It’s because Support/Tank are in demand. DPS isn’t and there are too many of them. So in my mind anyone who becomes a Support/Tank main is doing the game a favor by getting the playerbase closer to balance
If we had a “soft” role queue, that would mean most of my games I’ll just be a tank more frequently than I already am.
It doesn’t solve the problem that I’d still be pigeon-holed into a role.
With the current system, I can at least sometimes get into a game where tanks and healers are actually filled, so I can play a DPS (and usually not that good with it, to be honest). In a “soft” role queue, the 2 DPS slots will certainly be immediately filled by actual DPS players, so I don’t have a chance at that role ever.
I get that, I know that there are too many DPS mains, but I’m not going to main Support at the cost of my enjoyment, sorry. It’s not like I main DPS because it’s popular, I main it because it’s what I like most. Taking away fun from me or any other player and not replacing it whatsoever is just not the right way imo, even if it would make the game more balanced overall.
1 Like
You literally said that you like Hitscan DPS. Idk how playing Baptiste would be so unfun for you if Soldier 76 is right up your alley.
The healers all have wildly different playstyles so it shocks me that you can flat out say that you hate the entire Support role when there’s literally a hero for just about everyone.
1 Like
What?! I never said I hated playing Support, in fact I said I do like playing Support, as well as Zarya in my first reply, just NOT AS MUCH AS DPS. And yes, I love playing Ana, 1 for her Hitscan mechanics and 2 because I do also like playing Support. But I simply love playing Widow MORE. I like playing Mercy too, just not as much as I like playing Tracer. Zen is also fun to me, just not as much as McCree is. How do you not get the drill of this? Absolutely nothing bad about playing Baptiste, a lot wrong about having to play Baptiste AND not getting to play Soldier. And even if they have almost the same mechanics, DPS and Support will always have different jobs. And whilst I like doing both I - again - prefer DPSing.
“taking away fun” referred to dragging my enjoyment of playing DPS down due to the long queues, not to playing Support.
1 Like
Why? They may not be as good as Tracer in Dive for example, but you can very much run Dive with a long-range DPS, as well as run Tracer outside of Dive. As a Widow main, I don’t see why you would do that. She has her strengths and weaknesses, comps that especially favour her, comps that really don’t, comps she counters and comps she gets countered by - just as any other DPS. I’m sorry, but I genuinely don’t see the reason. If anything, utility DPS like Sym, Mei, Torb, etc. should get their own sub role - or make sub roles overall (like Off Tank, MT, Long and Close Range DPS, utility DPS, Hitscan and Projectile, etc.) - but not just for snipers?
Edit: nvm, I think I saw your reason beforehand. And yes, in that case I do agree, sub roles for DPS (and also Tank and Support) would probably help there, but don’t make Hanzo and Widow their own - in fact, I can play Tracer better than Hanzo lol, simply am more focused on Hitscan than Projectile.
yes exactly.
What they could do is make you select heroes before you play, then after the fact put you in a role. Also the other person in your role that they match you with would have picked a different hero…I’m gonna make a post about this.
yeah, good idea basis, definitely, though still don’t agree with Hanzo and Widow getting one for their own.
widow should get one all to her own…same with Rein and Mercy and probably a few others.
basically role SR is lame and hero SR is awesome ![:slight_smile:](https://d74zh8edaijub.cloudfront.net/en/overwatch/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=6" ":slight_smile:")
still disagree, sure there are Widow one-tricks, but you can one-trick any hero really. What would hero SR look like if you swapped mid-game? How much comp would you have to play in addition to the already pretty huge amount of time you have to spend to get SR that somewhat accurately represents your skill? (It took me ~100 hours of Comp to get out of Diamond, mostly solo qing, when at the time I began the climb GM players told me I played my main heroes at at least a Master level - on a good day even close to GM -, not trying to brag, just showing how much time it really does take).
I think this would encourage one-tricks even more, like if you don’t have seperate slots for these heroes, you could at least expect from a Main Healer to be able to play at least 2 of the 3 - or at least be able to play a few Off Healers. A good Widow should always be able to play McCree, and I’m currently working on my overall Hitscan heroes (Tracer, Ashe, Soldier (and Sombra)), whilst they’re not bad at all, they’re not yet where my Widow and McCree are, and I don’t want to be known just as a “Widow main” but primarily as a “Hitscan Main”. But maybe that’s just me, I also understand if people simply don’t share my mindset, or don’t have the time to work on more heroes of a role. Still, I don’t think this would work out in a SR system, it’s yet another excuse to one-trick and I’m not sure - maybe I’m misunderstanding something - but I believe this would heavily work against switching heroes to counter play in OW.
A Rein main should be able to paly Winston, like what are you gonna do if Rein suddenly isn’t good any more?
I get where you’re coming from, I just don’t think it’s doable, and has way too many downsides overall.
cmon man, don’t make me read all that 
I’m against role queue. Blizz gotta have something really awesome to sell me on it, cuz I can’t think how they’re gonna do it in a way I like.
lol don’t start a dicussion if you can’t bother to read. Basically I just said I don’t think people should be able to q as heroes, as it would encourage one-tricks even more and be extremely horrible to balance SR around. I’m very sceptical about Role q myself, though if done right (which I don’t know what I’d deam right), I think it could be great.
1 Like
no, use good forum etiquette. I’m not here to write or read novels. Short and concise correspondence only.
nothing wrong with one-tricks
jeff thinks the opposite
agreed
I like to explain myself, admittedly I do drag out sentences longer than they need to be sometimes, but at least I’m able to follow the simply rule of claim - explanation - example and not just say something and make you guess my reasonings.
a lot wrong with one-tricks, to only give ONE example: the game is built around flexibility
Jeff thinks for role q - not for hero q. Besides, I explained my thoughts on that before as well: It takes ridiculous amount of time to find your true rank with all heroes combined already, it would take even more to do it for each respectiviely.
no it’s not, look at the flexibility of OWL players,
you’re trying to turn your opinion into facts
it takes about competitive 150 games to find you rank on a new account. it would just take 450 games now. I’m okay with this.
I’m worried the dps one tricks will see the queue time for role queue and just continue to one trick in normal queue
1 Like
Hrm. I’m not convinced this will have the intended effect. Superficially, it seems like there would be a correlation between player performance within hero class (tank, damage, support), but that assumes within-class skill sets are inherently more similar than between-class skill sets. Ie, that a “tank” player will be better at Rein+Hammond than they will at Doomfist+Mei Doomfist+Hammond, Rein+Mei, etc.
If your hero roster is sufficiently unique, which I think it is, I don’t see a compelling argument for hero class defining a significantly measurable player skill set. By individual hero, perhaps, but not class. This sounds a lot like overfitting and that a general MMR would actually perform better, overall.
You could try to figure that out though with some simple analyses, such as looking for win-rate correlations across all hero-pairs. As long as it’s not too simple of an analysis that just looks at “tank” vs “support”, because (a) there are some pairs of similar heroes within-class that’ll skew that analysis and (b) you might just end up measuring performance on a person’s “main” if that dominates their playtime (which tells you nothing other than what role label their main has).
Also, all this hinges on how disjoint your hero class definitions are. The Tank and Damage labels are pretty poor matches to actual hero roles within game. “Damage” being the worst offender by implying the purpose of these heroes is to, well, deal damage, when it’s actually to apply pressure through lethality/CC/zoning. The tanks also have a high-damage sub-group (the bruisers), which lack the same zoning/range potential. Merging Defense and Offense into Damage created an entirely new set of player confusions. I dunno, maybe y’all should’ve named the merged group “Assault” or something. Anyway, I digress. The point is, role queue linked MMR depends on upon having three strongly typed hero classes, which this game actually doesn’t have. (That’s good, imho.)
My intuition is that this would take up a lot of developer time for an ultimately net negative effect on matchmaker performance.
1 Like
You want me to be able to play 15 characters at a 3.8k level (some of which I don’t even enjoy playing)? Yeah mate, I too, have unlimited time to play this game.
1 Like
I’m not expecting people to know them all, but i’m going to hope they are having fun with at least more than 1 different hero in dps role considering it has 15, many of them are fun to play, could easily be an answer to problem you may face, but i understand if they only play 1 character.
It would be ideal to know more when ever you have opportunity to learn them and try them out in QP/Arcade/Training.
I would hope you communicate with your fellow DPS/Team in the 2-2-2, to try to work out a gameplan, should something not work out.
How are you not implying to needing to be able to play them all? Otherwise, I agree, one-tricking isn’t the best thing to do and you should have at least a few heroes you can play, all of them is just too much to ask for imo.