Nah it’s definitely the former. I look forward to Kailan’s response and hopefully furthering my understanding of this situation. I don’t think there is anything to be gained from talking to you about this anymore.
Just being honest. I am ready to admit I’m wrong. I just need someone capable of convincing me.
What if you’re a Moira main and you asked for Ana to get nerfed?
Like I said, then actually address my points instead of ignoring them and pretending they don’t exist. Otherwise, your argument has nothing to stand on.
Umm oKaY wow.
THey Had tO deAl wiTh aCCusaTionS of SoFT-LocKinG!
Except… We’ve already explained how the value of rez is not necessarily dictated by the amount of players dead at the time it’s pressed. Again, that is removing resurrect from its context and disregarding the way it was used primarily: situationally, and at a user’s own judgment. There were multiple ways of getting value out of rez, and just rezzing the most people did not mean it was the most valuable action you could take.
An example scenario:
Except: now the enemy has ult charge from destroying your team already, while your team doesn’t. They get wiped a second time, and you just wasted your ultimate on a lost cause, despite the fact that on paper, resurrecting 5 members at once would be the maximum potential of resurrect.
On paper, rezzing the three dead teammates would be most effective - it would bring you right up to six and cut the spawn timer down. But - that would also mean losing your rez when chances are that the enemy team is holding ults.
The best course of action here would not be to go for the bigger rez, but to wait out the timer to bait the ults (when they assume you don’t have rez since you didn’t use it), then rez the two on the cart who die to those ults right as your other three teammates are returning from spawn - which effectively would turn a 2-man rez into a 5-man rez due to the Mercy taking advantage of the spawn stagger.
This is why you can’t just argue that more teammates dead = better, because that was hardly ever the case in context of how the actual game was played. There were always multiple factors acting on whether or not a rez was valuable, and the amount of people rezzed was only one of many factors that determined the value of Mercy’s ultimate at the time it was used.
Pretending it was any different is either just willfully ignoring it, or just a genuine misunderstanding on how Mass Rez actually functioned in practice.
considering this argument, no it isn’t. I’m sorry.
Look, here’s something to keep in mind, when sombra’s hack got increased to .65 seconds, it became apparent that there was this problematic .1 lock on. This prevented it from being a buggy mess. Now this wasn’t really a problem at .8 seconds, but instead of going back to that, they made hack a burning house fire for months.
Why? Because the community had decided that this .1 second was a huge flaw and would rather her be unplayable than have that.
Mass rez isn’t a viable option. Not because of any numbers but because the community decided it isn’t. Does that make sense?
So, let’s get away from resurects. Let’s come up with something else
You get a 
for that.
Most of the community only disliked mass rez because of invulnerability. That’s easily solved by removing the invulnerability, and even moreseo by adding even more counterplay, like a LoS restriction and a cast time. And again, mass rez is not the only option for rez as an ult, but it absolutely is a viable one.
What community? No one was asked whether they’d prefer mass Resurrect or the rework.
Just ignore Ginger. They’re delusional and lives in their own Mercy bubble.
Well no, people disliked it because it deleted big plays and encouraged poor teamplay at lower ranks. To be honest, I don’t remember hide and Rez being like a thing, I do remember the “die on point” type thing, and feeling bad when my big play got deleted.
Not my fight, really. But you have people who dislike mass Rez and you have mercy players who dislike the current iteration. Going back to mass Rez isn’t a good solution because of how angry everyone will get.
Oh I replied to your response in the other thread. I wish you didn’t split them…
I explained why I wanted to avoided the whole circumstantial consideration in the other thread and I feel addressed everything you said here, over there. Plz respond to that ![:slight_smile:](https://d74zh8edaijub.cloudfront.net/en/overwatch/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=5" ":slight_smile:")
<3 thx.
“Die on point” is easily countered by simply realizing what the enemy is doing and not using more ults than you need to. With more counterplay, it’s even easier, as you can just directly stop it regardless.
Care to say anything constructive about what he said? Oh wait, you have no rebuttal…
People were angry when they reworked her. Let’s be gangsta here, Blizzard doesn’t care.
whether it’s counterable or not doesn’t matter. Listen, You don’t need to convince me. I want people to have more fun. I don’t really care because I know I can outplay those things.
My point was that mass Rez is a bad solution because look at this thread, and look what it devolves into. So your solution can’t be to make the people who disagree with you angry, when you can make both sides happier by doing some other change.
I’m just helping them from sinking into a pit of pointless conversation with a person who ignores all debate and points, but their own narrative. It’s a waste of time and the person I did reply to, who wasn’t you btw, deserves better.
Not an argument, but enjoy living in your own bias bubble.
I can’t ignore points if they/you don’t make any. 
Not that I’ve ignored any to begin with, I’ve addressed all of them.