Still then you dont play the hero because you want to but because you feel its a necesssity to the problem at hand.
Just like i said.
Nope. I want to flex. Therefore any hero I flex to is out of a desire to do so.
You just said you want to flex because you like solving problems.
Yes.
- I like solving problems
- Resulting in flexing being the ideal role to do so.
- Resulting in me liking the flex role and any hero I choose to accomplish that goal.
Except there are very little problems which can only be solved with cross role flex when role queue is involved.
Currently people flex to tank or healer because they have none, or only one which cant shoulder the job alone because maybe they decided to flex and arent simply good enough in that role
You can still flex within your role to efficiently deal with problem heroes on the enemy team.
The odds against the enemy team are still even as they are limited within their role just like you are.
Incorrect. Many times the enemy team has an answer to the pick you would use within the same role. Making that not a good pick for you to go with and making a cross role pick more ideal.
Not to mention the situations in which you and a teammate need to switch roles due to differences in ability.
I find myself to be a competent hitscan. Often times the dps on my team aren’t. Invery often propose a switch between me and the other person. Thus filling the role through flex across multiple roles.
There are plenty of opportunities to flex cross roles and plenty of reasons to do so considering the varying nature of the game.
Thats the exact reason why role queue is better because people who play dps are actually at the skill lvl their SR suggests. They can implement role based SR. Your hitscan teammate in the current system might not be good enough because he got where hes at by flexing and just decided to play dps for once.
1 Like
It will not work out that way as your wins and losses will be more out of your hands an almost entirely on the hope that those in the other roles do theirs.
Flex players are a mitigator of this issue. Removing flex means removing that mitigation.
You are always dependend on your teammates doing their job, but role queue will improve matchmaking by giving you teammates at their respective SR for the role they want to play and not roll a dice where you might get a Mercy main trying to bring his McCree.
You are assuming two things.
- That there will be seperate sr in the first place
- That they will RESET sr at all for this.
True. However without flexing the dependency will INCREASE exponentially as the options available to you as an individual will decrease. Even more so for anyone who tanks or supports as the options for them are far more limited.
Jeff basically confirmed this. I check if i can find the VOD.
1 Like
Here it is.
Even if its true, it still does nothing to address the fact of increased dependency and a loss of personal impact. Especially for flex players.
Looking for solutions that do not throw the baby out with the bath water. Role queue and 222 does not offer that. Ban’s can.
Its not increased dependency. You get to play the role youre best at and have the biggest impact on while at the same time it guarantees you that your teammates play the roles they want to play.
If you flex from main tank to dps because your dps sucks, like it is in the current system, then you try to solve one issue by creating another because suddenly you dont have a main tank on your team and your supports on the team might think youre throwing the game.
If you distrust your teammates from the start even with improved matchmaking where dps players get to play dps and you dont have to fear that a tank or support player suddenly decides to play dps on your team, then there is still LFG.
1 Like
Once again. Not true for everyone. I am best at the flex role. I will not be able to flex as it is no longer available. Throwing flex players under the bus because THEY are not the stubborn ones is nonsense.
I’ve experienced this and won despite it. Mostly because I chose something that could fill both roles to a certain degree.
Its not a matter of trust. Its a matter of versatility. Many players have proven to either not be willing or unable to be versatile. Which is why flex is needed. Flex would not be needed if people who chose the dps role diversified their hero picks enough to deal with problems.
Same with people who have chosen the tank and support roles to main.
Many people don’t diversify at all within a role. Resulting in the need for flex players.
The forums can be interpreted as a hive mind. Also, I am willing to guess that Brig would be banned pretty consistently as well as Sombra.
Yes, but if there is a meta, like GOATs, people will want to follow that meta and ban those that counter it. In OWL, the entire first stage was mostly GOATs.
Universally is an exaggeration, but there are heroes that the majority of the player base doesn’t like to play against, like Brig and Sombra.
Unless there is a meta that completely dominates all other team comps in most cases, like GOATs. People like to follow metas.
People will post any line of reasoning to disagree - “unless there is a meta that completely dominates”… its still a game about flexing, even then. The game was clearly designed, metas or not, to flex around. Don’t twist your neck off trying to dispute the clear design of the game. There is no intention by Blizzard that only “X” characters should be played at one time as part of a “meta”, that is an unfortunate side effect of a too-open system with too many permutations, thus they find this broken set of mechanics for GOATs and stick to it… all the more reason for 2/2/2…
Then why do one tricks exist? Then why does the majority of the player base not actually flex? Then why did every team in OWL play GOATs in the first stage with few exceptions?
You think 2-2-2 will stop metas from occurring?
1 Like
The game is designed as jeff discussed to flex.
One tricks exist because the game inadvertently rewards it. Moving to multiple role SRs will help this. Teams play GOATs because as I just said, problems in the game, that doesn’t mean the designers wanted GOATs or metas period. Ideally they don’t.
2/2/2 will not prevent “metas” explicitly, but it makes them less rigid because a set of characters balanced to be in pairs in sets of six is far, far easier to balance with. So we go from say one rigid meta per map to say something more like 3-4 equally viable “metas” per map, if that.
And fwiw, OWL is not the best measure, we are concerned with what QP and the ladder look like as that’s the better example of what the game really is for players.
I apologize for asking about your 2-2-2 statement, if you want to debate about 2-2-2, go to those posts about 2-2-2 that are abundant these days as people are always willing to fight over something so nonsensical (in my opinion at least)