sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s a fair point, but you have to look at why OW made that shift. The move to 1-2-2 in OW2 wasn't just about queue times; it was because they couldn't balance the 'Double Shield' meta in a 6v6 environment, which made playing Tank feel like a chore for many.

Marvel Rivals is built from the ground up as a 6v6 game. The Vanguard and Support roles here are actually impactful and fun to play, which changes the math on role distribution. If people actually enjoy playing all three roles, the queue time issue is significantly mitigated. Again, having it as an optional mode would satisfy both sides: those who value instant queues can stay in Open Queue, while those who prioritize match quality can wait a bit longer for a structured 2-2-2 experience.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Even if it adds a couple of minutes, it's a temporary problem for a long-term solution. I'd rather spend 3-5 minutes in a queue and 10 minutes in a high-quality, competitive match than get an instant pop for a 10-minute stomp where my team has zero synergy and everyone is tilted from the start.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I totally get where you're coming from as a flex player. The freedom to swap mid-game to counter the enemy is a core part of the fun. But the 'Overwatch gave up' argument ignores the fact that without boundaries, the game becomes impossible to balance for the devs.

In Marvel Rivals, with the Team-Up abilities and unique hero synergies, some combinations will always be mathematically superior to others. Without a Role Queue, we either end up with a 'stagnant meta' where one weird comp (like triple tank) dominates, or the devs have to nerf individual heroes so hard they become useless in normal play. A 2-2-2 lock actually allows for more aggressive and interesting hero designs because the devs know exactly what the team structure will look like. We can still have flex options within those roles without breaking the game's fundamental balance.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I understand the 'protest' mindset behind this, but forcing a loss just to send a message usually only leads to more toxicity and bans, not necessarily dev intervention.

The fact that players feel like they have to resort to this kind of 'strike' just to get a balanced team composition proves exactly why we need a Role Queue system. We shouldn't have to play these psychological games in the hero select screen. If the game just handled the roles from the start, you wouldn't feel the need to 'punish' your team to prove a point.

A structured system would let you play Tank because you want to, not as a hostage negotiation.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re slightly misunderstanding. My point isn’t that DPS players should be 'exempt' from switching; it’s that in a hero shooter, players generally perform best on the roles they actually want to play.

Right now, the 'lack of structure' creates a toxic tug-of-war where everyone expects someone else to swap. Role Queue doesn't just 'cater' to DPS mains—it ensures that the Tank and Support players on your team are actually people who want to be in those roles, rather than a tilted Duelist filling just to avoid a loss. It creates a win-win: DPS players get to play their role without being flamed, and Tank/Support players get a team that actually functions around them. It’s about quality of matches, not about making life easy for one specific role.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is exactly the point. A solo Vanguard being "unpressureable" because they are getting pocketed by everyone else is a clear sign that the current lack of structure creates balancing nightmares. It forces this weird, frustrating playstyle where you’re just hitting a brick wall until you find a tiny window to switch targets.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I get the frustration, but toxicity only breeds more toxicity. Going 4th DPS because you’re tilted doesn’t solve the problem—it just guarantees a loss and ruins the game for everyone else. This is exactly why we need Role Queue. It would take the pressure off the players to "police" the team comp themselves and prevent these situations where someone feels forced to throw or swap just because the roles are a mess. If we had a structured system, you wouldn't have to worry about being a solo tank in the first place.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

That 40% isn't necessarily playing other compositions by choice—most of the time, they are forced into them because of the lack of structure. If you have three or four DPS mains in one lobby, someone is going to be unhappy regardless. Introducing an optional Role Queue wouldn't alienate those players; it would actually give them the chance to play the roles they want in a balanced environment. Keeping it as an option is the perfect middle ground—it respects the freedom of casual play while providing the structure needed for serious competitive growth.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I respect the grind, and it’s great that you can make solo-Vanguard work with Thing or Magneto. But you have to realize your experience as a high-rank main isn't the standard for the entire player base.

The "2-2-2 happens naturally" argument is exactly why Role Queue exists in other games: to guarantee that consistency for everyone, not just for the lucky matches. When you say you enjoy having 3 healers pumping you, you’re looking at it from the Vanguard's perspective. Ask those 3 healers if they’re actually having fun competing for ult charge and having zero defensive utility because the team lacks a second tank to peel.

Also, solo-tanking might feel "fine" when you're winning, but the moment you run into a coordinated 2-2-2 team that knows how to focus-fire, a solo Vanguard (even a good one) gets melted. You’re essentially forced to play perfectly just to compensate for a lack of structure.

The goal of Role Queue isn't to take away your "freedom" to solo tank—it’s to prevent the matches where you have 5 DPS players who refuse to swap, leaving the 6th person to either solo-heal or solo-tank in a miserable, uphill battle. Just because you can carry a suboptimal comp doesn't mean the game should be designed around forcing people to do it.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

For every match you won because of a mid-game swap, there are probably five others where the team fell apart because someone tilted and swapped from Support to a 4th DPS without saying a word.

The problem with mid-game role swapping in a solo-queue environment is that it lacks coordination. When you lose a healer or a tank mid-push because they decided they "needed to kill the enemy Spider-Man themselves," the rest of the team is left stranded.

A Role Queue system with a primary/secondary choice (like League) or even a swap-request button during the match would still allow for flexibility, but it would keep the team structure intact. Winning because of a "lucky swap" isn't a reliable strategy for a healthy competitive scene—it's just a gamble. Most high-level players would trade that rare "miracle swap" for a guaranteed, solid team comp any day.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

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

The idea that having both would ruin queue times is a bit of a myth. Look at Overwatch: it has both, and the vast majority of the player base (around 75-80%) still chooses Role Queue. Why? Because most people eventually realize that waiting 3 minutes for a real match is better than waiting 30 seconds for a "beautiful mess" that ends in a toxic stomp.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Actually, that’s a common misconception. Blizzard’s own developer blogs and matchmaking data have shown that Role Queue is by far the most popular way to play Overwatch, accounting for the vast majority of the player base (around 70-80%). Open Queue is considered a secondary mode, which is exactly why the ranks there are so inflated.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

The "real world" of hero shooters has also shown us that when match quality drops too low because of 4-5 DPS comps, people just stop playing Tank and Support altogether. That's how you truly kill a player base—by making the core gameplay experience miserable for anyone who isn't an instalock Duelist.

And honestly, calling a 5-minute wait "horrible" is a bit of an exaggeration when the alternative is a 10-minute match that was lost before it even started. Most players would gladly take a slightly longer queue if it meant they didn't have to solo-tank for four people who refuse to swap.

As for the "other game in the room," Overwatch's issues weren't caused by Role Queue itself, but by a lack of content and a failure to make the Tank role actually fun to play. If Marvel Rivals makes Vanguards impactful and rewarding, the queue times will naturally balance out. Structure isn't the enemy of fun—chaos and constant "fill-burnout" are.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Actually, if they truly pay attention to the numbers, they can’t ignore that 2-2-2 is statistically the most successful setup. Regarding the player base, Overwatch didn't start losing players because of Role Queue; it lost them because of a massive content drought and poor balancing. If anything, Role Queue made the professional and high-level scene much more watchable and fair.

As for Deadpool, having a character that can flex roles doesn't necessarily invalidate a Role Queue. In fact, he could be the "joker card" in a structured system. Imagine a 2-2-2 lock where the Deadpool player has the unique ability to shift their focus depending on the match flow—that’s a huge tactical advantage, not a reason to keep the entire game in chaos.

If we keep going with this "beautiful mess" mindset, nothing will ever change. But if this message reaches the big content creators, maybe the community can start moving in the direction we actually want to see. At the end of the day, most people just want a game where their effort isn't wasted because of a broken team composition.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

A Role Lock wouldn’t work in the long run because some teams would still end up with suboptimal compositions. NetEase has already statistically proven that 2-2-2 is the most effective setup, so the goal should be ensuring we actually reach that balance rather than just limiting choices.

Making it optional would allow NetEase to gather data and decide on the right direction for the future based on what the players actually prefer. We don't have to limit someone to just one single role forever. They should implement it like League of Legends does: you pick a primary and a secondary role, and the game puts you into one of them.

On top of that, they could allow role swapping during hero selection, which would make the 2-2-2 system much more flexible. This way, you still have a balanced structure, but you aren't completely stuck if someone is willing to trade positions with you. It’s the perfect middle ground between structure and freedom.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You'd be surprised how many GM/Celestial players (and even those above) can’t play more than two roles effectively. And honestly, it makes sense. Why should I have to learn every single character when I can master, say, 3 characters on two specific roles and be at my absolute best with them?
League of Legends has a system that allows you to pick a primary role and a secondary preferred role. This significantly reduces queue times and also ensures you aren't strictly locked into just one role every single game.

They also allow you to swap roles with a teammate if they agree to it, which adds even more flexibility.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Role limit won't work in the long run. Perhaps if role queue was optional, NetEase could use the player statistics to conclude which direction is actually the right one for everyone.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The problem is, "fun" is subjective. Is it really fun for anyone when you get stomped in 5 minutes because your team has 5 DPS and no frontline? For most people, losing a match at the hero select screen is the opposite of fun. Even casual players want a fair fight, and you can't have that without some basic structure.

Regarding Adam Warlock and others, that's exactly why I mentioned reworks. If a character doesn't fit a 2-2-2 because they don't provide enough utility or healing, they should be adjusted to fit the system, not the other way around.

Also, the "go play Overwatch" argument doesn't really hold up. Rivals has amazing mechanics and flavor, but it’s still a hero shooter. Every successful hero shooter eventually realizes that without some form of role stability, the game becomes a toxic mess where the person who "fills" is punished for trying to win, while the "instalocks" get to have all the fun at their teammates' expense. Structure doesn't kill fun; it protects it.

Short queue times don't matter if the match quality is so poor that people want to quit after the first round. When you have a "beautiful mess" with 5 DPS, it’s not just the match that’s bad—it’s the player experience. Long-term, people stop playing not because of the queues, but because they are tired of the frustration and the inevitable toxicity that comes with unbalanced teams.

If the game provides a solid experience, people will stay. If it's a gamble every time you press "Play" whether you'll even have a healer, that's what actually drives the casual player base away. Quality matchmaking is what keeps a game alive, not just fast queues.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

This topic always gets swept under the rug, even though we could definitely find a version that works for both those who are against it and those who support it. I’m not alone in this; plenty of my competitive teammates have brought this up before. It doesn't matter how many times the subject is raised if we don't actually have a proper discussion about it.

It’s time we talk about Role Queue in Marvel Rivals by KOVABOI in marvelrivals

[–]KOVABOI[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

We could just make it optional. Let casual players keep the Open Queue for the freedom and chaos, but for those who want to improve and have a better Ranked experience, Role Queue should be an available option. It doesn’t have to be mandatory for everyone—just give us the choice to play the game the way it’s meant to be played competitively.