BALANCED =/= In a good position…
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.
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. 
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! 
~Sincerely Yours xoxo,
a Lover of True, Fair, and Fun Balance.
xavvypls 
2 Likes
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
2 Likes
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?
1 Like
Yeah, let us just put our complaints on the Mercy megathread that totally doesn’t get shut down in 7 minutes everyday…
3 Likes
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.
It didn’t doe.
1 Like
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.
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.
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).
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.
1 Like
And how does that change anything?
1 Like
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.
That doesn’t answer the question.
I didn’t ask if you think it changes anything. I asked how it makes a difference.
2 Likes
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.
1 Like
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.
1 Like
I see the sacrifice of some of Mercy’s viability as an acceptable one, under the right circumstances.
Mercy’s current viablity is a universal one. Her most valuable asset is on a cooldown, and her ult does almost all the work for you. This makes current Mercy’s value easily obtained, whether you’re brand new to healing or a longtime veteran. She has viablity, but at a cost.
That cost is the factor of player skill. Mercy’s skill ceiling is so low that her players have been bound to a state of mediocrity. Where are the thrilling highlight montages with the current Mercy? Name one that isn’t battle Mercy.
I subscribe to the idea that players who are bad at a specific hero should have poor results, and being skilled with a hero gets you good results. Being really skilled with a hero gets you noticeably better results than other people who play the same hero.
I wish for a Mercy that follows that model. I want her to be more difficult to play the higher you climb, but if you have the skill you can certainly do it… just like any other hero.
This used to be the case. As I recall, in higher tiers you used to need godlike gamesense/etc. to preform well with the old Mercy (asssuming you climbed with your own skill; and not the SR exploit).
The rework suggestion would take away some of Mercy’s viability, yes. But that’s because it would once again be possible to be bad or excellent at playing her.
1 Like
That’s cool, but realize that it’s just your take on the matter. Some might not consider a loss of viability as acceptable, etc, etc.
As it should be. All things should have a cost.
The devs seem to want to keep her a simplistic entry level hero. In that sense, while I can understand wanting more skill based expression, addition of such might very well be against what the devs wish for her. I think of the whole rez as a resource topic when it comes to this.
Yes this should be obvious and true for all heroes.
What is one thing for you can be easily different for many. I don’t know if the dev’s ideals and such all align with this. I can understand why you’d wish it so.
Sure.
There’s many facets to this argument and many things to consider. Taking away Mercy viability doesn’t sit well with many. For instance right now her viability is in question, for many that is not a good thing. There are many that want her to always be a good choice, just not necessarily the best choice. Then there are some that will sacrifice all her viability in order to just have “fun.”
This is a complicated topic. One that can’t be approached with naive preconceptions.
Just because a hero has a low skill floor, doesn’t mean they should be excluded from having a high skill ceiling.
Mercy used to be a low skill floor/high skill ceiling hero. She was easy to pick up, but much more challenging to master than many gave her credit for.
This is what helped get many new players into the game as committed players: here was a hero they could pick up and play, but what kept them playing was realizing that they had only scratched the surface of what it meant to “gitgud” with her.
I want to go back to that. I think that Mercy’s skill ceiling can be raised much, much higher than it is now, without raising her skill floor.
Titanium’s rework proposal does that. The previously mentioned sacrifice of viability would be at the higher tiers, because just being “okay” at playing Mercy up there would no longer be enough.
3 Likes