True. Unless my team was really good, or we already had the advantage, me dying usually meant having to retreat or risk a full wipe. Matches where I managed to not die at all (yes, that happened, sometimes) were all won by a pretty big margin.
Also, kind of off topic, but not really because it pertains to balance… does Ana’s nano boost buff kind of remind anyone of how Ana’s nano boost can work in HotS? That the nano boost can heal the player being boosted. I just kind of realized that.
Because it is a controversy, it is a reason that is only part of the reason she is picked and not picked.
Her healing is good but it depends on rank and her viability and use.
For example a master Ana will be a better pick that Master Mercy during season 3 or 4 but at the same time at gold even if the Ana is skilled people will feel more comfortable with Mercy as the main healer.
Also you have to consider environmental situations, the dps at higher ranks can burn through that healing, reducing viability.
Right now mercy healing is still technically strong, in matches she can still solo carry.
In the past, Mercy can solo carry with 50hps, she can solo carry with 60 hps
But her healing was only part of the reason she was chosen, it wasn’t a deciding factor.
Which is why I have been saying that rez on E would have kept her very viable even WITH a healing nerf IF the other supports were NOT buffed.
Ironically because her 60hps was more reliable than 50hps, it didn’t matter if Res had all these locks and chains on it and restraining its use.
Which is why my prediction is… They will make res easier to use as one of their 2 remaining moves…
It is either improve Valkyrie to make it superficially strong or improve res to make it easier to use to compensate healing
If you can’t keep them alive then make it easier to bring them back, if you can keep them constantly alive they you don’t need a super easy to use res
I usually reply to posts as I read through them if they require me to scroll down to see the entire post.
I was too lazy to go back and edit the first part of the reply after reading the last part of your post.
Which one?
Insisting upon the existence of evidence without providing any does not prove the existence of evidence. You said:
Which is accusing us of mass-false-flagging those who disagree with us simply because they disagree with us.
A claim that you have yet to back up with any evidence.
You linked a bunch of debates.
Nowhere in those debates do I see evidence of mass-false-flagging.
It’s upsetting to see someone quote you?
Actually, they replied in this thread to put the quote where I could see it. If you’re going to say things like:
Then you really ought to put that where that claim can be put to the test, no?
If I’m going to attack someone’s arguments on the forums, I put it directly in front of them so they can see. I don’t try to be sneaky about it to avoid it being dismantled.
If one cannot stand with a position against adversity, there’s no point in standing with that position at all.
Is that what you’re upset about?
I had been quoted and mentioned by name. I think I was pretty darn relevant to the conversation.
You are literally making the assertion that someone consistently disagreeing with you and choosing to voice that disagreement is harassment, and warrants a flag.
In addition, you are arguing that quoting you is trolling, and warrants a flag.
I can’t be the only one between the two of us that sees the irony when you accuse myself and other Mercy mains of mass-false-flagging you.
Guilty of refusing to back down in a debate, reinforcing and revising my assertions, and shooting down the arguments made by those who try to do the same to mine? Guilty of initiating civil confrontation and defending those who do the same?
Sure. I’ll own that.
Nope. I mean:
My post being this one:
There you go using that word again as though it means something sinister.
No. that is very clearly an opinion you are presenting as fact. You having reasoning to form that opinion does not make it a fact. It is still an opinion.
That’s called reaching a conclusion from known facts, or “reasoning”. The conclusion stands as a fact until something else comes along and kicks the supporting facts out from under it, or replaces the conclusion with a more accurate one under the same support facts.
If you know A and B are true, and you know that C is true when A and B are true, you know C is true. That’s not an opinion. That’s logic.
Resurrect as a basic ability is more powerful than Resurrect was as an ultimate.
Mercy was a must-pick for almost a year after Resurrect was placed on a basic ability. Mercy never was a must-pick prior to her rework.
We know that Valkyrie wasn’t the source of Mercy being Overpowered, as Mercy’s damage output/healing output hardly changed. This also eliminates her pistol and beams as possibilities, as they didn’t change either.
GA is only as powerful as the rest of Mercy’s kit allows her to be (mobility is a tool for amplifying impact; it’s not impact in itself), removing that as a possibility, in addition to the fact that it was hardly changed by the rework.
That leaves Resurrect as the only possible culprit. Simple process of elimination.
As though that isn’t enough to point you towards Resurrect, we have all of these:
First is the availability of Resurrect now versus Mercy’s 1.x versions. Today, Resurrect runs on a consistent 30 second cooldown regardless as to the Mercy player’s performance. Killing a Mercy repeatedly does not impede upon their ability to return and use Resurrect; the only thing Mercy needs to have Resurrect available is time, and nothing in the game can deprive her of that. Mercy 1.x, on the other hand, needed to fill a resource meter in order to use Resurrect. Sure, that resource charged passively over time, but at an incredibly slow rate proportional to the requirement. If the player were to just wait for that resource to fill passively, they would be waiting 5 minutes and 25 seconds, which could be half the match by itself.
Anyway, because Mercy needed to fill a resource in order to use Resurrect on an acceptable basis, it was far easier to impede its availability by targeting or eliminating the Mercy. The time respawning and walking back to the fight would otherwise be time spent healing, shooting, or amplifying damage, depriving her of ultimate charge and therefore a use of resurrect.
Second is the optimal usage for the ability. Given Resurrect’s current availability and single-target mechanics, its optimal usage is obvious; it is best used to reverse the first pick in a fight, operating as a 1-up for an ally in every poke-at-choke scenario. This one-up functions as a buffer that disincentivizes an enemy engagement after the enemy gets a pick and therefore a numbers advantage, resulting in a continuation of the poke battle and a second chance for Mercy’s team to get the pick instead. As a result, Resurrect now stops the snowball before it begins, making it much more reliable when it comes to post-rez success. Preventing a snowball is much easier than trying to reverse a snowball after it has already gained velocity.
Mass-Resurrect, on the other hand, had variation in its optimal time of usage due to its inconsistent availability and its variation in numerical value. If it were to be used as a tempo-rez every time, it would simply be outmatched by the post-rework Resurrect because it cannot compete with 2.x’s cooldown rate. Thus, in order to maintain a good numerical value, a balance between tempo and mass-revives needed to be held. Finding that balance and by extension the optimal time and placement for Resurrect was difficult, making the ability harder to use overall.
As mentioned before, however, it is more difficult to reverse a snowball after it has gained velocity. Thus, Mercy 1.x’s Resurrect was far less reliable in post-rez success than Mercy’s 2.x’s Resurrect.
Resurrect is also used much earlier in the fight than it was before, reducing the window to prevent it from what used to be anywhere between the first pick and after the fifth kill to just the first pick. There is a smaller window to stop it.
As though the above advantages weren’t enough to push Resurrect over the edge, Resurrect also no longer occupies one of the team’s six ultimates. An ultimate is not lost upon its expense.
To recap:
- Availability is consistent and unaffected by performance. It is easier to have resurrect ready to be used now than it was with 1.x.
- Optimal usage is predefined, making it much easier to use Resurrect to its maximum capacity now than with 1.x.
- Now prevents snowballs before they begin, which is much easier than stopping them after they are already in motion. Much more likely to end in success.
- Is now more difficult to prevent through preliminary action, as it is used much earlier now.
- No longer takes up an ultimate slot.
While the number of revived players every match may be nearly identical, the mechanics of the newer Resurrect makes it far more powerful in application.
If there is only one possible culprit, and we know that every other piece of evidence points towards that one culprit, we know that said possible culprit is the culprit.
You and I have been over this specifically in other threads. Not only did you admit that this was an overall average across all elo’s rather than GM specific stats,
Which was shot down by an argument you conveniently ignored: All stats (save for Lucio’s healing done and Mercy’s damage done, I believe) among supports scaled upward while approaching GM. Moira’s healing done, for example, scaled much more aggressively than Mercy’s healing done.
This leads us to believe that Mercy’s healing done scaled the same way prior to the rework. Alternatively, if one considered that Valkyrie, if anything, made it easier for low-tier players to get more healing done due to it’s extreme ease of use, one could theorize that Mercy’s healing dealt scaled less aggressively after the rework than it did before, which tosses the hypothesis that Valkyrie could have contributed more at high ranks after the rework out the window.
You attempted to use an argument of hypotheticals with no numbers to back it up, which is shot down by it’s own counterparts of more-likely hypotheticals, to try to shoot down a conclusion that all of the solid evidence points towards.
“We know A and B. A and B point to C.”
“But what if D is true?”
A “what if” doesn’t take precedence over known facts, especially not if existing evidence and reasoning suggests that the opposite of that “what if” is happening.
you intentionally lied in order to uphold that argument by trying to say you can’t possibly view GM specific stats.
You’re attaching intention to text that displays none of that intention, and ignoring the context that flatly contradicts that supposed intention.
You say I was lying when I said this:
There is no way to extract GM healing averages from Overbuff, FYI.
But when you reminded me that Overbuff has a “primary” section where you could get a limited resource of rank-sorted stats, I replied with:
Oh, my bad… Now I just feel silly. I always selected the hero to see their specific stats. You can’t see Mercy’s number of revived players or Ana’s number of targets slept without clicking on the hero to reveal their specific stats.
If I was “lying” with my first assertion, then my first response to being proven incorrect probably would not have been to admit to being proven incorrect. I’ve been familiar with Overbuff long enough to know my way around that site, but I just never used some parts of it, so they weren’t at the front of my thoughts while I was typing that up.
The option to extend GA even further and not start the cooldown until after GA is fully finished does not make the cooldown longer. The cooldown is still the exact same, you are just in the animation of GA for longer.
Hence:
effective cooldown.
In what universe though?
This one.
A hero can have an overpowered ability and still be garbage-tier. Just look at pre-rework Hanzo. Scatter Arrow was overpowered, but Hanzo was worse off than Symmetra at the time.
No, she needed a lot of buffs to her ultimate, and even then her ultimate was still ultimately unimpactful in the grand scheme of things.
Already been over this with someone else in this thread, so I’ll go ahead and copy/paste my reply.
She needed something
This is correct.
She needed something to be able to survive to use her ult whether it was invul
This is incorrect.
They took a hero who was weak overall, and buffed the part of her kit that was already incredibly strong. The problem wasn’t that any part of Mercy’s kit was weak; the problem was that she didn’t have nearly as many things in her kit as her support counterparts.
The reasons Mercy was picked in season 3 were high-output, consistent healing and Resurrect. She did both of those things very well. Neither of those components needed buffs. Instead, Mercy needed another reason to pick her over her support counterparts.
Buffing Resurrect was like taking pre-rework Hanzo and buffing Scatter Arrow. It made them more powerful overall, but buffing a part of a hero’s kit that isn’t underperforming isn’t a good idea.
Mercy with mass res was stagnant, plain and simple. With her in that state, their was never a chance of her having any real impact, or seeing any use in pro play, aside from damage boosting Phara and Widow.
Add the alternative of Mercy being overpowered and dominating the meta, and you have Mercy with E-rez.
At least mass-rez Mercy was able to consistently achieve a healthy pickrate in GM prior to the rework without depending upon a handful of other heroes for viability. Now Mercy’s base kit is pocket-oriented, and she has the most volatile “basic ability” in the game. She’s going to swing between underpowered and overpowered with even the slightest changes, and when she achieves semi-decent balance, it will probably be traced back to certain heroes who she pairs well with being good picks.
Yes, this is how balancing works. Mercy gains extra utility,
Mercy gains an overpowered ability and begins treading on other heroes’ turfs…
in order to balance this, you take away from one of the many things she excels at.
And in order to compensate, they chip away at the few things they said they wanted Mercy to be. The remove some of Mercy’s turf.
So much for not wanting Mercy to depend upon Resurrect to be useful…
And still, she is by far the best pocket healer in the game,
She isn’t supposed to be a pocket healer. She’s supposed to be a main healer.
so they very specifically didn’t stop her intended niche.
They most certainly did.
Is this before or after the invulnerability buff?
It isn’t contrasting pre-invulnerability vs post-invulnerability. They are both equally numerically complex. This is contrasting pre-rework to post-rework.
Either way, I’m pretty sure forcing a team to aid in getting off a powerful ability like resurrect is a lot more complicated than something like, shift+q without consequence.
This isn’t at all relevant to what you just quoted, but I have the covered in the OP too.
and actually requires team work and/or heavy game sense to successfully get that rez off without being punished.
Shot down in the OP already.
Either way, mass res, even as you’ve suggested it with it’s balance changes would not solve either problem.
Elaborate on that?
Because I recall that previously, you said you agreed with the rework proposal.
Really? because you have advocated that Valk is terrible on many instances, yet in that sentence, Jeff is saying both Valk and Res as it was were strong enough to be ultimate’s.
This was when Valkyrie granted a charge of resurrect. If you read the OP, you might notice that I addressed that too.
But that’s not what the developers wanted. Instead, for reasons never provided, they wanted to take the pile of dung that they scrapped in the alpha stages of the game (citation ) and slap it into the game as Mercy’s ultimate. How did they do this?
They extended its duration 20 seconds.
Of course, probably seeing that the ability was still flaming garbage, they decided to add a few other bonuses to it. They added a bunch of buffs to Mercy’s pistol (most of which were removed before going live), and they added the potential to get four uses of Resurrect out of Valkyrie (rez, valk, rez, wait, rez, wait, rez). This time they were successful in making Valkyrie worthy of being an ultimate, because they added an ultimate (Resurrect) to a basic ability (Valkyrie). A basic ability in addition to an ultimate nets an ultimate ability.
Now the developers had a different problem. Mercy had two ultimates: Resurrect and Valkyrie… Or to be more direct about it, Resurrect and then more Resurrect. As you probably already know, Valkyrie was nerfed repeatedly. Resurrect was slowly withdrawn from the sack of garbage that was sacked and then unsacked, eventually rendering the sack of garbage to be a sack of nothing but garbage.
When Resurrect was pulled out Valkyrie, so was the ultimate in Valkyrie. Now we’re just left with a basic ability that lasts fifteen seconds on Q, while Mercy’s real ultimate is on her E.
An instant cast of res on 30 seconds was very much strong enough to be an ultimate,
Which was provided by Valkyrie, making Valkyrie an ultimate.
It’s no longer provided by Valkyrie. Valkyrie is now a basic ability with a 15 second duration. It’s not an ultimate.
Mercy’s ultimate is on her E key.
You taking that sentence out of context did in fact change the whole meaning behind it.
Except… it didn’t.
Adding “in combination with Valkyrie” doesn’t change the fact that he just said that Resurrect is playing out like an ultimate ability.
Which is a lot of the problem, yes. You are far to concerned with making a hero fun instead of balanced. So much so that what you’re advocating for does nothing to balance that hero, and only shifts the power they once had to another part of their kit to appeal more fun.
If Mercy’s D-tier and we’re happy with how Mercy is, why does it matter?
It’s much easier to find a fun build and try to balance it than it is to take a… not-even-close-to-balanced build and try to make it balanced and fun.
Hence calls for another rework. The current state of Mercy renders balance and fun as mutually exclusive events.
We don’t care about the current balance state of Mercy because we wouldn’t play Mercy even if she were overpowered; we want to play Mercy because she is fun to play, not because she is overpowered and is the optimal choice.
That said, we care a lot about the balance state of the rework proposals we make, because those rework proposals satisfy the fun part of the equation. Once fun has been satisfied, balance becomes a primary issue, so long as it doesn’t encroach on that fun again.
I fail to see the irony.
You accuse me of trying to instigate an argument…
I guess that’s only the case when you’re not trying to instigate an argument.
When you literally just said:
What is figure of speech? Figured somebody who’s so articulate would be able to follow,
Which is a personal jab.
I firmly hold my position on this. Now more than ever.
This neither confirms nor corrects my understanding of what you mean when you said that I ban bait.
Do you want me to post more bait memes? I have a lot saved…
They will make res easier to use as one of their 2 remaining moves…
So Mercy is back to being rez bot, since her healing is awful now?
We made full circle, back to rez being her core ability, except with everything being nerfed.
If they boost heal, it means they revert which means they didn’t keep their words and there a chance we will hold it against them.
Make Valkyrie too powerful and it will be overpowered. You boost the healing aspect and people will only use healing, if you boost damage boost it will be used more than heals, improve pistol and people only use pistol, you can’t boost valkyrie without changing the other parts.
Then that means we only have GA, Mercy mobility is fine unless she gets independent mobility outside of Valkyrie…
Which means we can only work on res… So best they could do is reduce cast time to about 1.5 seconds… or improve her survivability
they already reverted by nerfing it back to her previosu 50 hps she had before.
what you mean.
Damage boost already used more, than heals, as it remained untouched. Healing wasn’t enough to sustain team in dire situation, even when it was 60 hps.
Buffing rez can backfire hard, especially since they will have to increase her survivability during it, aka give her back damage immunity. Small reduction of cast time won’t change anything, since it’s slowdown that causes most problems with survivability.
It depends on the situation, 60hps can, but if you are already stomped whilst in base with 60hps, then in Valkyrie 60hps will make no difference…
A lot of us can heal to the same degree as Valkyrie healing
It depends on the situation, 60hps can, but if you are already stomped whilst in base with 60hps, then in Valkyrie 60hps will make no difference…
Somehow I never saw situation, where Valkyrie with 60 hps could save the day, compared to healing like normal, with switching between teammates. Unless you got someone on the ground after you, so you fly in the air to keep healing.
Ok if you are inexperience, 60hps Valkyrie helps but in most cases, if you are doing well keeping it team alive without Valkyrie and just base healing, going Valkyrie to push back at a Team that is starting to make their comeback is handy.
Hope they will remove chain beams already, and give that powered up beam same 300 hps nanoboost got. Because as for now, Valkyrie is ultimate cleaned from almost any skilled use.
Hope they will remove chain beams already, and give that powered up beam same 300 hps nanoboost got. Because as for now, Valkyrie is ultimate cleaned from almost any skilled use.
Yeah… but that idea was suggested like in Megathread 1, 2 or 3… when which then evolved into Beam Merge and super beam that can heal/boost people…
and then tada… the birth of Moira.
Then they, indeed, got no options to buff Valkyrie. Other than returning to resurrect buffs/adding some extra effects, at least.
Or they will have to do, like with Torbjorn: move Valkyrie to E, add some new variation of resurrect as ult, and call it new awesome rework. Worst case scenario they will set GA as “signature ability” of Mercy and remove resurrect completely.
From my point of view, since Pharah received great buffs, Mercy is having a peak of pickrate, but that’s it. As soon as Pharah is nerfed, Mercy will return to her normal pickrates
There’s a lot of problems with those kinds of contests that I don’t wanna get too deep into as that’s a looooong rant but basically, by hosting these kinds of contests you are exploiting artists because they are doing free labor for you and only a few select winners actually get any benefits while Blizzard themselves would reap all the benefits of not having to hire an artist to do work for them. It also devalues the works of artists that do freelance as they become unnecessary if video game companies keep hosting these contests where they get (mostly) free labor. It’s legal yeah, but the ethical aspects are questionable.
I’ll link these two videos by a youtuber who is also a freelance artist if you’re interested in this topic:
(the forums won’t let me add links even though there’s a feature specifically meant for putting up links so here’s the titles and the channel’s name is T.B. Skyen)
- Why you shouldn’t submit your creative work to Beyond Good & Evil 2 || Ubisoft’s crowdsourcing scam
- A 30 Minute Rant About Art Contests And Freelancing As An Artist
Over 1600 likes and 4000 replies, and the devs still haven’t poked their heads in here yet.
Maybe soon, when we BlizzCon has passed.
To be fair, many of those replies are a few people using this thread as a chatroom lol
Depends from how those contests are organized. For artists it’s more about improving their portfolio/reputation, than money. If you are not very famous, making few skins for such contest can make you famous.