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.
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:
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.
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’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:
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:
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.
Hence:
This one.
Already been over this with someone else in this thread, so I’ll go ahead and copy/paste my reply.
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.
Mercy gains an overpowered ability and begins treading on other heroes’ turfs…
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…
She isn’t supposed to be a pocket healer. She’s supposed to be a main healer.
They most certainly did.
It isn’t contrasting pre-invulnerability vs post-invulnerability. They are both equally numerically complex. This is contrasting pre-rework to post-rework.
This isn’t at all relevant to what you just quoted, but I have the covered in the OP too.
Shot down in the OP already.
Elaborate on that?
Because I recall that previously, you said you agreed with the rework proposal.
This was when Valkyrie granted a charge of resurrect. If you read the OP, you might notice that I addressed that too.
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.
Except… it didn’t.
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.
You accuse me of trying to instigate an argument…
When you literally just said:
Which is a personal jab.
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…
