Damage Handicap: Numbers Don't Lie

General Discussion
1 2 3 26 Next
Thread Lock:
The topic has reached its post limit. However, I will edit the OP with video links demonstrating proof and will create a new thread to link to this one, when it is ready. Thank you for all of the support.


There have been countless threads about the forced 50/50, which has not been able to be proved; obviously. And perhaps the MM is fair, but over the past few weeks I have been noticing a spike in damage done/taken with my group based on our winning streak:

The more you win, the less damage you do and the more damage you take.

Last night, after winning 10 consecutive games, in a pre-formed group, we began to lose, no matter how hard we focused. This continued into this morning until we hit 10 losses. Interesting.

After our 5th loss, I wanted to obtain actual numbers and began testing my theory. D.va's pilot damage is obvious and static, so I used her. I remained out of the MEKA and would only fire 1-2 shots an enemy's chest.

On heroes with no armor/shield it was 6 damage per bullet to the chest, consistently. My team has since started a custom game and repeated the same experiment, each bullet now does 14 damage to the chest.

I am not a theorycrafter, nor a game designer, I am just a regular gamer. If we are able to have more evidence, and visual proof (Soon ™), Blizzard will not be able to deny that they implemented a handicap in a game they call fair.

Want to see this for yourself? The easiest way to notice the increased damage you take is by Roadhog's hook. Its baseline damage is supposed to be 30, regardless of where it lands. Watch it fluctuate depending on your winning streak.

Edit: Video proof will be uploaded as soon as I am able to replicate a 10 game winning streak with my group. I will be using FRAPS per community recommendation. Since the baseline of my complaint is purely damage done, I will replicate the D.va pilot example as notated above. This will show a single shot into a flankers chest with no other enemies, armor/shield, or healing available and will be compared to a video after purposefully losing numerous games on QP
Highly Rated
If this is confirmed... ohhh maaaan...
Wow and I thought the forced 50% people were stupid.

This is next level.
Damning if true. Hard data would definitely be useful to confirm either way.
WTF... this better not be true.

I am going to flip big time if this is actually true...

How could you possibly put hidden mechanics in a fps to lean players tword a win/loss ratio? Increasing or reducing their damage is not only manipulating, but this completely breaks the concept of an fps and makes it unfair.

I am so p.issed right now that, when I get off work, Im going to test this with my friends in custom games and see if its true.

If this is true, I am going to be completely outraged.
You start losing more as your mmr goes higher. This is not forced 50% this is literally how matchmaking works.

You naturally do less damage and get dmged more vs better people. Stop this illuminati !@#$ ffs.
06/11/2016 11:26 AMPosted by SkiNNyBane
You start losing more as your mmr goes higher. This is not forced 50% this is literally how matchmaking works.

You naturally do less damage and get dmged more vs better people. Stop this illuminati !@#$ ffs.

Losing based out being out-skilled is fine. Losing because of hidden damage handicaps is not.
Read my post, I based it off a hero with static damage and hit the same area of the body on numerous heroes.
I've honestly been thinking this since the game launched, because that's exactly how it felt. Increased damage taken when you're supposed to lose.

I pushed the thoughts to the back of my head because I figured "There's no way Blizzard would do something that stupid and not say anything about it"

If this turns out to be true, this game probably won't recover for a very long time.
I'm sure Widow body shots deal 150 and headshots kill all non-tanks regardless of my winning or losing streaks. Same for Pharah rockets, Roadhog hook combo, Genji right click cancelling etc.

And that Mercy always heal 50 per second if this matters.
06/11/2016 11:28 AMPosted by Aetherious
06/11/2016 11:26 AMPosted by SkiNNyBane
You start losing more as your mmr goes higher. This is not forced 50% this is literally how matchmaking works.

You naturally do less damage and get dmged more vs better people. Stop this illuminati !@#$ ffs.

Losing based out being out-skilled is fine. Losing because of hidden damage handicaps is not.
Read my post, I based it off a hero with static damage and hit the same area of the body on numerous heroes.


NICE PROOF BRO - 10/10 POST
06/11/2016 11:30 AMPosted by Zish
I've honestly been thinking this since the game launched, because that's exactly how it felt. Increased damage taken when you're supposed to lose.

I pushed the thoughts to the back of my head because I figured "There's no way Blizzard would do something that stupid and not say anything about it"

If this turns out to be true, this game probably won't recover for a very long time.


Reading this entire post, I was going "there's no way", but am now remembering those weird moments where Junkrat 1-shot me as Zenyatta, or McCree did a regular left-click headshot to 1-shot me.

I don't know if those odd events prove anything, but from my point of view in both situations, I was DEFINITELY 1-shot by something that shouldn't have.

Seriously hoping this isn't true. To be clear, so far as there's no proof I won't believe it. Either damage indication doesn't work, or I was 1-shot by things that shouldn't 1-shot me. If I was hit without any indication of it beforehand, then that's a valid explanation itself.
Maybe that explains how a widowmaker one hit my reinhardt at full health...
06/11/2016 11:33 AMPosted by TripSin
06/11/2016 11:28 AMPosted by Aetherious
...
Losing based out being out-skilled is fine. Losing because of hidden damage handicaps is not.
Read my post, I based it off a hero with static damage and hit the same area of the body on numerous heroes.


NICE PROOF BRO - 10/10 POST

I dont have the ability to film in the game. My "proof" was for self confirmation, really, the point of this thread is a call to arms to see if we can gather undeniable evidence.
In tandem with OP's suspicions, I half wonder if a damage boost is applied towards the end of a match to give the losing team a bit of an edge to prolong the match. I mean, I get that with seconds to go, the losing team whips themselves in a frenzy and does whatever they can to go into overtime and clutch a victory, but we're talking in some scenarios where the losing team goes ALL GAME getting wrecked and suddenly they're on even terms with the team that's been thrashing them for the past 5 minutes simply because they got a little more aggressive?

Mind, for QP I do not mind a mechanic that gives the losing team a little handicap to keep the game going - if my enemy needs it just to become a challenge, I'll let them have it. I didn't pay $40 to win game after game after game within 2 minutes of start, nor losing.

And it's not as though such an algorithm is hard to scale. If we're talking payload and they're still messing around at the first check point, a decent boost is forgivable, and it makes sense if it totally disappears the moment they hit a checkpoint and get some more time back. But towards the very end, where it's neck and neck - fair game and the clock is ticking down, fair game. Though if the payload is meters from the end and there are still 5+ minutes on the clock, I wouldn't consider a boost to the defense entirely unwarranted either.

Of course, competitive play shouldn't feature any hand holding. You join ranked matchmaking to prove yourself, not to merely get into a scrap with a bunch of other players with no strings attached like in quick play.
06/11/2016 11:44 AMPosted by Littleman
In tandem with OP's suspicions, I half wonder if a damage boost is applied towards the end of a match to give the losing team a bit of an edge to prolong the match. I mean, I get that with seconds to go, the losing team whips themselves in a frenzy and does whatever they can to go into overtime and clutch a victory, but we're talking in some scenarios where the losing team goes ALL GAME getting wrecked and suddenly they're on even terms with the team that's been thrashing them for the past 5 minutes simply because they got a little more aggressive?

Mind, for QP I do not mind a mechanic that gives the losing team a little handicap to keep the game going - if my enemy needs it just to become a challenge, I'll let them have it. I didn't pay $40 to win game after game after game within 2 minutes of start, nor losing.

And it's not as though such an algorithm is hard to scale. If we're talking payload and they're still messing around at the first check point, a decent boost is forgivable, and it makes sense if it totally disappears the moment they hit a checkpoint and get some more time back. But towards the very end, where it's neck and neck - fair game and the clock is ticking down, fair game. Though if the payload is meters from the end and there are still 5+ minutes on the clock, I wouldn't consider a boost to the defense entirely unwarranted either.

Of course, competitive play shouldn't feature any hand holding. You join ranked matchmaking to prove yourself, not to merely get into a scrap with a bunch of other players with no strings attached like in quick play.
Sorry mate, but a game that prides themselves in fairness should be all in fairness. Hand holding should neither be in quick play or ranked. Also, it has yet to be stated whether there is a straight forward MMR or not..
06/11/2016 11:53 AMPosted by SirChase
06/11/2016 11:44 AMPosted by Littleman
In tandem with OP's suspicions, I half wonder if a damage boost is applied towards the end of a match to give the losing team a bit of an edge to prolong the match. I mean, I get that with seconds to go, the losing team whips themselves in a frenzy and does whatever they can to go into overtime and clutch a victory, but we're talking in some scenarios where the losing team goes ALL GAME getting wrecked and suddenly they're on even terms with the team that's been thrashing them for the past 5 minutes simply because they got a little more aggressive?

Mind, for QP I do not mind a mechanic that gives the losing team a little handicap to keep the game going - if my enemy needs it just to become a challenge, I'll let them have it. I didn't pay $40 to win game after game after game within 2 minutes of start, nor losing.

And it's not as though such an algorithm is hard to scale. If we're talking payload and they're still messing around at the first check point, a decent boost is forgivable, and it makes sense if it totally disappears the moment they hit a checkpoint and get some more time back. But towards the very end, where it's neck and neck - fair game and the clock is ticking down, fair game. Though if the payload is meters from the end and there are still 5+ minutes on the clock, I wouldn't consider a boost to the defense entirely unwarranted either.

Of course, competitive play shouldn't feature any hand holding. You join ranked matchmaking to prove yourself, not to merely get into a scrap with a bunch of other players with no strings attached like in quick play.
Sorry mate, but a game that prides themselves in fairness should be all in fairness. Hand holding should neither be in quick play or ranked. Also, it has yet to be stated whether there is a straight forward MMR or not..


Sorry, "mate," but go play competitive when it's released if you want fair matches. Quick play is intended as the screw around mode. Once competitive is an actual option, the people that would flip out if there's some hidden behind-the-curtains boosts in play won't give a $#!% about quick play, being a casual centric mode without need for stress inducing factors and performance anxiety. The only people !@#$%ing then would be the one's that take winning in the casual mode WAY too damn seriously.

In other words, wait for YOUR mode. A mode that caters to casuals and $#!%%& matchmaking (or selfish players, really, it can't compensate for that) that are only looking for a good time is never a bad thing to have in a game that also prides itself as being casual friendly.

But remember, this is just speculation. It's not entirely out of the realm of possibility that the losing team pulls a Space Jam when they're about to lose, it's just that *I've* noticed an eery consistency of the losing team doing so.
06/11/2016 11:53 AMPosted by SirChase
...Sorry mate, but a game that prides themselves in fairness should be all in fairness. Hand holding should neither be in quick play or ranked. Also, it has yet to be stated whether there is a straight forward MMR or not..


Sorry, "mate," but go play competitive when it's released if you want fair matches. Quick play is intended as the screw around mode. Once competitive is an actual option, the people that would flip out if there's some hidden behind-the-curtains boosts in play won't give a $#!% about quick play, being a casual centric mode without need for stress inducing factors and performance anxiety. The only people !@#$%ing then would be the one's that take winning in the casual mode WAY too damn seriously.

In other words, wait for YOUR mode. A mode that caters to casuals and $#!%%& matchmaking (or selfish players, really, it can't compensate for that) that are only looking for a good time is never a bad thing to have in a game also prides itself as being casual friendly.
"Quick play is intended as the screw around mode." I hope you're joking because that is the most stupid statement I have ever seen. I do also wonder why you're so easily offended. I mean, quick play is just out there for people to go in and purposely lose the game, right?
06/11/2016 11:36 AMPosted by Gnome


Reading this entire post, I was going "there's no way", but am now remembering those weird moments where Junkrat 1-shot me as Zenyatta, or McCree did a regular left-click headshot to 1-shot me.


I mean, Junkrat hits for 120 and Mccree's left click's headshot does 140. Zen has 150 so it's easy to imagine that you lost health from a minor fire before getting hit with those hits.

Zenyatta is notoriously squishy for a reason.

(Also I actually think Junkrate does more than 120 if you get hit before it bounces once)
06/11/2016 11:36 AMPosted by Gnome
06/11/2016 11:30 AMPosted by Zish
I've honestly been thinking this since the game launched, because that's exactly how it felt. Increased damage taken when you're supposed to lose.

I pushed the thoughts to the back of my head because I figured "There's no way Blizzard would do something that stupid and not say anything about it"

If this turns out to be true, this game probably won't recover for a very long time.


Reading this entire post, I was going "there's no way", but am now remembering those weird moments where Junkrat 1-shot me as Zenyatta, or McCree did a regular left-click headshot to 1-shot me.

I don't know if those odd events prove anything, but from my point of view in both situations, I was DEFINITELY 1-shot by something that shouldn't have.

Seriously hoping this isn't true. :(


Now I haven't run any numbers or anything but you were running THE hero to get one shot with lol.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum