What I typically don't see mercy suggestions address (an opinion)


#1

And I do say typically, because there have been a few that have made me go “hmm…that’s not bad…I’d like to test this on ptr.” But for the most part…no.

I’ve seen dozens of posts ranging between the following ideas:

  • Complete rework
  • 1.0 Revert
  • Remove rez
  • LoS on old rez
  • Switch valk and rez between Q and E
  • Boost her healing/damage amp more during valk
  • Make rez earned/resource meter

And none of these seem to address the problem that I’ve consistently had with mercy since my first time playing her. She has no depth of play. There is seemingly nothing (outside of positioning and timing) that separates a good mercy from a great mercy. You can’t heal better; you can’t rez better. There’s no aiming to improve upon (no this isn’t about “muh skill”). And it’s been this way since day 1. Every iteration of mercy has had this problem, from mass rez, to insta-rez must-pick, to the current version. I get that she’s supposed to be the low-skill, easily accessible, reliable healer, but there’s got to be something to improve on. Anyways, this was my opinion. Y’all are welcome to your own. And no, I don’t have a suggestion to how I would want to see her at this time, sorry.


#2

I mean there’s nothing much that can be changed to make her skill difference increase between a good Mercy or a great one (Other than position etc).

People suggested that she had to aim her beam but that sounds weird? and not a lot like that doubt it’s a good idea tbh.

I honestly wanted rez out and a new ability for her E but ehh idk

This is the worst one though.


#3

You missed the part where people suggested what to add if resurrect was removed.

I assume that was on purpose to create another troll Mercy post that everyone can flock into and not talk about anything useful.

Good job.


#4

Troll post?

Also no. I gave examples of what I see. And none of them cover the problem I have with mercy.


#5

Your problem with Mercy is “depth of play”, but you fail to define it because you don’t know what it is.

You also say you have no suggestion, while claiming all other suggestions are not “good” further proving my point that you don’t know what you want.


#6

But my point was never to say what I want, or offer a suggestion for changing mercy. My point was to explain that I feel mercy has no depth of play (which I do explain what I mean) and that most other mercy threads I see don’t talk about them.


#7

Quote it to me from your op. What is “depth of play” for Mercy? What it should be?

You explain nothing. You try to criticize other suggestions with no counterargument. Then, you claim you have nothing to offer as a separate suggestion. Sounds like a troll post to me.


#8

Basically, areas to practice, and improve, and get better at.

My point is that she doesn’t have a depth of play (or rather it is extremely shallow), and I clearly say that I don’t know what it should be at the end of the post. But I don’t need to know what I want or what it should be, to know what I don’t want.


#9

Earned res adds some depth to it.
Id like there to be more, even if it has to be nerfs to her kit. like making it so the beam requires los or whatever.


#10

That is not a definition of “depth of play”. You just listed the things that doesn’t seem important to you (positioning and timing) and listed actions that are literally impossible to improve on because of character design.

You are basically saying that you don’t like a character design that limits a player to certain type of playstyle that doesn’t reward their skill levels.

In other words, you are not satisfied with the way Mercy players play the hero because you think there might be a better way to design the hero. Yet, you fail to specify what way that is, so that people who read your post about “depth of play” can understand what you mean by that.

Your move, cowboy.


#11

Did I say they were not important? I acknowledged that they were areas to improve upon. But outside of that, you really can’t. And that is the problem I have with mercy.

No, those are not “basically what I am saying” Don’t paraphrase me if you can’t get it right. I have no issues with the way other people play mercy. People play heroes differently and there is no one right way to play a hero. I’m saying that the number of ways to improve as mercy are quite low. And I’m also saying that the people who make mercy suggestions don’t address that, which is why I don’t find those suggestions good.

“Your move, cowboy?”
You had to resort to snide comments? We aren’t playing chess. This isn’t a game. It was my opinion and that is all.


#12

You might want to rephrase the subject line slightly since it comes off a bit argumentative and can lead to argumentative picking at what you’ve written.

Would I be understanding you correctly to assume that you’d like a variant of Mercy more if she had a function that could clearly be seen as being skillful and clearly had a potential for improvement?

I think that unless you change Mercy’s base kit you won’t get much in that regard.

You might have a few abilities suggestions like Titanium’s Pacify

That have a piece of the kit lean that way but the rest of it is still isn’t likely to appeal to you.

Personally, if I was going in that direction for an ability I’d replace res with some sort of Biotic Blast where you’ve got a projectile that can block an amount of damage, deal an amount of damage, and heal an amount of damage. You’d need to aim the projectile so it’d actually hit whatever objective you would be attempted to achieve.

You’d then have Valk cut it’s cooldown so when ulting it was a bigger part of your efforts.

But, even with something like that you’d only be getting to use the ability a small fraction of the time so that probably wouldn’t be good enjoyable enough for people that really want a clear method of improving and showing accomplishment.


#13

Hmm…perhaps you’re right. Very well.


#14

GA tech adds a surprising amount, but it goes underutilized due to the rest of her kit. I want to see some mechanic to discourage continuous pocketing or incentivize switching targets, like a lingering effect or TF2 medic mechanics.


#15

I wouldn’t even say that. Consider dysvalence’s mention of Guardian Angel. When they added the bunny hop, it added tech to her kit that while not necessary to be good or useful, could be utilized to maximize and push her kit further. Even little things like that could be good while keeping her base kit the same.


#16

The mercy community is already upset that her description – consistently reliable healing dealer – does not fit her kit (according to the mercy community, 50HPS does not fit the description of being the most consistent reliable healing output hero because it’s too slow).

By making her beam require LOS/more mechanical skill, I cannot see the community supporting that change especially when they want her to be a consistent & reliable healing output hero.


#17

Most people that make Mercy suggestions have already established that she is low skill hero and doesn’t need a Widowmaker’s aim or Tracer’s cooldown management to be useful contender as a healer pick.
Most of those people are suggesting to buff Mercy so she is a contender for Ana’s spot.

Your “depth of play” argument is that adding a higher skill ceiling is going to improve Mercy, while it will just alienate most people that play her.
The reason people like playing her is because she’s easy to play and doesn’t require too much intensive work done to feel like you were the crucial part of a teamfight win.

As for aiming argument, she has a pistol that some use to great effect. I used to play Mercy back in the day, and I always switched weapons as I used GA and looked around for targets, when I knew I had a safe opening for that (no teammates requiring healing/damage boost).
——————————————————————
“Your move, cowboy” is my way of inciting a competitive situation between difference of opinions. I like fun arguments and I always seek a good opponent.
Arguments lead to a better understanding of a topic at hand and can yield better end-game result by combinations of different viewpoints.