What does character re-balancing mean to you?

jamesh

The rockett said:

Even updates to the 2/3/4* feeders in champ levels. Still have some 3* that both give the same 4*. 
Example:
Elektra and DD give Elektra 4* 
Rags and Drake give X23
Gamora and SL give SL 4*
Colossus and Patch give XFW

Not sure if I am missing any others. 

Beast and Angel both give Jean Grey covers (and in the same colour order at that).  That was a bit of a head scratcher, given the other recently added X-Men characters without feeders.

The rockett

jamesh said:

The rockett said:

Even updates to the 2/3/4* feeders in champ levels. Still have some 3* that both give the same 4*. 
Example:
Elektra and DD give Elektra 4* 
Rags and Drake give X23
Gamora and SL give SL 4*
Colossus and Patch give XFW

Not sure if I am missing any others. 

Beast and Angel both give Jean Grey covers (and in the same colour order at that).  That was a bit of a head scratcher, given the other recently added X-Men characters without feeders.

Ah. My one 3* Angel is maxed champed and the other one is getting rebuilt so I could not see this.  I thought this was the case but wasn’t 100% sure.  Thanks for that. 

Kahmon

To me character rebalancing means free covers from system reboot.

Borstock

To me, the easiest way to re-balance the game is to outright eliminate the 5* tier. But that would probably drive everyone away, too.

JHawkInc

1) To me, a character rebalance is an overhaul of the entire character. It's the "big fix" that happens 1-2 characters at a time, and is accompanied by a System Reboot. Not updating champ rewards, not minor tweaks or gameplay changes (fixing how individual powers work, slight buffs like letting Green Goblin fortify repeaters, the introduction of repeaters in the first place, that time they updated powers that work with team-ups and made people mad with how 4Cyke and SWitch changed, etc).

To me, the purpose of a rebalance is to take a character that is subpar, either due to powers not working as intended (like the original Riri build, which wasn't bad in theory, but never worked well in practice), or due to being overshadowed by the changing meta (say, the original Star-Lord revamp)

2) I think this question approaches things from the wrong direction. It's not about moving characters up/down a list of ranking (because that's a zero-sum game and ultimately pointless), it's about making the characters closer together. Extreme outliers, good or bad, aren't great for the game.

3) Sure, I don't mind them fixing outright broken things (3* Gambit, or the original 4* Star-Lord before he got hotfixed). 

4) I personally don't. I trust the devs to look at the data they have and make the call. As slow as they are to fix and change some things, one thing they do well is take time to pour over the data. I don't see any reason to think they've done a bad job of this so far.

5) Not really. You would think the booster shot of positivity would help, but the people that frequent the forums are too negative for it to really be worth the dev's effort. People complain now about the lack of updates, but when were getting regular rebalances people complained that the wrong characters were getting changed. It's impossible to appease people who only want to be negative, so I don't see reason for the devs to make rebalances solely for the sake of good will.

6) You could shift that mindset, but it would take a significant overhaul/change to the game. More fights like Kaecilius, or an achievement/quest system that rewards different styles of play.

LifeofAgony

“4) I personally don't. I trust the devs to look at the data they have and make the call. As slow as they are to fix and change some things, one thing they do well is take time to pour over the data. I don't see any reason to think they've done a bad job of this so far.”

How do you know that?  When have they released any sort of data to coincide with any of their decisions besides the made up reasoning for Old Man Logan nerf?  That’s a really big assumption to say they’re taking their time pouring over data.  The most recent communication about why most changes were being delayed was because of supports being introduced.  What data have they been pouring over exactly?

rixmith

Re-balances are fun! Well, buffs are fun. Nerfs, not so much.But here's some thoughts:

Let's say the devs re-balance 5* Hulk (beyond fixing the bug where his transformed self doesn't get his level buff, which needs to be fixed no matter what). 

Let's say his buff makes him about as good as 5* Spidey. Does it matter? People with Thor or Gambit probably still won't use him. And if you have Hulk champed, you probably have most or all of the top tier 5* characters champed as well.

Let's say his buff makes him top tier. Yes! Hulk should be top tier. He's Hulk! Now most of the player base is unhappy because he's Classic so they can't get him.(Oh wait, that's like Gambit now!)

What if we buff him and then use a 5* release spot for the new improved Hulk! That could save a bunch of development effort that could be used for something else! The 5* player base could get him from Latest Tokens. That would be awesome for a lot of the player base. But it probably doesn't get the WHALE portion of the base to spend since they already have him champed. 

So re-balancing him makes him MUCH MORE FUN on that one event a year where he is the 5* Essential. It helps a very small slice of players who got really lucky with their Hulk pulls and have him champed but no top tier 5*'s. If you make him top tier it helps all the people who have him champed, most of whom don't really need that help (but at least it changes the meta).

Don't get me wrong. I'd love to see Hulk fixed. I'd love to see it be difficult to decide what team would be best for a node. I'd love to get bonsues for using different teams on every fight so that coming up with smart team structures would be fun and worthwhile and having balanced characters would be meaningful. But I'm not holding my breath.

Because if you make Hulk a solid mid-tier 5* I'm still probably pulling out Thor and Chavez. So unless there is a fundamental change to the game which makes using most of all of your roster advantageous, I'm not sure how to justify the effort of re-balance work.

Dragon_Nexus

Well before it used to mean making previously meh 4* character usable and fun.

But I'm in 5* land, so...the only thing that matters now is the five 5*s I have champed. And that's pretty sad, honestly...

zeroswitch

To me, it means

• New hero (that we have 4 of already) will become a Latest 4-Star character
• Old hero (hope you got 'em) will become a Vintage 4-Star character

....wait, that's not re-balancing at all?  My bad.

In actuality, some buffs of numbers (dmg, health) to neglected or poor characters shouldn't be impossible.  

Chrono_Tata

To me, character rebalances are a way to keep the meta fresh and interesting, while not requiring too much development resources as new features.

So as a player it's usually a good thing, but from a business perspective I guess there are incentives for the devs to have clearly overpowered characters that people will spend money to buy, and they aren't earning any money from character changes.

Still, I'd like to see more small rebalances between seasons, such as damage, health or other number rebalances. It doesn't take as much effort as character overhauls and even small buffs to weak characters are generally well-received by the community, and I don't think player goodwill should be undervalued.

Straycat

1) B. Maybe not a major overhaul of abilities, but some update to their kit that makes them more useful in the current meta and in general, and keeps with the idea of how the character should work.

2) No, I don't think they should rebalance just for the sake of it. I don't think just changing the numbers would be a good idea. I dunno, I feel like just upping the numbers is lazier than not doing anything.

3)  I don't want nerfs, but I can live with them I guess.

4) If the problem with the character has been addressed or not. Drax had 2 of the worst kinds of moves. Destroys friendly cds and one that ends the turn. But he was very conditional before, and still is. Not buffed enough. Elektra had a purple that was mostly self harming and her red trap tile was too easy to destroy. Now, still not great, but her problems were mostly addressed.

5) I think character rebalances are fun. Something to look forward to. I don't take it as a sign the devs are listening, or not, I just think its something that keeps the game interesting.

6) Probably not

ZeroKarma

I believe that re-balances are a necessary action by the devs to:

a) Make a character more relevant or useful than previous because he/she is too weak and represents an extreme outlier on the negative side of the power band

b) Manage existing OP characters and bring them better in line with the overall meta when they are an extreme outlier on the positive side of the power band. 

Sometimes I'm sure there are other reasons. People complained forever that Spidey was an iconic character and shouldn't be a terrible 3* as an example. 

The developers really painted themselves in a corner with a couple of things: 

1. Vaulting - During the vaulting period it was relatively easy for modest spenders to get 4* close to 370. The removal of vaulting means that people who took advantage of this period are more likely to use these max, or close to max champs, instead of newer characters. Level 320 to level 370 is a HUGE difference when boosted. 

2. Wild swings in power in the 5* tier
- MPQ releases two very undesirable 5* characters at the bottom end of the power band.
- People hoard forever because missing a 5* doesn't have any repercussions
           - Fixed with 5E kinda
- MPQ releases an OP character that changes the game and is a requirement for competitive play and the hoarders rejoice!
- Digital Day and some major "oops" moments mean that OP character is not just there, but THERE in terms of many level 500+ copies running around
- Character leaves Latest tokens, is never fixed, no counter is created, and therefore no one has any incentive to spend again until the next OP character arrives

Fix? Re-balancing!!!!!

PenniesForEveryone

HoundofShadow said:

1) What does character re-balancing mean to you, especially for those in 4* or 5* land?

Does character re-balancing mean:

a) making minor updates to the characters' abilities that make them more effective? For example, increased damage, decrease ap needed, increase scope of effects etc.

b) major overhaul of characters' abilities?

c) turning a perceived bottom-feeder characters into a top 3 or top 5 characters? For example, 5* Hulk, 5* Dr Ock, Kraven, 4* Elektra, Winter Soldier, Sentry etc.

d) others?

To me it's more about making all characters pretty equal in strength.  The meta will always gravitate toward the best characters - even if they are only very slightly better than the others, but the others should still be strong enough so that players can still have success with them.

HoundofShadow said:

2) Should character be re-balanced for the sake of re-balancing? If one character moved up a spot after re-balancing, another character must move down. 

No, again the goal should be to have them all relatively balanced - it's the ones that are significantly better or worse than the rest of the pack that need to be moved more toward the middle.

HoundofShadow said:

3) How comfortable are you with your top character (s) getting nerfed?

Totally fine with it.  OP characters are bad for the game, and I recognize the potential for a character that I've spent good money to acquire to be nerfed.

HoundofShadow said:

4) How do you determine whether a character has been buffed or nerfed enough?

By usage I would say.  If a Gambit nerf dropped the 90% Gambit teams I see to 50-75% I think you could call it a success.  

HoundofShadow said:

5) Does periodic character re-balancing helps players in this forum to feel better? To prove that devs are "listening" to them?

Hahaha, no.  They've demonstrated countless times that they have no idea how the top tier meta works, and almost no interest in consulting with any vets or forum dwellers beforehand to learn.

HoundofShadow said:

6) Potential Challenge: The top players are usually only interested in characters who can end a fight as fast as possible. Any support characters that do not increase significant damage or help them fire powers faster are usually perceived to be useless. Defensive characters are perceived to be useless because they slow down the fight. 

Is it possible to shift the mindset of top players to not focus on purely speed or power? 

Not really no.  Speed is just a byproduct of the rest of the game mechanics and the reward structure.  You compete for placement and in PvE the winner is the player that does it fastest.  In PvP a big part of scoring high is being able to hit a lot of high value targets fast enough to shield and avoid taking hits and losing those points.  As long as these types of mechanics are in place you will continue to see players focus solely on speed.  Things like moving placement rewards to progression might combat that.

marshall

Small buffs and nerfs and the bread and butter of online games. Look at Blizzard: Diablo, Warcraft, WoW, they've always kept on top of the meta to ensure older builds are viable, even if not top tier.

Right now going in with OML/PHX/Banner/BSSM means you are unlikely to win and very likely to get hit by everyone else.

sambrookjm

LifeofAgony said:

sinnerjfl said:

The rockett said:

DR. S:  Why is he like a marshmallow with his health?  My level 462 Dr S is 39315.  Want to guess Okoye 450 base health?  59K.  Why?   

Because of his passive yellow. Can you imagine chewing through a 60k Dr Strange and you can't fire powers...  (sure stuns exist, not many in the 5* tier and you still need to keep him perma-stunned). No thanks.

Bolt passive is just as bad if not worse and he has way more health.  That argument doesn’t hold water.

Bolt's passive is powerful, but it doesn't penalize you for doing what you're supposed to do in the game.  The point of the game is to gain AP to fire off your character's abilities.  Strange says "You can do that, but it's gonna hurt."  It's also why 5-star Strange's passive doesn't heal up your characters like the 3-star one does.  At the 3-star tier, it's annoying but not overpowered.  Healing up all of your 5-stars for 2000 health every time an enemy fires off a power?  Unless you're running Gladiathor/Daredevil at half health, that's crazy good.

It's (presumably) the same reason that the Mutations are the symbiotes with the lowest health.  Their passive ability Guard Dog penalizes you for something that you're supposed to do and is usually beneficial - getting rid of enemy special tiles.