Revert the nerfs to widowmaker. It doesn’t matter how annoying she is, that’s no reason to continue poor design. The biggest lie you guys say about her is “if she’s annoying, people will quit the game!” because we know that’s not true.
Blizzard has been hard core screwing this community for months now. With anti consumer marketing, egregious macrotransacitons for skins, canceling the game features that were allegedly the whole reason we’re in OW 2 to begin with, and more. Blizzard has done all of this to you, and you’re still playing. Might as well revert some of widow’s nerfs and practice actual good game design since blizzard can do anything to you, right?
It doesn’t matter if you find her annoying. Revert some of the nerfs, and you know what? Buff hog, too. Lets take this from the top and revert most of the poor design choices, can we? Personal annoyance is no excuse for poor balance, and you’ll play Overwatch anyway, so why not?
Yes, but with an asterisk. I already said in my main post that we could at least revert some of the nerfs. For example, we could try
Or something similar to that which would vaguely resembles good game design.
Thanks, but my jokes are funnier when you choose to interpret them correctly. At the end of the day, two things are true.
1.) Heroes shouldn’t be nerfed because people refuse to counter them. In doing so, we aren’t just nerfing the hero; we’re changing the game as a whole due to other characters getting indirectly buffed.
And if they got three consecutive buffs right now, what would you do? Well, I mean “what would you do after willingly loading Overwatch and playing it again”?
I mean, nothing different. It would just be equivalent to telling their playerbase, “yeah we really don’t know what we’re doing” and piss them off even more.
Personally? If they buff her again without actually addressing the issue (which most of these patches fail to do), then I’m probably going to further ween myself off of Overwatch.
If your thought process is, “well people won’t quit if they buff this hero they find infuriating” and that’s justifying a buff to a hero who holds certain maps hostage, then I don’t know what to tell you other than I strongly, strongly disagree with that thought process.
I like the idea someone had of having her do more damage and actually able to get 1 shots only if your “revealed” by something so like sombra hack, hanzo arrow, new sym turrets, give her more venom mines or like something that triggers her infa red sights from long range
No, my thought process is “people will stick with this game regardless, so why not just give characters what they need and ignore the community”? We have to accept the fact that this means, yes, widow has to be viable too. Most won’t accept any change that isn’t “widow can’t one shot”, but you haven’t considered whether or not widow needs her one shot. Spoilers: she does, or she would have lost it ages ago.
Would you, though? Even if you would, I’d wager most people would still say “Widow killed me in one shot, so she’s bad and unhealthy for video games, and veteran video game designers are wrong in saying snipers are good” regardless. This is because, in my opinion, people don’t argue in good faith when it comes to widow. Instead, they die to her and say "that simply shouldn’t be allowed. She didn’t engage me in a way I like, so therefore she’s designed poorly.
Because allowing a hero to dominate lobbies the way she did before shouldn’t be an option.
Oh, no. I think that’s the inherent thing about snipers in FPS - they piss off the community because they generally don’t give you time to react, and people dislike that, but that is a sniper’s nature.
If she does that, she better be glass. Glass cannons, baby. You can’t shoot cannons and not be glass.
I don’t believe she’s ever dominated lobbies in a way people say she did. Perhaps in really high ranks, but remember, I’ve asked for footage and literally saw people do nothing to counter her and then blame her. We’ve all seen the people blatantly disregard ways to counter her, going so far as to unironically say “mirrors don’t count. Moving up with a barrier shouldn’t be an option. Using cover to flank her isn’t an option. She has no counters”.
No, I sincerely do not believe Widow has ever been a problem like described on here, and I’ve said as much before. But that’s just an opinion of course.
I agree, but people misunderstand what a glass cannon is. They think she should have low health, but I believe she should have poor mobility instead. She could have 300 HP, no mobility, and still be a glass cannon because she’d die super fast when challenged.
So, you know, I’d make her like Ana but in the DPS role (not with 300 HP, that was just an example. No mobility, but with two cooldown abilities she could use to help her team, or save her life, and the key would be flanking her and forcing her to use her cooldowns to save herself. That way, even if she killed you, she’s going to die on the next flank and you got value in causing her to use her only tools to help her team or herself.
Even if you can put up with annoyance more than the average player, most people on here can’t. you can tell that just from the quality of the posts.
I see you don’t really like a lot of my definitions for things
Still, I don’t think 200 HP would be that big of a deal for widow. If Widow is being pocketed, why not send two people to beat her? The idea that “no, I should win that 2v1” is problematic in itself. Why should anyone be that entitled to where they think widow AND someone helping her should lose to one person in a team game?
