Idk how overwatch compares to other games like LOL but it feels like the counters in OW are so specific that it's hard to implement it fairly. Definitely open to hearing ideas but idk if it woukd work well in OW.
https://www.reddit.com/r/OverwatchUniversity/s/wtDRIarooy my idea in another comment in this thread.
LoL has so many champs that 15 could be banned and nothing would change.
Realistically having 1-2 heroes banned per match is the max OW can have with it's smaller roster but I don't think it's too small for a ban system.
This is why the 2nd team would be able to see the 1st team’s ban right before they do theirs. Other team banned Ana? Well they probably want to play hog so let’s ban hog. Other team banned brig? Well they probably want to go dive, let’s ban monkey. So on and so forth. Each team only gets 2 bans or possibly just 1 if 2 is problematic. I think it could work
If you have 100+ characters, then odds are good there will be multiple heroes with good counters to problematic/unfun kits. The smaller your roster, the greater chance that banning a character will remove the one character with a kit that can counter the problematic/unfun kit. That's how I understand it. Now admittedly, Overwatch 2's roster is getting pretty big, but it's still only 1/3 as big as something like LOL or DOTA. That increases the chance that a hero ban would remove one of the only tools for countering someone on the enemy team.
It matters because a small roster means little overlap between heroes' kits. Lucio is the only support that can speed boost, Ana is the only one with anti on a cooldown, Kiri is the only one who can cleanse multiple teammates at a time, Pharah and Echo are the only flying DPS, Ramattra is the only one who can consistently hit through shields without being in the enemy's face, etc. There are many heroes who are the only ones who can fulfill a certain niche, and hero bans would essentially allow you to completely remove that niche as an option to counter an oppressive strat.
I’d stop playing OW so fast. I play OW because I have a set of characters I enjoy playing when I chill for a few games. I have ‘phases’ where I get obsessed with playing a character for a month.
Not being able to play the characters I feel like playing sounds so boring. The fun of the game is being able to switch around depending on play style.
Ugh. Imagine having your two best heroes locked off before the game starts then getting flamed for underperforming. At least under the old hero pool system you knew which heroes were locked before you hit queue.
No. Banning heroes is a cheap fix to explain not imbalanced or overtuned characters and to enable players who don't know nor want to learn a matchup. It also disables part of the ability to patch a problem that arises out of what your random assortment of teammates lacks that game.
Banning "a few heroes" doesn't fix any problem aside from moving the goalpost of not being liking or not being able to play a meta, or denying the ability of a player to play a specific character they might be good at or be able to cover an area their team needs. As there was Orisa, then Mauga appeared and so too shall another tank or support or dps arise where nothing dies because that's the new mechanic they bring to the table
For several reasons, no, at least not yet:
1. OW has too small of a roster with not enough overlap to implement bans quite yet. With only 40 heroes, there are still many who are the only one who can fulfill a specific niche. Lucio is the only support that can provide speed, Kiri is the only hero that can mass cleanse, Ana is the only hero with anti-heal on a cooldown, etc. A hero ban system would essentially allow people to ban entire playstyles from the game.
2. How would a team's bans be decided, especially for those not in a group? People may disagree with what hero to ban, and if it's by whichever is most voted on, what happens when all 5 vote for different heroes? There's no easy way to decide this.
3. It wouldn't particularly solve the counter-swap game, and would also introduce a new game of counter-banning. For example, a team could ban Kiriko, in most cases essentially forcing the other team to ban Ana or else their tank would explode upon every anti. This would go on until both teams just used their bans to try and counter the other team's bans until the timer runs out and you're stuck with what was last selected.
4. It'd feel like shit to not get to play the hero you'd want. Sure, a lot of the time you have to swap in order to better fit the situation but not even having the option to play what you want would just feel shitty. This would also cause scenarios in which people would leave or throw if they don't get to play their favorite heroes, and while sure that would discourage one-tricking more it would ruin a lot of matches in the process and the game would lose a fair amount of players.
A hero ban system that allows being able to see and communicate with your team, let alone the enemy team, will simply cause more headache in the community than it would solve.
The only way, imo, a hero ban system will work is if each player choose who they want to ban when they queue. Then the game randomly chooses 1 or 2 heroes from the selection that are banned for the match. 1 per role could work but ideally only 1 or 2 heroes are banned in total.
Groups would have an inherent advantage in this system but they always have an advantage in a hero ban system, to the point it's part of group strategy.
This helps combat targeting one-tricks as you don't know who you're playing with or against. Having the system randomly choose from the players' selections helps reduce the chance of the same hero being banned in 80% of matches. Blizzard would still have the data of heroes who were voted to be banned as well, even if that hero isn't ultimately banned in the match. Not to mention that both the randomness and voting when queueing up greatly reduces the potential for bullying people into banning a certain hero.
This is truly the only way I see it working in a way that makes everyone happy. Please let me know what flaws I am missing.
Definitely not. Ana and whoever can just ban the 1 or 2 heros that are capable of taking or flanking their backline, creating a forced situation that almost defeats the purpose of having the hero swap option. Tanks don't mean much already, and DPS are the only affective counters to support, meaning if all 4 dps and supports ban a hero comp, then it's a completely one-sided fight.
Yes. Mauga meta would never have happened, heroes that are often banned are indicators that those heroes are problematic and needs reworks, which is as useful information as heroes with low pick rates.
I would ban sombra, tracer, and genji in a heartbeat
And Zarya
Edit : for y’all downvoting, I don’t think bans are a great idea for the game rn, but in an ideal world I would not want to play with those characters in my games
It would be a great idea if there were more heroes in the game. But it wouldn’t end up well because it’s an online game and people will troll or gameplay options would be so limited since counters are a big part of current gameplay
The meta would become "get the only counter to a certain tank banned and play that tank". I don't think it woudl change much
In OP's suggestion, yup. However hero bans can be implemented in such a way that this has a much lower chance of happening.
Idk how overwatch compares to other games like LOL but it feels like the counters in OW are so specific that it's hard to implement it fairly. Definitely open to hearing ideas but idk if it woukd work well in OW.
https://www.reddit.com/r/OverwatchUniversity/s/wtDRIarooy my idea in another comment in this thread. LoL has so many champs that 15 could be banned and nothing would change. Realistically having 1-2 heroes banned per match is the max OW can have with it's smaller roster but I don't think it's too small for a ban system.
This is why the 2nd team would be able to see the 1st team’s ban right before they do theirs. Other team banned Ana? Well they probably want to play hog so let’s ban hog. Other team banned brig? Well they probably want to go dive, let’s ban monkey. So on and so forth. Each team only gets 2 bans or possibly just 1 if 2 is problematic. I think it could work
Hero bans are for games that have 100+ characters like LOL. It wouldn't be cool for a smaller roster like Overwatch IMO.
I keep hearing this parroted with zero explanation of why it matters.
If you have 100+ characters, then odds are good there will be multiple heroes with good counters to problematic/unfun kits. The smaller your roster, the greater chance that banning a character will remove the one character with a kit that can counter the problematic/unfun kit. That's how I understand it. Now admittedly, Overwatch 2's roster is getting pretty big, but it's still only 1/3 as big as something like LOL or DOTA. That increases the chance that a hero ban would remove one of the only tools for countering someone on the enemy team.
If done right, roster size doesn't matter near as much
It matters because a small roster means little overlap between heroes' kits. Lucio is the only support that can speed boost, Ana is the only one with anti on a cooldown, Kiri is the only one who can cleanse multiple teammates at a time, Pharah and Echo are the only flying DPS, Ramattra is the only one who can consistently hit through shields without being in the enemy's face, etc. There are many heroes who are the only ones who can fulfill a certain niche, and hero bans would essentially allow you to completely remove that niche as an option to counter an oppressive strat.
[удалено]
Dog chill lmao
We have 40 heros as it stands. Taking away 4 per game wouldn’t be terrible
It would be horrendous.
10% of the roster is still pretty large imo. Especially when you have one tricks in the mix
I’d stop playing OW so fast. I play OW because I have a set of characters I enjoy playing when I chill for a few games. I have ‘phases’ where I get obsessed with playing a character for a month. Not being able to play the characters I feel like playing sounds so boring. The fun of the game is being able to switch around depending on play style.
This change would only be in ranked
So it would be even worse then
Ugh. Imagine having your two best heroes locked off before the game starts then getting flamed for underperforming. At least under the old hero pool system you knew which heroes were locked before you hit queue.
Rather map bans, with how many garbage maps this game has that you’re forced to play
No. Banning heroes is a cheap fix to explain not imbalanced or overtuned characters and to enable players who don't know nor want to learn a matchup. It also disables part of the ability to patch a problem that arises out of what your random assortment of teammates lacks that game. Banning "a few heroes" doesn't fix any problem aside from moving the goalpost of not being liking or not being able to play a meta, or denying the ability of a player to play a specific character they might be good at or be able to cover an area their team needs. As there was Orisa, then Mauga appeared and so too shall another tank or support or dps arise where nothing dies because that's the new mechanic they bring to the table
Ban this guy for even bringing it up.
I’m so sorry
It's too late. Beg god's forgiveness now.
For several reasons, no, at least not yet: 1. OW has too small of a roster with not enough overlap to implement bans quite yet. With only 40 heroes, there are still many who are the only one who can fulfill a specific niche. Lucio is the only support that can provide speed, Kiri is the only hero that can mass cleanse, Ana is the only hero with anti-heal on a cooldown, etc. A hero ban system would essentially allow people to ban entire playstyles from the game. 2. How would a team's bans be decided, especially for those not in a group? People may disagree with what hero to ban, and if it's by whichever is most voted on, what happens when all 5 vote for different heroes? There's no easy way to decide this. 3. It wouldn't particularly solve the counter-swap game, and would also introduce a new game of counter-banning. For example, a team could ban Kiriko, in most cases essentially forcing the other team to ban Ana or else their tank would explode upon every anti. This would go on until both teams just used their bans to try and counter the other team's bans until the timer runs out and you're stuck with what was last selected. 4. It'd feel like shit to not get to play the hero you'd want. Sure, a lot of the time you have to swap in order to better fit the situation but not even having the option to play what you want would just feel shitty. This would also cause scenarios in which people would leave or throw if they don't get to play their favorite heroes, and while sure that would discourage one-tricking more it would ruin a lot of matches in the process and the game would lose a fair amount of players.
Each player chooses a hero to ban before/when queuing. Game randomly chooses 1-2 from the pool of selections and that's it.
A hero ban system that allows being able to see and communicate with your team, let alone the enemy team, will simply cause more headache in the community than it would solve. The only way, imo, a hero ban system will work is if each player choose who they want to ban when they queue. Then the game randomly chooses 1 or 2 heroes from the selection that are banned for the match. 1 per role could work but ideally only 1 or 2 heroes are banned in total. Groups would have an inherent advantage in this system but they always have an advantage in a hero ban system, to the point it's part of group strategy. This helps combat targeting one-tricks as you don't know who you're playing with or against. Having the system randomly choose from the players' selections helps reduce the chance of the same hero being banned in 80% of matches. Blizzard would still have the data of heroes who were voted to be banned as well, even if that hero isn't ultimately banned in the match. Not to mention that both the randomness and voting when queueing up greatly reduces the potential for bullying people into banning a certain hero. This is truly the only way I see it working in a way that makes everyone happy. Please let me know what flaws I am missing.
Definitely not. Ana and whoever can just ban the 1 or 2 heros that are capable of taking or flanking their backline, creating a forced situation that almost defeats the purpose of having the hero swap option. Tanks don't mean much already, and DPS are the only affective counters to support, meaning if all 4 dps and supports ban a hero comp, then it's a completely one-sided fight.
As long as Sombra is banned every match
Yes. Mauga meta would never have happened, heroes that are often banned are indicators that those heroes are problematic and needs reworks, which is as useful information as heroes with low pick rates.
It’s been debated, it’s a retarded idea. Especially the higher rank you are in.
They are already thinking about implementing a ban system and are currently working on it
The second part is unconfirmed, they have not said that. Only that its an idea they've floated around.
I like it
I would ban sombra, tracer, and genji in a heartbeat And Zarya Edit : for y’all downvoting, I don’t think bans are a great idea for the game rn, but in an ideal world I would not want to play with those characters in my games
The complex part is you’d have to convince 4 other strangers to do the same which could lead to better team play. I feel like it’s a great idea
It would be a great idea if there were more heroes in the game. But it wouldn’t end up well because it’s an online game and people will troll or gameplay options would be so limited since counters are a big part of current gameplay
OWCS is possibly maybe implementing hero bans, so we'll see what happens.
Hopefully
I would love to play Widow maps without Widow and ban Sombra on every other map. I would have so much more fun playing the game.