Add to this pool at least 2 different DPS from different subroles and I and sure that you will not care about hero bans at all, tbh. But even with this pool you will be probably safe most of the time.
Safe like how running Goats is a 3/3 and I’m terrible at Brigitte? My Damage hero choices are Torbjorn, Symmetra, Mei, and Junkrat. My aim is terrible on a GOOD day. I can fill just fine but there’s enough problems with hard counters as it is that we don’t need banning heroes on top of it. I’d rather see the 2/2/2 Meta Lock over banning heroes. I shouldn’t have to worry about, what, 3 hero bans on top of being hard countered by the entire enemy team because I can’t pick the heroes that they’re weak to.
You can play Rein, Dva and Moira. All of them are part of goats.
Than you are safe because you have Goats counters in your pool. Good for you.
Actually, with your hero pool you should feel safe in current meta and will be safe with hero bans. On the other hand, forced 2/2/2 could possibly screw you, because one of the strongest 2/2/2 comps include pharahmercy and Widow and your hero pool includes almost nothing against it)
I’m not a fan of locking roles in any capacity.
Fundamentally locking roles would be Blizzard saying “we’ve decided to lock the meta based around some players arbitrary idea of what the game should look like”
If we were going to lock roles why do people goto 2/2/2, why not have a role system where you are allowed a maximum of 1 tank? The reason we take two tanks is because usually 2 tanks are better than one but if neither team can take two tanks then it’s still equal.
This way more players have an opportunity to play DPS, the reason people want this role locking is because DPS players generally don’t fill the tank and support roles. If there is only one slot to fill then we would have more games with the correct roles filled.
You might look at my suggestion and think ‘oh but that’s just going to make several heros completely unviable’. Yeah, every role lock system is going to do that to some hero or another. Would Brigitte really be viable if she was forced to play in the support slot? How does the role system deal with hybrid characters?
OP i like you system a lot more than other suggestions because it’s less limiting but it’s still more limiting than what we currently have so I personally don’t like the idea. In a 1/1/1 lock system I imagine a team with solo zen, solo roadhog running around with 4 DPS. It doesn’t matter how you restrict the players, if they intend to not work with their team for a good team comp then adding restrictions is not actually going to get in the way of them making a bad team.
Honestly, LFG is an opt-in role queue. If this role queue idea really was what players wanted then surely the LFG system would be far more active and heading toward the primary method of searching for games?
1 Like
But I’m not arguing why it’s bad for only my sake. Like I said, Bans means someone who fills has to be competent with at least 15 heroes. Right now I have Reinhardt, DVa, Orisa, Winston, Ana, Mercy, Moira, Lucio, Bastion, Junkrat, Mei, Symmetra, and Torbjorn. That’s 13. I am almost at the 15 hero mark and I at least try to better my gameplay with those characters so when I fill I can work with my team well enough to win. Unfortunately, not everybody has that wide of a hero pool. Some people may only be good at hitscan and lack positioning skills. If someone was only good at snipers like Widow, Ashe, and Ana where they have a scope to work with, the Ban system could easily destroy them. Ashe and Ana may be picked by their teammates and Widowmaker could be banned. That specific individual is screwed in that case.
For a moment I was wondering you actually read it or not. You’re more than welcome not to like the idea of any kind of limiting system. I just wanted to get this idea out into the community so we didn’t suddenly get stuck with a forced 2/2/2. I want Overwatch to remain a game where my team is free to play how they like. I always feel that a minimum of 1 support is required for any team and I usually fill that role, but I also want to be fair to all Overwatch players. I can’t see limiting just 1 or 2 roles. If anyone has limits, they should ALL have limits.
Not true. Only one-tricks will suffer from hero bans, which is a good thing to be honest.
With hero bans if you want to be safe you should be able to play 3 heroes minimum. 3 heroes is possible.
But if you want to play successfully, you should be able to play as many heroes as possibly, up to all of them. It is not a certain number like 15 or whatever.
Hero banning does not increases number of heroes required for being successful in competitive because it is already limited only by number of heroes in the game in total. Hero banning only increases minimum heroes required fro being safe from 1 to 3.
The game already screws this type of so niche players. Player like this will be screwed by both Dive and Goats in most cases. Player like this should learn more heroes outside of his niche if he wants to play successfully.
Have fun with your 1/1/1 where the only healer is Zen and the only tank is D.Va.
I was referring to someone who fills like me. Someone who has to combat the hero bans and the 5 other heroes the team picks. For someone who fills, you’re limited by more than just the bans. That’s why you need a large hero pool if you plan on filling.
But that’s why I pointed them out specifically. A portion of players will feel targeted by this kind of system similar to how Mercy and Brig players feel about getting nerfs and how people with disabilities enabled by heroes like Symmetra felt about the 3.0 rework. This is just one more thing that’s going to destroy the game for somebody. It might not be every game but if you happen to play one of those commonly banned heroes, you’re going to feel frustrated.
A portion of players that play the game in a very wrong way. Systems should not please one-tricks and too niche players in competitive. If a certain players want to play only one hero or one niche of hero - that hero can play QP, or go LFG to find a team that will favor him. But in both cases his way of playing still will be wrong and system still will punish him for being wrong.
To be successful in competitive you should be as flexible as possible. Hero bans just slightly raises a minimum level of flexibility required from zero. It will encourage players who play in a wrong way to start playing it right way.
It is a good idea to have more than 1 hero you can play well and I don’t like how one-tricking works, however, we shouldn’t be forcing them not to play heroes by banning. This has gotten very off topic from the 1/1/1 conversation and I’m honestly getting tired of your bans argument. It no longer has anything to do with the topic here or what it’s trying to do for the game.
I feel like that would give players an excuse to suggest that 1 tank 1 healer is a ‘norm’ and end up being counter productive.
I honestly think any lock would be counter productive.
1 Like
It’s better than a forced 2-2-2 but I think there should be two versions of comp- one with forced roles and one without. That way those you want stability can use forced roles and those who want flexibility can used the regular version.
While I think making two distinct versions of comp(or even quickplay while they were at it) would fit the “make everyone happy” boat, the developers would need to adopt one approach in balancing the OWL scene, which would inevitably lead to people thinking they favor one style of gameplay to the others and only want to balance around that one.
This might just be because I prefer locking 2-2-2 as a meta, but I rarely find myself in a situation where I thank the developers for at least allowing my teammates to have their creativity when we play at a disadvantage. Having 4 or more damage heroes rarely feels good as a team. A lot of people dislike the current meta. Both are the result of perceived creativity that creates more harm than good. You should never feel like you are probably going to lose the game at the hero select screen, and I feel the game currently makes that happen a lot.
3 Likes
I agree. Mainly because I do play a lot of Roadhog, I like the hero, but Roadhog virtually doesn’t fit into a 2/2/2 composition.
If there’s enforced 2/2/2, Hog will see even less playtime, and that’s because he works best in triple tank comps.
1 Like
no you wouldn’t.
Bastion statistically deals the most damage. He isnt being picked. Damage is nice but it has to do more with ultimate/ability synergy rather than who does the “most damage”
You do have a good point there. I usually use 2-2-2 anyway.
I don’t think anything should be mandatory. It’s a game that promotes the ability to play whatever you choose
Bastion can be easily countered due to things like his lack of mobility and the size of his hitbox. He has his place when it comes to compositions like pirate ship but he lacks in places where other Damage heroes shine. Bastion as he is now is comparable to a niche hero. My example was more for heroes that aren’t niche. Supports all do roughly the same Damage Per Second but their rate of healing is vastly different. Ana and Moira would be more likely picks over Mercy and Lucio would likely become a bigger pick over Brigitte due to his consistent AoE Heals and Speed Boosting. If we look into the Damage Role, it’s likely you would see even less of Symmetra and Torbjorn because the turrets can be easily countered and that’s a significant chunk of their damage output. You’d be more likely to see heroes like McCree, Tracer and Pharah (if there are no hitscan heroes in the 2 Damage Roles or an Ana to counter her). These heroes have a statistically higher damage output and are not niche picks and you only need a few heroes like that to exist before you stop seeing the others get played.
Players like cyx here would suffer in a 2/2/2 because like he says
Tanks would probably be in the worst situation. If you think you see a lot of Reinhardt now, the 2/2/2 would likely make him mandatory. Everyone who plays a good Reinhardt would become Reinhardt One-Tricks simply because the team composition demands it. They don’t want to play Reinhardt all the time but they have to or the team will fail. Forcing 2/2/2 means that the entire game would need to be rebalanced around it. All current existing heroes would need to stand on even ground with each other and some of them just aren’t built well enough to do that.
While I do agree with this and my point of this post was to improve on the idea of a 2/2/2 Meta Lock (not enforce it), I don’t think a team composition like GOATS should be allowed to be as strong as what it turned out to be. It’s existence seems like the result of large flaws in balancing and it needs to be taken care of in one way or another. If a 1/1/1 made the overall game experience more balanced and fun, I would support it, until then, I think the heroes need to have some stats evened out before the issue of a main meta becomes less of a problem.
I don’t agree with this. High ground control is still extremely important on maps like Numbani and Gibraltar, so Winston will be a favored pick on maps that have a lot of high ground. Maps like Junkertown, or even point A Eichenwalde defense, Orisa will be favored. Enforced 2/2/2 won’t have that much of an impact on the main tank role.
I do bring up Roadhog, because even though he is a tank, he doesn’t have the peel potential like the other off-tanks, and has no way of protecting his teammates. Hog has always been best in a 3-tank lineup.
Got any thoughts on this idea. Trying to figure out if there are any major issues with it.