Options

Buff List Needs To Be Changed

2»

Comments

  • Options
    DPXFistheGOATDPXFistheGOAT Posts: 727 ★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Wouldn't that help someone like Juggernaut who is always on some annoying node for some reason? Because based on this, it seems like not everything can be quantified (ie. How putting Juggernaut on a stun immune node can ruin the rhythm of someone who likes to parry). Or at least, it's effects are "spread out" (ie. Juggernaut on stun immune node K/D ratio would be in a different report than Path A, which has, Juggernaut completion/fail ratio)

    Re: what's quantifiable. I'm not saying I fully agree with this, but I can say what I think most game developers would say if pressed. The first is that datamining quantifies results, not methods, and results are always quantifiable. The ultimate quantifiable metric is rewards: all the combat ultimately generates a specific basket of rewards. Kills, completions, those things are all quantifiable and game balance is about ensuring that all advantages exist within reasonable boundaries, and those advantages are judged based on results. This is basically a fundamental principle of data-driven game balance.

    (And it is often the source of great player confusion. Sometimes apparently overwhelming combat advantages are allowed to exist in some games for what seems to be no reason, but the reason they exist is because they don't translate into actual net advantages in rewards. For example, suppose a champ existed that had an ability where if you performed some specific sequence of moves absolutely perfectly the target just dies. That would be a huge combat advantage in theory. But suppose the devs datamined the game and discovered that on average most players using that champion were actually taking longer to complete event maps, maybe because the tactic was extremely difficult to pull off and players just kept trying. The datamining might suggest that this huge combat advantage wasn't translating into actual player reward benefits, which might be a point in its favor to remain in the game even if there were tons of Youtube videos showing how "OP" it was).

    Then there's the inside ball. Every game developer has that thing they would like to change. And every game developer will tell you that there's generally two ways to get it changed. One: find a metric everyone agrees is reasonable then prove the thing you want to change fails the metric quantitatively. Two: try to convince everyone else you're right by arguing with them until all of them say you win.

    Quantitative metrics are like referees in that regard. No one thinks they are always right, many think they are almost always wrong, but without them there's just chaos. Without them developers would just be arguing with each other constantly and never actually creating any content.
    Isn't that why they test the game? I would think that regardless of all these statistics, they can unanimously agree that someone like Magento is absolute garbage (despite being insanely an popular Marvel character). If they rely so much on stats that they couldnt figure that one out, then it seems like they dont test it regularly at all (which makes sense. Theres well over 100 characters)
    You can't get complete agreement on the forums that Magneto is absolute garbage, except by shouting down everyone who disagrees. In a game developer studio, you don't have the luxury of being in an environment where one point of view gets amplified above everyone else. The opposite, in fact. There are a ton of people who probably think Magneto is not garbage, but are afraid to state that fact on these forums. And then some of them become game developers. How do you think those developers view "forum wisdom?"

    One of the most hilarious questions I keep seeing, not just on this forum but practically every game forum I've been on, is "don't the devs play this game, or any game?' Yes, yes they do. Professionals though they are, they are just as good at knowing how everyone playing the game behaves and sees the game as, well, any other game player you know. Which is to say: not very.

    In some games the developers have a responsibility to be on the forums. In some games they are actually banned from participating on the forums. Most games make it optional. Wanna take a guess as to what percentage of game developers agree to participate on game forums when given the choice? I don't know precisely, but I can tell you how many digits are in that percentage, and it isn't two. And believe me: that's an informed decision.

    The question people should be asking isn't why their datamining is so wrong, it should be why my intuition doesn't match the actual data. That's a learning experience that directly leads to better understanding game development, and how to talk to game developers. Everyone I know whose opinion about gaming I give any value to at all can ask that question of themselves honestly.
    But you said it yourself: You can't quantify everything. I agree that the majority of people on forums don't always agree with developers, but that's because they think they're lazy or that management give them absolute freedom. In reality, their jobs are stressful and I'm sure most people on the forums wont be able to handle even the basics of programming.

    That being said, just because the player base doesnt have access to Kabam's stats or have experience programming doesnt mean we're all clueless (especially hardcore players who analyze strategies based on both eye tests and in-game values) or that reaching a general consensus is impossible. And there's people who play this game and every champion so much that I think it's unwise to simply dismiss their opinion. I think the question people should be asking is "How can we provide qualitative feedback in a respectful manner?"

    I get that people on forums are rude and whiney, and that developers arent allowed to curse them out no matter how much they want to, but they're also a big, active part of the community that are willing to offer more than just numbers.
  • Options
    WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 7,233 ★★★★★
    V1PER1987 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    V1PER1987 said:

    Jaded said:

    The list was based on Data that we collected. The Champions we had listed were statistically performing worse than others in game. This includes factors like Damage Dealt vs.Damage Taken, as well as their utilization.

    The Champions you've listed may get a lot of conversation, but are statistically performing better than other Champions. We haven't released any Champions as 6-Stars that were performing/being utilized as low as those were.

    Statistically speaking, they're not doing as bad as the others that were on that list. That's not to say that they won't be buffed in the future, but they're not as high as a priority as these were.

    Would love to see these stats for interest purposes.
    Yes I would like to know the data being collected because if you’re talking about damage dealt, Venompool, OML, and HtD dish out more damage than Magneto, HB, Jugg, and Rhino. Damage taken isn’t really a great factor because Magneto has a sig ability that is essentially a weak safeguard (terrible sig), and 3 tanks with above average armor.
    Damage taken verses damage delivered is an extremely common measurement metric. It often underlies some of the balancing design guidelines used to create things in the game in the first place. Although it has some flaws, I've used it myself as a balancing metric for reward generation systems.
    I was debating whether or not to respond to this but I figured why not. I don’t see how that would be an extremely common measurement metric. It doesn’t really give any meaningful data. You are going to tell me that the less damage taken equals a good champ? I have an even better metric. It’s called play the game. Or even ask the community. I will concede that they did ask the community who we wanted buffed first, but the players should’ve voted on that list in the first place. The easiest measurement metric is maybe, I don’t know, playing the game? Anyone who plays the game for any period of time will quickly see which champs are better and which desperately need help. I guess the players don’t know what’s best for them though right?
    To be fair the majority of the community is horribly wrong or shortsighted on a regular basis. If it was up to them, UC difficulty would be more like normal and LoL would be like ch1 of RttL
  • Options
    V1PER1987V1PER1987 Posts: 3,474 ★★★★★
    edited July 2019

    V1PER1987 said:

    I’m not usually one to defend Kabam, but honestly, Old Man Logan & Colossus both needed buffs. If you are among the few who actually like OML right now, prior to his buff, good for you. But the majority of us are unhappy with him currently. Saying that he shouldn’t get a buff because you are among the few that currently enjoy him is a pretty selfish move.

    I do however, in the future, think we should get more 6* Buffs. I have no idea why 6*’s aren’t getting buffed. Maybe they want to give us all trashy 6*’s? I don’t know, but it’s pretty stupid. The only 6* to be buffed since 6*’s were even released was Gamora. Time to give 6-stars like Magneto, Hulkbuster, Deadpool X-Force & Iron Fist some love.

    So I am selfish because I see more value in Logan than I do Magneto? That’s a bold statement to make. Who said I even use him or enjoy him? I just made statements based on fact. Logan has a lot more going for himself than HB or Magneto and that’s why I made this post in the first place. Logan is actually useable whereas HB isn’t. Magneto is only ever used because of his psychic immunity.
    I’m saying you complaining that OML is getting a buff & not others is pretty wack. Obviously, there are WAYYY more Mutant characters in need of a buff, like Mags & DPXF. But I prefer not to complain about any buffs to any characters...
    This isn’t a complaint post. It’s a suggestion post. It’s meant to illustrate reasons why I think other champs should be reworked over the current list. That’s what’s wrong with this forum is anytime someone makes a constructive post, it’s cut down by other members saying it’s whining and complaining.
  • Options
    GravediggerMCOCGravediggerMCOC Posts: 193
    maybe abomb or doc strange could be buffed
  • Options
    NeotwismNeotwism Posts: 1,803 ★★★★★
    First of all, o vnnj

    maybe abomb or doc strange could be buffed

    Why comment on a thread that's over a year old?
  • Options
    GravediggerMCOCGravediggerMCOC Posts: 193
    Neotwism said:

    First of all, o vnnj

    maybe abomb or doc strange could be buffed

    Why comment on a thread that's over a year old?
    idk
Sign In or Register to comment.