Reverting to Mass Res - And the Common Misconception


#148

I disagree. Resurrection kept fights going. Therefore, it was not only part of the team fight, it prolonged them.

Not sure what point you meant to bring with the high rank mercy wanting buffs to res. If your team consists of just 1 main healer. You were usually dead to begin with. If you had a secondary healer, and you were in your team and they couldn’t keep you alive as the main healer, that’s the fault of the healers and / or the tanks.

A team with just one main healer is simply bad team composition. And I disagree, if one of your 5 team mates is a secondary healer, you are not a “dead team”. If at that point you rezzed 5 people and they still couldn’t hold the point, you were simply outplayed.

And saying “high ranking mercies this” and “low ranking mercies that” is also irrelevant, because of your previous point, so thank you for that clarification.

Not really. Mass res is subjectively the more balanced ultimate. It had a lot less nerfs than Valkyrie, and Mercy wasn’t a must pick across the ranks while having it, like she did with Valkyrie. That’s just the facts.

I’m not referring to just a revert without tweaks either, which I have already explained in previous posts…

Incorrect. The failure or success of a change isn’t tied to “how many buffs or nerfs” a hero gets, that failure is tied to how unbalanced that hero is in terms of pick and winrates. If a hero is 100% picked all the time WITH nearly a 100% winrate, that is a failed rework. Valkyrie has had that, and needed to be nerfed a hell of a lot of times just to balance it out. That is what I would call a failure.

Mass res Mercy had no such problems. She had much low pickrates, and even lower winrates. All that was needed was to tweak her ult. No one wanted them to rework the hero into an OP goddess.

  • Mass res benefits the main hero.
  • A lot of people still want Mass res to return.

So… remind me how this isn’t a “main factor?”

That is subjective opinion, not backed by fact.

That is once again subjective opinion, not backed by fact. Where have I ever said “I think all rezzes are bad because Rez on E is bad?” in any of my posts?

That is your opinion. From my experience, she’s always meant to be played defensively as a healer who benefits most from keeping fights going over time, and her kit most benefits from defensive play.

The 50hps nerfed Valk is not a good initiation ult, because it doesn’t give enough sustain to secure an effective push like other initiation ultimates can (trans, soundbarrier, or even nano boost). An initiation ult should give you the ability to sustain heavy focus fire, so you actually can secure the point (or atleast make it there) through loads of damage. Mercy’s current ult with it’s lackluster sustain healing does that job horribly.

But these are both just opinions here, so we’re going to have to agree to disagree on that. Though a single target beam that gives a lot more healing in ult would be admittedly, a nice compromise to her valk healing problem.

Here’s the way I think of it.

Initiator = Needs some sort of Burst healing to outheal consistent damage through a choke point.

Sustain = Needs consistent healing to maintain heroes through inconsistent damage while defending.

Making Mercy an initiator would require her to have the tools to push her team through lots of damage. Unfortunately, her ult doesn’t do that. 50hps is not enough to get you through a team wiping ult or heavy focus fire, it just doesn’t happen, and is part of the reason why people now pick Ana over her in Platinum and above. The cons outweigh the pros when your enemies have half-decent aim in defending.

I completely disagree, supports should be able to to both. Case in point, Transcendence, Sound barrier, (and formerly) Mass resurrect.

You’re kind of oversimplifying there a bit. Yes, you are putting bodies to make up for the loss, as that is the point of resurrect, which was rewarding. There was still a chance that the rezzed allies could turn the tide if they were skilled enough, which made fights interesting.

If you are getting steamrolled and you’re initiating in Valk, you take no major role in that fight. You get to watch your team get steam rolled, and you end up back at spawn. There is a lot less engagement and the risk is much lower… since you’re high in the skybox. You are still playing passively if you want to be effective in Valk, since Mercy does not have the toolkit to secure a point with as much impact as her support counterparts.

And it was balanced out with the fact that she originally had one of the best Ultimates in the game, so the drawbacks were justified.

I’m not concerned with “selling” you anything. However, the facts are this.

  • Mercy in 1.0 was never an OP moth for 5 months and then nerfed 11+ times just to “achieve perfect balance”.

  • Mercy 1.0 didn’t have 30-40% of her playerbase leave due to the healing nerfs that made her even more unrewarding to play.

  • Mercy 1.0 wasn’t a must pick, causing people to hate her players for reasons outside of their control.

  • Mercy 1.0 didn’t have essentially a “spectator camera” as an ultimate due to how arguably unfun it was to use.

But hey, I won’t judge you. If you really love Mercy as she is right now, more power to you and continue on playing her to your hearts content. I’m unsatisfied with how Mercy’s ultimate ended up. No, I think they could have taken her back, and given her the minor tweaks that kept her balanced while maintaining her rewarding playstyle.

“This rework was a huge success.”

~Sincerely Yours xoxo,
a Lover of True, Fair, and Fun Balance.
xavvypls
:blue_heart:


#149

Treating a controversial and vitriolic user as the gospel isn’t really helping sway anyone… Ijs


#152

If you wanna go technical, a teamfight is over when one of the teams or players active in the fight die. If a Mercy swoops down and rezzes a dead team from nowhere, she’s starting another teamfight.

Supports using defensive ultimates prolong teamfights, unless you’re using a tempo rez in the middle of the fight you’re prolonging it.

Its perfectly relevant, because of this:

Standard Overwatch composition, and what the game asks you to have- is two healers. One main healer, one off healer. Main healers either lack utility or consistency, which is why when high ranked mercy players died for a Rez, their teams would die afterwards, as their off healers couldn’t keep a team alive by themselves until the Mercy player re-spawned and joined the fight.

Mercy was considered a troll pick because of this.

Ah, so you want a Rework, not a real revert. Makes sense.

This is subjective, and not backed up by facts at all. (something something my opinion is fact)
Facts are:
Resurrection got a range nerf
Resurrection got an invulnerability buff
Resurrection got a mobility buff
Resurrection got a GA cooldown buff

If Mass Resurrection was objectively or subjectively balanced, it would had never needed buffs, ever.

rework in British
(riːˈwɜːk )
verb (transitive)

  1. to use again in altered form
  2. to rewrite or revise
  3. to reprocess for use again

A failed rework is a change that doesnt changes anything. Whenever you like Valkyrie Rework or not, it changed Mercy’s gameplay and playstyle. That’s a successful rework.

However, balance-wise…

There it is, pack it up boys.

I don’t see why you keep making these discussion threads up if you’re gonna keep saying “subjective this subjective that” to others that doesn’t agrees with your premise even if your premise is subjective too.

This means that her rez on a fixed 30 second cooldown is way too forgiving, allowing you to make bad rezzes without having to worry about the consequences -

This is subjective, not backed up by facts. Unless you have official data that says players are allowing enemies to pull off bad rezzes/rez is too forgiving?

Transcendence doesnt stops pushes. Transcendence can be outdamaged and is easily cancelled by biotic grenade.
Neither does Sound Barrier. Sound barrier is easily outdamaged and hardcountered by EMP.
They prevent, not stop. And while you agree supports should do both, none of them do.

Not to mention, these ultimates are off-healer ultimates. They compensate for the fact off-healers have low hps. I don’t see why Mercy should have a main healer kit and an off-healer ultimate. So much for not make her "Jack-Of-All-Trades-Master-Of-Everything”

Did you forgot Valkyrie adds chain damage beams? Initiation ultimates dont need burst damage. Case in point: nanoboost has always been the initiation ultimate of this game, and since 2016 it never needed to give burst damage to initiate a push. It is until now that it’s been given burst heal to be used as a defensive ultimate.

Which is something allies still do to this day, with rez on E. Still rewards you for putting bodies back on point, resurrected allies still turn tides and make fights interesting. None of what you said is “unique” from Mass Rez.

Yeah, so lets revert her to that state, no not be touched again because it was “balanced”. I dont know why blizzard listened to the Mercy mains back then, Resurrection was “one of the best ultimates in the game”, They shouldn’t had cared about viability when you could had the best ult.


#153

BALANCED =/= In a good position…


#154

IDK why you say mass rez isn’t bad. It’s obscenely toxic! Sure, you can compare a 5 man rez to a 5 man wipe, but don’t you understand that a 5 man wipe shouldn’t be a thing you can get back from? That’s too safe! When the NFL improved the helmet to prevent concussion, they did it so well the playes started using it as a point of impact during tackles!

Let blizzard handle that. And if they f-ed up, you can count on the responders here to charge your “I told you so” ult. I can agree that her ult now is a tad sad, but I also don’t wish to relive the time when mercy was absolutely crucial ever again. So leave her well enough alone now that’s she balanced or whatever.


#155

And Mercy by extension, still prolonged them when she had mass res. I’m not sure if we’re using the same definition of teamfight here. Maybe for you it is when all the active players die, but for me when she resses a team mate, that “death” is undone, and thus, no longer counted. I’m sure there’s no debate regarding the fact that no matter what the “technical term” would be, when Mercy had mass res, fights were longer overall than when she had Valk.

It states the need for “another healer”, nothing more, nothing less. There isn’t any prompt that tells you to specifically use a main healer and an off healer, and there could still be success in comps that utilize two main healers instead of just one.

I do understand your point though, but I’ve seen two main healers do quite decently in high ranks, and off healers that were able to hold the team together until their team mates return. There is no set strategy to win 100% the time, so there are always exceptions to how supports are played.

Well yes and no. Mercy was considered a troll pick also due to the meta at the time. Triple tank was incredibly strong, and thus, the comp favored burst healing over sustained healing. Mercy was simply outclassed by Ana in most ranks and her Resurrection ability wasn’t worth the risk of a hero with low self-defense capabilities. There were many factors that made her a troll pick, which is why I’d argue that the buff was intended to make her more consistent in general. Whether or not it was the right buff is up for debate.

No. What I am referring to is what I call “a revert with tweaks.”

If her ability started on Q, was put on E, then back on Q, I would consider that a revert. If they tweak her afterwards, I would consider that a revert with tweaks.

I would consider a rework as being something that’s added to the hero that is completely new and never done before. Mercy has had res on Q before, so it doesn’t exactly qualify as a rework in my eyes, or in the very least “a complete rework” if that makes sense.

So are you going to argue that Valkyrie was more balanced than Mass res?

Here’s some facts for you:

  • Valkyrie was nerfed a lot more than Mass res.
  • Valkyrie made Mercy way more OP for 5 months straight.
  • Media coverage of pro players and twitch streamers and their own OWL staff criticizing Mercy only appeared AFTER Valkyrie existed.
  • Valkyrie Mercy has lost more of it’s playerbase than Mass Res Mercy did. A whopping 30-40%.

Show me where this is the text-book definition of what Blizzard considers “objectively or subjectively balanced”? Otherwise, this is your own subjective opinion, not backed by facts.

Oh, so we get to be technical now? Okay sure.

Let’s look back as to why the rework was made in the first place. It was intended to ultimately be the answer to “Hide and Res”.

What does Mercy still need to do to successfully rez? She needs to hide.

So while it changed “some” of the way Mercy played, it did not overall “change her playstyle”. Mercy still needs to hide in order to res, she still needs to stay int he back lines in order to prevent harassment, she still does almost everything she’s done before save for her ultimate, and her ultimate still has not addressed the problem of making her “more engaging and fun to play”

So, no… The rework, by your logic, is still a failure.

A discussion isn’t a conversation where one is going to agree 100% with everything you say. I’m sorry if my opinion differs from yours, but if you aren’t going to point out your points as opinions, I am free to call it subjective. Also I think I’ve been pretty clear when I’m giving a subjective opinion. The problem arises with one has an opinion and acts as if it’s fact. :smirk:

Not really subjective. Whether you like it or not, Res on E is too forgiving. In fact, it’s so forgiving, that it’s been considered by Jeff himself as acting “like another ultimate.”

“We tried to move Resurrection to a secondary ability, and the ability, right now, in current Overwatch, isn’t playing out as a secondary ability; it’s playing out like another ultimate ability”

Also I’m sorry, did I ever say “Players are allowing enemies to pull off bad resses?” No, I don’t think I have, so I don’t know where you’re pulling that from [citation needed].

But allow me to clarify. The point is that Rez on E is infact extremely powerful, because it is now, spoon fed to you whether or not you earned it - eliminating most of the real risk. Titanium explains this problem beautifully. And if you’re still looking for validation on whether or not this is backed by fact, I suggest you look into their thread, because this was made with months and months of research looked into the hero.

Eh, not always. A well formed team could take advantage of a well timed Lucio or Zen Ult and completely stop a push in it’s tracks - forcing a regroup. So in all, that’s pretty subjective and situational. We’ll have to agree to disagree there since both of these are just opinions. Sorry.

I’m sorry, where did I say that “I think Mercy should have an off-healer ultimate?” [Citation needed].

“burst damage”? I think you mean burst healing? Because an initiator ult like Nano-boost certainly allows some heroes normal damage to be upgraded to what we consider as “burst damage”.

You used “burst damage” again, so I assume that you actually meant burst damage. So I’m sorry but your comment of

Completely contradicts itself… Nano-boost Boosts both your damage output and your damage taken. If I recall… It’s always done that.

This is true. It still doesn’t take away the fact that it was an initiator ult, made to now be both for initiating or sustaining.

1 ressed ally has 1/5 the impact of ressing 5 allies. There is a lot less impact per res and a lot less reward. One is earned, the other is not. So yes, they are two completely different experiences.

Thanks for sharing your opinion! :slight_smile:

~Sincerely Yours xoxo,
a Lover of True, Fair, and Fun Balance.
xavvypls
:blue_heart:


#156

Valk as it is now can’t be the reason she was OP, ultimates cannot carry heroes as we saw plainly with the fact Mercy was considered a D lister despite being “frustrating”
And if 60 HPS was still able to warrant that D lister then the only factor that really has any impact now is rez. Which is what should have been looked at instead of this lazy nerf


#157

So why is it okay for other ultimates (offensive, setup, and support) to be 1:0-6, but not for Resurrect to have a similar range?


#158

Yeah, let us just put our complaints on the Mercy megathread that totally doesn’t get shut down in 7 minutes everyday…


#159

Wasn’t that the fact that mass rez encouraged “hide and rez” strategy - regardless what you or anyone would say it must have been enough of a problem for blizz to decide to get rid of it, doubt los checks would fix that.

Yeah sure irrelevant but a common argument for why your team sucked and deserved that mass rez thrown into face

hey i wasn’t attacking you! “You” is also plural form so I was just speeding up the conversation without having to be attacked by all “counterplay” ideas such us keep her in spawn room, “git gud” and all that, so i was replaying to what people would write anyways. I used sombra because on the one hand people were constantly crying in mercy threads that “just keep her in spawn room” while complaining (to clarification- in other threads) sombra is not playing with team and is spawn camping instead.

Again - you, plural.
Sorry if you felt like i was attacking you personally and putting words into your mouth.


#160

It didn’t doe.


#161

Aria Rose? You’ve got to be kidding me. She is not to be taken seriously.
Oh yeah, Mercy is balanced. Deal with it. She’s not OP or underpowered.


#162

that’s literally what jeff said in the developers update introducing mercy’s rework why do people keep insisting it’s a false statement.

They have logs from every match, and even tho you didn’t experienced that or didn’t do it yourself doesn’t mean no one did (for example i experienced it many times, i can’t count how many times i even went close to hiding mercy asking for healing just to let her watch me die because she was unbothered). The fact Jeff addressed is as an issue with mercy 1.0 and one of the reasons she got reworked. They must have had sufficient data for such recognition.


#163

Because just because someone says it, doesn’t mean it’s true. How gullible are you?

I’m sorry but that wasn’t encouraged by the ultimate but rather the player who uses the ultimate or the team with the ultimate. Why do you think so many of us Mercy players insist that tempo ressing is the go-to strategy. Because the ultimate encourages that rather than hiding, then resse en mass.

All he can prove is that it was done a noticeable amount of times by bad players… Most of us have already refuted the idea of the ultimate encouraging “Hide n Res”. Why would they even make an ultimate that encourages that to begin with? It’s obvious that it’s a misuse of an ultimate and the winrate with the strategy shows this much (chances of winning with this strategy are ridiculously low and extremely risky).


#164

The difficulty I have with it is that invuln was given to mass rez for a reason. Taking that away, adding in LOS (which can be pretty buggy as we know), adding a cast time, and whatever else, has a likelihood of making it even worse than preinvuln. It’s hard to really know how well that’d work within the current state of the game and risks making her ult potentially useless in many situations. That’s just the balancing and practical application part of it, ignoring the problems I have with mass rez fundamentally as a mechanic.

I don’t know where you got that idea from. I played Mercy prior to invuln buff. Ofc I know Mercy 1.0 was objectively less powerful than current Mercy statistically.

Due to rez uniquely interacting with dead team mates. No other ult does.


#165

And how does that change anything?


#167

Imo it changes things quite a bit. All other ults only effect ALIVE players. Rez being the only to affect dead ones, specifically dead team mates, warrants unique consideration.


#168

That doesn’t answer the question.

I didn’t ask if you think it changes anything. I asked how it makes a difference.


#169

There’s three things that would prevent a non-invuln mass rez Mercy from being useless:

1: The proposed rework includes an AoE burst heal for living teammates and Mercy herself. She can rush in, rez, then be healed for almost any damage she took in the process.

2: The GA bunnyhop is included in the rework proposal. Assuming that Mercy gets back her GA reset on rez, Mercy can slingshot her way to safety. So many people underestimate how much Mercy’s suitability went up when she got the bunnyhop…

3: Pacify, the proposed E ability for reworked Mercy. She can use it to cover her getaway.


#170

Due to that difference the variable aspect on other ults etc makes sense, and having it on Mass Rez does not. All other ults effect alive players, and in that context variable works fine. When it comes to effect dead players, the variable ult is problematic on the most fundamental level of being unintuitive, contrary to hero/role/game design, etc. Team mate death is the worst punishment and should at all times be avoided as much as possible.

I don’t know if it would prevent a non invuln mass rez Mercy from being useless. Especially in the current state of the game. It’s purely speculative thinking so. Invuln rez wasn’t the greatest ult either. In higher coordinated tiers Mass Rez with invuln was basically used just like Rez on E with cast time is used now.