Fair reasoning. With his passive, he probably could stand to have harder CC but less mobility (like a short-range dash, but nothing more). If Meteor Strike had a greater knock-up, it could serve as his moment of mobility and self-setup?
Additionally, about Baptiste. I’ve been considering posting a topic discussion about Supports in general, but one idea I had for Baptiste’s Amplification Matrix was for it to be a large visor in front of Baptiste that moves with him. He’d be the only one to amplify damage/healing from it, and I think that idea can work for the combat medic. Thoughts?
He’s probably just going to get more CC, same mobility but less damage come OW2 for his tank rework.
About the Bap concept, one main thing that came to mind was Bap players using it as a pseudo tac visor. Bap could be getting dived, slam Q then just one tap the opposition, he can’t do that with the current iteration because its much easier for the enemy to fight around a flat rectangle than a travelling visor. It’d solve the issue of him locking down choke points with it, but it arises a new issue of turning him into more of a DPS than a Support.
One of the main things I’d consider with ideas like that is what you want the hero to be able to do with it, instead of tying it to their persona.
1 Like
LMAO Blizz just got wrecked.
Nice.
1 Like
For most of my character changes, I tend to involve three things:
- What the character is (their design)
- How they are presented in lore (how they should feel to the player)
- Playing more into the “hero” aspect of the game (do they feel heroic/powerful to play as)
Pretty much, I try to make them more like their lore counterpart, while also being designed in a way that is fair and balanced from a gameplay perspective. [“Overwatch: Marksmen” was one instance of this.]
Players should feel like they are actually playing as X hero description, and said description should also further hone in on how the hero plays in-game.
As much as I feel sour from this being an out of touch reveal, thank you Blizzard for at least acknowledging the content creators that aren’t just YouTubers. Fanartists don’t have enough recognition.
That works on the aesthetic side of things, though going too far into the “hero” and “lore” aspect when it comes to making abilities can cause a bit too much power fantasy at sacrifice of balance or direct intention.
If you want my opinion, it’s a good foundation to have, but it should also be tied into things like:
“What do I want this ability to accomplish?” - Like is there a certain niche that is going to be filled with it, what is it designed to counter, be countered by, how will it interact with the cast and various team comps, map formations/geometry like long sightlines or tight chokes, etc.
“What do I NOT want this ability to do?” - Essentially concerning circumstances of possibility where the ability wouldn’t work as intended or have unforeseen consequences. The whole “Bap Visor” thing I talked about was one of those. Another could be the whole “Hide N’ Rez” dilemma a long while back. Sometimes you gotta think outside the box with ability design, like “how could X aspect of this ability be exploited?”
“Does the ability present its solution to the problem in a fun way?” - Basically making sure the ability is fun to interact with. Big example would be beat and trans vs. immortality field. The two ults feel fair to fight against, while immortality feels rather cheesy.
Other thoughts that assist the process would be breaking down and analyzing other abilities heroes already have that solve similar issues, what makes them fun, unfun etc. and building off of that.
1 Like
Feels like one of these things needs to have happen like yesterday:
- Short Story that includes New Content or New Characters (not recycled content)
(aka looking at that Reaper Event as Recycled)
- A Image or Poster that Hints at an Upcoming hero not reveal yet
- Just a Dev in the forums talking about future changes.
1 Like
That’s why I’m very diligent about numbers and concepts when doing the heroes. I still think it’s within the realm of possibility, and addresses some concerns people have about each hero. [I actually really liked the ideas I had for McCree and Hanzo, though for Hanzo, some things I couldn’t get exact information on like projectile arching and speed…?]
Of course, with 5v5 on the horizon, I’ve been gearing my ideas more towards that than the current game’s format…
[SELF NOTE: 2400th post.]
1 Like
In which case, it could align more with 5v5s ideology of turning everything into more “brawl/duel” style, to which the Bap changes do make sense.
Honestly imo 5v5 is a huge gamble, it could swing either way.
What’d have been a REALLY good idea would be to instead of let content creators make crazy patches for meme cards. Have them balance a 5v5 gamemode with the intent of “If you could balance 5v5, how would you do it?”
If they did that, ran it through a bunch of different iterations with content creators, and kept a constant cycle of it rolling, they could get the playerbase’s general feel for 5V5 and if it’d be a good idea to proceed with or not from a combat interaction perspective. Sure, they can’t make new graphics and stuff for that type of thing, but going through several iterations of workshop-esque changes would give some general feel to it.
True. Though I just see 5v5 as an inevitability now. Sort of a “well…we’re here now” sort of deal. It could go either way, I just design around what could be the most beneficial outcome–especially for Tanks.
Practically everything about Overwatch 2.0 is a gamble with how much they are stockpiling in hopes that the out-pour draws in new players (notice that I don’t say old players).
1 Like
Honestly having 2CP in the ExC playlist was a waste of time and testing.
1 Like