No, the commitment to the emote is the whole point. It shows that you are willing to die to send the appropriate message and it also leads to funny screw ups when you inevitably fat finger an emote at the wrong time.
No, the commitment to the emote is the whole point. It shows that you are willing to die to send the appropriate message and it also leads to funny screw ups when you inevitably fat finger an emote at the wrong time.
Please prove to me that forced 50/50 is a thing. I would honestly be happy to finally have a proof for it, instead of the usual “I lost x amount of games in a row, it must be forced 50/50 and it surely isn’t just me being bad or simply unlucky”.
I genuinely play only Rein and Orisa because i enjoy them now in OW2. I stopped playing Orisa when she got buffed in S6 though, did not want to get flamed for playing her even if i only do so because i enjoy her, not to counterpick. So i spent a season playing Rein into Doom. That was fun.
The lower the player count is, and consequently the higher the chances of you being grouped with the same people again, the more problematic it becomes to increase the avoid count.
In the instances where the avoid as teammate would not be much help due to the incredibly low chance of running into the same people again is when the avoid count could be increased without impacting queue times too much.
In your case, being in Australia would mean that increasing the avoid count even by a couple of spots would make the matchmaker basically unable to create a lobby.
People often underestimate how much of an impact such specific restrictions have on a matchmaker. Think of it like this, it’s basically like trying to split a hundred children into classes of 20 each but where each child can freely choose which other child they don’t want to be in the same class with. It makes the creation of the classes impossible.
A specific restriction such as “i don’t want to be grouped with x player”, when allowed for everyone, pose a much bigger strain than global restrictions such as “teammates and enemies must be within a y range of skill”.
Lastly, I think your title might be a bit offensive given that you don’t know who worked on the system (women will almost certainly have been involved given the sheer amount of people needed to create such a system) and given that the source of the problem is in the end of the day a mathematical problem, which makes solving it a matter beyond sentiment.