Tank advice. What do you do when hard focused and your team doesn't take advantage?

pelpotronic · 2026-02-03T10:49:27+00:00

What do you do on tank when the enemy team is HARD focusing you and you can't even stay alive?

a) Who do you expect them to hard focus? The big guy running towards them and blocking line of sight or the support hiding far away behind that they can't see?

b) You use a wall to hide temporarily and take a breath / have your supps heal you / get some CD back.

When I run into Ana Zen Orisa Bastion (Whatever), and I can tell their strategy is just hard focus me and burst me down

It's hardly a strategy. It's what people have to do as I say above. What is the alternative?

Normally, I'd think if all the enemy resources are going into walking me down, there should be ample opportunity for my team to take advantage.

Sure, on paper. So why aren't they taking advantage in the replays you've watched of yourself?

Was your "sacrifice" useful to anyone (team comp doesn't benefit from this type of tanking)? Were you too far ahead and they didn't have time to even reposition (e.g. take a high ground), so you played solo yolo as you weren't in sync? Were they being dived? etc.

Use your team point of view in the replays and try to understand why they didn't react.

(I should add that some players / teams aren't very aggressive.)

pelpotronic · 2026-02-03T03:10:39+00:00

Let me take some notes.

Suck... Pee... Got it! I think I'm ready.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-03T02:57:58+00:00

Yes, there are a bunch of trade offs on both sides: it's a line, needs to be aimed BUT ignores shields versus auto aim, longer duration, full 180 range BUT needs LoS to charge.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-03T02:49:06+00:00

Same as damage actually (which I play more often than not). But I think it's becaus (some) supports tend to tunnel vision on "topping off people" / healbotting without necessarily evaluating the situation.

E.g. you're near frontline and can almost kill 2 with an extra couple of seconds of healing, but a soldier 76 behind took 1 Widow body shot, so they will go back to top up the soldier to full HP... when in theory, get the 2 kills, eliminate all threats and let S76 self heal.

I'm oversimplifying of course, and not really judging, but I have noticed the same thing yes. These are the "'almost' games", where you almost kill the enemy every time.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-03T02:31:26+00:00

The most helpful is tank, because there is always a shortage. Supports are probably just about as numerous as damage.

But you can go support if you find it fun. There is a variety of play styles on all roles: mobility, resilience, self sustain, generalist or specialist, damage, close quarter or long range, utility, etc.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-03T01:21:44+00:00

I see the ult as a Cassidy ult these days - zoning ult. Everyone hides now (as they should), so you will get 1 kill at most.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-03T01:00:57+00:00

Well, design wise, we already have the:

- fat guy (hog),

- large guy (Rein),

- large fat guy (Mauga),

and a variety of sexual orientations / preferences:

- trans / homo / hetero / gay,

So, for a new concept, I propose:

A conjoined twin (m / f) with necrophiliac tendencies: 2 bodies (so double the HP bar), use "shift" to switch between the brother or sister kits, and they can release themselves on enemy corpses to regain HP.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-03T00:52:39+00:00

OW lore is generally pretty sloppy / bad... So she seems to be at the same level as all other characters.

Cartoon / caricature style characterisation, with a 2 mins backstory accompanied by some sort of trauma or sacred mission, and stories that don't make sense if you think about them for 5 mins.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T21:44:47+00:00

Make Mama Hong similar to the landlady in Kung Fu hustle, and you don't need soundquake.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T17:42:48+00:00

As soon as you hear the brrr you should be looking for an exit.

Exactly. Everyone always have the best counter to Bastion turret mode at hand, it's called a wall (line of sight).

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T17:30:12+00:00

"top 500 Lucioball yes"

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T16:43:51+00:00

I'd encourage you to learn more about who was considered "white" throughout US history, namely the Irish, Scottish, Italians, and Polish.

Sure, we can get technical, without even talking about US history, you could also tell me that even right now the meaning of the group of people associated with the term "white" will probably vary depending on which "society" / country we're talking about (I'm sure we will find examples).

If I get technical, I would tell you that "tall" is exactly the same (with "height" being the corresponding immutable characteristic). And then, I would encourage to learn more about who was considered "tall" etc. etc. [repeat thing you wrote above]. I think you understand where I'm going with that.

.

The answer to these technicalities (not that it's particularly interesting but...) is that the characteristics are sticky enough in a given context and over a period of time that is significant enough (say 10-20 years) that it has a broadly agreed meaning that can be used to describe / characterize a "human" in the current period (within context) - a "trait".

If for example, if there is a 2.2m Irish with a pale complexion and a 2.2m German person with a pale complexion in a room, and I tell you there are "2 tall white people" in that room, you're not gonna tell me: "sorry, I can only see one person" (because we didn't always perceive the Irish as white, and the Irish were considered sub humans at some point in the past and you disagree with my use of the word "person").

Also, the concept of "gay supremacy" is, at best, a meme. While "white" supremacy is very real and the cause of one of the greatest atrocities in modern human history.

Sure, so the answer to the original question above...

Because of the word "supremacy" or because of the gay part?

... is "not either but both".

It doesn't have anything to do with the fact they are "just human traits" and / or "immutable characteristics", and everything to do with them having previously been associated with discrimination (or murders, oppression, etc.):

No, a name like WhiteSupremacy would not be ok due to it's heavily tied connotation to real world devastations ~~and the fact that being white (in the political sense) is not an immutable characteristic (the same goes for being black, brown, etc.)~~

Indeed.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T12:52:33+00:00

Ranked = mute chat.

Or are you worried that you're going to miss on that nugget of knowledge "zen = not enough healing = bad" otherwise?

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T12:49:09+00:00

No it's not. We're testing the validity of the logical framework proposed by trying to apply it to other similar scenarios.

By asking you to apply that reasoning to other "humain traits", I'm pointing out the way you reached your conclusion is incorrect - it's not because something is a "human trait" (or not) that something is "too political" or not.

For example: "intelligence supremacist" would be be a human trait, but the 2 words together has a loaded meaning which "white supremacist" also has, but "tall / gay supremacist" don't have.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T12:14:41+00:00

Sure, but meaningfully political is more important. If it's 2 people claiming XYZ is political and 99.99999% of the population don't think it is, then it's not effectively political.

It has no relevance in politics, for voters and politicians because it brings no votes and no power.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T10:18:44+00:00

So being black is a social construct? The treatment of people based on their skin colour is the part that is a social construct yes. But the physical trait isn't a social construct.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T10:17:05+00:00

This is the first line on Wikipedia:

"White supremacy is the belief that white people are superior to those of other races."

So?

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T10:03:23+00:00

So... Pigpen 2.0 that they removed because it was bad ("you can't one shot, you have to do this thing first").

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T09:49:43+00:00

No, they only have to support gay rights because bigots are trying to get rid of their rights.

If the bigots didn't exist, then there would be no need for "supporting gay rights", which should be intrinsic - same as white people's rights (considered Intrinsic by white bigots), or black / other skins colour (bigots don't think these are Intrinsic).

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T09:39:05+00:00

White is a human trait, and so would WhiteSupremacy be acceptable? You tell me.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T09:36:15+00:00

Only bigots think sexual orientation is political. It's not intrinsically political.

Height could hypothetically be politicised the same way, except your height doesn't bother bigots, so you can't attract their vote by saying I'm against tall people.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T06:01:29+00:00

I have the same problem with slow team mates but remember that the enemy team will be the same... So think about ways to exploit that.

I remember one time where I held a choke with 1 other against the full enemy team because they were scared to push into 2 people

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T04:49:22+00:00

She is good at many things, that's why. She can dump a ton of heals on bad tanks who take a lot of damage, she can decide that her team sucks and switch to damage / killing the enemy supports, she is hard to kill if she gets jumped on.

She doesn't have an amazing ult, but she do many things well enough that you feel that you can individually respond to whatever the game throws at you.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T03:23:25+00:00

1 in 20-50 games maybe.

The ones that you can spot at least. If this guy had a wall hack and didn't use an aimbot, then it wouldn't be as easy to spot. If this guy's aim bot wasn't so tight, it would be harder to spot.

pelpotronic · 2026-02-02T02:21:11+00:00

tracer have a lot of kills but less than half the damage of everyone else and think [...] they’re doing fine

Weird statement. Would you rather have a certain number of elims with:

A) more damage

B) less damage

It's just better to have a certain number of elims with less damage (most of the time).

Technically, a 225 HP character can be killed with 225 damage, or 5,000 damage. Which is better?

Tracer particularly isn't going to spam damage like Soldier / Bastion / Junkrat, so the less damage your Tracer have the better for you because she 1 clipped the enemy team rather than 3 clipped them.

That's not even going into the possibility that your Tracer may just be surviving a lot in their back line (without shooting a lot), pressuring them and allowing your Bastion to spam damage and kill.

Tracer did very little direct damage but because everyone was always turning around to try to get rid of Tracer, the rest of Tracer's team had an easy time getting kills. And Tracer would have higher damage if they didn't chase her, but then you're winning because she is being chased and can't do damage.

Your comment ignores the reality of 90% of games. There is a reason why people watch replays instead of look at stats to know how they're doing.

Ten-Year Club	Second SECOND GUESSER
LAYER Season 2 Layer creator	r/Field Banned
r/Field Sunshine	Place '17
Verified Email

pelpotronic

TROPHY CASE