Fun is subjective, what is fun to you might not be fun to someone else. The fact that Mercy is still one of the most picked heroes in the game could be used to argue that players are still having fun with her.
1 Like
They won’t stop until she’s fun to play. Given that she has basically an ult on E that’s not fun to use, and an ult that doesn’t feel impactful, “fun to play” won’t happy through simple buffs until she’s OP. That’s why so many are asking for a rework.
2 Likes
Valk is going to cancel CC’s now.
If you see the countless threads talking about Mercy, you will realize most of those that play and played Mercy do not find her fun anymore.
There is even a thread asking non mercy players to voice their opinions, and most of them say, as you can expect, that she’s incredibly boring.
1 Like
It’s not like Valkyrie changes her gameplay substantially from what the rest of the Mercy-playing experience is like. It’s a very impactful ultimate and the chain heals/damage boost is a great way to help your team win a fight more handily. Plus, you get the option to go battle mercy on that widow. >:D
How is valk any less fun than playing mercy the other 90% of the time? The principle is still the same. You still have to make decisions about who to heal (if your team is spread out, which groups to heal), or when to damage boost.
1 Like
Sure, it’s subjective… But it’s the majority opinion, and blizz is ignoring it.
This is just like me arguing that the numbers show that players are still using her because she is still fun, it’s just a subjective interpretation. I’m not trying to invalidate the posts of other people, just trying to put things into perspective, not everyone agrees with whatyou state, and as long as the numbers keep going like they are going, Blizzard is not getting the message that she is not fun to play. If you really want them to get that message, stop playing her at all, and encourage people to do so, that is how they will get the message.
I have no way of knowing if any of that is true, it could be, or it could not be. It would help if an actual official analysis was made by a third party who has no bias or opinion on the matter so that the results are as objective as possible. One analysis being made by a Mercy player is not very reliable.
They should be thankful for none of their complaints being addressed, no responses to the thousands of posts/mega threads, and the toxicity directed toward them in this community?
I wouldn’t be either.
This buff simply put her ult back were it was a patch ago before the nerfs to her base HPS. Did nothing to address any of the complaints of feeling unimpactful/“spectator mode”
5 Likes
We can pretend now that mercy has burst heal lol.
4 Likes
It’s literally about her being fun again, not op
I’ll gladly take any scrap I can get. I’m sure Blizzard knows this as well. I was hoping for meaningful changes, but for now this is better than nothing.
This “buff” i just reverting the 50hps nerf and only to that garbage to use ult. Honestly at this point I just want 60 hps and Valk can jump off a cliff.
2 Likes
They cant even admit the 50 hps nerf was garbage and unnecessary.
2 Likes
It is normal that they don’t answer to threads as there is no way of having a conversation in which they don’t get sh*t on by those people if they tell them that they don’t agree with their suggestions. Imagine for a moment that I am the game’s director and I come to you post and tell you something like “I don’t agree with your suggestions because X or Y, so I’m thankful for your feedback but we are not reverting or reworking Mercy for now because we don’t believe that is the right thing to do as no information that we have points towards that and our instincts as developers support that”.
Would you truly go “Ok, too bad but hey I did my part and gave them feedback so no biggie”. While I don’t know for sure what your response might be, I’m pretty sure most people would just get up in arms and crucify them, because I know the forums very well…
It’s a glorified spectator mode.
It takes away from her fluidity of her movement (you can’t conserve momentum on GA, no gravity)
It takes away the decision making from selecting the correct target to beam
Also makes her really hard to kill, which also takes away the necessity to take cover and strafe.
To add insult to injury, it’s almost the longest ultimate, and it forces you to use it for its entire duration.
1 Like
Seriously it boggles the mind. They didn’t even wait to see how their buffs affected the other healers before unnecessarily nerfing her yet again.
The only change I really wanted before that nonsense hit was the rez in Valk to be instant so it felt a bit exciting other than being a complete snoozefest.
1 Like
While this is true if the enemy team can’t aim, it’s not so true otherwise. There is also definitely still decision making involved, although maybe less so when it comes to heal priority. But you can still do a lot of thinking about ultimates, and the relation of Valk to other ults in the game. If you’re not thinking and tracking ultimates, you get screwed over super easily by the aforementioned two ultimates. But if you’re thinking, you can hide around cover and get more value out of your ultimate. For example, you can use Valk to bait out a high noon or a tac visor.
I’m surprised it never occurred to them that buffing all the supports while simultaneously nerfing her would cause her to underperform. Reading the patch notes is like rubbing salt in the wounds. They know she’s underperforming, yet rather than just revert the last nerf they make it charge 15% faster and give her the 60 hps in ult only.
1 Like
Telling people things they don’t want to hear eventually has to happen and they have done it before.
I believe that any amount of dialogue with the Devs could be beneficial at this point and could be used to shape feedback across multiple hero’s that need work. Simply stopping by to disagree and offering no follow up would not be a good idea for sure. Giving some of the information they have would be helpful as well as acknowledging the criticism they have received.