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.
I'd be fine with talent tree going to PVP if they also implemented a vote ban just as a player enforced stopgap.
Or maybe they already introduced vote bans and we just didn't see it in the demo, that must have been why McCree wasn't shown in any maps a dab.
You probably don't want to give characters too much health or it'll slow the game down.
Is slowing the game down a bad thing? Right now, most DPS ults instantly end a fight, and the only decent way to counter them is with DPS ult. Even their abilities vaporize non tanks if caught off guard, or even just thrown out randomly like Hanzo's arrows. Some vaporize tanks too. The actual game time is still dependent on controlling the point/payload though, so it would slow down first (or overtime) battles, which would cause a huge problem in 2CP's already problematic situations, but make the other 90% of the game a lot more engaging and less frustrating.
0
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. 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.
So... Paladin's talents? :P
0
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.
Is slowing the game down a bad thing? Right now, most DPS ults instantly end a fight, and the only decent way to counter them is with DPS ult. Even their abilities vaporize non tanks if caught off guard, or even just thrown out randomly like Hanzo's arrows. Some vaporize tanks too. The actual game time is still dependent on controlling the point/payload though, so it would slow down first (or overtime) battles, which would cause a huge problem in 2CP's already problematic situations, but make the other 90% of the game a lot more engaging and less frustrating.
I mean that all comes down to preference. I feel most shooters these days are slow so it's nice to have one that's still fast-paced.
And the devs seem to agree from everything I've read.
0
KasynI'm not saying I don't like our chances.She called me the master.Registered Userregular
You probably don't want to give characters too much health or it'll slow the game down.
Is slowing the game down a bad thing? Right now, most DPS ults instantly end a fight, and the only decent way to counter them is with DPS ult. Even their abilities vaporize non tanks if caught off guard, or even just thrown out randomly like Hanzo's arrows. Some vaporize tanks too. The actual game time is still dependent on controlling the point/payload though, so it would slow down first (or overtime) battles, which would cause a huge problem in 2CP's already problematic situations, but make the other 90% of the game a lot more engaging and less frustrating.
Are we playing the same game? Aside from the occasional well-done Genji ult, the only time single DPS ults "instantly end a fight" are when there's a catastrophic positioning error by the team on the receiving end of it.
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.
So... Paladin's talents? :P
I dunno, never played it. If that's what they do, then sure.
Kasyn on
+1
KasynI'm not saying I don't like our chances.She called me the master.Registered Userregular
I doubt individual heroes would change much they'd probably introduce a new mechanic before that
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.
I'm trying to think of a way this comment could be more pointlessly dismissive and am coming up short.
I don't think hoping for more of a gameplay shakeup in a full sequel is too much to ask, especially when the switch to 5v5 is going to have a ton of implications for everyone. Not asking for full redesigns across the board, but something on the order of what they're doing for Reinh / Winston would refresh the game quite a bit. Small to medium sized changes that open up gameplay options a little more for heroes, I'd really like to see that.
I have no doubt that every single hero is going to get a rebalance pass, to at least tweak numbers if not re-evaluate abilities in the new 5v5 system. We probably didn't see much of that for this demo because a lot of those numbers are still being worked on, but I'm expecting at least minor changes for pretty much every hero in the game. Removing a full player is just too significant not to.
+1
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
I mean I get what you're saying I'm just saying that probably isn't gonna happen.
Hell I'd also love a major shakeup
0
KasynI'm not saying I don't like our chances.She called me the master.Registered Userregular
I have no doubt that every single hero is going to get a rebalance pass, to at least tweak numbers if not re-evaluate abilities in the new 5v5 system. We probably didn't see much of that for this demo because a lot of those numbers are still being worked on, but I'm expecting at least minor changes for pretty much every hero in the game. Removing a full player is just too significant not to.
I think so too, and it more just feels like they simply haven't gotten around to what the Reinh-scale changes look like for other heroes yet. I simply don't think they can move to 5v5 smoothly and leave the vast majority of the cast intact, the implications of that change are just too big.
The discussion today made it seem like the switch to 5v5 is a relatively recent thing, which I find a bit concerning? But we'll just have to give it some time I guess.
I doubt individual heroes would change much they'd probably introduce a new mechanic before that
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.
I'm trying to think of a way this comment could be more pointlessly dismissive and am coming up short.
I don't think hoping for more of a gameplay shakeup in a full sequel is too much to ask, especially when the switch to 5v5 is going to have a ton of implications for everyone. Not asking for full redesigns across the board, but something on the order of what they're doing for Reinh / Winston would refresh the game quite a bit. Small to medium sized changes that open up gameplay options a little more for heroes, I'd really like to see that.
I was merely stating a fact. If you don't care about PvE, which it seems you don't, then there is no need to purchase Overwatch 2, full stop. You get all the PvP changes, all the new heroes and maps, everything PvP-related for free. And I can't imagine what you're looking for if you think that what they're doing is not enough of a gameplay shakeup. They haven't ruled out more big changes to the remaining heroes, they just aren't going to fix what isn't broken.
0
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
edited May 2021
broadly paladins is slightly higher survivability than overwatch - eg although u can get one shot by the widow hero on a very low hp flanker u can get items over the course of the round to make it not happen (-% single target attack damage) eg. its mostly designed around not usually being one shot, while in ow the balance is very much that most heroes have access to something close to a one shot in their raw kit or an ult that makes up for it. i think it feels better that way overall, and heroes like widow/hanzo are more frustrating through the fact that their normal mo is to one shot ppl from narnia (tho kinessa has obviously been oppressive and broken af in paladins at various times because that game is coded like spaghetti and the hitboxes are a joke)
a move in that direction could be good without slowing things down too much - especially if you remove a lot of cc
and yes a full rebalance is obviously coming for a huge number of reasons, not least of which is that current hero balance is a result of a specific series of tuning decisions made around tanks...
surrealitycheck on
0
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
edited May 2021
also do people not understand reapers trenchcoat is a buff
they also literally said its 2-2-1 in the livestream btw
surrealitycheck on
+1
KasynI'm not saying I don't like our chances.She called me the master.Registered Userregular
I doubt individual heroes would change much they'd probably introduce a new mechanic before that
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.
I'm trying to think of a way this comment could be more pointlessly dismissive and am coming up short.
I don't think hoping for more of a gameplay shakeup in a full sequel is too much to ask, especially when the switch to 5v5 is going to have a ton of implications for everyone. Not asking for full redesigns across the board, but something on the order of what they're doing for Reinh / Winston would refresh the game quite a bit. Small to medium sized changes that open up gameplay options a little more for heroes, I'd really like to see that.
I was merely stating a fact. If you don't care about PvE, which it seems you don't, then there is no need to purchase Overwatch 2, full stop. You get all the PvP changes, all the new heroes and maps, everything PvP-related for free. And I can't imagine what you're looking for if you think that what they're doing is not enough of a gameplay shakeup. They haven't ruled out more big changes to the remaining heroes, they just aren't going to fix what isn't broken.
You can't imagine what I'm looking for? I've described multiple things in the last page that give you an idea of what I'm talking about. Shit, I described it in the post you quoted. Zooming past that so you can go "lol don't buy the game then" is something else, man.
Like, let's not lose track of the fact that a sequel with PvP backwards compatibility with its predecessor is very much not the norm. It's not at all unreasonable to want to see the sequel to what is primarily a PvP game bring a little more to the table in terms of PvP. There's all this interesting new design space they have with the PvE talents and I can't help but be bummed that absolutely none of that is going to make its way into the PvP experience.
broadly paladins is slightly higher survivability than overwatch - eg although u can get one shot by the widow hero on a very low hp flanker u can get items over the course of the round to make it not happen (-% single target attack damage) eg. its mostly designed around not usually being one shot, while in ow the balance is very much that most heroes have access to something close to a one shot in their raw kit or an ult that makes up for it. i think it feels better that way overall, and heroes like widow/hanzo are more frustrating through the fact that their normal mo is to one shot ppl from narnia (tho kinessa has obviously been oppressive and broken af in paladins at various times because that game is coded like spaghetti and the hitboxes are a joke)
a move in that direction could be good without slowing things down too much - especially if you remove a lot of cc
and yes a full rebalance is obviously coming for a huge number of reasons, not least of which is that current hero balance is a result of a specific series of tuning decisions made around tanks...
"Slighty" ignores how much more common defensive abilities are (essentially every non-DPS has at least one escape/mobility move), how much stronger defensive abilities in general are, and the uptime they can have when built around maintaining them. You have to respect and play around the infinite shield Koas, Fernandos, Ashs, and Terms, not just charge straight into them and run them down like you can to Rein or Orisa, who are supposed to be able to hold their ground. Bastion on his own monopolizes and melts even the strongest tank's defense just on sheer DPS.
Plus, it separates the CC from the burst damage. ie You don't have any characters like McCree who get a point and click free stun AND enough burst damage to kill a tank. Or Hog, even. The strongest burst damage (thinking Moji, BK, or Dredge) don't just straight up obliterate tanks the way Reaper/Echo/Junk do, to say nothing of the DPS like Doom and Mei who bully tanks with close to impunity (although the CC change may be mitigating that?) The much more helpless supports without defensive abilities and nowhere near the same health pool don't stand a chance.
0
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
by slightly i just mean the raw health pool and damage number calibration ya there are other considerations
but i just like that raw tuning in and of itself, it feels good to usually not just get plonked by a random log from downtown
0
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
player acceleration being slower is huge for projectile heroes if they keep it
also indirect buff to wid lul
+1
BRIAN BLESSEDMaybe you aren't SPEAKING LOUDLY ENOUGHHHRegistered Userregular
I suppose after role queue this doesn't really surprise me, as they've demonstrated previously if they aren't able to solve the problem (in this case, making tanks compelling/satisfying, worse matchmaking queues) they make broader structural changes to the way the game plays instead (reduce the tank footprint on the game).
I don't care for it but it is nothing if not consistent with their balancing approach at this point
0
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
edited May 2021
the design failure was the tank role concept tbh
first person shooters are about shooting things in first person, tanks inherently stop u shooting things in first person, those abilities are always negative overall for experience (using a shield doesnt feel as good as the shot it stopped would have felt to the player shooting it), nobody conceptually wants to damage shields or deal with defense matrix, every time damage mitigation abilities have been strong everybody has hated it
i get why they did it and i dont think there was every a functional solution here really other than taking the L and massively scaling that shit back and refocusing tanks on the elements of their kits people actually like (eg beating ass on rein)
same with a lot of the hard cc - remove it and move on. mei could never be good so long as she had hard cc on left click; nerfing that into the ground allows her to be buffed into more than just a frustrating map-specific niche pick
first person shooters are about shooting things in first person, tanks inherently stop u shooting things in first person, those abilities are always negative overall for experience (using a shield doesnt feel as good as the shot it stopped would have felt to the player shooting it), nobody conceptually wants to damage shields or deal with defense matrix, every time damage mitigation abilities have been strong everybody has hated it
i get why they did it and i dont think there was every a functional solution here really other than taking the L and massively scaling that shit back and refocusing tanks on the elements of their kits people actually like (eg beating ass on rein)
same with a lot of the hard cc - remove it and move on. mei could never be good so long as she had hard cc on left click; nerfing that into the ground allows her to be buffed into more than just a frustrating map-specific niche pick
Counterpoint: I just finished a game in which I saved Ana from pulse bomb with bubble and then blocked a shatter with self bubble which won the game and my teammates called me a god.
That was infinitely satisfying.
0
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
well the burst mitigation stuff is much more satisfying which is broadly what they left in
clear strength clear downtime clear decision point
by slightly i just mean the raw health pool and damage number calibration ya there are other considerations
but i just like that raw tuning in and of itself, it feels good to usually not just get plonked by a random log from downtown
Ah. Thought you meant that OW feels better to have something that can one-shot in their kit.
I do think Paladins' ability to tune characters is a bit of a double edged sword. It's nice to have the option to give yourself another +3% HP or whatever to take yourself out of those danger zones, and helps provide kind of balance and playtesting on the fly for how much impact an extra bit of health versus a few extra bullets in a clip would be, but it also adds a shitload more complexity and need to learn what characters do what and how they can change depending on the talent or build, which is confusing and frustrating. I couldn't tell you probably at least a dozen attacks if they were classed as blast or direct damage. And every now and then, you run into someone with a wacky build, like an Air Jordan Inara or Maximum Boop Ash, and oops, you're on Frog Isle so now because you didn't rush Resilience, because Ash, you're kind of fucked. That's not good design and a lot of the synergistic loops people create that you need to break to counter/shut them down may not be immediately obvious, which is a design problem. Like, it's okay to generally understand "being near Inara = CCed," but Term may be going full DR and rundown, and be totally different from one built around pewpew-ing with his siphon.
I don't think tanks are a mistake though, and I'll echo Sanstodo. If you're playing well, hitting every shot, shielding the bursts, etc, you SHOULD feel like a badass, and that's where OW tank philosophy fails. The only tank who really has that in even small measure is Zarya. So many DPS can just run straight into your face and melt you in what is supposed to be your zone of control, and it's difficult to take the fight to people too like Paladins off-tanks can because of a severe lack of self-sustain built around "go find a health pack" instead of the cards/loadouts to reward effective play.
+1
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
i mean tanks as "point character who is quite beef" not terrible, but i think their initial view of tanks was influenced by mobas/wow and they did not consider the difference in feel between an fps and eg wow arenas
in an fps the raw interactions - movement, shooting etc - are a vastly bigger chunk of the experience than eg shooting a fireball in wow. so abilities/design approaches that make sense in a moba/mmo context end up feeling a LOT worse in an fps because they are directly interfering with the kind of interaction and experience that make fpses enjoyable; where they seem to be heading with ow2 is overall a sign that they have realised which bits of their design have tended to be major pain points. when you think of the really egregious metas they almost always revolve around either cc or tank nonsense: double shield, goats, mei/reaper...
Sometimes you have the fun, sometimes the fun has you. There's plenty of fun and satisfaction to be had in shutting down other people's ability to do what they enjoy. In all things. A basketball dunk is fun, but so is stuffing somebody going for one while yelling "Not in my house, motherfucker!" A main/point tank in Overwatch is mostly stuck with the role/goal of "stay alive," and are not sufficiently rewarded for doing that well. This is the build I love to play with Term, for example.
When I siphon at the right time, I get tons of pew pew for a powerful burst barrage. When I hit my pew pews, I both heal and get more siphon. When I'm doing the right thing and in the thick of it, I'm an unkillable monster, literally too angry to die, sustaining myself off of my own damage, which is fueled by effectively using my defensive ability. Overwatch tanks just plain don't have any fun interactions like that. Only Zarya comes close, but she's easy to cap out on her damage buff, and usually doesn't require much more thought than "bubble other tank." Shutting people down and being able to go toe to toe with 2-3 people at once attacking you haphazardly feels awesome. In Overwatch, that stuff for tanks is too much wrapped up in their ults only, if it exists at all.
well the burst mitigation stuff is much more satisfying which is broadly what they left in
clear strength clear downtime clear decision point
I also would be happy with this kind of design broadly applied, but also more clearly communicated to the player. Some heroes like, say, S76, often feel to the player like they’re doing things when they are doing nothing other than feeding support ult. The game often obscures the difference between good and bad play/decisions for many heroes.
Or in other words, I want the devs to make it more immediately obvious to a player when they’re succeeding and when they’re failing.
Some have aspects of that right and wrong at the same time. Hog is a prime example. His hook has clean, clear feedback. You hit the hook or you don’t, you get the kill or you don’t.
However, hog’s big drawback is feeding opponent’s ult and that has no immediate feedback to the player. Sure, the enemy’s ult goes off faster, but that looks like a team failure (or the dps’ fault for not keeping pace) when it’s often the fault of the roadhog alone. Worse, it looks like success to the roadhog player (breather and builds a bad ult faster).
I don’t want the game to coddle players by patting them on the head for sucking because that only encourages more sucking. Game design, particularly in PvP, must encourage good play, which they really fucked up in OW and I hope they fix it in OW2.
well the burst mitigation stuff is much more satisfying which is broadly what they left in
clear strength clear downtime clear decision point
I also would be happy with this kind of design broadly applied, but also more clearly communicated to the player. Some heroes like, say, S76, often feel to the player like they’re doing things when they are doing nothing other than feeding support ult. The game often obscures the difference between good and bad play/decisions for many heroes.
Or in other words, I want the devs to make it more immediately obvious to a player when they’re succeeding and when they’re failing.
Some have aspects of that right and wrong at the same time. Hog is a prime example. His hook has clean, clear feedback. You hit the hook or you don’t, you get the kill or you don’t.
However, hog’s big drawback is feeding opponent’s ult and that has no immediate feedback to the player. Sure, the enemy’s ult goes off faster, but that looks like a team failure (or the dps’ fault for not keeping pace) when it’s often the fault of the roadhog alone. Worse, it looks like success to the roadhog player (breather and builds a bad ult faster).
I don’t want the game to coddle players by patting them on the head for sucking because that only encourages more sucking. Game design, particularly in PvP, must encourage good play, which they really fucked up in OW and I hope they fix it in OW2.
OW2 cuts ult charge given by tanks in half. A tank shouldn't feel that they're making a mistake by drawing fire, which is part of their job. There are still bad plays, like drawing fire from enemies that otherwise wouldn't even be shooting, but as long as your teammates are with you you'll be fine.
Yeah honestly I kind of feel like Roadhog feeding enemy team ult by soaking damage is a flaw in the game's ult system. That's a change for OW2 that I'm definitely looking forward to. Tanks feel like they should be drawing fire. It's what Hog's physical design feels built around.
That and getting select picks with delicious chain hook combos.
Had an interesting game where my offtank refused to play with me (I’m rein) while the other team’s Dva peeled for their rein, ate fire strikes, etc.
We swapped roles and suddenly we won because our rein could engage properly. It actually got an apology from the other tank which was a nice treat for the day.
Edit: unfortunately that was the only good game tonight. 5 in a row with a thrower or leaver deciding things. Ok blizz, I'll play something else, lol
sanstodo on
0
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
So the devs did a AMA with content creators that went over a lot of stuff, was done in private though.
My two biggest takeaways were that
- They said every character probably will be rebalanced for 5v5 some more than others but they want to keep the spirit of each character.
- They said with 5v5 their biggest concern isn't even tanks rather sniper characters. And the way they were talking those characters might be reined in a bit somehow.
The Archives challenge events are probably fun in a group, but after spending a full night with pugs failing on every single one, fuck that, I don't want the Cyber Ana skin that badly.
0
miscellaneousinsanitygrass grows, birds fly, sun shines,and brother, i hurt peopleRegistered Userregular
The Archives challenge events are probably fun in a group, but after spending a full night with pugs failing on every single one, fuck that, I don't want the Cyber Ana skin that badly.
just in case you didn't see the reply from miscellaneousinsanity, you can do ANY game mode in quick play or arcade. a win gets you 3 points, a loss gets you 1.
Counterpoint: I just finished a game in which I saved Ana from pulse bomb with bubble and then blocked a shatter with self bubble which won the game and my teammates called me a god.
That was infinitely satisfying.
Zarya and Roadhog are basically Tanks For People Who Actually Wanted DPS But Picked Tank For Faster Queue Times.
Rein, D.Va, Horse and Sigma are all True Tanks (fat hp, low damage output, strong CC, big defensive abilities) and are abominable as a result. A cursed relic from Blizz designing this as an MMO first.
Ball is ball and hangs around doing ball things and I think should just be classified as an Agent of Chaos.
Delete tanks and nerf ults and you might start to get a good video game. The idea that multiple ults are team-wipingly good by themselves and you get six of them is also terrible design. Another piece probably co-opted from MOBAs without thinking about whether it's good for FPS gameplay (answer: it is not).
The Archives challenge events are probably fun in a group, but after spending a full night with pugs failing on every single one, fuck that, I don't want the Cyber Ana skin that badly.
just in case you didn't see the reply from miscellaneousinsanity, you can do ANY game mode in quick play or arcade. a win gets you 3 points, a loss gets you 1.
Oh I saw, I just didn’t have the patience for the other modes.
The Archives challenge events are probably fun in a group, but after spending a full night with pugs failing on every single one, fuck that, I don't want the Cyber Ana skin that badly.
just in case you didn't see the reply from miscellaneousinsanity, you can do ANY game mode in quick play or arcade. a win gets you 3 points, a loss gets you 1.
I think it's 2 for a win. It should be 3 so it was identical to the old 9 wins thing but I don't think it does that.
The Archives challenge events are probably fun in a group, but after spending a full night with pugs failing on every single one, fuck that, I don't want the Cyber Ana skin that badly.
just in case you didn't see the reply from miscellaneousinsanity, you can do ANY game mode in quick play or arcade. a win gets you 3 points, a loss gets you 1.
I think it's 2 for a win. It should be 3 so it was identical to the old 9 wins thing but I don't think it does that.
It is equivalent assuming you win only 50%.
0
surrealitychecklonely, but not unloveddreaming of faulty keys and latchesRegistered Userregular
apparently over 10k banned in a wave just now. intention to talk more about it which is nice i suppose
+1
DragkoniasThat Guy Who Does StuffYou Know, There. Registered Userregular
That reminds me one thing I did see from the devs Q&A was that they finally acknowledged the smurfing issue. That said not sure what will be done but hey that's a big step there.
Personally while I knew it was a thing I also felt it could be a bit overblown at times either way that's some positive news for some.
Posts
I'd be fine with talent tree going to PVP if they also implemented a vote ban just as a player enforced stopgap.
Or maybe they already introduced vote bans and we just didn't see it in the demo, that must have been why McCree wasn't shown in any maps a dab.
Is slowing the game down a bad thing? Right now, most DPS ults instantly end a fight, and the only decent way to counter them is with DPS ult. Even their abilities vaporize non tanks if caught off guard, or even just thrown out randomly like Hanzo's arrows. Some vaporize tanks too. The actual game time is still dependent on controlling the point/payload though, so it would slow down first (or overtime) battles, which would cause a huge problem in 2CP's already problematic situations, but make the other 90% of the game a lot more engaging and less frustrating.
The PvP is a free update. The PvE is the paid part.
So... Paladin's talents? :P
I mean that all comes down to preference. I feel most shooters these days are slow so it's nice to have one that's still fast-paced.
And the devs seem to agree from everything I've read.
Are we playing the same game? Aside from the occasional well-done Genji ult, the only time single DPS ults "instantly end a fight" are when there's a catastrophic positioning error by the team on the receiving end of it.
I dunno, never played it. If that's what they do, then sure.
I'm trying to think of a way this comment could be more pointlessly dismissive and am coming up short.
I don't think hoping for more of a gameplay shakeup in a full sequel is too much to ask, especially when the switch to 5v5 is going to have a ton of implications for everyone. Not asking for full redesigns across the board, but something on the order of what they're doing for Reinh / Winston would refresh the game quite a bit. Small to medium sized changes that open up gameplay options a little more for heroes, I'd really like to see that.
Hell I'd also love a major shakeup
I think so too, and it more just feels like they simply haven't gotten around to what the Reinh-scale changes look like for other heroes yet. I simply don't think they can move to 5v5 smoothly and leave the vast majority of the cast intact, the implications of that change are just too big.
The discussion today made it seem like the switch to 5v5 is a relatively recent thing, which I find a bit concerning? But we'll just have to give it some time I guess.
I was merely stating a fact. If you don't care about PvE, which it seems you don't, then there is no need to purchase Overwatch 2, full stop. You get all the PvP changes, all the new heroes and maps, everything PvP-related for free. And I can't imagine what you're looking for if you think that what they're doing is not enough of a gameplay shakeup. They haven't ruled out more big changes to the remaining heroes, they just aren't going to fix what isn't broken.
a move in that direction could be good without slowing things down too much - especially if you remove a lot of cc
and yes a full rebalance is obviously coming for a huge number of reasons, not least of which is that current hero balance is a result of a specific series of tuning decisions made around tanks...
they also literally said its 2-2-1 in the livestream btw
You can't imagine what I'm looking for? I've described multiple things in the last page that give you an idea of what I'm talking about. Shit, I described it in the post you quoted. Zooming past that so you can go "lol don't buy the game then" is something else, man.
Like, let's not lose track of the fact that a sequel with PvP backwards compatibility with its predecessor is very much not the norm. It's not at all unreasonable to want to see the sequel to what is primarily a PvP game bring a little more to the table in terms of PvP. There's all this interesting new design space they have with the PvE talents and I can't help but be bummed that absolutely none of that is going to make its way into the PvP experience.
But his shoulder pads are a nerf.
Steam: MightyPotatoKing
"Slighty" ignores how much more common defensive abilities are (essentially every non-DPS has at least one escape/mobility move), how much stronger defensive abilities in general are, and the uptime they can have when built around maintaining them. You have to respect and play around the infinite shield Koas, Fernandos, Ashs, and Terms, not just charge straight into them and run them down like you can to Rein or Orisa, who are supposed to be able to hold their ground. Bastion on his own monopolizes and melts even the strongest tank's defense just on sheer DPS.
Plus, it separates the CC from the burst damage. ie You don't have any characters like McCree who get a point and click free stun AND enough burst damage to kill a tank. Or Hog, even. The strongest burst damage (thinking Moji, BK, or Dredge) don't just straight up obliterate tanks the way Reaper/Echo/Junk do, to say nothing of the DPS like Doom and Mei who bully tanks with close to impunity (although the CC change may be mitigating that?) The much more helpless supports without defensive abilities and nowhere near the same health pool don't stand a chance.
but i just like that raw tuning in and of itself, it feels good to usually not just get plonked by a random log from downtown
also indirect buff to wid lul
I don't care for it but it is nothing if not consistent with their balancing approach at this point
first person shooters are about shooting things in first person, tanks inherently stop u shooting things in first person, those abilities are always negative overall for experience (using a shield doesnt feel as good as the shot it stopped would have felt to the player shooting it), nobody conceptually wants to damage shields or deal with defense matrix, every time damage mitigation abilities have been strong everybody has hated it
i get why they did it and i dont think there was every a functional solution here really other than taking the L and massively scaling that shit back and refocusing tanks on the elements of their kits people actually like (eg beating ass on rein)
same with a lot of the hard cc - remove it and move on. mei could never be good so long as she had hard cc on left click; nerfing that into the ground allows her to be buffed into more than just a frustrating map-specific niche pick
Counterpoint: I just finished a game in which I saved Ana from pulse bomb with bubble and then blocked a shatter with self bubble which won the game and my teammates called me a god.
That was infinitely satisfying.
clear strength clear downtime clear decision point
Ah. Thought you meant that OW feels better to have something that can one-shot in their kit.
I do think Paladins' ability to tune characters is a bit of a double edged sword. It's nice to have the option to give yourself another +3% HP or whatever to take yourself out of those danger zones, and helps provide kind of balance and playtesting on the fly for how much impact an extra bit of health versus a few extra bullets in a clip would be, but it also adds a shitload more complexity and need to learn what characters do what and how they can change depending on the talent or build, which is confusing and frustrating. I couldn't tell you probably at least a dozen attacks if they were classed as blast or direct damage. And every now and then, you run into someone with a wacky build, like an Air Jordan Inara or Maximum Boop Ash, and oops, you're on Frog Isle so now because you didn't rush Resilience, because Ash, you're kind of fucked. That's not good design and a lot of the synergistic loops people create that you need to break to counter/shut them down may not be immediately obvious, which is a design problem. Like, it's okay to generally understand "being near Inara = CCed," but Term may be going full DR and rundown, and be totally different from one built around pewpew-ing with his siphon.
I don't think tanks are a mistake though, and I'll echo Sanstodo. If you're playing well, hitting every shot, shielding the bursts, etc, you SHOULD feel like a badass, and that's where OW tank philosophy fails. The only tank who really has that in even small measure is Zarya. So many DPS can just run straight into your face and melt you in what is supposed to be your zone of control, and it's difficult to take the fight to people too like Paladins off-tanks can because of a severe lack of self-sustain built around "go find a health pack" instead of the cards/loadouts to reward effective play.
in an fps the raw interactions - movement, shooting etc - are a vastly bigger chunk of the experience than eg shooting a fireball in wow. so abilities/design approaches that make sense in a moba/mmo context end up feeling a LOT worse in an fps because they are directly interfering with the kind of interaction and experience that make fpses enjoyable; where they seem to be heading with ow2 is overall a sign that they have realised which bits of their design have tended to be major pain points. when you think of the really egregious metas they almost always revolve around either cc or tank nonsense: double shield, goats, mei/reaper...
When I siphon at the right time, I get tons of pew pew for a powerful burst barrage. When I hit my pew pews, I both heal and get more siphon. When I'm doing the right thing and in the thick of it, I'm an unkillable monster, literally too angry to die, sustaining myself off of my own damage, which is fueled by effectively using my defensive ability. Overwatch tanks just plain don't have any fun interactions like that. Only Zarya comes close, but she's easy to cap out on her damage buff, and usually doesn't require much more thought than "bubble other tank." Shutting people down and being able to go toe to toe with 2-3 people at once attacking you haphazardly feels awesome. In Overwatch, that stuff for tanks is too much wrapped up in their ults only, if it exists at all.
I also would be happy with this kind of design broadly applied, but also more clearly communicated to the player. Some heroes like, say, S76, often feel to the player like they’re doing things when they are doing nothing other than feeding support ult. The game often obscures the difference between good and bad play/decisions for many heroes.
Or in other words, I want the devs to make it more immediately obvious to a player when they’re succeeding and when they’re failing.
Some have aspects of that right and wrong at the same time. Hog is a prime example. His hook has clean, clear feedback. You hit the hook or you don’t, you get the kill or you don’t.
However, hog’s big drawback is feeding opponent’s ult and that has no immediate feedback to the player. Sure, the enemy’s ult goes off faster, but that looks like a team failure (or the dps’ fault for not keeping pace) when it’s often the fault of the roadhog alone. Worse, it looks like success to the roadhog player (breather and builds a bad ult faster).
I don’t want the game to coddle players by patting them on the head for sucking because that only encourages more sucking. Game design, particularly in PvP, must encourage good play, which they really fucked up in OW and I hope they fix it in OW2.
OW2 cuts ult charge given by tanks in half. A tank shouldn't feel that they're making a mistake by drawing fire, which is part of their job. There are still bad plays, like drawing fire from enemies that otherwise wouldn't even be shooting, but as long as your teammates are with you you'll be fine.
That and getting select picks with delicious chain hook combos.
We swapped roles and suddenly we won because our rein could engage properly. It actually got an apology from the other tank which was a nice treat for the day.
Edit: unfortunately that was the only good game tonight. 5 in a row with a thrower or leaver deciding things. Ok blizz, I'll play something else, lol
My two biggest takeaways were that
- They said every character probably will be rebalanced for 5v5 some more than others but they want to keep the spirit of each character.
- They said with 5v5 their biggest concern isn't even tanks rather sniper characters. And the way they were talking those characters might be reined in a bit somehow.
They didn't go over specifics though.
just in case you didn't see the reply from miscellaneousinsanity, you can do ANY game mode in quick play or arcade. a win gets you 3 points, a loss gets you 1.
Blizzard: Pailryder#1101
GoG: https://www.gog.com/u/pailryder
Rein, D.Va, Horse and Sigma are all True Tanks (fat hp, low damage output, strong CC, big defensive abilities) and are abominable as a result. A cursed relic from Blizz designing this as an MMO first.
Ball is ball and hangs around doing ball things and I think should just be classified as an Agent of Chaos.
Delete tanks and nerf ults and you might start to get a good video game. The idea that multiple ults are team-wipingly good by themselves and you get six of them is also terrible design. Another piece probably co-opted from MOBAs without thinking about whether it's good for FPS gameplay (answer: it is not).
Oh I saw, I just didn’t have the patience for the other modes.
I think it's 2 for a win. It should be 3 so it was identical to the old 9 wins thing but I don't think it does that.
It is equivalent assuming you win only 50%.
https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/overwatch/t/overwatch-bans-long-term-mentality-and-recent-action/612730
apparently over 10k banned in a wave just now. intention to talk more about it which is nice i suppose
Personally while I knew it was a thing I also felt it could be a bit overblown at times either way that's some positive news for some.