I know everyone reading this is going to be like “oh, here goes another mercy otp ranting about mercy”. and it is true to some degree, but I like to think of myself as support main who likes to play the following supports by order:
1- Mercy
2- Ana
3- Moira
4- Brigitte
5- Zen
6 - Lucio
Now the issue, we don’t have a lot of supports in overwatch currently, and in order to play support in GM or higher level without pissing off your team is to play Lucio Zen or Ana. I get it, they perform better than other supports currently. Why can’t we have all other “weaker” supports to a stronger position so we can actually have diversity in comp. Moira, for example, she has the lowest pick rate between all supports and blizzard doesn’t change anything about it since she came out, instead they nerfed her healing now to not heal people behind barriers (which affects her pick rate even more). and don’t say mercy is strong because she’s not, otherwise, people won’t get mad if you pick her in comp.
My point is, painting is fun with a variety of colors instead of only a few, same goes for playing supports.
2 Likes
To be honest, its one of the reasons I don’t even play tank/support.
In the dps department, your almost guaranteed to find a matching hero for yourself.
Not so with tank/heals.
Especially but this is true for dps as well, your hero also needs to be viable otherwise you’re kinda throwing. Regardless of your “helpful support pick”
(but I’m just plat, I’m sure viability is a way bigger thing in gm)
As example for a sniper you can play 2-4 dps heroes and even a support.
If you enjoy lucio/mercy well thats the only option you have.
Making each hero similarily viable is the main goal the game should strive upon. However, you need to consider the difficulty of each hero. That makes balancing problematic.
Focusing on mercy, she is an easy hero. She doesn’t require mechanical skill and her flat kit doesn’t challenge your cognitive skill, too. If Blizzard just buff her healing, we would have the Brigitte effect: She is fine at high ranks but destroys the low ranks.
Of course “git gud” would be a good argument but people often disregard the sudden difficulty spike when playing easy yet strong heroes. At one point, they hit a wall they can’t overcome because that “easy” hero doesn’t perform well anymore.
In order to make every hero equally viable, each of them must be equally challenging, too. How exactly should they be challenging? That is completely open. In order to allow as much gameplay diversity as possible, each hero should challenge a different kind of skill. Mercy, for example, would challenge your cognitive skill. Mechanical skill wouldn’t be needed but every tiny mistake, like false positioning, bad tactical thinking, wrong cooldown management, would be lethal.
To cut it short, heroes need to be challenging before they can be strong, too. Otherwise, it would break the competitive scene.
No.
just flat no. Lower skilled supports work fine for lower tiers, higher skilled supports work fine for higher tiers.
this is how game balance should be
If you make everything equally viable, then it means homogenization, which means it no longer matters what you pick.
everything equally viable in a game makes it boring and pointless.
you just have to accept the fact there are tiers for characters and this is fine
1 Like