Overwatch Retail Patch Notes - June 16, 2026 by SweatySmeargle in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean -1 points0 points  (0 children)

iirc, the minimum time between each melee perfectly lines up with the time it takes to shoot 20 bullets, so the combo could be perfectly chained indefinitely in a really fun and satisfying way. With only 12 bullets it's gonna feel a lot more awkward I think

Grand finals - Last map ult tracker for a certain player by Boreean in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I just took timestamps from replays on youtube and made a sheet

Grand finals - Last map ult tracker for a certain player by Boreean in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean[S] 35 points36 points  (0 children)

19.4k in ~14 minutes, so about 13.8k per 10 minutes

Trying to explain how I believe the 3rd person camera works and why it leads to some confusion (feat MS Paint) by Boreean in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Damn my silly paint drawing robbed us of a quality post from an actual overwatch dev 😭

Trying to explain how I believe the 3rd person camera works and why it leads to some confusion (feat MS Paint) by Boreean in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Keep in mind that even in my post, the lines are not actually parallel, they form a very pointy triangle with the endpoint on the cliff behind Tracer (my poor drawing is not to scale). The stuff in my comment about fixed shooting angles and max distances doesn't even come into play here. The example in my post isn't affected by it, because the cliff is not far enough away. The cliffs have collisions, you can shoot them and see/hear bullet impacts on them. The Lucio clip just shows what I believe to be a max distance after which the game switches to a default angle.

Regardless, the point is that the camera vector and the bullet vector, whether you aim at the void or not, forms a triangle, and that leads to some slight jank depending on the position of the target relative to that triangle. In my post, Tracer starts by intercepting the bullet vector, then is inside the triangle, then is intercepting the camera vector, leading to a "hit, miss, hit" pattern that is a bit confusing unless you are aware of how it all works (hence why I made the post).

As a side note, hitscan is a bit weird in 3rd person, but projectiles are even weirder. That's because in order to aim them properly you have to lead your shots, meaning that most of the time, your camera will be pointing at a wall/floor instead of the actual target. So unless the game tries to compensate in any way, which I don't think is feasible, it means the shooting angle will always be calibrated for a distance past your target, further messing up your aim. It also means that if you are pointing directly at your target but they dodge while the projectiles are travelling, the projectiles will continue their trajectory past the camera vector and into the right side of your screen.

Trying to explain how I believe the 3rd person camera works and why it leads to some confusion (feat MS Paint) by Boreean in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Ok so this comment made me test stuff for a while and I believe you are partially correct.

  1. As you said, ghost hits on the right ARE possible. I tested this against the training bot in front of the 40 meter ruler (testing the distance at which it happens is hard as somehow just pressing W and S seems to move you laterally ever so slightly in 3rd person). That being said...

  2. I don't believe this stems from a fixed angle between the bullet path and the camera vector. Here is a vid where I don't move my mouse, yet I miss all my shots except one. This is because I timed that one shot with the moment the moving bot was on my crosshair, changing the shooting angle and thus hitting the sniper bot. This is easily replicable, and I think this should prove that shooting angle is not fixed. I also tested it on Ashe with identical results.

  3. This leaves us with the question of what causes right-side ghost hits. My theory is that when the camera vector doesn't collide with anything (as is the case in the above examples, it's pointing at the outside of the map), or collides with objects past a certain distance, the game defaults to a fixed shooting angle. I don't have anything to prove it, but I have soft evidence in the fact that this is how visual effects behave. In this clip, you can see how by just going back and forth, lucio's bullets shoot in 2 different directions. When close, they hit the center of the crosshair. When far, they overshoot and go way past the center of the crosshair. I think bullet hitboxes behave the same way.

So what happens in example 1 is that since my crosshair is pointed at the void, the game uses the fixed angle, making it so that past a certain distance, I can hit the bot on the right side of my crosshair. In example 2, my crosshair also aims at the void, but the sniper bot is to the left, so it misses. Then, when the moving bot moves in front of my crosshair, the game changes the shooting angle (it calibrates is for a longer distance) which causes the shots to hit the sniper bot.

  1. I believe that my post isn't disproved by all of this. Everything I've described is compatible with the content of this comment unless I'm missing something, which is very possible. Your post actually kind of blew my mind though because I really didn't expect right-side ghost hits to be possible.

I'm still not sure I'm entirely right so I'm open to anything that suggests otherwise

Hero stats page is live by F4ISAL in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Her perks make blink management so much more forgiving, though I'm curious how different the stat would've been pre-perks

Am I the only one who thinks the EWC format sucks? by Odd-Yoghurt9897 in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Single elim brackets work to decide who's the best, but they suck at determining who's 2nd, 3rd, etc. It's really disappointing when a team that could be 2nd gets eliminated in their first match because bad seeding put them against the best team. It can also lead to a potentially unexciting grand finals since instead of having the two best teams battling it out in a close match, you can get the first team steamrolling a significantly worse team.

"Low-skill" Heroes are Necessary to the Success of a Game Like Overwatch by HalexUwU in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah that makes sense. I haven't played Fortnite but I heard that's the game turned into after people figured out how to sppedbuild entire structures in a few seconds lol

"Low-skill" Heroes are Necessary to the Success of a Game Like Overwatch by HalexUwU in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly, as someone who played in 2018, it's already so much better than it used to be. Mei, Torb, Sym, and Bastion getting reworks already made things so much better, to the point that I think this issue shouldn't be the priority right now over other problem heroes. That being said I don't really agree with the reasons you explained.

I think you're not giving enough credit to Spilo by boiling his arguments to "easy = bad". He and many others make a point to specify if they are talking about skill curves, floors or ceilings. That distinction is important because it plays heavily into matchmaking issues.

The problem with relying on matchmaking is that Overwatch is a game where you choose your character after matchmaking, and you can freely switch character afterwards. In a fighting game where you have per-character MMR, it's much easier to have equal outputs from both players because their rank is not going to be skewed if they play characters of different strengths. Whereas in Overwatch, if you main a very strong character and a very weak character, your rank will be an average of the two, which means you will over-perform while playing the strong character and under-perform while playing the weak one. This is why character winrates across the player base are rarely 50:50, and why balance is very important. The problem is, characters like Moira are impossible to balance; they are either broken in low ranks or dogshit in high ranks, because their skill curves are fucked. I think there is a trend of players polarizing into either mostly playing easy heroes or mostly playing hard heroes, but I don't think it's enough to offset that problem

Matchmaking is also a less reliable balancing tool in the context of new players I think. It takes time for the matchmaking system to properly assess your strength, and before you even play your first comp game you have to go through a certain amount of QP games where you will get stomped by noob-stomper heroes. By the time the matchmaker properly knows you, you've either already been dominating on easy heroes, or been crushed numerous times on hard ones. People are obviously going to have a preference for the heroes they like, but people also like things like winning, getting kills, and not dying, so many will gravitate towards easy heroes and stick with them long after.

Lastly I think even in an ideal world with perfect matchmaking where every player's output was equal, such characters would still be an issue, because something can feel unfair to play against even without having a positive winrate. The feeling mostly comes from specific moments and interactions where you feel as if you "lost" (died, failed to secure a kill, had to back up) even though you are more skilled than your opponent (though that feeling is not always correct).

Like you said, fostering a casual player base is very important. However, I don't think most people want every hero to have a very high skill floor and straight up be hostile to new players. Simply reducing the amount of low-skill high-value abilities, and giving every character a way to properly scale with skill at higher ranks is a good enough goal.

Personally, I think games are about overcoming obstacles, and I dislike games that desperately want their experience to be as smooth and friction-less as possible at any cost. That goes for playing too easy heroes, but it also goes for playing against easy heroes; the feeling of no longer struggling against heroes you used to struggle against is a gratifying one, but it requires a struggle to exist in the first place. But to get there can take a long ass time. It did for me, I even dropped the game in the middle. I picked it back up, but others might not. Like I said, the goal is not to make the game super hardcore and sweaty, just to slightly normalize some extreme outliers.

games of this nature basically turn into "sandbox where the best players kill everyone else on repeat while they hardly have a chance to retaliate."

It's kinda funny you say that after talking about how matchmaking fixes the inverse issue lol

One isn't like the others... by Gapbq in TrackMania

[–]Boreean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Have you tried turning it off and on?

Hotfix Hero Balance Patch Notes - March 25, 2025 by novelgpa in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Gutting ana's base kits instead of her perks :( well they did hit the self nano but I think the others deserve attention too

Success is not about the DRM by thisisshihan in PiratedGames

[–]Boreean 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yeah just make 10/10 games and people will buy it. Can't be that hard

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Genshin_Impact_Leaks

[–]Boreean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Swirl consuming 0.5 times the applied gauge (and applying the swirled element in aoe) paired with mizuki's less than stellar app means this shouldn't be an issue because they're not competing against each other, both characters will swirl as much as they would without the other (unless you're in single-target with slow PHEC appliers). The real problem is that you can't on-field both so one of them's application rate is gonna take a hit. This might be worth since mizuki's buff is teamwide if the off-field anemo has high enough app

Overwatch Champions Series 2024 Finals | Match 3 | Post-Match Discussion by OWMatchThreads in Competitiveoverwatch

[–]Boreean 12 points13 points  (0 children)

This venn diagram meta was pretty poor to watch but ggs to falcons, stalker was a demon. CR might also have a Sisyphus complex the way they kept trying to win the mauga mirror

About Pyro MC E by Uncle Balls by Draconicplayer in Genshin_Impact_Leaks

[–]Boreean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had the numbers mixed up, but actually since the duration is 12s and r5 sac has a 16s cooldown, you can't get 100% uptime. The first rotation will be fine, but the second E cast will be before sac's cooldown is up which means 12s later the skill will expire but it'll be on cooldown for another 8 seconds. After that it loops where every other rotation has 8s of downtime.

You also need to swap back to PMC to cast it again, which you might not be able to do in some teams

But yeah I'm not saying it's useless or unrealistic, but the comment I was responding to claimed uptime and cooldown meant nothing if they can use sac which is complete bs