Options

An Update to Balancing in MCOC!

13468920

Comments

  • Options
    BigPoppaCBONEBigPoppaCBONE Posts: 2,339 ★★★★★

    DNA3000 said:

    Ken1378 said:

    This just seems like a big waste of time. The rating are going to be so subjective. Maybe the Damage rating can be based on player data, but there are still so many different situations that impact it: synergies, awakened abilities, ramp-ups, skill-level required, and probably a dozen other things. Putting one number to all of that doesn’t even make sense. Let alone trying to rate utility or ease of use.

    This seems to be a common misconception, or maybe I'm the one that's wrong here, but to clarify my position here my understanding is the devs aren't going to analyze every single champ and try to figure out what rating to give to them, like a player making a tier list. They are going to publish what the design intent was for that champ, or in the case of older champs for which that is no longer available they are going to try to retroactively publish what they believe the design intent was supposed to be. They aren't *measuring* champ damage to determine the rating. They are saying "this champ was intended to have high damage, this one was intended to have average damage, this one was intended to have below average damage." They are just doing that with numbers and not adjectives.

    *Separately* they will be using the game metrics to try to get an idea whether the champ *meets* that design rating. But they have always done that, this isn't something they are starting to do now. They are just formalizing the structure for how they do that so they can better communicate this to the players.

    The devs are *not* making a tier list, or a four point ratings list. It is probably a misnomer to even call it a rating. It is more of a target. The reason why I say this is because of this:



    When we conducted tuning changes in the past, the majority of negative feedback from the community was due to the fact that these tuning changes were conducted in a vacuum. Players had a hard time understanding what was overpowered and underpowered and had no input into what was changing.

    Now, with the rating system, players will be able to better judge if a Champion is in the right place, and be able to give feedback along the way while updates are being made.



    In other words, this sounds like the devs will be tuning champs to match the ratings, not set the ratings to match the champs. So the rating has to be more of what the devs want, not what they know the champ is. The ratings are subjective in a sense, because I believe they express intent. But that's unavoidable with intent. The point is not for the rating to be an absolute measure of a champ's performance. I believe it is to communicate to the players what the devs are aiming for, so devs and players are on the same page.

    That's what I gathered. I also suspect it will assist in our own understanding, though I believe people will still compile their own judgments either way.

    I wonder if the ratings will be rough. Say iHulk, Hyperion, and Archangel all have 5/5 for damage. They make new champ Blue Marvel and they want him to be in rank 5 but his output at Hyperion class is too hard to achieve and too shart to be of value so they tweak him.

    That reminds me of the old Image comics rating system where god-tier Strength-Speed-Durability superhumans were called Majestic class after Mr Majestic (Superman pastiche for those those that don't know). That categorization could be easier for people to wrap their heads around. Saying "We want her to be Hyperion class ballpark for damage" and she's Grooting it up, you know they missed the mark and can convey that simply by saying, "Lol. No. She's Grooting like mad. Go back to the lab."
  • Options
    DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 21,358 ★★★★★

    It is refreshing to occasionally see just how stupid most of the playerbase is

    Elaborate.
    Have you not read the comments in this thread?
  • Options
    DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 21,358 ★★★★★

    It is refreshing to occasionally see just how stupid most of the playerbase is

    Worknprogress

    I fail to see why the player base is as you say it, “stupid”.

    Essentially what is being told in this post is the beloved buff program is being replaced. This replacement will buff less champions and add a rating system that no one asked for or really wants.
    I wouldn't say it's "beloved". It's only that way when people like a buff and there's been many times where people haven't. I'd say it was an accepted program but like everything else Kabam does, y'all hate unless it goes your way.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,334 ★★★★★
    Many of the issues are questionable at best. They're doing what they can to be open and clear on their goals with these reworks. Something that was definitely highlighted by the confusion people have had with the outcomes. They're also being realistic with the work load involved. As much as people tend to assume that all they have to do is change some values in one fell swoop to bring the bottom to the top, there's more work involved than that. It's never going to look like a list of God Tiers vs. Trash Tiers and how to make the Trash into God Tiers. I respect that people have their own analytics, but that's just not how they see their own product.
    We can't ask for communication and clarification and then turn our nose up at efforts to offer that.
  • Options
    GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,334 ★★★★★
    I've said this for years. Players pick favorites. They choose "bests". However, as long as that exists, there will always be a "worst". It's ingrained in the very nature of comparison, and that's not something that's a reasonable goal to set for game balancing.
  • Options
    DemonzfyreDemonzfyre Posts: 21,358 ★★★★★
    Done2023 said:

    Disappointed 100%. What's the point now in putting sig stones into my 6* Herc? You guys are going to nurf like there's no tomorrow. Complete BS. Screw trying to get new champs, I hope this blows up in your faces.

    Where did they say that?
  • Options
    The_Sentry06The_Sentry06 Posts: 7,782 ★★★★★
    thepiggy said:

    Why does Namor's regen need a nerf but Diablo's is okay? It's hard to take these calls for balance seriously.

    No offense but you literally proved why having some form of numeric system like what Kabam are saying in the post is needed.
This discussion has been closed.