Nah, the people in this community genuinely wanted control over who you could pick. That is the core issue with most of their complaints from private profiles to one tricking, to the people who act like the dps are the only ones who can counter Pharah and only as hitscan. It never ends.
1 Like
If Iâm reading it right, this idea would kind of wash down the distinction between roles, and basically make every hero into a dps. Thatâs what players like, right?
On the one hand, yes, on the other hand, the game would lose what makes it special. Going full hame on a tank design, or a healer design, rather than yet another pewpew hero with maybe a small heal thrown in, is one of the things setting OW apart. Go play Quake Champions or UT or something if you donât like it.
This is 100% false, BTW.
LONG before GOATS, we saw comps all over the place. 3 dps comps were fairly common in high-tier competative before RQ. One of the most popular ones was Ball + 3 dps. Usually it was one of the tanks who were cycled out, or else a tank was replaced by Mei.
You are pretending that 6 DPS v.s. 6 DPS plays the same as 2/2/2 v.s. 2/2/2.
Those two matches are so completely different, they might as well not even be the same game.
2/2/2 creates a certain kind of match. Healing and tanking slows down teamfights and makes them much more strategic and coordinated. When that coordination is removed, you get chaos, shorter fights, much more emphasis on picks, and a much different game.
People wanted 2/2/2 not just for a âbalancedâ matchâthey wanted it because it is the OW experience. If DPS were strong enough that 6 of them is viable against healers and tanks and DPS working together, then the coordination aspect of the game would be entirely meaningless.
What youâre advocating for would require DPS to be the most OP role.
As it stands, DPS was slightly underrepresented in OQ competatively, but not much. Even GOATS was starting to fade out before RQ was introduced (Despite common assent, RQ was NOT created to combat GOATS, it was made because people were complaining about people autolocking DPS all game long. Itâs why other popular games like LOL moved to that system too. Blizzard tried teambuilder, but it wasnât working).
GOATS wasnât even a symptom of tanks/supports being OP: it was the symptom of A SINGLE support being broken, and building a team around that. GOATS never couldâve existed without the monster that was release brig.
The fact that in high competative, 2/2/2 was the most common strat for OQ as well shows that there was a fair balance to the roles.
Sorry, but this has to be one of the worst takes Iâve seen yet. If you want deathmatch, play deathmatch. Thatâs a different game from OW.
The same goes for goats.
Your team coordination needed to be on point to overcome the range disadvantage and getting the target priorities right. Also the likelihood of having 3 Tank and at least 2 Support players on your team who actually play the required heroes well enough for their Rank was extremely low with how many DPS mains are out there.
Simply picking goats without being able to actually play it properly was pretty much an auto loss and I have seen it happen over and over again.
The goats issue was simply non-existent for the overwhelming majority of the player base and this is not just me saying it - it was also confirmed by the devs at some point.
No. This is a class based shooter, not a strict FPS. The class you take should absolutely matter.
Because this is a CLASS BASED SHOOTER. Team comps are dependent on the classes being present and filling their roles. With few exceptions, DPS cannot heal like support and DPS cannot hold the objective like Tanks.
What the majority likes to play has little bearing on what a team needs to be successful.
This game failed because it didnât teach the playerbase the importance of teamwork. The higher ranks figured it out intuitively, but the vast majority of players still play this game hoping to have an individual impact on matches instead of trying to help their team.
So, all of the players that did play to help their team have long since quit the game in frustration since the devs keep catering to the selfish players that remain.
You never played GOATS and it shows.
GOATS comps essentially required voice comms, and the team had to stay clustered together, so Taking space had to be a coordinated effort.
If you didnât play it properly you were going to lose.
Yes, it was an extremely powerful comp, but only for those that played it correctly.
You wanted 2 tanks and 2 supports, that arenât DPS players dodging queue times.
There is actually reason - this is unbalanced comp. That sacrificed sustain for damage.
2-2-2 is âgeneralistâ comp, where we do not specialise in any area. 1-4-1 is âassault specialistâ comp, 3-0-3 is âdefense specialistâ. And like any specialised comp, it has weak spots. Which can and often will be exploited - in case of 1-4-1 itâs their low sustain, making them unable to maintain pressure for long.
For 3-0-3 it was range - tanks generally not good at ranged combat - which also can be exploited.
Because it didnât build teamwork, one step at a time, it expected it.
For instance, if I pocket someone, it is teamworkâŚbut unless they are smurfing, it wonât save game for us. And since it wonât save game for us, players would wonder âwhy am I even trying to work with that teammate, it got us nowhereâ.
As support, I often found myself asking âwhy am I even trying someone, except my pocket, it doesnât work and only wastes resourcesâ.
They often are, since âdamage always winsâ in most games. Only saving grace for other roles is DPS lacking other talents, besides killing enemies.
Yes. Tank spam was attempt to counter ever increasing pace of gameplay, where you drop dead in mere seconds.
1 Like
We have the numbers on what people preferred to play.
I think we can very safely say objectively.
But it didnât bring balance between roles, which was necessary for it to function without long queues.
If you mean 4 DPS comps, they were rather optimal. Problem was, it caused rather unbalanced pickrates for heroes - Mercy was pretty much mandatory support for that.
First of all, Goats was spear headed by Rein+Zarya, which is overwhelmingly popular and easiest Tank combo to pull off for majority since day 1, and it s still true even to this day.
Secondly, Goats used Brig, the mini raidboss herself, still one of the easiest and most broken hero in OW history. The last Tank can be whatever, Dva is a good choice but it doesnt matter that much at this point.
Lastly, clustering up and move straight to point as 6 people together using those brawl heroes is the easiest, most straight foward strategy ever. You dont have to worry about a single DPS wandering somewhere flanking or taking duels, you dont have to worry about Winston making the jump too soon, or any of the heroes use their movement abilities to move past your team. It s almost always guaranteed that you fight as 6 with no minimal weakspot.
If using that minimal common sense and basic tactic sounds hard to you, you were probably unlucky to have a silver teammates all the time.
It wouldnât make everyone DPS, it would make a reinhardt equal to a junkrat. If this required him to lose 800 shields so he has 800 left, thats what happens. But at no point would any hero lose what makes them unique, only have heroes lose some power until match ups donât require 4-6 tanks and supports per team to be optimal. Thatâs the part that kills me, when you need 4-6 of them to do well, why should you need so many of them? Why is it not ok to have 1-2 of them?
I donât want deathmatch play style, I want how good you are to matter more than what role your hero fills.
If there a reason DPS canât help support a team like how Soldier 76, Sombra and Symmetra do?
1 Like
We have usage numbers rather than preference numbers and the only official preference numbers - the biggest poll ever done on the subject - favoured open 6v6. Although it must be said that none of the polls that have been conducted to date followed a valid method of attitudinal data collection
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-2wa6jvprl7hfCpvw0ULzg/community?lb=UgzDz50oW1Yg_VUPfe54AaABCQ
1 Like
not at all
there are a number of actual facts that indicate that 222 was and is not a success, and there are folks with opinions on both sides of this matter
to state that 222 is a success, when others have an equal argument that it is not, makes it quite manifest that such a statement is a statement of opinion rather than fact
the fact that there is no one unit of measure of âsuccessâ also means that success cannot be objectively quantified, which in turn means that it cannot be demonstrated objectively - as a fact - that it was/is a success or not a success
bottom line - the statement was a statement of opinion, not of fact
âŚand many of of would say, as I certainly do, that we feel that match quality is actually worse in 222
There indeed are plenty of numbers
None of them from valid datasources, but yes, there are a large number of invalid sets of data regarding this matter
as such, no, any declarations of the overall populationâs preference in this regard are unsupported opinions - subjective, not ojective
2 Likes
We?
You claim to speak for all players?
I know I didnt want this so-called balance
Many many many other players have spoken to this as well, stating their preference for role-less queue mode play
so no, there is no such âweâ
something being âbalancedâ doesnât mean it is good
an orange could be balanced (on the slim side of a board, for example) and that doesnt make the orange better or worse
I keep seeing this argument made with it being strongly implied that âbalancedâ somehow being an improvement, when there is no real data to prove this to be so
Given the number of times I have seen so-called âbalancedâ teams handily beaten by teams lacking said âbalanceâ, I have never even seen it in my own limited experience
actually, they did create the tank shortage problem
in any queuing system where there is not a demand made that there be a certain number of role x (whatever x is) there is never a bottleneck created over role x. If there is such a demand, which is one of the demands 222 made, then the bottleneck can occurâŚand as we know, did occur. Is occurring. and will continue to occur.
the 5v5 bottleneck might turn out to be supports, for all we know right now. In such a case, we simply trad eone horrendous and unnecessary bottleneck for another
there is no guarantee that 5v5 will queue faster
it could even be slower
2 Likes
Yes indeed. Agreed on all points
1 Like
Yeah, no. That wasnât the case.
Yes it is a fact, that is not in question.
1 Like
Sorry but itâs not a fact. If it were fact they wouldnât have to radically redesign the entire game to make it just about work with sensible queue times, and the game wouldnât be at itâs lowest point ever
1 Like
It is a fact, that is why OW2 has RQ.
1 Like
Itâs been delayed another year so evidently rq isnât helping them that much when they have so much work to do to fix the issues that it creates and their fixes then cause other issues
1 Like