERY interesting.
I like the idea behind LFG not as a tool to form a perfect team, but as a tool to meet more socially-inclined players to chat while playing the game. They could be a start to eventually form a team, but anyone that thought they would make a well-oiled machine in 30 minutes to play like a Tier 2 team in Contenders were surely disappointed.
All hero classes games start rolling with a ban system once they have enough hero but they will be a ways down the road for overwatch they need more heroes first before regular play gets bans.
I don’t think anyone expects a semi-pro pug to really reflect what will happen on ladder. If only for the fact that the semi-pro scene is far smaller and targeted bans (i.e. banning Ana against ML7) are far more effective since you know who the one-tricks and specialists are.
Not to say that it can’t work, you can know who a OTP is by playing with them fairly frequently, or even them being in the last game. If someone popped off on Widow, a ban system would let you target that.
However, I personally think it would have a net positive on the ladder.
It’d help solve easily one of the biggest problems on the ladder, where certain heroes dominate at certain levels of play without forcing Blizzard into the decision where a hero either has to be dumpstered for regular players because they’re too good in the higher levels (Tracer or Widowmaker comes to mind here), or where you’ll never see a hero at a professional level because to give them that level of power would make them oppressive at lower levels (Sym, Torb, Bastion, etc).
I think the biggest net positive is that it gives the playerbase a way to quarantine overpowered heroes.
I don’t think it’s unfair to say that when heroes are overpowered enough to warp the meta, whether it be Ana, Tracer, Genji, Widowmaker, Mercy, Dva, Doomfist, Brigitte, or whoever ends up being overpowered.
Not to mention that ironically a ban system opens up a huge amount of the roster to be played. Can a Dva-less Dive withstand a Roadhog or Reaper? Can a Brig or Zarya-less GOATS deal with a Junkrat or Pharah raining death upon them?
If you take Widowmaker out of the picture, suddenly Soldier and McCree are far more workable since they don’t have to compete with a Sniper who has better range AND better burst than them.
Even then I don’t think that banning out Doomfist, Moira or Brigitte simply because you don’t like playing against them is completely unfair. When I play League of Legends, I frequently ban Yasuo or Blitzcrank, not because I think either of them are overpowered, but just because they’re super annoying to deal with.
Fair points. I think the game, and the hero pool right now, is just far too young to be pulling a hero ban type system on the majority of the ladder. While I definitely agree it would potentially solve some very popular complaints, I don’t think it’d be worth it to implement at this time. It’d have many complicating factors as well.
I think we need like another 10 heroes or so before we get into the potential for ladder wide hero ban type stuff.
Personally I’m not against it myself, it’s just I’m trying to keep in mind all of those people that share a different opinion than I do.
I think the relatively small hero ban just necessitates a different kind of ban system.
I think putting off such a system until we hit X heroes is unrealistic with the current pace that the game is releasing heroes. Using your example, if we waited until say, Hero 40 to implement a ban system, then if Blizzard maintain their current 4 month hero cycle, then we won’t hit hero 40 until like March or July 2022.
Will Overwatch even be around for that long if they don’t implement systems to solve how deeply unsatisfying the ladder system currently is?
I understand the appeal of releasing more heroes, especially more Tanks and Healers before implementing a ban system, but I don’t think there’s any realistic number you can really wait for that will be in a decent timeline.
Oh boy… I agree with you in a lot of ways. I just don’t want to incur the wrath of all those I know that will have a problem with what you’re saying so…
Yeah it’s good to see that. And you make good arguments, I find myself agreeing with you a lot, and when I don’t I still definitely respect and have to take into consideration your points.
Keep fighting the good fight. I’m trying to be a good boy because I think I might be close to a perma ban so…
