The Crucial Role of Tanks in Overwatch 2 Competitive Play

General Discussion
21

:thinking:

Hereā€™s some more arguments I came up with.

Advocating for the removal of the tank role in Overwatch is a controversial proposition, given the integral role tanks have played since the gameā€™s inception. However, upon closer examination, several compelling arguments emerge in favor of such a radical change. By eliminating tanks, Overwatch could potentially address longstanding issues related to game balance, match dynamics, and player enjoyment.

First and foremost, the tank role in Overwatch has historically posed significant challenges in terms of game balance. Tanks are designed to absorb damage and create space for their teammates, often possessing high health pools and powerful defensive abilities. However, balancing tanks alongside other roles, such as Damage and Support, has proven to be a daunting task for developers. Tanks that are too resilient can dominate matches, leading to frustrating gameplay experiences for opponents. Conversely, tanks that are too weak can render certain compositions and strategies ineffective, limiting diversity in team compositions. Removing the tank role altogether could alleviate these balance issues by simplifying the gameā€™s design and allowing developers to focus on refining the remaining roles.

Furthermore, the presence of tanks can sometimes result in stagnant and uninteresting gameplay dynamics. Tanks excel at holding defensive positions and controlling chokepoints, which can lead to prolonged stalemates and repetitive gameplay patterns. This phenomenon is particularly evident in professional play, where teams often opt for ā€œprotect the presidentā€ compositions centered around a single tank hero. By removing tanks from the equation, Overwatch could encourage more dynamic and fluid gameplay experiences, where teams are forced to adapt and innovate in response to changing circumstances.

Moreover, the tank role can create barriers to entry for new players and hinder the overall accessibility of the game. Tanks are typically responsible for leading engagements and initiating fights, requiring a deep understanding of game mechanics, map layouts, and team coordination. For novice players, mastering the intricacies of tank play can be daunting and overwhelming, leading to frustration and disengagement. By eliminating tanks, Overwatch could lower the skill floor and make the game more approachable for players of all skill levels, thereby fostering a more inclusive and welcoming community.

Additionally, the removal of the tank role could pave the way for new and innovative gameplay experiences within the Overwatch universe. Without the constraints imposed by traditional tank heroes, developers would have the freedom to explore alternative concepts and mechanics that defy conventional roles and expectations. This could lead to the emergence of entirely new playstyles and strategies, revitalizing interest in the game and attracting players who may have grown disillusioned with the current state of affairs.

Of course, advocating for the removal of the tank role is not without its challenges and potential drawbacks. Tanks are deeply ingrained in the identity of Overwatch and have become iconic symbols of the gameā€™s universe. Removing them could alienate longtime fans and provoke backlash from the community. Moreover, the absence of tanks could fundamentally alter the core gameplay experience of Overwatch, requiring extensive reworking of existing maps, heroes, and game modes.

In conclusion, while the proposition of removing the tank role in Overwatch may seem radical and controversial, it offers several compelling benefits that warrant consideration. By addressing longstanding issues related to game balance, match dynamics, and player accessibility, Overwatch could undergo a transformative evolution that revitalizes interest in the game and secures its longevity for years to come. While the road ahead may be fraught with challenges, the potential rewards of such a bold decision are too significant to ignore.

1 Like
22

Do you think Iā€™m anti-tank?

23

Not when I am around ?

But you do contribute a lot on anti tank threads ?

24

Maybe we should ask ChatGPT. It would know best.

3 Likes
25

As a pro-tank advocate. Iā€™m a tank main of 8 years now.

1 Like
26

That is analysis from overbuff. Not a single person biased opinion.

You have contradicted yourself here.

Good strategy. This same strategy can be applied to shut down the two dos. Again your argument is your opinion. Which is acceptable in competitive. I donā€™t see anything to challenge here ?

Anyone who posts this should post their last 10 games codes to defend. I will post mine as a tank.

Agreed. This is part of the game the shut down. I donā€™t see any argument here that Tanks are not important and dps can handle it

27

In the realm of Overwatch, the traditional hierarchy of roles, with tanks occupying a central position, has long been unquestioned. However, upon closer examination, it becomes apparent that the importance attributed to tanks may be overstated, and there are compelling arguments to be made for redistributing their responsibilities to other roles, particularly Damage (DPS) heroes.

Firstly, the notion that tanks are indispensable overlooks the evolving nature of the game and the increasing versatility of DPS heroes. Overwatch has undergone numerous balance changes and hero reworks over the years, resulting in a more diverse and dynamic roster of Damage heroes. Many DPS heroes now possess abilities that enable them to fulfill roles traditionally associated with tanks, such as creating space, initiating engagements, and providing crowd control. Heroes like Mei, Doomfist, and Sombra exemplify this trend, offering disruptive capabilities that rival those of traditional tank heroes.

Moreover, the reliance on tanks may inadvertently limit strategic diversity and innovation within the game. By perpetuating the notion that tanks are essential for success, Overwatch reinforces a narrow-minded approach to team composition and gameplay strategies. In reality, there are countless viable compositions and playstyles that do not rely heavily on tanks. Dive compositions, for example, prioritize mobility and burst damage over raw tankiness, allowing teams to capitalize on enemy vulnerabilities and exploit positional advantages. By embracing a more flexible approach to team building, Overwatch can encourage creativity and experimentation, leading to more engaging and dynamic matches.

Furthermore, the overemphasis on tanks detracts from the agency and impact of DPS heroes, who are often relegated to secondary roles in the traditional tank-centric meta. By redistributing tank responsibilities to DPS heroes, Overwatch can empower Damage players to take a more proactive role in shaping the flow of the game and influencing match outcomes. This shift would not only elevate the status of DPS players within the Overwatch community but also foster a more balanced and inclusive gameplay experience.

Additionally, the removal of tanks could address longstanding issues related to game balance and matchmaking. Tanks are inherently difficult to balance due to their role as frontline bulwarks and primary initiators. By reducing the prominence of tanks in Overwatch, developers can streamline the balancing process and allocate resources more efficiently to address other areas of the game, such as hero diversity, map design, and matchmaking algorithms. This, in turn, could lead to a more enjoyable and satisfying experience for players across all skill levels.

In conclusion, while tanks have traditionally held a central role in Overwatch, their importance may be overstated, and there are compelling arguments to be made for redistributing their responsibilities to other roles, particularly Damage heroes. By embracing a more flexible approach to team composition and gameplay strategies, Overwatch can encourage creativity, innovation, and strategic diversity, leading to a more engaging and dynamic gameplay experience for players.

I SENT YOU MY PAINSTAKINGLY SELF WRITTEN ESSAY PLEASE RESPOND

2 Likes
28

Overbuff denies the existence of private profiled individuals. That in and of itself is a bias. Not to mention, you invoked professional players in your research therefore inviting the criticism I levied of the population differential.

You have to show the contradiction, not just say it is contradicting.

The expert game play of a single DPS or Support, of which there are 2 of per team can and will frequently overwrite the equal or larger skill value of a single tank. The power that the role holds versus the skill they have the ability to represent is not balanced.

As an example, of which there are many, this is but only one;

Genji can kill multiple players with a Dragon Blade Ultimate regularly without the assistance of the team. You will rarely find a single tank Ultimate to have that power level.

Yes, this was originally for good reason. But I will again invoke that the tank player is now covering the role of 2 with the gameplay of 1.

It is my opinion as much as your claim is your opinion.

The difference exists in how this can be applied.

Example;

A single Reaper will make playing Winston difficult. While a Single Pharah will not make playing Reaper difficult as long as you have a hitscan DPS partner.

There is no tank partner, so once you are countered, you must swap or lose. It matters not if that counter is one person or an entire team. This is the rule of 5v5. (no, I am not advocating for 6v6 as Blizzard doesnā€™t revert any significant change, no matter how good or bad it will be)

Mainly because you are speaking from the proverbial Oligarchy of Overwatch. You have taken the best players and told the rest of the community ā€œbe like the bestā€. I am telling you my opinion as a tank player in the ā€œeverymanā€ category how the game is where we live.

When I pick tank, I play to try to make the least mistakes and counter when necessary. I used to play in an attempt to facilitate my team into play making scenarios. Today, I can still facilitate play making scenarios, but this is far diminished to what it used to be years ago. I say this as someone who almost plays exclusively tank heroes. To my credit, you will never find a post I have made over the last 8 years (the old forums not withstanding) that claims tanks should be granted unlimited power. Of my 2000+ hours, about 75% of this accounts play time is tanking 1500+ hours (I have another account named Tank which has 100% tank playtime), I have advocated for the balance between all roles. To specify, my most played tank Reinhardt has been given buffs I saw as a poor choice to game balance because of the dynamic it would create within the game itself. Making that single tank too powerful, not only to the other tanks in the role, but to the cast in general. Very few times do you see this within the camps of DPS or Support.

At the end of our exchange thus far, what I see from you is that you want people to carte blanche agree with your command. You leave no room for criticism and deflect with ā€œthatā€™s just your opinion bro!ā€. The forums is made up with many differing opinions, but one of the more widely accepted is;

We need more tank players and the way Blizzard is going about it isnā€™t working.

1 Like
29

Again I do not see any arguments here which state or show that a tank is not important or needed.

What you are mentioning above is all part of comp. a shut down is part of comp.

If you think a charge Zarya with nano cannot decimate a team like a genji then we can debate on how false that is.

Not saying a genji cannot do better. A tank can do that as welll.

So show me where a tank is not an integral part of 5v5 then we can debate.

Try better, maybe I will. You are using the free version. I will when you upgrade to the paid version.

30

ive been a tank main for a long time now, seen the ups and downs (mauga meta my least favourite) and everything youve said here is completely true, though i add that sometimes even if you do all of that, even if you do it perfectly. right now the game in the current game state if your dps dont follow up and the actions you make (such as shattering a full team) then you are left feeling helpless, and thats the feeling i think alot of people are having atm when they say that tank is miserable (because most dps dont follow up)

31

I never said tanks werenā€™t important. If I must clarify my stance, let me do so now.

Tanks are important, but not important enough. One player has the responsibility of two, but not the impact of two players. To solidify this stance, I invoke the idea that as you gain rank and skill, the tank becomes less derivative of their skill, and more derivative of their ability to not make a mistake. Which leads me to my conclusion that playing a role where not making a mistake is more important then being skillful leads to a negative gameplay loop, hence fewer players wanting to play that role.

The way to fix this is out of the scope of what Blizzard can do. As in, they are too incompetent to fix the problem that exists, and they fix other things that have no bearing on tanks in general. See the last patch as proof.

This requires Zarya to have Nano, where Genji can do it all by himself. Thatā€™s reinforcing the point I was making.

Even if, for the sake of argument, we say Zarya can solo team wipe in a Graviton Surge, the likelihood of the player doing this is far less likely then Genji Dragon Blade, by design. A design that existed when we had two tanks.

My point is they become less integral as you increase in rank until the point you start getting paid to play the game. As your research shows.

And save me the whole ā€œthen we can debateā€ part. I am doing you a favor by replying to you, in an actual debate I would be playing chess while you played checkers.

32

Done. That was the post was for. Rest you can make a thread and I will check if it needs a debate.

Sometime we need to show the forum facts.

Same me too. I post on the forums about issues.

But I donā€™t say tanks are in a bad spot or dps is.

It is the quality of players. Problem is March making.

33

How you get to your conclusion matters.

Let me show you;

Based on what metric?

Again, based on what metric? (and we will ignore the spelling error.)

Basically, you made a claim;

And now dismiss anyone who tells you that they arenā€™t the most influential role, again which you claimed, as either it just being ā€œyour opinion bro!ā€ or in my case, that they are simply important thereby validating your claim they are the most important.

What you seek is the adulation of your peers on the forums, and you wrote an entire paper to receive it. The difference between you an I is that I require no validation to know Iā€™m right.

34

completely agree tanks are not in a bad spot in the slightest. Some tanks are funner than others- thats true enough. But overall the game is designed to be a team based shooter, and in mot team based game if theres a tank they are there for mit soak and cc, not damage

35

It is based on shooter but it is not a pure FPS game.

Problem is people want this to be like Valorant.

36

can you please stop with the ā€œanti tankā€ if anything your anti tank. you can throw out all the arguments but if i hear flats say seagull the litteral most experienced player in all off ow and overall a super chill guy couldnt bear more then three matches of tank and almost lost his mind thats bad. all tanks want is for the game to be fun it doesn matter how much ā€œimpactā€ you have if the gameplay loop is genuinly awful then no one wants to play tank anymore. stop using ā€œanti tankā€ to shut down actual tank players

37

which is exactly what 5v5 is trying to do

38

So do you want me to reply to your thread ? Or you donā€™t want me to ?

You are going out of way to be rude.

And now I am kind of getting annoyed. You wrote big post which I was going to reply but your attitude is not helping.

Seagull left the game.

Flat is almost jobless contemplating where to go next (as per his content that he put out. I like flats. No disrespect).

While the only thing that is confirmed is Blizzard art team will release the next battle pass with more skins.

Sorry I am more fact based.

So do you want me to reply ?

39

alright here some facts for you. you and i like different things and prefer different versions of this game . we can agree on that. right now the tank role is creating queue time issues. more people are starting to realize tank isnā€™t going to be fun in 5v5. so tank players wont play tank anymore creating rising queue times for dps and support. if dps and support have to queue longer for a match that has overall less quality and fun they too will conclude its not worth it. if they conclude that the game will die. i donā€™t want the game i love to die neither do you we can agree on that as well right? even if you donā€™t like it even if you bring all the facts you are still part of the minority of 5v5 tank players. what you think doesnā€™t matter neither does what i think. what matters is making the game inviting and fun. 5v5 and ow2 has ruined what little reputation ow had left after they abandoned ow1. reputation matters fun gameplay matters. if people donā€™t want to play overwatch because the game sucks then overwatch will never experience growth and stable playerbases. if that doesnā€™t happen the game is destined to die. no matter how much fact you bring the game will die if we continue the current trajectory. if 5v5 is the problem 6v6 is the answer. as the problems created by 5v5 where not present in 6v6. so its only smart to choose the answer that can fix the most issues. and now for my thoughts: this is why you piss. me. off. you are directly responsible for killing fun in ow and more so responsible for killing overwatch as a whole. as your outlook does not care about anyone other then you.

no attitude from me at all. you just oppose me and cant win. because you choose to stand at the losing side. the overwatch ending side

40

This has always been an issue. It actually is much better in OW2.

Que times were the sole reason I picked up tanking as a solo player in OW1. So good job on blizzard.

You can try tanking or you can try for all slots if you like comp. that should not be an issue. There are options for you.

Again more is your content creator who should not have any opinion. They can and should work with the team in niche issues of the game. Which I think they are as they have the most credible opinion on how things may work. But they should not have any opinion on the framework of the game. Which again blizzard made it very clear. Stylosa even confirmed this o his latest video. And he is ok with it.

They are more than welcome to leave and go to valorant.

Tank has always been the center of blizzard games. Weather you like it or not.

They said that wow wil die for this very same reason. If you donā€™t like blizzard games and their framework maybe this is not your playground ?

I never cry dps ques were long. I made the change because I know none is going to tank and get solod by a dps who is half my health.

This is what a tank is. He tanks for his team. This is the framework. You like it or not. You have options.

I will support at 6v6
I will support at 5v5.

What matters is who is paying and subscribing. You will leave the very next day.

You are 4 years late for this comment. What we have now is the loyal customers. The peak of OW is passed. You are now left with customers who enjoy blizzard games.

Not when it is f2p.
Not when players are happy with skins and titles.

Donā€™t believe me do a simple thread search.

Enjoying the game and not making it my paycheck.

There I answered all your questions. Which no one will answer.

Here is a suggestion :

Try some other game. Put OW on the side.