All these “tests” for different formats, they are all failures. Everybody knows that just going back to Open Queue 6v6 is the solution. Every other format is objectively inferior. The only reason OW1’s OQ 6v6 had issues towards the end of its life is because of how overtuned supports became. But instead of just adjusting supports, we changed the format. And now look where we are.
Both the original OW team, not these new guys, and the MR team, who both developed their respective games, both decided that OQ 6v6 played the best. Why aren’t we listening to them?
no, it’s not that obvious: testing is a fundamental part of a pvp game that has been around for years now. one of the mistakes of Overwatch 2 was literally the same know-it-all that you are also demonstrating: pretending to know what is best without actually trying it. it was the stubbornness of not having left (sensibly) the 5v5 active TOGETHER with the possibility of playing 6v6 at least in a non-competitive context that created these useless feuds in the community.
we wouldn’t be wasting so much time on this kind of hypothesis if this was the way it was done from the very first moment the idea of 5v5 came up. and this will always be an indelible overwatch mistake. BUT… testing is never a stupid thing to do. we completely disagree on this.
Blizzard for some reason snakes around the simple request majority of community wants, and becomes too late for people to care by the time they get to it.
Community: 6v6 2-2-2
Blizzard: 5v5 and raid boss tanks!
Community: 6v6 2-2-2
Blizzard: Overwatch Classic prior all the patches?
Community: 6v6 2-2-2
Blizzard: Moth Meta for OW Classic?
Community: 6v6 2-2-2
Blizzard: Minimum 1 Max 3?
(Future)
Community: 6v6 2-2-2
Blizzard: How about 1 dps 2 tanks 2 healers?
Community: 6v6 2-2-2
Blizzard: Brigitte introduction to OW Classic?
Community: 6v6 2-2-2
Blizzard: 2 tanks and a giga healer?
We know the reasons. They’ve pretty explicitly told us that the lack of tank players is the issue with 2-2-2. That’s why they’re doing all this testing
Ha! Now this is more the flavor of nonsense I expect. That other thread about min1/max3, filled with solid analysis and pros and cons, will disappear into the ether.
Meanwhile, this egotistical simpleton take will likely provoke 100 responses.
Even 5v5 open queue feels like pure hell when you got 3 tanks on you and your screen is full of colors, flashes, bullets, shields and what else.
Imagine increasing this by adding 2 more players into the map.
Yeah hell no.
Or because its just too much stuff happening for people to coordinate with.
Citation needed.
But but Jawa says old team, and a competitor wanted the OQ setup, so thats obviously better.
Source: Trust me bro, here are my stats and citations provided to back myself up.
6v6 min 1 has been a blast. No role passives means the tanks are killable, even with 3 present, and it is much harder to cheese the opposing team since the open format lets everyone counter with characters they are comfortable playing. I have seen far fewer one-sided stomps in the 6v6 min 1 games I’ve been playing than any role queue format. The bulk of my games have been fairly close unless the opposing team was a comp sweat stack. Best of all, wait time has been consistently shorter compared to role queue.
I played like 8-10 games and about half of those were pretty stompy
A paraiso where the attacking team got full held, a push game where one team full capped in around 5 minutes with the other team not even making it to the checkpoint, a midtown game where the attackers finished with over 4 minutes left and defenders barely got any kills.
Well, so the same as usual I guess. Though to be fair some of those stomps were partially my fault for daring to pick mauga and being the only tank. At least 1 such match. You can’t play the game in that scenario due to comp diff
You’re the one crying about visual clutter, and trying to use that as an excuse as to why we shouldn’t have a functional format, lol.
Once again, you are bringing up something that has nothing to do with the format, and using it as a complaint.
This is a matchmaking problem, caused by their awful monetization patent, and OW2 being a F2P game. Format has no impact on if a game will be a stomp or not. It’s entirely decided on the players in a given match.
This is is often cited as a fact, but the fact of the matter is that Overwatch started “failing” in the late 2017, early 2018 when its playerbase began shedding massive amounts of players – a full year and half before Role Queue’s implementation in the third quarter of 2019. Was the open queue format, which created a lot of friction and frustration, to blame? Role Queue proponents will unequivocally claim that yes; but they would also be wrong, at least partially. There’s no doubt that some players quit over the aforementioned issues, but the boring and unglamorous reality is that no matter how great Overwatch was when it was GOTY, most gamers that picked it up were casuals: they had their fun, for a while, and then moved on to other games.
Yup. They realized they suck at balancing so they threw on the training wheels. Now when they take the training wheels off with min 1 max 3 everyone hates it because the AWFUL balance becomes very apparent.
6v6 OQ would be the way forward if Blizzard actually had a competent balance team but they don’t so I think it would be a disaster. Let these kids balance with training wheels. They need it.
You personally feel like it would be the solution.
Probably because barely anyone played Open Q while it coexisted with 2/2/2 Role Q?
It’s not what the majority of the player base wants.
DPS players rather waited several minutes in queue for a spot in 2/2/2 Role Q than getting an instant match in Open Q - that is really all you need to know about it’s popularity compared to 2/2/2 Role Q.
Its not my fault you dont understand what visual clutter means and you understood “better graphics quality is what it means”.
Meanwhile your excuse for that is “its better”
That wasn’t a complaint, that was sarcasm.
Ah ofc, another conspirazy theorist.
A balanced matchmaking would mean everyone gets same amt of wins, to have this, half the gamers need to lose their fights and half would win. at all times.
Ran the numbers on friends circle of 2 dozen, the avg is 52%.
and that 2% is what you are crying about here on “matchmaker isnt balanced”.
You are supposed to skill diff into wins, not being handed wins in platters cause you think you are entitled to a win without any improvements.
I agree. which doesnt make it a matchmaker problem really.
You can have people having bad days on team, people trying new things, people placed higher but are settling down in their ranks.
