I prefer a power creep over what we got / are getting.

Unknown

DumDumDugn wrote:

Kyosokun wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

The people saying you cant creep past 1-2 turn kills aren't looking at the big picture here, only numbers

How about introducing a 2* hero with the following ability: Any time green is matched (by either side), subtract 3 red from the opponent. If enough people used that, Rags becomes a liability, which has ripple effects towards the entire meta without directly nerfing Ragnarok.

This is how MTG and MAA shake up the meta without completely nerfing top tiers. Introducing hard counters.

That works a lot better when you can't choose your opponents. You introduce that character, and when that's your opponent, you either skip them, or just use a different character. Thats assuming the meta of speed doesn't just overwhelm that character. Oh, you are running her. First target on the list. She becomes a speedbump that takes a 1-2 turn win and turns it into a maybe 3-4 turn win.

It's more than that. If she had 3000 hp, thats 3000 hp you have to take out before you can thunderclap. That's a lot of turns.

And skipping or changing characters...that adds both time and variety...exactly what we want!

But when that character isn't being run? Back to 1-2 turn wins. And you CAN thunderclap in that time. 3k HP? Not a really big issue. Thats part of the problem.

Unknown

Kyosokun wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

Kyosokun wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

The people saying you cant creep past 1-2 turn kills aren't looking at the big picture here, only numbers

How about introducing a 2* hero with the following ability: Any time green is matched (by either side), subtract 3 red from the opponent. If enough people used that, Rags becomes a liability, which has ripple effects towards the entire meta without directly nerfing Ragnarok.

This is how MTG and MAA shake up the meta without completely nerfing top tiers. Introducing hard counters.

That works a lot better when you can't choose your opponents. You introduce that character, and when that's your opponent, you either skip them, or just use a different character. Thats assuming the meta of speed doesn't just overwhelm that character. Oh, you are running her. First target on the list. She becomes a speedbump that takes a 1-2 turn win and turns it into a maybe 3-4 turn win.

It's more than that. If she had 3000 hp, thats 3000 hp you have to take out before you can thunderclap. That's a lot of turns.

And skipping or changing characters...that adds both time and variety...exactly what we want!

But when that character isn't being run? Back to 1-2 turn wins. And you CAN thunderclap in that time. 3k HP? Not a really big issue. Thats part of the problem.

Have that character be required for a few tournaments, buffed for others, etc. Let people see how good of a counter it is to ragnarok, and i guarantee you people would run her (i certainly would).

You would be surprised at how responsive people are to hard counters against current meta, at least for other competitive games I play.

Unknown

DumDumDugn wrote:

Have that character be required for a few tournaments, buffed for others, etc. Let people see how good of a counter it is to ragnarok, and i guarantee you people would run her (i certainly would).

You would be surprised at how responsive people are to hard counters against current meta, at least for other competitive games I play.

Why? Just for defense? She'd be a speedbump. I honestly don't see how she would be more than that without being overpowered herself, at which point you are just replacing one problem with another, and not ACTUALLY solving the original problem of a set of characters being capable of 1-2 turn wins.

Unknown

Kyosokun wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

Have that character be required for a few tournaments, buffed for others, etc. Let people see how good of a counter it is to ragnarok, and i guarantee you people would run her (i certainly would).

You would be surprised at how responsive people are to hard counters against current meta, at least for other competitive games I play.

Why? Just for defense? She'd be a speedbump. I honestly don't see how she would be more than that without being overpowered herself, at which point you are just replacing one problem with another, and not ACTUALLY solving the original problem of a set of characters being capable of 1-2 turn wins.

Look, i'd like to theorycraft with you for ages about stuff like this, but it's the developers job, not ours

My point is, there are ways to shake up the meta besides overnerfing the top tier. This philosophy has certainly been proven for many other games. You can argue the specifics with me until the cows come home, but not the approach.

Unknown

You might wanna go look up what power creep implies, because keeping older characters relevant is not what power creep does. Ragnarok got over-nerfed, but it's only fair given how over-powered he was for so long. They might bring him back in line in a month or two - just relax and adjust, if you used Ragnarok as a crutch to do well thusfar, I'm sure you'll have enough rewards from doing so to adapt.

Puritas

DumDumDugn wrote:

For example, I'm going to use a fighting game example

In SF4, Sagat was the king. However, he got absolutely owned by C.Viper. C.Viper on the other hand, lost to a lot of other characters. Thus it was advantageous to not only rely on Sagat (or C.Viper), but others as well. As a result, although Sagat was clearly the best character in the game, he hardly won any tournaments.

I like how you didn't mention how Sagat was horribly overpowered, took relatively little skill to play, everyone knew it, and he got nerfed heavily in the next version.

Unknown

Kamahl-FoK wrote:

You might wanna go look up what power creep implies, because keeping older characters relevant is not what power creep does. Ragnarok got over-nerfed, but it's only fair given how over-powered he was for so long. They might bring him back in line in a month or two - just relax and adjust, if you used Ragnarok as a crutch to do well thusfar, I'm sure you'll have enough rewards from doing so to adapt.

Power creep doesn't turn top tier into unusable trash tier. It turns previous top tier into mid tier, at the very least, or upper mid tier.

Unknown

Whoops, double posted.

Unknown

Kyosokun wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

Kyosokun wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

Have that character be required for a few tournaments, buffed for others, etc. Let people see how good of a counter it is to ragnarok, and i guarantee you people would run her (i certainly would).

You would be surprised at how responsive people are to hard counters against current meta, at least for other competitive games I play.

Why? Just for defense? She'd be a speedbump. I honestly don't see how she would be more than that without being overpowered herself, at which point you are just replacing one problem with another, and not ACTUALLY solving the original problem of a set of characters being capable of 1-2 turn wins.

Look, i'd like to theorycraft with you for ages about stuff like this, but it's the developers job, not ours

My point is, there are ways to shake up the meta besides overnerfing the top tier. This philosophy has certainly been proven for many other games. You can argue the specifics with me until the cows come home, but not the approach.

I can. It works for many games. It also DOESN'T work for a lot of games. Or it only works because their meta is not just constantly evolving, but it's moving. Magic for example. Old sets become illegal, new sets are introduced. It's essentially a new game every new set, because old cards are phased out completely, with new cards phased in.

And even then, you know what? Magic erratas and bans cards

Unknown

You can have hard counters without powercreep and vice versa.

Sure powercreep makes the previous top tier mid tier. But what of the mid tier and low tier?


Post-nerf Rags is not low tier btw.

Unknown

Kyosokun wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

Kyosokun wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

Have that character be required for a few tournaments, buffed for others, etc. Let people see how good of a counter it is to ragnarok, and i guarantee you people would run her (i certainly would).

You would be surprised at how responsive people are to hard counters against current meta, at least for other competitive games I play.

Why? Just for defense? She'd be a speedbump. I honestly don't see how she would be more than that without being overpowered herself, at which point you are just replacing one problem with another, and not ACTUALLY solving the original problem of a set of characters being capable of 1-2 turn wins.

Look, i'd like to theorycraft with you for ages about stuff like this, but it's the developers job, not ours

My point is, there are ways to shake up the meta besides overnerfing the top tier. This philosophy has certainly been proven for many other games. You can argue the specifics with me until the cows come home, but not the approach.

I can. It works for many games. It also DOESN'T work for a lot of games. Or it only works because their meta is not just constantly evolving, but it's moving. Old sets become illegal, new sets are introduced. It's essentially a new game every new set, because old cards are phased out completely, with new cards phased in.

And even then, you know what? Magic erratas and bans cards.

MTG is a tricky case because of erratas and bans, yes.

However, just look at MOBAs, fighting games, MMOs, etc. If the game system is fluid enough, metas will constantly evolve without the need to nerf top tier into the ground.

Unless you're saying MPQ isn't designed well enough for that...well that's a whole nother argument for another day.

Unknown

Puritas wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

For example, I'm going to use a fighting game example

In SF4, Sagat was the king. However, he got absolutely owned by C.Viper. C.Viper on the other hand, lost to a lot of other characters. Thus it was advantageous to not only rely on Sagat (or C.Viper), but others as well. As a result, although Sagat was clearly the best character in the game, he hardly won any tournaments.

I like how you didn't mention how Sagat was horribly overpowered, took relatively little skill to play, everyone knew it, and he got nerfed heavily in the next version.

For you to say how little skill Sagat took to play, I have no comment. Sagat was way harder to play than the other top tiers in that game (excluding Akuma).

Unknown

DumDumDugn wrote:

MTG is a tricky case because of erratas and bans, yes.

However, just look at MOBAs, fighting games, MMOs, etc. If the game system is fluid enough, metas will constantly evolve without the need to nerf top tier into the ground.

Unless you're saying MPQ isn't designed well enough for that...well that's a whole nother argument for another day.

And I'm pretty sure all those games nerf characters who are too OP too. I know LoL does. It does both.

Unknown

ihearthawthats wrote:

You can have hard counters without powercreep and vice versa.

Sure powercreep makes the previous top tier mid tier. But what of the mid tier and low tier?


Post-nerf Rags is not low tier btw.

Looking at mischiefmaker's list, I would put Rags at about Captain America level. And that's ignoring all the effort/HP/ISO it takes to get him to 5/5/115. If you factored that in he'd be at Loki level.

FoxInSox

DumDumDugn wrote:

Kamahl-FoK wrote:

You might wanna go look up what power creep implies, because keeping older characters relevant is not what power creep does. Ragnarok got over-nerfed, but it's only fair given how over-powered he was for so long. They might bring him back in line in a month or two - just relax and adjust, if you used Ragnarok as a crutch to do well thusfar, I'm sure you'll have enough rewards from doing so to adapt.

Power creep doesn't turn top tier into unusable trash tier. It turns previous top tier into mid tier, at the very least, or upper mid tier.

Completely agree. Marvel Heroes does this right.

Every thread on nerfing ragnarok (previous to this castration) had many suggestions as to how to make him balanced. Even those that wanted him severely nerf didn't want them to go this far. I'm completely befuddled as to the thinking behind it. Making him useless (or close to it, which he now is) is not fun and is not a BALANCED solution. Most of the calls where to slightly tone him down and make other characters actually useful. If the end goal is to make all characters as bad as the ones that need boosting, the end result is just a game with bad characters that isn't fun to play.

Unknown

I think a large part of that is the meta can change but when people are paying money for things they believe can directly impact gameplay then it is a different discussion.

TF2 you buy hats which do no impact gameplay at all. If you were to pay for the soda popper then an hour later have the entire weapon changed....i think it would be upsetting or at least not what you paid for.

Granted...you do not directly pay for upgrades. you buy HP to upgrade powers making it indirect and I suppose protects devs but it does leave a bad taste in your mouth. similar to soap. ever eaten soap?

Unknown

Kyosokun wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

MTG is a tricky case because of erratas and bans, yes.

However, just look at MOBAs, fighting games, MMOs, etc. If the game system is fluid enough, metas will constantly evolve without the need to nerf top tier into the ground.

Unless you're saying MPQ isn't designed well enough for that...well that's a whole nother argument for another day.

And I'm pretty sure all those games nerf characters who are too OP too. I know LoL does. It does both.

I played DOTA for 4 years and there was nothing that compared to what Rag got yesterday. Even OP characters like timestopper got completely retooled (and still useful) instead of heavy numbers nerfing.

Unknown

DumDumDugn wrote:

Kyosokun wrote:

DumDumDugn wrote:

MTG is a tricky case because of erratas and bans, yes.

However, just look at MOBAs, fighting games, MMOs, etc. If the game system is fluid enough, metas will constantly evolve without the need to nerf top tier into the ground.

Unless you're saying MPQ isn't designed well enough for that...well that's a whole nother argument for another day.

And I'm pretty sure all those games nerf characters who are too OP too. I know LoL does. It does both.

I played DOTA for 4 years and there was nothing that compared to what Rag got yesterday. Even OP characters like timestopper got completely retooled (and still useful) instead of heavy numbers nerfing.

I won't argue there. I think the Rag nerf was too heavyhanded. But powercreep is not the answer.

Unknown

Even wisp is still viable without the 1 second tether stun!

Plus...dota you have accessories and make your heroes FABULOUS!

Unknown

DumDumDugn wrote:

This is how MTG and MAA shake up the meta without completely nerfing top tiers. Introducing hard counters.

But not exactly. They use formats with defined contents and ban and restrict cards when necessary. If MTG had had anything like what we had in Rag, it would have been banned in standard.