Assholes don't need to be given a legitimate excuse to be assholes. They're already overrunning the game as it is, and acting with complete impunity.
Obfuscating and hiding information about who the bad actorsare only empowers and enables them further, and gives them further tools to grief other people.
+2
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
Yeah, like rather than hiding things I think simply giving people better tools to deal with toxicity makes more sense.
+1
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
edited May 2021
this information would be used productively almost never
ow isnt a game like league where there are state pieces of information u need to track about ur team mates like items or gold income or whatever, the only state ur team mates have is hp, position and ult charge and u got that shit
these stats would be purely consulted for blame shifting. this is made worse by the fact that people are delusional in how they conceive of how the game works; for example, a lot of players unironically believe that junkrat "should have gold damage", when in reality it completely depends on map, comp and playstyle. if im playing wid into orisa im going to have 60 crits and 60% accuracy just from pounding the fat horse cranium but its nothing to do with how sick i am. people dont need to be able to keep an eye on their team mates to know who the guilty party is because thats not the problem and u have literally no way to resolve those disputes productively anyway. ur ana has 50% scoped accuracy? guess what u can ask her to swap and she doesnt, now what? nothing u can do
its neither necessary nor beneficial and especially at lower levels performance is so wildly variable and understanding so poor its zero payoff
games are not low quality because of bad actors who have identifiable low stats; games are low quality because players get mad in competitive games
surrealitycheck on
+3
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited May 2021
I'm not really talking about teammates.
I moreso want the info for myself.
If it's that big a deal how about you only get the stats after the match is over.
Those problems exist without that information. Productive players can use it to identify where the team is struggling and what can be done to best help the team. Toxic players, yes, will use it to be assholes, but those players are already using a lack of information to be assholes, and on top of that, exploiting that their own poor behavior can't currently be detected to further be assholes, and deflect the blame unjustly and unfairly onto other people because very few are going to check replays to see that the Genji spent every fight hopping around without attacking or the Junkrat only shot at walls.
Bad actors are already acting badly. The fear that they would continue to act badly should not be a reason to keep tools from the rest of the player base to better detect and police them, especially since Blizzard is unwilling to do it themselves.
+3
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
edited May 2021
Anniversary event, no patches or experiments, maybe Thursday or not (there was an off week in OWL last week which would have been perfect for a patch but fuck you, Blizzard yells out).
Sombra has a Catwoman skin which is easily her best skin, like Zatanna Symmetra. Best skin of the whole batch.
Doomfist's Gladiator skin is one of his better ones, up there with Tuxedo
Junkrat's candy theme makes him look like he's part of Big Mom's family, looks like Perospero
Moira = meh
Baptiste = overplayed theme and I hate the character so much so nah
Ana is getting a Cyberpunk knockoff which is eh
Echo's bird theme looks really nice, probably the default pick
8 Ball Richard Hammond is just a mash of Carbon Fiber and his wood skin, and Hammond isn't even wearing the David Putty 8 ball jacket way to drop the ball even more Blizzard.
Those problems exist without that information. Productive players can use it to identify where the team is struggling and what can be done to best help the team. Toxic players, yes, will use it to be assholes, but those players are already using a lack of information to be assholes, and on top of that, exploiting that their own poor behavior can't currently be detected to further be assholes, and deflect the blame unjustly and unfairly onto other people because very few are going to check replays to see that the Genji spent every fight hopping around without attacking or the Junkrat only shot at walls.
Bad actors are already acting badly. The fear that they would continue to act badly should not be a reason to keep tools from the rest of the player base to better detect and police them, especially since Blizzard is unwilling to do it themselves.
My feelings exactly. Plus, obfuscating useful information from players interested in improving makes it harder for those players to improve, forcing them to rely on flawed outside sources like overbuff rather than the logical place, the game itself.
The weekly 'challenges' are "Play 27 games"? For the previous event, you needed to earn 30 stars a week in the PvE things, and you could easily get 8-10 per clear. You could play an hour a night and still not even be close to 27 games, especially if you're playing comp. That's a good quick way to get me to nope out of even logging on to play the PvE days, Blizzard.
Oddly you can get the halloween and summer stuff for coins or in boxes
That's been the case for the last couple anniversary events as well. Everything is available/in anniversary boxes.
I noticed it for the first time as usually I will play till I get what I want or buy with the coins
I missed out on getting Dva's halloween skin this last time
0
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
The weekly 'challenges' are "Play 27 games"? For the previous event, you needed to earn 30 stars a week in the PvE things, and you could easily get 8-10 per clear. You could play an hour a night and still not even be close to 27 games, especially if you're playing comp. That's a good quick way to get me to nope out of even logging on to play the PvE days, Blizzard.
It's 27 points, and playing a full game win or lose gets you a point. You get two points for a win. It looks like it's more to combat the terrible matchmaking times and leavers right now.
The weekly 'challenges' are "Play 27 games"? For the previous event, you needed to earn 30 stars a week in the PvE things, and you could easily get 8-10 per clear. You could play an hour a night and still not even be close to 27 games, especially if you're playing comp. That's a good quick way to get me to nope out of even logging on to play the PvE days, Blizzard.
It's 27 points, and playing a full game win or lose gets you a point. You get two points for a win. It looks like it's more to combat the terrible matchmaking times and leavers right now.
If they made tanking more fun and cracked down on toxicity, they’d have more players and a better distribution of roles.
But they’d sell fewer alt accounts to toxic players so they make rewards harder to get and keep the shiftiness.
someone said this a long time ago but there are so many hidden mechanics of the game that really shouldn't be, i'd like to see those before adding different stats showing up. for example, how much does each weapon do? I should be able to see that info right in the info screen for the character. How much does a crit do? What makes me crit? What does my ult actually do? How long does it last? These are all things that people have to look up at secondary places or spend a lot of time figuring out and it doesn't need to be that way. This ties into the cards issue for things like defensive assists, what even are those? Its all obfuscation and it's really bad for the health of the game. Why should i pick X player to counter another player? Sure if you are a veteran you know the answer but if you are new or stuck in bronze, maybe you don't know and the game certainly doesn't help you find out.
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
News is OW2 PvP is 5v5, 1 tank.
When you won't balance your game the right way and had to change the system already because you wouldn't balance years ago, why not lose a teammate altogether. Big brain time, this means more players available by 17%!
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited May 2021
1 tank is interesting.
I'm guessing they're gonna be severely rebalanced kinda like that experimental from months ago.
TBH back before role queue I was used to being the only tank anyway so it isn't that big of a difference but I will miss tank synergies.
Also, no more tank to tank voicelines.voiceless.
But I understand why they're trying it. Tanks are in a weird position where you make them too powerful and they instantly imbalance the game but too weak and no one wants to play them.
Limiting tank to might allow them to up the player level while worrying less about broken synergies.
Tanks are getting buffed so they can play more aggro and now get to monopolize healer attention so chances are you get to feel like a raid boss instead of feeling like you have to always be setting up a front line.
edit:
Those role buffs seem interesting:
Tanks: Players generate less ult for shooting tanks.
DPS: everyone runs like 10% faster across the board
Support: Everyone gets passive HP regen after a while
KasynI'm not saying I don't like our chances.She called me the master.Registered Userregular
Feels like a lot of these changes are aimed at making the game a more coherent viewing experience in OWL. I'll reserve judgment on the 5v5 change - hopefully they do a good job adjusting for it and we don't spend several patch cycles fixing heroes that are broken in complicated ways by the shift. I'm skeptical as to whether or not the map design will do enough to make it so you're not just forcing people onto barrier tanks only.
Feels like a lot of these changes are aimed at making the game a more coherent viewing experience in OWL. I'll reserve judgment on the 5v5 change - hopefully they do a good job adjusting for it and we don't spend several patch cycles fixing heroes that are broken in complicated ways by the shift. I'm skeptical as to whether or not the map design will do enough to make it so you're not just forcing people onto barrier tanks only.
I don't think this change has anything to do with OWL specifically, considering how small OWL is compared to the player base as a whole. I do believe them when they say they did it to reduce the chaos and confusion of the game for players in general.
If they were making this change for OWL specifically, I would consider it a major miscalculation because this is going to earn them a LOT of bad blood from pros (specifically, tank players) and fans alike, even if it ends up being better for the game in the long run.
Houk the Namebringer on
0
KasynI'm not saying I don't like our chances.She called me the master.Registered Userregular
Feels like a lot of these changes are aimed at making the game a more coherent viewing experience in OWL. I'll reserve judgment on the 5v5 change - hopefully they do a good job adjusting for it and we don't spend several patch cycles fixing heroes that are broken in complicated ways by the shift. I'm skeptical as to whether or not the map design will do enough to make it so you're not just forcing people onto barrier tanks only.
I don't think this change has anything to do with OWL specifically, considering how small OWL is compared to the player base as a whole. I do believe them when they say they did it to reduce the chaos and confusion of the game for players in general.
If they were making this change for OWL specifically, I would consider it a major miscalculation because this is going to earn them a LOT of bad blood from pros (specifically, tank players) and fans alike, even if it ends up being better for the game in the long run.
Was the confusion of the game a significant objection of the playerbase? I've never really seen that be the case. The chaos of actually spectating the game, though, has in my experience been the #1 thing people raise as to why they're not more into OWL.
Not that this change can't be made for more than one reason at the same time.
Feels like a lot of these changes are aimed at making the game a more coherent viewing experience in OWL. I'll reserve judgment on the 5v5 change - hopefully they do a good job adjusting for it and we don't spend several patch cycles fixing heroes that are broken in complicated ways by the shift. I'm skeptical as to whether or not the map design will do enough to make it so you're not just forcing people onto barrier tanks only.
I don't think this change has anything to do with OWL specifically, considering how small OWL is compared to the player base as a whole. I do believe them when they say they did it to reduce the chaos and confusion of the game for players in general.
If they were making this change for OWL specifically, I would consider it a major miscalculation because this is going to earn them a LOT of bad blood from pros (specifically, tank players) and fans alike, even if it ends up being better for the game in the long run.
Was the confusion of the game a significant objection of the playerbase? I've never really seen that be the case. The chaos of actually spectating the game, though, has in my experience been the #1 thing people raise as to why they're not more into OWL.
Not that this change can't be made for more than one reason at the same time.
I mean as someone who has spent waaaay too much time watching OW twitch streamers, visual clutter and overall team fight confusion has been a constant complaint I've seen, yeah.
I dunno, it could just be that I'm a credulous idiot (absolutely) but I'm perfectly happy to take the devs at their word that this change was done with the wider playerbase in mind.
I don't feel strongly about whether 6 or 5 player teams are inherently better. 5v5 is tried and true in MOBAs. One tank is really interesting - it is a lot of pressure for that person, and a lot of risk for toxicity directed at them for their hero pick, but it also makes it much easier to balance tanks around being really powerful. I question the 2 healers though - why not 1-1-3?
5v5 is fine and I'm pretty sure I suggested it way back when because it naturally forces asymmetry in team comp. I'm less sold on mandating one tank so long as the maps remain claustrophobic, the kill-boxes remain ridiculously deadly, and the TTK in general remains nigh instantenous. The dominant meta in the been-5v5-from-the-start Paladins has pretty much always been 2 DPS, 1 main tank, 1 main healer, and then either 1 off tank or 1 off healer depending on various things. Two damage, three sustain characters, at any rate. But the maps, mechanics, and damage rate promote a shitload more mobility focus than Overwatch has. One tank with 50% more barrier/HP is just going to die in 1.2 seconds instead of 0.7 without addressing *waves hands* all the other things.
Cutting way down on hard CC, especially on DPS, would also be a hugely welcome improvement and something I've been saying since time immemorial.
None of it will really matter though if they're not going to crack down on throwers and trolls.
I don't feel strongly about whether 6 or 5 player teams are inherently better. 5v5 is tried and true in MOBAs. One tank is really interesting - it is a lot of pressure for that person, and a lot of risk for toxicity directed at them for their hero pick, but it also makes it much easier to balance tanks around being really powerful. I question the 2 healers though - why not 1-1-3?
3 DPS and 1 support would ensure that the support is dead at all times constantly forever, even more so than now.
+6
KasynI'm not saying I don't like our chances.She called me the master.Registered Userregular
I don't feel strongly about whether 6 or 5 player teams are inherently better. 5v5 is tried and true in MOBAs. One tank is really interesting - it is a lot of pressure for that person, and a lot of risk for toxicity directed at them for their hero pick, but it also makes it much easier to balance tanks around being really powerful. I question the 2 healers though - why not 1-1-3?
They seem to want to reduce overall incoming damage and slow the game down a bit. Adding another DPS while removing a tank and a healer would uh...probably not do that.
It'd also basically delete Zen from the game, there'd be a lot of pressure to pick a versatile main healer if you only have one slot.
The same can be said for the tank changes though - and from what I've seen of the gameplay so far today I'm not at all confident they've done nearly enough to address the fact that your one tank needs to get his ass on a barrier pick. They simultaneously made Reinh more necessary AND drastically improved him. Hopefully it's not just him and Zarya that are getting gameplay passes, since Hog and D.Va looked unchanged.
0
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited May 2021
Yeah they want to reduce the importance of shields bit to do that you also have to keep the damage output down.
Also they said they play tested 1-3-2 and it was terrible so I doubt 1-3-1 is any better.
I don't feel strongly about whether 6 or 5 player teams are inherently better. 5v5 is tried and true in MOBAs. One tank is really interesting - it is a lot of pressure for that person, and a lot of risk for toxicity directed at them for their hero pick, but it also makes it much easier to balance tanks around being really powerful. I question the 2 healers though - why not 1-1-3?
3 DPS and 1 support would ensure that the support is dead at all times constantly forever, even more so than now.
That seems like something that can be solved by just buffing support survivability, e.g. health and self-heal abilities.
Still don't feel very good about playing sole tank; I feel like with OW's community it's just a built in scapegoat to dogpile toxic chat onto at the end of a losing round.
I don't feel strongly about whether 6 or 5 player teams are inherently better. 5v5 is tried and true in MOBAs. One tank is really interesting - it is a lot of pressure for that person, and a lot of risk for toxicity directed at them for their hero pick, but it also makes it much easier to balance tanks around being really powerful. I question the 2 healers though - why not 1-1-3?
3 DPS and 1 support would ensure that the support is dead at all times constantly forever, even more so than now.
That seems like something that can be solved by just buffing support survivability, e.g. health and self-heal abilities.
Even if they make them more survivable, the game still becomes "who can kill the single healer first" which I personally don't think sounds as fun. 2 dps 2 support just seems better all around.
+3
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
You probably don't want to give characters too much health or it'll slow the game down.
0
KasynI'm not saying I don't like our chances.She called me the master.Registered Userregular
I don't like their dodge on the question of hero changes. I'd really like to see changes on the scale of what they've done to Reinhardt to the vast majority of the cast, but right now it seems there are only about 5 heroes with any kind of gameplay changes. The role traits aren't going to be enough to update hero gameplay, hopefully they plan on doing more.
0
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
edited May 2021
I mean there are gonna be new heroes.
I doubt individual heroes would change much they'd probably introduce a new mechanic before that
Dragkonias on
0
KasynI'm not saying I don't like our chances.She called me the master.Registered Userregular
I'm torn on the decision to keep talent trees out of PvP. On the one hand, that's an obvious balance nightmare. On the other - I'd really like to see the overall gameplay evolve. I could imagine a trimmed down version of it working. Something like a big, single feature from each talent tree and you get to pick one of the three.
I bet at some point they add talents in PvP as an experimental / arcade mode and it's really popular and then they have a big decision on their hands.
0
KasynI'm not saying I don't like our chances.She called me the master.Registered Userregular
Posts
Obfuscating and hiding information about who the bad actorsare only empowers and enables them further, and gives them further tools to grief other people.
ow isnt a game like league where there are state pieces of information u need to track about ur team mates like items or gold income or whatever, the only state ur team mates have is hp, position and ult charge and u got that shit
these stats would be purely consulted for blame shifting. this is made worse by the fact that people are delusional in how they conceive of how the game works; for example, a lot of players unironically believe that junkrat "should have gold damage", when in reality it completely depends on map, comp and playstyle. if im playing wid into orisa im going to have 60 crits and 60% accuracy just from pounding the fat horse cranium but its nothing to do with how sick i am. people dont need to be able to keep an eye on their team mates to know who the guilty party is because thats not the problem and u have literally no way to resolve those disputes productively anyway. ur ana has 50% scoped accuracy? guess what u can ask her to swap and she doesnt, now what? nothing u can do
its neither necessary nor beneficial and especially at lower levels performance is so wildly variable and understanding so poor its zero payoff
games are not low quality because of bad actors who have identifiable low stats; games are low quality because players get mad in competitive games
I moreso want the info for myself.
If it's that big a deal how about you only get the stats after the match is over.
Bad actors are already acting badly. The fear that they would continue to act badly should not be a reason to keep tools from the rest of the player base to better detect and police them, especially since Blizzard is unwilling to do it themselves.
Sombra has a Catwoman skin which is easily her best skin, like Zatanna Symmetra. Best skin of the whole batch.
Doomfist's Gladiator skin is one of his better ones, up there with Tuxedo
Junkrat's candy theme makes him look like he's part of Big Mom's family, looks like Perospero
Moira = meh
Baptiste = overplayed theme and I hate the character so much so nah
Ana is getting a Cyberpunk knockoff which is eh
Echo's bird theme looks really nice, probably the default pick
8 Ball Richard Hammond is just a mash of Carbon Fiber and his wood skin, and Hammond isn't even wearing the David Putty 8 ball jacket way to drop the ball even more Blizzard.
My feelings exactly. Plus, obfuscating useful information from players interested in improving makes it harder for those players to improve, forcing them to rely on flawed outside sources like overbuff rather than the logical place, the game itself.
The weekly 'challenges' are "Play 27 games"? For the previous event, you needed to earn 30 stars a week in the PvE things, and you could easily get 8-10 per clear. You could play an hour a night and still not even be close to 27 games, especially if you're playing comp. That's a good quick way to get me to nope out of even logging on to play the PvE days, Blizzard.
That's been the case for the last couple anniversary events as well. Everything is available/in anniversary boxes.
I noticed it for the first time as usually I will play till I get what I want or buy with the coins
I missed out on getting Dva's halloween skin this last time
It's 27 points, and playing a full game win or lose gets you a point. You get two points for a win. It looks like it's more to combat the terrible matchmaking times and leavers right now.
If they made tanking more fun and cracked down on toxicity, they’d have more players and a better distribution of roles.
But they’d sell fewer alt accounts to toxic players so they make rewards harder to get and keep the shiftiness.
Blizzard: Pailryder#1101
GoG: https://www.gog.com/u/pailryder
When you won't balance your game the right way and had to change the system already because you wouldn't balance years ago, why not lose a teammate altogether. Big brain time, this means more players available by 17%!
this thread is becoming a bigger cesspool by the day, damn
Steam: MightyPotatoKing
I'm guessing they're gonna be severely rebalanced kinda like that experimental from months ago.
TBH back before role queue I was used to being the only tank anyway so it isn't that big of a difference but I will miss tank synergies.
Also, no more tank to tank voicelines.voiceless.
But I understand why they're trying it. Tanks are in a weird position where you make them too powerful and they instantly imbalance the game but too weak and no one wants to play them.
Limiting tank to might allow them to up the player level while worrying less about broken synergies.
edit:
Those role buffs seem interesting:
Tanks: Players generate less ult for shooting tanks.
DPS: everyone runs like 10% faster across the board
Support: Everyone gets passive HP regen after a while
Sounds like they want less hard CC all around
Edit: Sounds like they're removing crowd control from a lot of DPS heroes.
Steam: MightyPotatoKing
I don't think this change has anything to do with OWL specifically, considering how small OWL is compared to the player base as a whole. I do believe them when they say they did it to reduce the chaos and confusion of the game for players in general.
If they were making this change for OWL specifically, I would consider it a major miscalculation because this is going to earn them a LOT of bad blood from pros (specifically, tank players) and fans alike, even if it ends up being better for the game in the long run.
Was the confusion of the game a significant objection of the playerbase? I've never really seen that be the case. The chaos of actually spectating the game, though, has in my experience been the #1 thing people raise as to why they're not more into OWL.
Not that this change can't be made for more than one reason at the same time.
I mean as someone who has spent waaaay too much time watching OW twitch streamers, visual clutter and overall team fight confusion has been a constant complaint I've seen, yeah.
I dunno, it could just be that I'm a credulous idiot (absolutely) but I'm perfectly happy to take the devs at their word that this change was done with the wider playerbase in mind.
Cutting way down on hard CC, especially on DPS, would also be a hugely welcome improvement and something I've been saying since time immemorial.
None of it will really matter though if they're not going to crack down on throwers and trolls.
3 DPS and 1 support would ensure that the support is dead at all times constantly forever, even more so than now.
They seem to want to reduce overall incoming damage and slow the game down a bit. Adding another DPS while removing a tank and a healer would uh...probably not do that.
It'd also basically delete Zen from the game, there'd be a lot of pressure to pick a versatile main healer if you only have one slot.
The same can be said for the tank changes though - and from what I've seen of the gameplay so far today I'm not at all confident they've done nearly enough to address the fact that your one tank needs to get his ass on a barrier pick. They simultaneously made Reinh more necessary AND drastically improved him. Hopefully it's not just him and Zarya that are getting gameplay passes, since Hog and D.Va looked unchanged.
Also they said they play tested 1-3-2 and it was terrible so I doubt 1-3-1 is any better.
That seems like something that can be solved by just buffing support survivability, e.g. health and self-heal abilities.
Even if they make them more survivable, the game still becomes "who can kill the single healer first" which I personally don't think sounds as fun. 2 dps 2 support just seems better all around.
I doubt individual heroes would change much they'd probably introduce a new mechanic before that
I bet at some point they add talents in PvP as an experimental / arcade mode and it's really popular and then they have a big decision on their hands.
Then how is a sequel justified? More maps and more characters isn't enough to warrant a full new game.
If that's all you want then you don't need to buy the sequel.