Overwatch

Anything to do with games at all.
User avatar
jiggles
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: pyxl-8

PostRe: Overwatch
by jiggles » Tue Apr 25, 2017 4:43 pm

Managed to bag a 27 kill streak with D.Va in ranked last night and we somehow still lost the match. I must've went through 7 mechs in the one life.
Streaming: YouTube Gaming | Tweeting: Twitter
User avatar
Jam-Master Jay
Member
Joined in 2008
Location: Stourbridge
Contact:

PostRe: Overwatch
by Jam-Master Jay » Tue Apr 25, 2017 5:20 pm

I've completely given up on competitive. It's just a constant stream of people rage-quitting or spewing salty bile at other players for not playing their preferred way.
ImageImage
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Overwatch
by Hexx » Tue Apr 25, 2017 7:21 pm

Ducking cuntballs

Mumbi attack. Cap CoD, Genji. Junk.Reaper and Hanoi. All trying to sneak and disrupt. No one pushing objective.

Edit - Exact same composition on defense too! All rush the base, get murdered. Instant fail. Ffs this strawberry floating game and it's toxic brain dead player base
User avatar
Qikz
Member ♥
Joined in 2011

PostRe: Overwatch
by Qikz » Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:20 pm

FUUUUUUUUUUCK OH MY GOD THAT NEW D.VA SKIN IS SOOOOOOOO GOOOOOOOOOOOD!

All you need to do to get it, is play 5 Heroes of the Storm games this week and 5 next week. If you play 5 the week after you get lots of Dva stuff and if you play the week after that you get 10 loot boxes for HoTS and Overwatch!

Blizzard are killing it!
Image
The Watching Artist wrote:I feel so inept next to Stay Dead...
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Overwatch
by Hexx » Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:25 pm

Who wants to be my Hots chum?
User avatar
Lagamorph
Member ♥
Joined in 2010

PostRe: Overwatch
by Lagamorph » Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:34 pm

I have Heroes of the Storm installed but have never played it.
Might for D.Va stuff though.
Lagamorph's Underwater Photography Thread
Zellery wrote:Good post Lagamorph.
Turboman wrote:Lagomorph..... Is ..... Right
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Overwatch
by Hexx » Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:40 pm

Hexx#2342
User avatar
Karl
Consider The Following
Consider The Following
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Overwatch
by Karl » Tue Apr 25, 2017 8:56 pm

Apparently you can get Oni Genji this week and Officer D.Va next week. It's 5 grouped-up games with a friend each week if you want the reward. A game of HOTS is apparently ~20 minutes.

I'm kind of tempted to try HOTS this & next week just because it's a bit different and I'd get a couple of skins out of it. I don't think I'll actually like it though, and I don't really play D.Va or Genji, so maybe it's a waste of time...

EDIT: I posted it last page but I'm KarlAM#21661.
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Overwatch
by Hexx » Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:08 pm

I actually might be fine with this. It's crystallised tonight in my head that this a poorly designed/bad game.

Your enjoyment is directly related to the actions of other players. It's near impossible to have a 'good game' if your team isn't playing properly. Most other games (CoDs, Titanfall, Battlefield, Destiny etc) you can still have a good time in a bad match.

I can only see you having a 'good time' in a bad match here if you 'go native' and ignore the objective for nonsense as well. But then you'll still be judged harshly.

It does nothing to actively promote or reward 'good play', and conversely often promotes bad play.

Slightly hyperbolic example I played Lucio. Got Silvers for Kills, Heals and Objective. Jumkrat does strawberry float all to push objective. Get limited killls mostly from his tedious ultimate. He gets play of the game.

We we both get fails. Despite my 'good' play and his 'bad' we both lose skill rating. He gets no feedback on the merits of each - he fact he's received positive feedback! I bet he thinks we held him back. I wandered earlier how people still played badly. It's obvious when you think about it. The game doesn't teach them to do better - in instances it actively does the opposite.

Its amazing how how many people recommend walking away after one, two or three matches.

There's plenty of games people walk away after a while from because it's too tense, or too frantic, or too dry eye can't blink making. I struggle to think of another one that you walk away from because it's design just creates rage.

I wander how late in the game they went with the 'addiction creating' lootbox system. Or rankings. That's how they hook people - constantly dangle a carrot. Oddly enough the 'hooks' for people feel like one of the more felt out elements - but then it comes from the MMO background (or Diablo for seasons). They know how to engender a false sense of accomplishment to keep people engaged in repetitive dumb tasks ;)
User avatar
jiggles
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: pyxl-8

PostRe: Overwatch
by jiggles » Tue Apr 25, 2017 10:49 pm

You can't expect people to work as a team if they don't communicate.
Streaming: YouTube Gaming | Tweeting: Twitter
User avatar
Mafro
Moderator
Joined in 2008
AKA: DAT MAF
Contact:

PostRe: Overwatch
by Mafro » Tue Apr 25, 2017 11:27 pm

HSH28 wrote:Assmung you ever get one that is.

Blog | Twitter
User avatar
Karl
Consider The Following
Consider The Following
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Overwatch
by Karl » Wed Apr 26, 2017 2:58 am

Hexx wrote:I actually might be fine with this. It's crystallised tonight in my head that this a poorly designed/bad game.

Your enjoyment is directly related to the actions of other players. It's near impossible to have a 'good game' if your team isn't playing properly. Most other games (CoDs, Titanfall, Battlefield, Destiny etc) you can still have a good time in a bad match...

...There's plenty of games people walk away after a while from because it's too tense, or too frantic, or too dry eye can't blink making. I struggle to think of another one that you walk away from because it's design just creates rage...


:lol: I don't entirely disagree - Overwatch has problems for sure - but I think this is a bit harsh. Overwatch is fundamentally designed to be an e-sport, in the same domain of games as like Street Fighter. (It still needs tweaking to be a good e-sport, but that's not really relevant here.)

In Street Fighter, beginners button-mash and the most mashy mashers tend to win, which is the opposite of the skillset you need to actually get good at the game. Plenty of people never progress beyond mashing and have tonnes of fun at that level, and that's great, but if your goal is to win consistently then you eventually have to unlearn that and adopt a better strategy, right? In Street Fighter, just knowing how to block and which moves leave you safe to continue blocking will let you stomp someone who's mashing. It's not enough to make you a pro, but it gets you out of that beginner bracket. OTOH, you shouldn't try to do the same ridiculous combos that a real pro would, because it's above your level and it'll make you do worse.

You're at 1400 SR, which means you're a beginner and playing with other beginners. I'm not much better than this myself so I can say from personal experience: beginners have bad aim, bad positioning, bad game sense (i.e. that gut feeling of when to push, when to hold, when to fall back...). Some heroes and strategies excel at exploiting those mistakes and become less relevant as you get better; some heroes and strategies that would be relevant at a higher level don't work when your team as a whole don't meet a certain level of proficiency.

I'm sure you do deserve to rank up, but to achieve that you'll need to adopt a strategy that stomps beginners, rather than one that relies on good team play which you won't get at 1400 SR. Be the Pharah that exploits the fact that their team don't know to look up. Or be the Reinhardt that sticks with the team, then charges the enemy to initiate a battle at the right time. Or be the Mercy that's actually on mic, directing the team to group up and push. You'll be 1000 SR points higher at least - and better ranked than I am! - before these basic, solid tactics stop carrying you (and your teams).

Sorry for the pep talk but it sounded like you needed one ;)
User avatar
Karl
Consider The Following
Consider The Following
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Overwatch
by Karl » Wed Apr 26, 2017 3:05 am

To be fair though I don't play that much Competitive so I can't speak to whether or not it's frustrating long-term. Quick Play is usually more my scene because it's relaxing and funny. :P
User avatar
Dual
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Irene Demova

PostRe: Overwatch
by Dual » Wed Apr 26, 2017 6:50 am

Mafro wrote:


:lol:
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Overwatch
by Hexx » Wed Apr 26, 2017 9:44 am

Karl wrote:
Hexx wrote:I actually might be fine with this. It's crystallised tonight in my head that this a poorly designed/bad game.

Your enjoyment is directly related to the actions of other players. It's near impossible to have a 'good game' if your team isn't playing properly. Most other games (CoDs, Titanfall, Battlefield, Destiny etc) you can still have a good time in a bad match...

...There's plenty of games people walk away after a while from because it's too tense, or too frantic, or too dry eye can't blink making. I struggle to think of another one that you walk away from because it's design just creates rage...


:lol: I don't entirely disagree - Overwatch has problems for sure - but I think this is a bit harsh. Overwatch is fundamentally designed to be an e-sport, in the same domain of games as like Street Fighter. (It still needs tweaking to be a good e-sport, but that's not really relevant here.)

In Street Fighter, beginners button-mash and the most mashy mashers tend to win, which is the opposite of the skillset you need to actually get good at the game. Plenty of people never progress beyond mashing and have tonnes of fun at that level, and that's great, but if your goal is to win consistently then you eventually have to unlearn that and adopt a better strategy, right? In Street Fighter, just knowing how to block and which moves leave you safe to continue blocking will let you stomp someone who's mashing. It's not enough to make you a pro, but it gets you out of that beginner bracket. OTOH, you shouldn't try to do the same ridiculous combos that a real pro would, because it's above your level and it'll make you do worse.

You're at 1400 SR, which means you're a beginner and playing with other beginners. I'm not much better than this myself so I can say from personal experience: beginners have bad aim, bad positioning, bad game sense (i.e. that gut feeling of when to push, when to hold, when to fall back...). Some heroes and strategies excel at exploiting those mistakes and become less relevant as you get better; some heroes and strategies that would be relevant at a higher level don't work when your team as a whole don't meet a certain level of proficiency.

I'm sure you do deserve to rank up, but to achieve that you'll need to adopt a strategy that stomps beginners, rather than one that relies on good team play which you won't get at 1400 SR. Be the Pharah that exploits the fact that their team don't know to look up. Or be the Reinhardt that sticks with the team, then charges the enemy to initiate a battle at the right time. Or be the Mercy that's actually on mic, directing the team to group up and push. You'll be 1000 SR points higher at least - and better ranked than I am! - before these basic, solid tactics stop carrying you (and your teams).

Sorry for the pep talk but it sounded like you needed one ;)


I've been on a journey this season from 1700 to high 1300s (now) - it's a death spiral I just can't see changing with this player base and game systems.

You're comparing a 6vs6 with a 1vs1 though - the feedback to that one person is much clearer.

The feedback and way to improve is a 6vs6 isn't nearly so defined (and as mentioned above features like medals/play of the game actively encourage/reward poor game play)

There's a reason we're nearly a year after release and "the majority" of players encountered in casual don't know how to play the game.

Let's look at your suggestions;

Pharah - relies on other team being terrible
Reinhardt - relies on team gathering up on you (or listening when you request)
Mercy - relies on team gathering up on you (or listening when you request)

It just doesn't happen. In the latter instance for example you get some prick Tracer being arsey "Be my pocket healer" as they run behind enemy lines and die horrible because they're gooseberry fool and then rage quit.

I also note you don't address the central point - it's too easy to have a bad game that's no fun. That's fairly unqiue (urgh) in my experience and points to weak gameplay. I can have terrible terribel curb stomp matches in other games - but I still enjoy my contribution. That doesn't often happen in Overwatch. Oddly enough I was thinking overnight - a 'resign' vote feature might help it. At least then you can try and pull the slot machine again quicker and without as much 'suffering'. [Then again given he frequency that people quit the penalty for quitting isn't bad. Maybe should just use that.]

You can call it a "pep" talk. I've seen through it now (don't meant that to sound all arrogant. I've seen what it is IMO) - a "carrot on stick" system to entice people to play a badly designed game. It's basically Simpsons Tapped Out :P
User avatar
Karl
Consider The Following
Consider The Following
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Overwatch
by Karl » Wed Apr 26, 2017 10:38 am

I don't know what you to tell you -- you're playing with really bad players and you won't adapt your strategy to acknowledge the fact that both your team and the enemy are bad, so of course you're going to be held back by those players. For inspiration, here is a guy who played only support characters and ranked up from Bronze to Grandmaster. I haven't watched all the videos but maybe they'll help, particularly the ones in Bronze/Silver.

Pick one or two heroes that are impactful - I made some suggestions you didn't like, so go ahead and decide what you think will have the most impact in the games you play :P - insist on playing them all the time, and play them really well. You don't have to carry every game, but to rank up you have to have enough impact that you win more games than you lose. The enemy has 6 randos and you have 5 randos plus yourself. If you're losing more games than you win then that might well be because you're trying to play 'properly' and your team aren't, but by the metric of winning it's actually you holding them back. You've got to change that or you'll be stuck in Bronze with idiots forever.

I don't actually mind if you think Overwatch is good or not but it kind of sounds like you're just upset or frustrated about being a low rank. ;)

For what it's worth, I very rarely have games that are no fun. I'm not gonna say it never happens, but I really like the characters I play, I find them inherently fun no matter what's going on around me. I play quick play primarily so I'm used to bad team compositions and no communication, but I don't see how I could possibly get stressed out playing Lucio or Mei ( :wub: ) or Winston, they are relaxing and hilarious. :D
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Overwatch
by Hexx » Wed Apr 26, 2017 10:55 am

Karl wrote:I don't know what you to tell you -- you're playing with really bad players and you won't adapt your strategy to acknowledge the fact that both your team and the enemy are bad, so of course you're going to be held back by those players. For inspiration, here is a guy who played only support characters and ranked up from Bronze to Grandmaster. I haven't watched all the videos but maybe they'll help, particularly the ones in Bronze/Silver.

Pick one or two heroes that are impactful - I made some suggestions you didn't like, so go ahead and decide what you think will have the most impact in the games you play :P - insist on playing them all the time, and play them really well. You don't have to carry every game, but to rank up you have to have enough impact that you win more games than you lose. The enemy has 6 randos and you have 5 randos plus yourself. If you're losing more games than you win then that might well be because you're trying to play 'properly' and your team aren't, but by the metric of winning it's actually you holding them back. You've got to change that or you'll be stuck in Bronze with idiots forever.

I don't actually mind if you think Overwatch is good or not but it kind of sounds like you're just upset or frustrated about being a low rank. ;)

For what it's worth, I very rarely have games that are no fun. I'm not gonna say it never happens, but I really like the characters I play, I find them inherently fun no matter what's going on around me. I play quick play primarily so I'm used to bad team compositions and no communication, but I don't see how I could possibly get stressed out playing Lucio or Mei ( :wub: ) or Winston, they are relaxing and hilarious. :D



You can adapt strategy - listed on previous pages a variety of heroes. But it's rare to swing gameplay. (Which comes back to another issue that permeates Overwatch that the skill to defend effectively is much much lower than skill to break it. There's huge imbalances for skill required to be effectiveness)

A game on Hanabi last night. I get a 22 kill streak protecting the objective. Every other strawberry floater is either glass or kill hunting BY their base. They die every time in seconds and only Symetra's OP turrets keep the game going. Oh wait Junkrat used his Super at the last mo and gets PoTG...and we all get minus 25 SR.

I'm not frustrated by low rank. I'm aterribleplayer - bad eyes, bad reactions and generally incompetent. Rank doesn't overly bother me (yey a gold gun for one character you might see sometime) but it just further pushes you into the boring dregs.

I'm bored and frustrated by poor and unrewarding game play and terrible decisions.

Tell you what. Defend this design choice

"We're going to adjust your Skill Rating (amount based, somehow, compared to players that played your character in other games) but the direction of movement will be determined nearly entirely by 5 randoms we picked."

but to rank up you have to have enough impact that you win more games than you lose


Except that's not actually true/ Depending on the SR movements for each game varying by class/contribution. You can quire easily win more than you lose and still end up overall down on Skill Rating.
User avatar
Karl
Consider The Following
Consider The Following
Joined in 2008
Contact:

PostRe: Overwatch
by Karl » Wed Apr 26, 2017 1:19 pm

Sure, OK. I guess if you find low ranks boring but aren't good enough to rank up then yeah, you're stuck. In that sense I agree with you in that I can understand why you are frustrated, it sounds like you might need to choose a different game that you are naturally better at. :P

I'm not convinced that this is entirely Overwatch's fault though. Any team-based game is going to suffer from lack of teamwork at the lowest of low ranks (which is what Bronze is). You can quibble about whether medals and plays of the game are to an extent negative reinforcement, but three of the medals are "objective kills," "objective time," and "healing done," many of the cards are for things like damage blocked, and those 'awards' aren't the basis of SR anyway. Being 'on fire' is the closest we have to a window into internal SR bonuses - and getting on the objective gives you fire points, and if you're on fire most of the game you get a card, and if you gain a lot of fire in a short amount of time you're more likely to get POTG... - but it's still pretty far off from what we know about how the SR system works.

The SR system rewards winning primarily, but also rewards you based on a variety of (sometimes hidden) metrics that say, "given his rank and hero, did he do more winner-like things than loser-like things this match?" Note that it doesn't decide based on how the developers think the game should be played, it judges you statistically by comparing your actions to those of winners and losers in other games. (By far the easiest way to game this system is to die less often. When you're dead you can't 'score' on any of these metrics, whereas when you're alive & doing stuff you're probably 'scoring' on at least some of them. But anyway...)

The defence of the design choice is that it would take ages for very good players to rank up (and for very bad players who were misplaced to rank down) if you didn't 'accelerate' the process by assessing the person's skill. I don't think this is necessarily optimal - perhaps it should be straight win/loss with the only modifier as your team SR compared to their team SR, or something - but I don't think it's what's holding you back either. I dunno, I haven't seen your games so maybe it really is gimping you. Sorry if that's the case. It's hard to know without looking over your shoulder as you play. ;)

But like I said, I don't really understand your mindset because I genuinely enjoy playing the heroes I play even when I'm losing and my teammates are bad. I play Lucio, Mei, and Winston because they constantly interact with the enemy in funny ways (both in terms of their gameplay mechanics, but also their voicelines and stuff) and I find it very amusing and fun. :D That's primarily what I get out of Overwatch. If I get matches with good teamplay then that adds another element I enjoy a lot, but I have fun pissing around too, which I guess is why I really like the game as a whole even though I'm ranked low and you don't. It's not like I get frustrated if I have a few 'bad' matches because I'm almost always playing one of the three heroes I really like. (That's not a judgement of you, just my hypothesis as to where we differ.)
User avatar
Dual
Member
Joined in 2008
AKA: Irene Demova

PostRe: Overwatch
by Dual » Wed Apr 26, 2017 1:24 pm

Mei players :X
User avatar
Hexx
Member
Joined in 2008

PostRe: Overwatch
by Hexx » Wed Apr 26, 2017 1:35 pm

Karl wrote:Sure, OK. I guess if you find low ranks boring but aren't good enough to rank up then yeah, you're stuck. In that sense I agree with you in that I can understand why you are frustrated, it sounds like you might need to choose a different game that you are naturally better at. :P

You asked me about SR. The SR system rewards winning primarily, but also rewards you based on a variety of (sometimes hidden) metrics that say, "given his rank and hero, did he do more winner-like things than loser-like things this match?" Note that it doesn't decide based on how the developers think the game should be played, it judges you statistically by comparing your actions to those of winners and losers in other games. (By far the easiest way to game this system is to die less often. When you're dead you can't 'score' on any of these metrics, whereas when you're alive & doing stuff you're probably 'scoring' on at least some of them. But anyway...)

The defence of the design choice is that it would take ages for very good players to rank up (and for very bad players who were misplaced to rank down) if you didn't 'accelerate' the process by assessing the person's skill.


It's completely contradictory.

"We'll give you a numeral by assessing you personally"

"We'll give you a + or - in front of it based on 5 randos were dragged in from the slurry pit next door"

You can't argue they accelerate the process by assessing a players skill, when they slow down the process for good players (and mediocre, at best :P) players by assessing the random teams "skill" via a simple win/loss mechanic.

But like I said, I don't really understand your mindset because I genuinely enjoy playing the heroes I play even when I'm losing and my teammates are bad. I play Lucio, Mei, and Winston because they constantly interact with the enemy in funny ways (both in terms of their gameplay mechanics, but also their voicelines and stuff) and I find it very amusing and fun. :D That's primarily what I get out of Overwatch. If I get matches with good teamplay then that adds another element I enjoy a lot, but I have fun pissing around too, which I guess is why I really like the game as a whole even though I'm ranked low and you don't. It's not like I get frustrated if I have a few 'bad' matches because I'm almost always playing one of the three heroes I really like. (That's not a judgement of you, just my hypothesis as to where we differ.)


Yeah ok. If were an ADD suger hi 11 year old running around not caring about winning or losing, doing my own thing with characters I enjoy, not worrying about contribution and singing "Mei so Bae" and writing erotic fanfiction I'd enjoy Overwatch ;)

Basically you are the players I'm whinging about :P

That's a judgement by the way. I am judging you. A lot. :slol: ;)

Return to “Games”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Godzilla, irishguy2008, jawafour, KjGarly, NickSCFC, Rich, SerialCeler, Shug5891, Trelliz, Xeno and 30 guests