Vault Dweller 111
Member
Yea.
None of that really factors into diamond tier games on Ps4 though. Which is the problem with balancing around the pro game and doing PC and console the same.
Overwatch |OT6| Boop
- Thread starter ExMachina
- Start date
- Status
None of that really factors into diamond tier games on Ps4 though. Which is the problem with balancing around the pro game and doing PC and console the same.
It's different with a comp specifically built to pretty much enable nanoboosts though. I don't think it would be much different on console personally if people played 3/3, the biggest difference maker between PC and Console Ana would be accuracy, and that would naturally be high since there's fat ass tanks everywhere and it's more about her burst heal quickly getting a nanoboost. The same snowballing would still apply.
I agree it would be a shame to see her nerfed but I dunno. Wouldn't be the first time that a character was changed due to what is essentially other characters in the game (sym shields and zen healing needing LoS being broken basically all because Tracer and Genji). Ana has similar synergy with tanks.
xaosslug
Member
optimus8936
Banned
Except they don't always balance them the same. Look at Torb and Symm.
Kor of Memory
Member
That's not it. But I'm not going to talk about it because I don't want to further the information. It is a full blown exploit.
Well on console Idk how often she can actually dump huge heals and keep the charge rate up. On PC though people will get coordinated enough to ult chain well once it's been out there. I'm on the side of "if the pros do it, there's a reasonable chance that solo q can eventually do it." The only times I've seen this fail is in Dota where people can't do tri lane or LoL where solo q play can't do lane swaps. That has a lot more to do with planning than it does with coordination though afaik.
Vault Dweller 111
Member
Fingers crossed I guess.
well, that blows.
optimus8936
Banned
Like, honestly, this seems like it could fix the whole 3/3 problem a lot better than nerfing Ana?
Doing work does not mean you are better than your opponents, it just means you have gained a momentary advantage. By rewarding and boosting good performance, it creates momentum. Momentum, especially on a team level, is very important to the game flow of Overwatch. It works both ways. If you're on a roll you can continue to be more of a threat as long as you keep performing, but at the same time there is huge incentive for a team to rethink how they approach a situation and if they can shake things up and turn things around for just a moment, that same momentum will work for them and you can turn a game that is going poorly around. Match dynamics are not fixed by some defined comparison of player skills, it is something that continues to flow in most matches. Being rewarded more for doing well also means getting punished harder for making mistakes.
Your Overwatch did a video about the PC vs Console differences. They tried it out over the free weekand and posted some thoughts about their experience. It's nothing in-depth or super detailed. I guess it's interesting to hear what they thought console felt like.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R6QEzkGUXU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3R6QEzkGUXU
Vault Dweller 111
Member
SO limiting though. I like 2/2/2 too. (Your head just said 'to', 4 times). But never being able to go more than 2 offense heroes again? Or two tanks? It's not in the spirit of the game at all.
optimus8936
Banned
Fair point, but that's exactly what Blizz said about hero stacking. idk, I'm just throwing out ideas.
Remember when I was REALLY against hero limits even when stacking was considered a problem? And Blizzard went ahead and did it for Comp and well, I just had to accept it. This is exactly the sort of thing I was afraid of. If people are okay with artificially limiting team setups, there will be an expectation that when there is a problem with meta, an easy overall solution would be to further limit what sort of team builds you can have. That's really stupid. 
I think it feels a little too arbitrary to me unlike them taking out hero stacking. Also might be problematic down the line with more Symmetra like characters since you already had to specify 3 supports so she wouldn't ruin it.
OdysseusVA
Banned
Blizzard should just nerf players based on their SR
Console balancing should cease at accessibility. Characters should not differ from their PC counterparts, at least IMO. Nerfing Torb and Symmetra turret damage is a lazy way to bring these characters on par with their PC counterparts, and in fact makes them worse than their PC counterparts.
Just because Ana requires decent aim doesn't mean she should be void of the nerf stick, if you think she needs it or not. Consoles players have problems with these turrets because they instantly lock on, and you're not going to have the same precision and reaction time on console to destroy them as capably as a PC player. So any nerf to them, should have been to that.
In regards to console balancing, snipers need to be looked at and aim assist could be improved across the board, also fixing whatever other aiming issues persist in the game still. In terms of characters having different stats, HP, or abilities between versions, I don't want this to continue happening for console balance.
In regards to Ana nerfs, I don't get why nerfing her would make her "unusable" on console. If any changes come to her, which they most likely will, maybe even mid-season they need to look into her effectiveness on console as well. I guess going by Blizzard's track record with console balancing, she will definitely be worse overall, but she shouldn't be.
Finally, in regards to the composition itself, three tanks provide a beefy health pool for Ana to build her ult. It is very cheesy and often revolves around tanks abusing the ult system and taking damage on purpose to charge her ult even faster. Ana is not simply rushed down with this comp, with three tanks that act as her protectors one that can one shot most flankers (Roadhog) and Zarya bubbles, Winston/Tracer/Genji have a tough time of focusing her down in the backlines. Doesn't mean it can't be done, but many of teams are positioned in ways where it's hard to really stop her. Oh and she has a handy sleep dart to stop this sort of thing herself.
Just because Ana requires decent aim doesn't mean she should be void of the nerf stick, if you think she needs it or not. Consoles players have problems with these turrets because they instantly lock on, and you're not going to have the same precision and reaction time on console to destroy them as capably as a PC player. So any nerf to them, should have been to that.
In regards to console balancing, snipers need to be looked at and aim assist could be improved across the board, also fixing whatever other aiming issues persist in the game still. In terms of characters having different stats, HP, or abilities between versions, I don't want this to continue happening for console balance.
In regards to Ana nerfs, I don't get why nerfing her would make her "unusable" on console. If any changes come to her, which they most likely will, maybe even mid-season they need to look into her effectiveness on console as well. I guess going by Blizzard's track record with console balancing, she will definitely be worse overall, but she shouldn't be.
Finally, in regards to the composition itself, three tanks provide a beefy health pool for Ana to build her ult. It is very cheesy and often revolves around tanks abusing the ult system and taking damage on purpose to charge her ult even faster. Ana is not simply rushed down with this comp, with three tanks that act as her protectors one that can one shot most flankers (Roadhog) and Zarya bubbles, Winston/Tracer/Genji have a tough time of focusing her down in the backlines. Doesn't mean it can't be done, but many of teams are positioned in ways where it's hard to really stop her. Oh and she has a handy sleep dart to stop this sort of thing herself.
Bumbletron
Member
But this momentum is also the reason that Attack wins so many games. If you take point A convicingly, even if it's just a fluke from a lucky pick, now your team has ults and the opposing side does not. Pair this with a 'one wipe and you're out' for any given section on defense, and it leads to the current scenario where in a game where you just need to win two pushes on offense, but you have to win all of them on defense to succeed, you can have a team win in a very fast time through, arguably, luck.
I would argue that being rewarded more for doing well means that you are punished less for making mistakes, as you still have ult advantage. The problem I have with the system is that it shifts the momentum too drastically in any given direction, and should be a bit more stable imo.
optimus8936
Banned
Because Ana is super fucking hard to use on console and there are still people who think she sucks. A nerf to her on console would be the end of her unless they buffed something else for her.
Kor of Memory
Member
But that already happens.
Ult charges based off of time. Like, I think Tracer gets an Ult every 90 seconds assuming she doesn't actually shoot anyone.
Bumbletron
Member
Exactly. I've always drawn this parallel, so it confuses me that ult charge is solely based on damage done. Just leads to problems like we have in 3/3. For instance, Reinhardt. Sure he can do damage, but you pick him to block damage, not necessarily to deal it out. So why does he gain more ult for dealing damage than for blocking it or tanking it? So after nano, he has his ult. Meanwhile, the enemy team gains little ult since you don't get anything for taking damage or dying, so the 3/3 is able to snowball the rest of the map.
Right, but that applies to both teams too and is so little it's mostly negligible on most heroes. Sure, Tracer might get ult every 90 seconds from that, but she can get three in the same amount of time from shooting people. Meanwhile, the team being shot gains nothing for taking that damage.
optimus8936
Banned
This is already a thing. Your ult charges slowly over time, even when you're dead.
optimus8936
Banned
You're saying you should be able to build ult charge for taking damage? Basically, you get rewarded for failing. That's dumb. I don't need a participation trophy, I'll earn my ult charge.
His shield has 2000 health, this would make Rein worthless because he'd be such an ult battery.
Like, if you think Roadhog is an ult battery, this is basically 4 times worse.
That's universal though; the guy that killed you is passively gaining just as much as you are while you look at the death screen.
I mean for the specific player being killed, they get compensated with ult charge. It closes the gap a bit more for the have and have nots, so snowballing isn't quite as powerful.
optimus8936
Banned
Why should players be rewarded for failing? That is the dumbest idea for a competitive game about succeeding.
Also, taking damage charges your supports ults, which are far more valuable than any DPS or tank ult.
Also, taking damage charges your supports ults, which are far more valuable than any DPS or tank ult.
Bumbletron
Member
This exact thing happens in fighting games, though. It's not a reward for failing, as you still gain less. It's a chance to turn things around. But yeah, for doing your job as a tank and keeping that damage from the supports and dps, you should be rewarded. Getting shot as a tank is not failing, it's succeeding.
Kor of Memory
Member
Meh,
I'm sorry, but I don't agree with anti-snowballing balancing. It sucks to get snowballed, but I absolutely do not believe that a player should be rewarded for being the worst performer.
Adjust their MMR and/or SR as needed, and move on.
Edit: As it is, in non-KotH games, losers are already getting the benefit of a closer spawn as the payload moves. That's plenty benefit right there.
nothing makes me wanna stick more to a pick than people being rude about switching.
optimus8936
Banned
This isn't a fighting game though. This is a team based FPS. Comparing the two is like comparing China to America, it doesn't work.
If you're not working with your team, you will fail, and you shouldn't be rewarded for not working well with your team.
It's not a reward because you would still much much rather do the killing than the dying. It's simply a system to mitigate snowballing when it comes to meter based games.
This has been a thing for 20 years of fighting games, so it's not like it hasn't been competitively tested.
TheLetdown
Member
Seems exploitable or at the least introduces feeding as a mechanic.
"Enemy Tracer has been wrecking me as Rein. I'll just feed the next couple of kills because her ult can get a handful of kills when timed 100% perfectly while my ult can 180 a game."
killdatninja
Banned
Before we talk about Nerfs/Buffs, it should still be pointed out that the aim assist still needs to be fixed/tuned down. There are times when I don't see the enemy on my screen and my crosshair moves by itself (this happens most often in nepal: sanctum when enemies are on/getting to the point and i'm near the wall by the big health pack).
Also, if there is a Zenyatta who steps close to my crosshair and has transcendence on, my crosshair sticks to him as well (even if I was aiming at someone else).
TL
R, aim assist still needs work on console. It works better than day 1 patch.. but still has some to go.
At some point, once I have a PC that can run OW properly (my PC is 5 years old... last time i tried to play OW I kept getting kicked for inactivity because I couldn't load the game properly). I'll have video comparisons on every version of OW, and how the different versions of OW affect my aim.
I've tried various control scheme setups, re-adjusting to these various control setups has definitely affected my play style and ranking. As well as shifting to different sensitivities and aim assist variances.
I've used:
PS4 Stock controller
PS4 Scuf controller (no triggers stops, but does have electromagnetic mapping)
Mouse keyboard (PC)
Mouse/keyboard (PS4 - via XIM4, one of my friends has a titan one I might be able to borrow for later testing)
XOne (not mine, friends)
Once season 3 rolls along, I hope to answer the biggest questions. 1.) Which controller is the best on console? 2.) Is mouse and keyboard on PS4 OW really cheating? 3.) Can console players go against PC players (given there is aim assist)?
Also, if there is a Zenyatta who steps close to my crosshair and has transcendence on, my crosshair sticks to him as well (even if I was aiming at someone else).
TL
R, aim assist still needs work on console. It works better than day 1 patch.. but still has some to go.At some point, once I have a PC that can run OW properly (my PC is 5 years old... last time i tried to play OW I kept getting kicked for inactivity because I couldn't load the game properly). I'll have video comparisons on every version of OW, and how the different versions of OW affect my aim.
I've tried various control scheme setups, re-adjusting to these various control setups has definitely affected my play style and ranking. As well as shifting to different sensitivities and aim assist variances.
I've used:
PS4 Stock controller
PS4 Scuf controller (no triggers stops, but does have electromagnetic mapping)
Mouse keyboard (PC)
Mouse/keyboard (PS4 - via XIM4, one of my friends has a titan one I might be able to borrow for later testing)
XOne (not mine, friends)
Once season 3 rolls along, I hope to answer the biggest questions. 1.) Which controller is the best on console? 2.) Is mouse and keyboard on PS4 OW really cheating? 3.) Can console players go against PC players (given there is aim assist)?
finalflame
Banned
The amount of time it takes for ults to passively regenerate is not worth being out of the match for the entirety of the respawn timer + walk back, instead of just playing well and charging more ult. It's not a viable strategy.
Bumbletron
Member
My opinion is more that the best performing players should not necessarily be rewarded as much as they are currently for their performance in the match. Soldier and McCree can almost always have ult up if their player is decent. Hell, as McCree, I get my ult back in like 20-30 seconds on most maps.
optimus8936
Banned
If taking damage charged ult, Roadhog would be the best character in the game. Not only does he take a lot of damage, but he can take all that damage back with his self heal, which charges his ult even more.
If failure charged ults in this game, there would be no reason not to run a character that can self heal.
If failure charged ults in this game, there would be no reason not to run a character that can self heal.
Bumbletron
Member
Rein tanking damage is working with your team, and is absolutely not "failure". Can you explain to me how this is not the case? Also, saying you can't compare two things that are surprisingly easy to compare doesn't work. In a game with an ultimate meter, match ups, and tier lists I'm pretty sure you can compare it to a fighting game with little difficulty.
Taking damage is not necessarily failure. Hell, just look at how you run 3/3. Rein takes damage to charge nano boost. Not only is that not failure, but it's working with your team to actively succeed.
optimus8936
Banned
Except for the fact that fighting games, where it's just you versus one other person, is not comparable to a FPS where you have to actually work with other people.
Basically, you want good players to earn less and bad players to earn more? Fuck that. If they're bad players, they need to improve their game. You're just giving them a reason to stay bad. If you want this system so bad, go play a damn fighting game, because this isn't a fighting game, this is a shooter.
Seriously, this is the dumbest way of trying to improve the system. Good players should be rewarded. It's as simple as that. If you want to be rewarded for failing, then don't play competitive because competitive is about succeeding, not failing.
Taking damage is meant to charge support ults, not your own.
Bumbletron
Member
Yeah, because if you actually are better than them, you would still win as you would still gain ult faster than them, and are 'better' than them so you should be outplaying them anyway.
TheLetdown
Member
He or she was talking about adding a mechanic where dying gives a bump, similar to meters / gauges in fighting games.
That's what I was referring to.
The thing with overwatch is that it's an all or nothing game. The entire meta is centralized around ults, both getting them as efficiently as possible and using them as effectively as possible. You either have ults up for a team fight, or you don't.
As we all know, if one team has ults and the other doesn't, that's a team wipe. Every percieved balancing issue surrounding the meta comes back to the ult system, so looking at how you can better balance the game hinges on how you handle ult gain.
Because meter does nothing else in the game.
As we all know, if one team has ults and the other doesn't, that's a team wipe. Every percieved balancing issue surrounding the meta comes back to the ult system, so looking at how you can better balance the game hinges on how you handle ult gain.
Because meter does nothing else in the game.
Kor of Memory
Member
But games where you are getting an Ult in 20 seconds are not good games. If you are doing this it means the enemy team is feeding you non-stop. Chances are, they shouldn't have been matched up against you, and should have their SR/MMR adjusted as needed.
The enemy team either needs to no play against players if your skill level, or they need to readjust their comp to stop you from getting Ult charge so quickly.
optimus8936
Banned
Well then if the good players are gonna win anyways, why change the fucking system? They're gonna win no matter what, nothing will change that.
Giving bad players more ult charge won't let them play better. Them actually improving there game should be how they play better. Giving the bad players leeway will just incentivize them to continue being bad because they aren't at as big of a disadvantage anymore.
- Status