337 replies to this topic

[Tennex]

I don't understand why the devs are so resistant to balance changes.

competitive games like league of legends, starcraft 2 make balance changes almost every patch.

Edited by Tennex, 08 April 2013 - 06:36 PM.

[Purplefluffybunny]

It is such a subjective topic. Only PGI have the data to see the larger picture. Even then I imagine it can be a tough call!

[El Penguin]

Because this game is suppose to be competiti- Umm, because the game is still in bet- Uhh... its how it is in the lor- .... ok I dont know!

Edited by El Penguin, 08 April 2013 - 06:41 PM.

[Zaptruder]

Probably because they're too understaffed for a dedicated balance team at the moment.

... Or they need to fire their balance guy.

I'm really not a fan of PGI's apparent slow iteration strategy. Iterate more. Iterate faster. Don't wait for a crushing wall of noise from the userbase to act. For the love of god just try SOMETHING!

[Ranek Blackstone]

Tennex, on 08 April 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

I don't understand why the devs are so resistant to balance changes.

competitive games like league of legends, starcraft 2 make balance changes almost every patch.

Player base. SC2 and LoL have much larger player bases so the metrics add up much faster then MWO. And some things the community whines about are actually balanced. I personally don't find SSRMs to be imbalanced (turn radius could be expanded though, but that's a minor gripe) but other people while about them all the time, which also adds problems. Are SSRMs balanced because I don't think they're OP, or are they OP because you don't think they're balanced?

Edited by Ranek Blackstone, 08 April 2013 - 06:46 PM.

[HRR Insanity]

Tennex, on 08 April 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

I don't understand why the devs are so resistant to balance changes.

competitive games like league of legends, starcraft 2 make balance changes almost every patch.

It's because they don't play the game well and have no ability to accept feedback from players who actually do play at a high level.

Grab anyone from the one of the tournament teams, or anyone with >70% win rate... ask them how to fix the game.

Sane answers nearly every time.

[Tennex]

Ranek Blackstone, on 08 April 2013 - 06:45 PM, said:

Player base. SC2 and LoL have much larger player bases so the metrics add up much faster then MWO. And some things the community whines about are actually balanced. I personally don't find SSRMs to be imbalanced (turn radius could be expanded though, but that's a minor gripe) but other people while about them all the time, which also adds problems. Are SSRMs balanced because I don't think they're OP, or are they OP because you don't think they're balanced?

they don't rely on metrics. they use their head

[Mawai]

1) It could be that they just have not collected the statistics necessary to properly balance the weapons. There are only so many people on the team and a lot of work to do.

2) They have done a few balancing passes ... the most recent being the adjustments to PPCs and pulse lasers that made them more usable. (heat, damage, projectile velocity)

3) It isn't time yet to balance the weapons. Weapon effectiveness depends in a large part on playability ... host state rewind ... "lag shield" elimination ... netcode improvements ... some of this has been implemented for some weapons ... however, proper balance between weapons depends on these features being in place for all weapons. This makes it less efficient to do any detailed balance until these features are actually implemented for all weapons ... then with the mechanics in place the weapons can be balanced in comparable circumstances.

4) The rough balance of the weapons doesn't seem too bad ... see above for why a lot of fine tuning is a bit of a waste at the moment.

[I am]

Tennex, on 08 April 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

I don't understand why the devs are so resistant to balance changes.

competitive games like league of legends, starcraft 2 make balance changes almost every patch.

Because they're too busy posting how high their ELO scores are on twitter?

[keith]

HRR Insanity, on 08 April 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

It's because they don't play the game well and have no ability to accept feedback from players who actually do play at a high level.

Grab anyone from the one of the tournament teams, or anyone with >70% win rate... ask them how to fix the game.

Sane answers nearly every time.

will only work for most stuff. different teams have different play styles=different ways to balance game. but yes in a nut shell they need to take balance feed back form more of the top teams/top players

[Noobzorz]

Purplefluffybunny, on 08 April 2013 - 06:38 PM, said:

It is such a subjective topic. Only PGI have the data to see the larger picture. Even then I imagine it can be a tough call!

There are some real no-brainers (MGs, flamers, LBX) that they just haven't touched.

Otherwise, I don't think I agree 100% with Tennex. They're slow as all get out, but they're doing it. Most recently consider the LRMpocalypse being cut short by hotfix.

[Lonestar1771]

Tennex, on 08 April 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

I don't understand why the devs are so resistant to balance changes.

competitive games like league of legends, starcraft 2 make balance changes almost every patch.

Egos. Egos and idiocy..

[Tennex]

logic fails PGI and at times like these i lose faith in the game's future. much more so than P2W/P2P... for some reason because i know with those issues, the community backlash would never allow them.

[keith]

Noobzorz, on 08 April 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

There are some real no-brainers (MGs, flamers, LBX) that they just haven't touched.

Otherwise, I don't think I agree 100% with Tennex. They're slow as all get out, but they're doing it. Most recently consider the LRMpocalypse being cut short by hotfix.

but they have touched them weps. the crit rate just up chances to explode ammo. instead it should do added dam to internal armor. this would make lbx a much better looking wep, 10 pellets have a chance to do more dam to internal armor once your too it.

[zolop]

Its not even that, I tried to create a thread where you had more in depth combat, where you actually had a functional base, with walls, generators a command building and objects to go after, ones that would change dynamically depending on how the battle went...(even tried to come up with alternatives besides repair)-(Ref Thread: http://mwomercs.com/...64#entry2131964) but if seems half the community just wants to keep on doing team deathmatch with no evolution of tactics. Just look at the threads that pop up on this forum, more than half are requesting buff this or nerf that in a given day.

I agree taht MWO developers have most of the information to balance, but I think having to constantly deal with all the nerf/buff that threads takes awway from developement time/testing builds.

Edited by zolop, 08 April 2013 - 07:07 PM.

[El Bandito]

Noobzorz, on 08 April 2013 - 06:51 PM, said:

There are some real no-brainers (MGs, flamers, LBX) that they just haven't touched. Otherwise, I don't think I agree 100% with Tennex. They're slow as all get out, but they're doing it. Most recently consider the LRMpocalypse being cut short by hotfix.

Missile nerf was more of an emergency bandaid rather than real balancing.

[Tennex]

El Bandito, on 08 April 2013 - 07:08 PM, said:

Missile nerf was more of an emergency bandaid rather than real balancing.

they HAD to do that because people stopped playing their game. public team speak was a ghost town.

the community has no way to motivate them for UP things

[Davers]

Hey if we the players can't even agree that machine guns aren't worth using, how can we convince the devs who USE them?

[Ryokens leap]

It shows that people care... And that is good.

[Ranek Blackstone]

Tennex, on 08 April 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

they don't rely on metrics. they use their head

Your head doesn't say the same thing as my head, so NOT using metrics is the peak of idiocy. Just because you think something isn't balanced doesn't mean other people don't, and unless you have hard numbers to PROVE you're right, you're just wasting everyone's time.

Lets take ECM. Now, ECM is something that gets a lot of people up in arms, but I don't have any issues with it. I run a mech that lacks missile hard points, so ECM jamming doesn't do anything to counter me. If anything, it HURTS them because I see that low signal icon and know they're with in 180m of me now, so they just lost the element of surprise, because I'm now looking for them. Lack of seeking weapons + good aim skill = ECM is not OP. That's my take on it.

An LRM boat though has a VERY different take on ECM because it slashes his ability to make war when he can't get targeting info for his missiles and is forced to use TAG to compensate and hope the ECM mechs stay away. Is ECM OP now? Maybe to him, but it's not OP to me. So who's right and who's wrong?

Now, once we've identified a problem (using metrics so that we can prove we have a problem mind you) the next problem is HOW to fix it. How do we buff/nerf the item so that it's now in line with other things with out over shooting the mark and making it OP/worthless. Sometimes it's an easy fix. The heavy energy weapons just got a couple points of heat per shot knocked off, and all was right in the world. MGs though? Should it deal more damage to make it a viable weapon against armor? Should it even BE a viable weapon against armor, and should we instead buff how much damage and how often it hits internal crit slots instead?

Flamers are another tough nut. How much heat is too much heat? Should a single flamer be a viable method to force you to over heat? And if so how do we keep lights from boating up on them, and just roasting you alive while they have something else kill you?

The LBX though? Maybe just tighten up the fire cone say 10% and we'll see how it goes from there. I've seen more then a few builds use them to some success, so they're obviously not as borked as some people seem to think.