Is Rebalancing (Nerfing) Stronger Characters Necessary?

Chipster22

Chrono_Tata wrote:

In theory I have nothing against nerfs, but considering 90% of the nerfs this game has seen in the past I wouldn't trust the devs within 10 feet of a nerf bat.

Their nerf bat doesn't seem to be made of a harmless soft foam safe for in house use, but rather an aluminum slugger with a nail welded to the end which has been dipped in a nerve toxin.

snlf25

KGB wrote:

Every Buff to one character is in reality a Nerf to every other character.

This was best illustrated when they gave a health boost to a lot of characters a while back in certain tiers. That health boost in effect nerfed all characters that didn't get the boost.

So what D3 is doing with the buffing of characters in the 4* tier is slightly nerfing all other 4* characters. Given enough time and enough buffs those characters who once defined the meta will be left behind until they themselves require buffs. It's an arm race.

KGB

I can't really agree with that. Massive sweeps like the damage and health increase or the nerfing of the entire 3* champion pool, sure. 100% agree. But I don't for a second think the improvements to Mr. Fantastic diminished any other character with the possible exception of Carnage, but he was pure excrement until Medusa came along anyway. When buffs happen sometimes new and truly exciting positive things happen, look at how IM40's buff made so many characters so much better. He single handedly redeemed the overly ravaged Goddess Thor.

snlf25

westnyy2 wrote:

No more nerfs!

There is enough things that need improving and I don't feel there are any characters truly overpowered. There are certainly characters that when boosted are better than others, nut none grossly overpowered.

Typically when we hear nerf, OML is the first brought up. In my view, OML is not overpowered. He does very little damage until he transforms or at least gets his strikes out. Many characters do more damage. He is simply used the most. He is used the most for his true healing which enables you to conserve health packs as you climb PVP or grind in PVE. \

Rather than nerf the true heal, change the health pack system. I don't pretend to know the number of health packs that are purchased with hero points and what kind of revenue it generates. Based on the play styles of my alliance, there seems to be very little purchases of additional health packs. A solution could be to only need health packs for downed players. The remaining survivors of any given match can start the next match with full health. I believe this would allow for more diverse teams that would be seen in the PVP mode. Some could see this as a nerf to any character with true heal but I don't believe it completely is. Sometimes you simply need a meat shield.

EXACTLY!! OML is how I avoid having to use up all my health packs which means I can play more which means I have more fun and spend more. Heath packs are nothing but a faux restrictive energy system and if the devs try to increase usage/need/expenditures too aggressively around health packs me and many others will be out!

bbigler

They should NOT nerf strong characters for many reasons:
1) it helps players transition between tiers by having those "in-between-tier" characters
2) it would automatically make everyone mad who spent precious resources on the nerfed character
3) power contrast is necessary in many games, let me explain.....

Characters only appear strong when compared to weaker characters, you don't appreciate good until you've seen bad. We need those bad 4*s in order to appreciate the good ones. If all 4* characters had the same amount of power, then no one is special and the game becomes a little boring. Imagine if all top tier 4*s were nerfed a little and all bottom tier 4*s were buffed a little, and everyone was at the same "level". Magic the Gathering understands this concept, they purposely make some bad cards so that you appreciate the average ones; they also purposely create some great cards so that you get excited and spend extra money to get them.

Contrast is necessary.

GrimSkald

In my opinion, there is no character in the game at this time that stands enough above the others that a nerf is required. This has not always been true (Goddess Thor and X-Force Wolverine were both overpowered, though in both cases I think they were nerfed too hard,) but I believe it is true at this time. Iceman is good, to be sure, but I'd say he's only slightly better than Jean (dat Passive, though...) and about on par with Red Hulk. And, honestly, there a number of non-AoE characters that are just as good.

I'm not saying a nerf is never the answer, I can go into why it sometimes is, but I do not see it as an answer for any one character at this time. I'm not aware of any combos that need nerfing either, though I've heard some talk about 5* Hawkeye/Coulson/Captain Marvel...

xidragonxi

westnyy2 wrote:

Typically when we hear nerf, OML is the first brought up. In my view, OML is not overpowered. He does very little damage until he transforms or at least gets his strikes out. Many characters do more damage. He is simply used the most. He is used the most for his true healing which enables you to conserve health packs as you climb PVP or grind in PVE.

I think it's important to point out that OML is used the most because he's been available the longest (other than Surfer, who was kind of lame when he first was released) and therefore more players have him and have more covers for him. If Black Panther was the second 5* ever released, you can bet you'd see him as much as you see OML now.

AXP_isme

Personally I think the approach of buffing the least used characters is probably the right one. They could even go so far as to buff this characters from the bottom to the absolute top. That way players with existing strong characters don't suffer, they still have the second best character in that tier, and you encourage people not to throw away their covers for the Mr Fs of this world. You may feel that RNGesus has trolled you by giving you a max covered MrF but when he's buffed to the top of the heap...

Kishida

AXP_isme wrote:

Personally I think the approach of buffing the least used characters is probably the right one. They could even go so far as to buff this characters from the bottom to the absolute top. That way players with existing strong characters don't suffer, they still have the second best character in that tier, and you encourage people not to throw away their covers for the Mr Fs of this world. You may feel that RNGesus has trolled you by giving you a max covered MrF but when he's buffed to the top of the heap...

My alliancemate who champed Wasp a couple weeks before her buff definitely looks a lot smarter than we thought at the time.

TxMoose

xidragonxi wrote:

westnyy2 wrote:

Typically when we hear nerf, OML is the first brought up. In my view, OML is not overpowered. He does very little damage until he transforms or at least gets his strikes out. Many characters do more damage. He is simply used the most. He is used the most for his true healing which enables you to conserve health packs as you climb PVP or grind in PVE.

I think it's important to point out that OML is used the most because he's been available the longest (other than Surfer, who was kind of lame when he first was released) and therefore more players have him and have more covers for him. If Black Panther was the second 5* ever released, you can bet you'd see him as much as you see OML now.

this. when you look at rankings done by those who actually have most of the 5s, oml is usually in the middle somewhere, maybe in the top half. not anywhere near the consensus #1 in the game. its bolt, a bunch in the middle, and banner.

they have made sure power creep ensures that any OP characters they accidentally make too strong won't be top dog long. as someone else said, the current batch might be the strongest group of 12 we've had, including the hb-rulk bunch that included the original big5. before the switch-out at the start of the season (put in mk and kate for Coulson and mordo), it was definitely stronger.

ammenell

vision went from meh to mr bombastic to who?

it was a bug, sure, but man, that was a ride.
could we have this bug again please?

TxMoose

ammenell wrote:

vision went from meh to mr bombastic to who?

it was a bug, sure, but man, that was a ride.
could we have this bug again please?

current bug is similar for characters like SL and wasp. add strong strikes and things die quickly.

Jarvind

Don't nerf.
Don't nerf.
DON'T. NERF.

If I ever own a game studio, this is going to be plastered all over the walls.

The only time something needs to be nerfed is if it utterly dominates to the point that nothing else matters. I'd argue that nothing in MPQ fits that description - 5*s were crazy when they came out, but now that the tier has had a chance to mature a bit, the novelty of lolhellamatchdamage has worn off.

All nerfing would do is foster resentment. As it is, it seems like they've taken the much more logical approach of buffing the **** characters to bring them more in line with the good ones. Here's hoping that trend continues.

(Please note that I'm not counting "fixing an obvious bug that makes a character better than intended, i.e. Wasp right now," as a nerf.)

StarScream

Pants1000 wrote:

There are times when a nerf is a good idea, but I don't think there are any current characters that are too overpowered. You could make a case for 3* Thanos, 3* Strange, or Peggy, but I wouldn't.

The only way I would make a case for nerfing ***Strange is if they nerf the goons too. Two or more goons in a node? I immediately go to Strange. He makes their way too overpowered **** more tolerable.

Tony_Foot

I'd welcome an ice nerf, but only because only a couple of the latest have less covers than him and I know it will take me 2 years of bonus heroes to cover the ****. They don't need to nerf, they will fool everyone into forgetting about previous top tier by feeding in better ones now they have vaulted 75% of what you have poured your money/iso into. They will re-work only the very latest 12 and bring out a couple that make Ice look like bagman.

STOPTHIS

You should never nerf unless completely necessary and right now no one character needs to be nerfed.

If Demi think that certain characters need to be nerfed due to high usage, they're looking at the problem from the wrong angle. They've created a game where long matches are harmful. Longer you're in a match in PvP, the more likely you are to be hit. Especially, on the high end. Take too long in a PvE match and your refresh points won't be as good as the person ahead of you. And when the difference between 10th place and 11th can be less than 100pts, a long match is a crushing blow. The longer the match, the more likely it is you're going to have to use a health pack or 3.

The overused characters are best at alleviating these pains and they all tend to fall into a few categories, often with some overlap:

High damage dealer/AoE Speed up matches (fuel themselves or team/lower AP costs) Slow down the opponent (stuns/steals AP/rises AI's AP costs) Self true healers

The most well received buffs fit into those categories. It's why IM40, Starlord, and Wasp are all great buffs and Mr. F, Miles, and Vision mostly were met with a "meh". I didn't use Falcon because I didn't like him, I stopped using him once I realized he didn't do anything to make my matches quicker as his Redwing animation took too long and he did no damage. Now that he does decent AoE damage, I'm using him again.

If they wants us to use more characters they either need to change how the game is played or change how characters play. Nerfing anyone doesn't fix why certain characters are overused. It just means new ones will take their place at the cost of angering most veteran players.

Wumpushunter

why is there no option on your poll to boost weak characters to match the strong?

Andre_Leca_89

Pants1000 wrote:

There are times when a nerf is a good idea, but I don't think there are any current characters that are too overpowered. You could make a case for 3* Thanos, 3* Strange, or Peggy, but I wouldn't.
.

Why nerf Strange he's a PVE character.

Why Thanos I only see him in lightning rounds.

Peggy only shows up in PVP when she is boosted she isn't a danger unboosted but still usable.

DrDevilDinosaur

There was a time when specific pairs of characters dominated the meta-game so absolutely. Even in most of those cases, nerfing was really not necessary.

The 5* tier is a meta-game unto itself. It's something that I can only observe through theorycrafting myself right now - or through reports of people who are at that stage of play. So I can't speak with too much authority, but I believe that there are enough characters to provide at least a little variation, and - although short of any hard counters - a few interesting partnerships which have a kind of hybrid Scissors-Paper-Rock relationship.

Recent changes to the 3 and 4* tiers - vaulted characters, new 3*'s, bonus heroes, etc - seem to be stirring up the meta-game at those levels now. Strange, Thanos, and Hawkeye have all brought some interesting gameplay to the 3* tier, with new counters and combos. The same is happening at the 4* tier, just on a much tighter schedule. I think there are a few characters in this tier that are "quite powerful" but, right now, I don't think anyone is being overused to the same extent as the old doubles were.

Now, more than ever, I think the focus should be on ensuring each new release is equivalently powerful to their tier. With only 12 4* characters "available", you don't want any of those to be a misfire. There are still a few characters in the Archives that need some maintenance & restoration work done on them, but's that's a case of bringing the golden oldies up to scratch rather than nerfing anything.

Killians8

If rebalancing is the goal, nerfing is no different than boosting. In fact, if there are more overpowered than underpowered characters, then nerfing is the quickest route to balance.

For those that complain or want refunds on nerfed characters, you're forgetting to be grateful that you've had the advantage for so long which you shouldn't have had. I wish I had an OML yellow so I could assert that dominance, but I don't.

babinro

Yes! I accept that I'm in the huge minority here but I'm all about character balance for the good of the game and that includes nerfs.

Having said that nerfs need to approached VERY carefully. You pretty much need to ask yourself several questions before you nerf.

1) Is this character genuinely overpowered or is it simply popular?
Case and point: OML is popular but anyone in 5* tier with a reasonable group of 5's will tell you that OML is not actually overpowered. There are several 5's that are considered to be more powerful for both PvE and PvP play. OML is a reliable health pack saver but he does not excel in other areas.

2) If a power is genuinely overpowered, is the character themselves still balanced by another means?
Iron Fist purple is completely bonkers and overpowered. 5* Doctor Strange blue is completely busted as well. Yet both of these characters are well balanced by their lower health pools.

3) Is the overpowered character actually harmful for the game?
XForce Wolverine pre-nerf genuinely was. His black skill was meta defining in a harmful way in that it just accomplished way too much at once. Great damage + board shake + AP destruction + AP gain all in one leading to potential cascade as well as follow up skills. A skill like this is overpowered and any attempts to try and push other characters to that power level would have made the game silly. I dread to think how swingy and crazy this game would be if a skill like prenerf XF became the norm.

4) As time passes, is the nerf STILL relevant?
Here's the one that just about every company ignores and I find it truly sad. Games evolve with time, there is some natural power creep with time. As a result, nerfed cards should get TOP PRIORITY for a buff. The fact that XF green has NOT been buffed to it's pre-nerf state is beyond me. That green nerf was questionable in his prime and as the game stands today its a frankly insulting 4* level skill.

Personal Opinion Time! What characters do I personally feel demand a nerf?
I can't stress enough how much this is just personal opinion and as such it shouldn't be the focus of this reply.

1) IM40: I feel his yellow is undercosted to the point where its actually harmful for the game. Unlike Fist, IM40 has a great health pool to compliment this AP gain skill. MPQ recently had a bug that made yellow cost 8AP instead of 6AP and I think most of us would agree that the skill costing 8AP still made IM40 a great character. If I had my way I'd have kept that skill at 8AP.

2) Juggernaught: Here is a 1* whose damage and health places him leagues above his 1* alternatives. Most players just roster him alone cause he can easily school ddq on his own. Either buff all other 1* characters in the game or take the easier action by making Juggs better balanced against other offensive characters.

3) Ares: This character is basically the Juggernaught of 2* land but not quite so extreme. In fact I think he just needs to be tuned back slightly. You have other 2's that are pretty excellent and are close in terms of power to Ares but they are often balanced out by needing multiple characters for synergy or simply having half the health.

It may surprise people but I'm mostly happy with everything in 4* tier and 5*. Both of those tiers have their BEST characters but I'm not convinced those characters are so good that they are harmful for the game. Sure Peggy, Star-Lord and maybe Carol all push the limits but I'm not convinced they go TOO far relative to other great options in their tier. 5* is actually impressively well balanced IMO. Bolt is probably the best character in that tier but with only 1 active spender and the possibility of helping your opponents AP gain I feel he's well balanced for his benefits.