Can I say 1 thing who tf asked for this ? You guys have proved once again that you don't even play the game Now delete this comment don't give a flying **** & I am out
This really sucks. We don't need an official tier list sort of thing in place of regular buffs.
So this is speculative, but here's what I think happened here. The ratings system is not replacing the current buff program. Somewhat the reverse, the current buff program is being replaced by the new buff program, and the rating system is being added to make the new buff program easier to explain.
Once upon a time, champions were designed, released, monitored, and then if necessary rebalanced. Back when champions were much simpler, champions didn't need rebalancing as often, but this was still the process. We know this because Kabam described this process long ago. My guess is that when they moved to the more aggressive buff schedule, this released champion review process was either heavily reduced or almost completely eliminated to make time for the buff program. And as a result, we might be seeing a higher variation in champions: more super gods, more duds.
This is problematic, because today's duds are tomorrow's old duds. If we are focusing on buffing old champs to the point where we're breaking all the new champs, we're not really making progress on the problem. What's more, whether we buff an old champ or a new champ in the long run doesn't affect how many duds the average player gets, but it does sour the new champion well more if the new champs are busted. More over, the longer the champ exists, the more people have it, the more familiar people are with the champ, the harder it becomes to tweak if there's a problem.
The hope, I'm guessing, is to solve several problems simultaneously. First, to try to stop the flow of duds into general population by returning to the old style release/review/tweak system. This might reduce the number of duds faster than buffing the old champs, because these tweaks are less likely to get tangled up in long term player expectations. Second, increase the value of new champions and new champion pools (which, when all is said and done, ultimately powers the game). And third, to learn some lessons from the last time this sort of thing was attempted, and create a system where the devs can signal to the players well in advance what the intended capabilities of a champion are in general terms, so that players are less surprised by updates: both when they happen, and what things are updated when they happen.
The rating system is not necessary for Kabam to update champions. The rating system is there to communicate to the players what they intended to make and what they are looking at when the release a champion. It is a kind of short hand for communicating the design intent of the champion when it was created. If we eliminate the rating system, all that changes is the players no longer get to know ahead of time what the design intent of champions is. The devs will still return to the release/monitor/tweak system. We just won't have any inside view of it.
A program that only does one or the other is broken.
A champion that should be nerfed but isn't because that's supposedly better for the players is like a student who isn't punished for cheating in class because that is supposedly better for the students. The problem is the same: both are graded on a curve. The student who cheats improves their grades at the expense of every other student. The champion that isn't nerfed keeps their performance by reducing the performance of every other champion in the game, by increasing the relative difficulty of the content of the game to accommodate it.
That's just how content is implemented in games like this. Its all driven by metrics. Average performance metrics.
Wow. I didn’t think Kabam could miss the mark this badly. To say I am disappointed is not close to the right word. This program would have been fine if implemented like 4 years ago.
I'd be fine if this was polished up a bit better for the most part.
What I'm not fine with is that it is replacing a well established buff system that was almost universally praised with hits like Mole Man, Ultron, Nebula, Diablo, Bishop, Venompool, Thor Ragnarok and Howard the Duck.
Kabam you need to up your game. But then again you guys really don't care what we think.
So basically long:short; we can’t even fulfill 2 year old promises to you, so allow us to release this new dumpster fire that will try to make you forget about our previously unfulfilled commitments. Oh and while you’re hopefully looking at this shiny object over here, we’re also openly telling you that we’re going to go ahead and nerf champions whenever we feel like it after we squeeze your wallets through Cavalier or other crystals and say “oh oops that champion isn’t functioning as intended”.
You guys may as well just come out and say you’re bent on burying this game 6 feet under.
This game isn’t going to last forever, and maybe it’s viewed as sunk cost — it’s an older game, now.
I don’t know what will be the end of this game. I do know this: Players genuinely looked forward to buffs each month. Now those are being cut down.
It’s definitely not easy to get 5/6-star rarities of characters released in the same calendar year. Not saying it’s impossible. Just saying that with more than 200 characters or so in the game…man. I don’t know.
I said this recently: I don’t understand Kabam and how they approach things. I really don’t.
This game is not a sunk cost lol😂😂
Honest question: Would you explain how you feel that this game, seven years in, isn’t sunk cost?
You are looking at this game like it’s a waste of kabam’s time an are gaining nothing in return for their investment.
Unlike many that think it, this game isn’t dying. They make money, regardless of how much people think they’ve lost on all the “horrible” deals they give us. You also don’t put time into a game like this an release videos of upcoming stuff, a new game mode, input fixes, this balance update etc. for a game that’s just a “sunk cost” to them
You saying this is a sunk cost makes it seem like they are putting the effort (time and money) in for this stuff and will receive nothing. That is not the case. They will still turn a pretty profit for their efforts.
I'd be fine if this was polished up a bit better for the most part.
What I'm not fine with is that it is replacing a well established buff system that was almost universally praised with hits like Mole Man, Ultron, Nebula, Diablo, Bishop, Venompool, Thor Ragnarok and Howard the Duck.
Kabam you need to up your game. But then again you guys really don't care what we think.
I agree with this. The idea should not be affecting the buff program. Buffs are wanted just as much as new champs. They excite just as much too
So February is already looking dry just like January, way to go kabaam. Incase the new CEO is not aware the community does not like the word balancing, that didn't go well last time.
Please don't do any of this. Part of the fun of the game is figuring stuff out on your own. We don't need ratings; we can figure those out on our own. We just want terrible champs buffed. Everyone knows which champs are unplayable. You have the data on which champs are never used. Just buff those champs. In the last two roadmaps you asked us to hold you accountable to what you said you'd do. This is my attempt to do that.
Monthly Champion Buffs used to make me excited, and for many players it was the same too. Now you're telling us that you are going to slow that down even more than it has already been?! So what, buffs to old champions and champions we all want to see get buffed are now going to be a once in a blue moon kind of a thing, since you are prioritizing balancing new champions...
like almost all of this feedback thread I hate that we are losing the older champion buffs in favor of over engineering champs most of us wont ever get to play before they are locked down. I love that my roster gets better, potentially much better every month because older poorly designed champs are getting fixed and made more relevant. Almost every change to a "new" champ with the exception of diablo and moleman have been either hated or irrelevant. Maw, ronin, odin, nova, IW all were "buffed" none were improved and were a waste of developer time since it didn't move the needle on any of these champs. Every new champ doesn't have to be the best, but every new champ except a very few (looking at you psychoman) is at least middle of the road, whereas dozens of champs that we already have are utterly useless. Bringing the useless out of the dungeon does far more for the game than taking a meh new champ and making them slightly less meh. Swing for the fences, stop holding back, but catch the absolute misses well after they enter the pool and buff those that have been around and are already in many summoners' rosters.
So basically long:short; we can’t even fulfill 2 year old promises to you, so allow us to release this new dumpster fire that will try to make you forget about our previously unfulfilled commitments. Oh and while you’re hopefully looking at this shiny object over here, we’re also openly telling you that we’re going to go ahead and nerf champions whenever we feel like it after we squeeze your wallets through Cavalier or other crystals and say “oh oops that champion isn’t functioning as intended”.
You guys may as well just come out and say you’re bent on burying this game 6 feet under.
This game isn’t going to last forever, and maybe it’s viewed as sunk cost — it’s an older game, now.
I don’t know what will be the end of this game. I do know this: Players genuinely looked forward to buffs each month. Now those are being cut down.
It’s definitely not easy to get 5/6-star rarities of characters released in the same calendar year. Not saying it’s impossible. Just saying that with more than 200 characters or so in the game…man. I don’t know.
I said this recently: I don’t understand Kabam and how they approach things. I really don’t.
This game is not a sunk cost lol😂😂
Honest question: Would you explain how you feel that this game, seven years in, isn’t sunk cost?
You are looking at this game like it’s a waste of kabam’s time an are gaining nothing in return for their investment.
Unlike many that think it, this game isn’t dying. They make money, regardless of how much people think they’ve lost on all the “horrible” deals they give us. You also don’t put time into a game like this an release videos of upcoming stuff, a new game mode, input fixes, this balance update etc. for a game that’s just a “sunk cost” to them
You saying this is a sunk cost makes it seem like they are putting the effort (time and money) in for this stuff and will receive nothing. That is not the case. They will still turn a pretty profit for their efforts.
No, I don’t think that at all — it’s the opposite, actually.
The game is the game, and within reason, we see how the game is monetized. They have been pretty consistent with that, for the most part, for years. I don’t have an issue with that; the game needs to make a profit.
But my point was that, for example, Superior Iron Man was released in 2015 or 2016, something like that. A reskin. Never particularly impactful upon the game.
That character has already been done. It’s sunk cost. The people who worked on the skin have already been paid. The kit itself is almost identical to OG Iron Man, even after the slightest of adjustments, years ago, so that design work was minimal.
Reworking Superior Iron Man would require new investment of time and resources — let’s say it was $100, as a round/even number.
Now, I would authorize it, because the kit hasn’t held up well and was never that strong to begin with. I would offer the kit in crystals again, after the buff, and attempt to make back the new investment expenditure that way, something like that.
But some people wouldn’t do that. Some people would say, “use that $100 elsewhere, or not at all. The kit’s done. Sunk cost.”
That’s the vibe this game gives, at times. Not that people aren’t working on it, still, in the present as part of their workflow/employment. The game is still operating and, as you noted, making a profit.
But in what feels, since last August, the diminishing cadence of buffs. Now this. I think everyone understands the pandemic has been hard to handle, and I don’t care if Wish crystals never make it to the game, stuff like that.
But I do question if addressing old concerns are simply not worth it to them
A program that only does one or the other is broken.
A champion that should be nerfed but isn't because that's supposedly better for the players is like a student who isn't punished for cheating in class because that is supposedly better for the students. The problem is the same: both are graded on a curve. The student who cheats improves their grades at the expense of every other student. The champion that isn't nerfed keeps their performance by reducing the performance of every other champion in the game, by increasing the relative difficulty of the content of the game to accommodate it.
That's just how content is implemented in games like this. Its all driven by metrics. Average performance metrics.
Who was the last champion that actually needed a nerf to keep from "breaking the game" and wasn't an "OMG? Did you test this at all?" situation? For context, Shang-Chi at release was an OMG. It took looking at his abilities and then a few minutes to try it to find his infinite stun loop. The champs that have really needed an actual drop after release are so few that it makes me wonder why this is such a concern of Kabam's. They've never had any problems making champs too weak but they keep dangling the nerf out there like they're about to use it any second.
There are champs that are immensely better for certain content. Kabam controls that by changing the nodes and the champs usefulness moving forward. Every few months there's max sig Namor content and duped Ronan content. Those champs are so much better than any other option for that content that it doesn't make sense to use anyone else.
Maybe it would be more useful if they ran the metrics by people and talked about how they determine a champ is too strong/weak and needs tweaking. The Namor regen is a good example of data used poorly that they should have run by someone before talking about it. The nerf to Hercules 😡 made little to no sense unless the purpose was to annoy players and remind them that anyone can get that pointless nerf so keep your torches and pitchforks ready. All the post-release nerf culture will do is make people angry because it's hardly ever truly necessary and wouldn't take months to discern in any case.
So instead of buffing champs, you have been working on this. No one needs this. No one asked for this. It is a complete waste of time and resources could obviously be spent in a LOT of other places. This is jumping the shark.
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.
"These new balancing initiatives will be spearheaded by an expanded Champion Balancing team here at Kabam. The newest recruit to the team is a beloved community member"
This is the single most intriguing thing about the whole post..... so they hired someone from here, from the forums, to work directly on the buff program.
Who, is this community member that they hired to work on this new Champion Balancing team???
My bet (hope) is on @BitterSteel . He has written extensively about the buff program , really well thought out posts. Besides, if my memory served me right I think he has degrees/background in statistics/data analytics so he fits the bill perfectly. And he is also well loved and respected in the forums.
Another (wishful thinking) one could be perhaps @DNA3000 ? Similar reasons as above.
.... or maybe is a forum mod that got promoted to Balancing Team member? Imagine if it's @Kabam Miike ... if it's him then I guess we will FINALLY get a Cyclops buff that would truly make him "EFFECTIVE" !!!! Yay? I guess...
Comments
Now delete this comment don't give a flying **** & I am out
Once upon a time, champions were designed, released, monitored, and then if necessary rebalanced. Back when champions were much simpler, champions didn't need rebalancing as often, but this was still the process. We know this because Kabam described this process long ago. My guess is that when they moved to the more aggressive buff schedule, this released champion review process was either heavily reduced or almost completely eliminated to make time for the buff program. And as a result, we might be seeing a higher variation in champions: more super gods, more duds.
This is problematic, because today's duds are tomorrow's old duds. If we are focusing on buffing old champs to the point where we're breaking all the new champs, we're not really making progress on the problem. What's more, whether we buff an old champ or a new champ in the long run doesn't affect how many duds the average player gets, but it does sour the new champion well more if the new champs are busted. More over, the longer the champ exists, the more people have it, the more familiar people are with the champ, the harder it becomes to tweak if there's a problem.
The hope, I'm guessing, is to solve several problems simultaneously. First, to try to stop the flow of duds into general population by returning to the old style release/review/tweak system. This might reduce the number of duds faster than buffing the old champs, because these tweaks are less likely to get tangled up in long term player expectations. Second, increase the value of new champions and new champion pools (which, when all is said and done, ultimately powers the game). And third, to learn some lessons from the last time this sort of thing was attempted, and create a system where the devs can signal to the players well in advance what the intended capabilities of a champion are in general terms, so that players are less surprised by updates: both when they happen, and what things are updated when they happen.
The rating system is not necessary for Kabam to update champions. The rating system is there to communicate to the players what they intended to make and what they are looking at when the release a champion. It is a kind of short hand for communicating the design intent of the champion when it was created. If we eliminate the rating system, all that changes is the players no longer get to know ahead of time what the design intent of champions is. The devs will still return to the release/monitor/tweak system. We just won't have any inside view of it.
A champion that should be nerfed but isn't because that's supposedly better for the players is like a student who isn't punished for cheating in class because that is supposedly better for the students. The problem is the same: both are graded on a curve. The student who cheats improves their grades at the expense of every other student. The champion that isn't nerfed keeps their performance by reducing the performance of every other champion in the game, by increasing the relative difficulty of the content of the game to accommodate it.
That's just how content is implemented in games like this. Its all driven by metrics. Average performance metrics.
What I'm not fine with is that it is replacing a well established buff system that was almost universally praised with hits like Mole Man, Ultron, Nebula, Diablo, Bishop, Venompool, Thor Ragnarok and Howard the Duck.
Kabam you need to up your game. But then again you guys really don't care what we think.
Unlike many that think it, this game isn’t dying. They make money, regardless of how much people think they’ve lost on all the “horrible” deals they give us. You also don’t put time into a game like this an release videos of upcoming stuff, a new game mode, input fixes, this balance update etc. for a game that’s just a “sunk cost” to them
You saying this is a sunk cost makes it seem like they are putting the effort (time and money) in for this stuff and will receive nothing. That is not the case. They will still turn a pretty profit for their efforts.
The game is the game, and within reason, we see how the game is monetized. They have been pretty consistent with that, for the most part, for years. I don’t have an issue with that; the game needs to make a profit.
But my point was that, for example, Superior Iron Man was released in 2015 or 2016, something like that. A reskin. Never particularly impactful upon the game.
That character has already been done. It’s sunk cost. The people who worked on the skin have already been paid. The kit itself is almost identical to OG Iron Man, even after the slightest of adjustments, years ago, so that design work was minimal.
Reworking Superior Iron Man would require new investment of time and resources — let’s say it was $100, as a round/even number.
Now, I would authorize it, because the kit hasn’t held up well and was never that strong to begin with. I would offer the kit in crystals again, after the buff, and attempt to make back the new investment expenditure that way, something like that.
But some people wouldn’t do that. Some people would say, “use that $100 elsewhere, or not at all. The kit’s done. Sunk cost.”
That’s the vibe this game gives, at times. Not that people aren’t working on it, still, in the present as part of their workflow/employment. The game is still operating and, as you noted, making a profit.
But in what feels, since last August, the diminishing cadence of buffs. Now this. I think everyone understands the pandemic has been hard to handle, and I don’t care if Wish crystals never make it to the game, stuff like that.
But I do question if addressing old concerns are simply not worth it to them
There are champs that are immensely better for certain content. Kabam controls that by changing the nodes and the champs usefulness moving forward. Every few months there's max sig Namor content and duped Ronan content. Those champs are so much better than any other option for that content that it doesn't make sense to use anyone else.
Maybe it would be more useful if they ran the metrics by people and talked about how they determine a champ is too strong/weak and needs tweaking. The Namor regen is a good example of data used poorly that they should have run by someone before talking about it.
The nerf to Hercules 😡 made little to no sense unless the purpose was to annoy players and remind them that anyone can get that pointless nerf so keep your torches and pitchforks ready. All the post-release nerf culture will do is make people angry because it's hardly ever truly necessary and wouldn't take months to discern in any case.
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.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.
This is the single most intriguing thing about the whole post..... so they hired someone from here, from the forums, to work directly on the buff program.
Who, is this community member that they hired to work on this new Champion Balancing team???
My bet (hope) is on @BitterSteel . He has written extensively about the buff program , really well thought out posts. Besides, if my memory served me right I think he has degrees/background in statistics/data analytics so he fits the bill perfectly. And he is also well loved and respected in the forums.
Another (wishful thinking) one could be perhaps @DNA3000 ? Similar reasons as above.
.... or maybe is a forum mod that got promoted to Balancing Team member? Imagine if it's @Kabam Miike ... if it's him then I guess we will FINALLY get a Cyclops buff that would truly make him "EFFECTIVE" !!!! Yay? I guess...
But ah well, I guess we'll know when we'll know.
The game needs bug fixes not tier lists