Feedback Wanted: Character Balance

BriMan2222

Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder

jp1 said:

BriMan2222 said:

tiomono said:

tdtmf said:

, but taking my time and money for a product, and then changing the product is unethical.  

So its unethical to change a product that someone paid for even if said product includes an agreement that the consumer accepts that the product can change anytime or even cease to exist at the whim of the creator of said product? You might not want to pay for anything with updating software ever again if you feel its morally wrong.

Exactly.  Any game with online play does this.  Look at any MMO, classes are buffed and nerfed on an almost monthly basis.  You could spend literally years building a mage only for them to say mages are too powerful and nerf them.  Same thing with any fighting game.  Characters have their special moves, speed, and damage tweaked with every single patch.

It's common video game practice.

So, common equates to ethical? I don’t think so. Those “agreements” are completely one sided and have at times resulted in class action suits when people got tired enough of being screwed over. 

Just because something is common doesn’t mean you as a consumer have to agree with the practice or accept it at face value. Maybe if there were a few more independent thinkers out there we would be treated with a little more respect in regarding our dollars.

Hive mentality has completely destroyed the integrity of this and many other industries. Micro transactions galore, because we are conditioned to accept it. Even then...don’t expect to keep what you paid for, that’s not part of the arrangement. How badly should we be treated as consumers before we start to say something about it?

If a nerf blast destroys your toon that costs you hundreds or thousands of dollars/hours to get...you should get to choose the exact replacement. Not placated with some silly tokens that are diluted to the point of uselessness.

It wouldnt be ethical if they just did it with no warning, but you've ignored the fact that tiomono pointed out that YOU AGREED TO THIS.  When you play any of these games there is a disclosure that by playing the game you agree to their terms.  Part of those terms are that as tiomono pointed out "the product can change or shutdown completely"
You agree to these terms when you install the game.

You can't complain about the terms after you agreed to the terms.
 
i could also make the argument that it would be unethical and boring not to adjust characters in online games.  It would be unethical if they had allowed an obviously broken character like gambit to be unchanged and just let the lucky people who had him dominate pvp, and also boring as pvp would just be gambit and friends.

If everyone played a mage and there were no fighter, rogues, healers,etc. because mages were OP that would be super boring.  It was super boring in Mortal Kombat 11 when every single online player was playing Jax because he was OP.  It's not unethical, it's good game balance.

jp1

Some characters could use super soldier serum

I guess everything governments do is also “ethical” since we have no choice but to agree with it. That’s one way to look at it. It’s not the way I see it though.

Sure, you could not play the game at all, I wonder how much they would like us to choose that option instead of asking for a fair shake.

BriMan2222

Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder

jp1 said:

I guess everything governments do is also “ethical” since we have no choice but to agree with it. That’s one way to look at it. It’s not the way I see it though.

Sure, you could not play the game at all, I wonder how much they would like us to choose that option instead of asking for a fair shake.

Comparing a game that you are in no way obligated to play to a government that you have "no choice" but to live under, even though you do have a choice because no one is preventing you from moving to another country, is comparing apples to watermelon.

You've also completely ignored the valid reasons that adjusting OP characters in any game is necessary for the health of the game.  You're complaining about fairness while ignoring that these nerfs are done for the sake of fairness.

jp1

Some characters could use super soldier serum

BriMan2222 said:

jp1 said:

I guess everything governments do is also “ethical” since we have no choice but to agree with it. That’s one way to look at it. It’s not the way I see it though.

Sure, you could not play the game at all, I wonder how much they would like us to choose that option instead of asking for a fair shake.

Comparing a game that you are in no way obligated to play to a government that you have "no choice" but to live under, even though you do have a choice because no one is preventing you from moving to another country, is comparing apples to watermelon.

You've also completely ignored the valid reasons that adjusting OP characters in any game is necessary for the health of the game.  You're complaining about fairness while ignoring that these nerfs are done for the sake of fairness.

Did you read the second part of my post? I clearly stated you could opt out. 

Nerfs done for the sake of “fairness” wouldn’t completely destroy the character. These are done to change the meta and create more spending opportunities. The thought of them trying to perfectly balance the game so there is no incentive to spend on the best toons is both unrealistic and boring.

SnowcaTT

Some characters could use super soldier serum

Tylander45 said:

As for 5s, prof x is flawed.  No other character can inflict the level of damage he can on the first turn with a series of cascades.  I’ve seen a 550 prof x deal out over 100k in damage on the first AI move with no powers firing.  That’s a major flaw.  A simple stun of himself after firing his power on the first match 4 would easily fix him.

I see PX is becoming the 3rd of choice of a variety of teams in Sim. I laughed when I saw someone that had broken for 3x (very high) latest and was still running PX + Panthos the other day. Lots of Thorkoye + PX, plenty of Grokitty/BRBkitty + PX, a boat load of X-men including PX, and a variety of other "anything + PX"

I've almost wiped to small PX's when they cascade into a couple match-4's. As they get bigger, the additional AP to take him down first makes that threat exponential. I can see why he's probably the most popular character to run with in the all 5* teams now.

bluewolf

Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder

Well, all the players would agree that you should be fairly compensated for a nerf.  It's not wrong to suggest that the devs should try to be fair in their compensation.

I am not sure what compensation should look like.  If they nerfed Bishop, for example....in the past a 4* nerf was paired with a higher sellback (HP and iso) and that was it.  Now it's going to take a lot of devoted resources to even champ a 4 let alone grow them to a high level.  5's are in a similar spot, as they always have been, although dilution has made it harder and hence more expensive to raise anyone to a high champ level.

As others have pointed out, what you and we want and what the devs offer are often two different things.  The devs are presumably aware that a nerf, regardless of compensation, is rife with risk in terms of either driving high performing players away completely or causing them to become much less willing to spend on the game.

Ultimately all you as a player can do is control your own response to a potential nerf and the compensation.

As always, any money people spend on this game should be viewed like gambling at a casino.  No promises are made other than "the machine works". 

fight4thedream

Some characters could use super soldier serum

jp1 said:

Nerfs done for the sake of “fairness” wouldn’t completely destroy the character. These are done to change the meta and create more spending opportunities. The thought of them trying to perfectly balance the game so there is no incentive to spend on the best toons is both unrealistic and boring.

This is actually a point I have been mulling over and I think you hit the nail on the head. In order for there to be "great" characters there have to be "good", "mediocre" and "bad" characters. I think that's why we see a lull between meta characters because the dev team is very aware that pushing out new meta level characters at a high frequency risks 1. sending the player base into exhaustion and 2. obsoleting a relatively new 5*(and 4*) characters too early. 

Having key characters to focus one's efforts on for a certain period of time is better than having players burn out with the realization that the character they chased will be obsolete within the next 2 or 3 releases. 

So disparity between characters in tiers is a common feature of these types of games and I can see why. I think the problem some people have is that they want each tier to be distinctly better than the previous tier but I think a healthy meta would allow for some overlap. 

SnowcaTT

Some characters could use super soldier serum

fight4thedream said:

I think that's why we see a lull between meta characters because the dev team is very aware that pushing out new meta level characters at a high frequency risks 1. sending the player base into exhaustion and 2. obsoleting a relatively new 5*(and 4*) characters too early.

Devs used to say they used MtG for inspiration, and "intentionally bad" is certainly something MtG does.

I agree with you they are aware and trying not to push out meta level characters quickly, but I'd suggest for a different reason: they learned from Panther + Thanos (back-to-back) and Gambit + Thor (in same three, I forget if DD was in between). If you do that, your big spenders (or hoard breakers) will only spend one time, and never again.

I don't player exhaustion is a concern (or we wouldn't see the frequency rate we do), but you're right about obsoleting those old combos. Panthos ruled for a good long time, as did Thorbit, as did Thorkoye. Panthos and Thorkoye were both old (hard for newer players to get) by the time their rule was over, and these combos were replaced by newer meta shifts - which meant new money spent. It's smart business, gotta keep the tap flowing. It's why I voted early on here "buffs": I'd like to see old ones get better - but I also doubt anything gets buffed into a meta category, it's not a Latest Legend (4-6 month) spending source for the devs...and it would be hard to get those new buffed meta 5*'s for anyone after the (presumed) initial special store was gone.

Better to keep the money flowing and the hoards small by putting Thor a distance from Okoye, Kitty a distance from BRB, PX a distance from....whoops. I know when I've discussed this theory with some, they suggest that "how good" a character will be isn't fully tested/known before it gets in the wild, I like to pretend it is.

It's why many broke for X-men: it seemed to be the best three together in a long, long time. PX/BRB are likely the best together we've seen that close together since maybe Okoye/JJ; I'd suggest since Thor/Gambit.

Jacklag

Some characters could use super soldier serum

Edit: This comment was writen in a very mean spirit. I apologize to everyone.

jp1

Some characters could use super soldier serum

Jacklag said:

jp1 said:

Perhaps you have more 5s than I do, I’m not familiar with your roster. The fifteen I do have champed contain most of the top and second tier 5s. Maybe that is a factor. Or maybe I’m willing to look for different strategies, or use other teams besides my top three. In any case, in my experience, he isn’t nearly as much a problem as he is made out to be.

Well, enlighten us, then. How do you beat a Bishop, then? I surely don't know.

Need to see your roster to make any suggestions.

Falconfreak

Some characters could use super soldier serum

I would like to see some of the bad 3* and 4* get a rework. Thing is a great character in the comics. In this game? Naw fam. He should be a tank with a heavy punch but his passive yellow is way too hard to pull off. His red costs too much for the damage it does. Compare his red to Sabretooth for example. His green is too random. Let the player pick the focus point of the diamond shape to at least give him some board clearance ability.

Jacklag

Some characters could use super soldier serum

fight4thedream said:

Edit to add: My apologies if any of this is incoherent. It is waaaaay past my bedtime but I figured I should burn the midnight oil and strike while the iron is hot.

Actually, this was an excellent read. You should consider moving this post to the Tips and Guides section.

AXP_isme

Some characters could use super soldier serum

Jacklag said:

Edit: This comment was writen in a very mean spirit. I apologize to everyone.

It may have been mean spirited but kudos on the apology. Also, it did make me chuckle so thanks for that too. 

tiomono

Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder

fight4thedream said:

So disparity between characters in tiers is a common feature of these types of games and I can see why. I think the problem some people have is that they want each tier to be distinctly better than the previous tier but I think a healthy meta would allow for some overlap. 

Some overlap is fine. Problems come in when one character from a tier below is always a great pick vs 100% of the tier above them. Kind of like how bishop all on his own punishes regular match 3's for the entire 5* tier.

RentedPanda

Not sure if this has already been said in this thread, but I think the problem isn't characters being OP or underP, it is that PVP rewards are not worth the effort.  Nerf kitty, grocket, juggs, DP or bishop and I don't have the time and energy to get to 75 in Sim, because Sim matchmaking.  I can probably beat all the teams I see with specific counters I have access to (and sometimes I do, for the giggles) but without the quick wins, 75 matches for a single cover worth having (arguably) is too much.  

Spudgutter

Some characters could use super soldier serum

tiomono said:

fight4thedream said:

So disparity between characters in tiers is a common feature of these types of games and I can see why. I think the problem some people have is that they want each tier to be distinctly better than the previous tier but I think a healthy meta would allow for some overlap. 

when one character from a tier below is always a great pick vs 100% of the tier above them. 

Only when paired with specific other characters of the next tier above.  And even then, that is just your opinion.  There was a time that 3* iron man was a "great pick" over a lot of 4*, and no one complained that i can remember. 

There are now 40 5*, and in a pick 2 environment, bishop works well with about 5 or 6.  Pair him up with over 20 and let me know how those matches go.

tiomono

Some characters could use a dusting of nerf powder

Spudgutter said:

tiomono said:

fight4thedream said:

So disparity between characters in tiers is a common feature of these types of games and I can see why. I think the problem some people have is that they want each tier to be distinctly better than the previous tier but I think a healthy meta would allow for some overlap. 

when one character from a tier below is always a great pick vs 100% of the tier above them. 

Only when paired with specific other characters of the next tier above.  And even then, that is just your opinion.  There was a time that 3* iron man was a "great pick" over a lot of 4*, and no one complained that i can remember. 

There are now 40 5*, and in a pick 2 environment, bishop works well with about 5 or 6.  Pair him up with over 20 and let me know how those matches go.

I think you dont know what bishop does if you think he needs specific teammates to punish every 5* characters basic match 3.

It is not an opinion to say that when a 5* champed character makes a match 3, bishop will jump to the front take that hit throw the damage back roughly 200% then gain 5 blue ap. That's in game fact.

Daredevil217

Rocket ONLY pairs well with Kitty.  Worthy ONLY with Hawkeye (2.5% of the tier). "Only" 6 people is still 15% of the tier.

Obviously no one is pairing Bishop with Wasp to Call that Swarm earlier (shame really).  Bish not being paired with a lot of 5s says more about how power creep has past many of them by and speaks to the weakness of those 5s- it is not a commentary on Bishop.  This is why we need buffs of those lower tier 5s as well as a Bishop nerf. Not one or the other.

Pair Bishop with any top-tier 5 and he dominates.  Especially if they have a top tier blue, which luckily only Strange and BRB have (jury is still out on Sinister, though I'm sure that pairing will be a thing).  I've also seen him with Jess, Thor, Kitty, Daredevil, Iceman, Okoye, Professor.  Bishop/Top Tier 5 is what people's queues are clogged with after a certain point.

The point is that Bishop is the best 5* in the game right now and that's evidenced by what everyone is running.  It's not even close.

StormDragonE55

Some characters could use super soldier serum

I would have voted for both the serum and the nerf powdering if I was able to chose both.  Some characters could use a small dose of nerf..... everyone above me has made it obvious which ones need it, though I'll add Kitty to that pool.

Most of the older 5 stars and 4 stars need an adjustment to their power requirements.  It takes too long to gather enough ap to launch an attack and by the time some of them manage.... those players using strictly the newer characters have demolished the older toons.

Spudgutter

Some characters could use super soldier serum

tiomono said:

Spudgutter said:

tiomono said:

fight4thedream said:

So disparity between characters in tiers is a common feature of these types of games and I can see why. I think the problem some people have is that they want each tier to be distinctly better than the previous tier but I think a healthy meta would allow for some overlap. 

when one character from a tier below is always a great pick vs 100% of the tier above them. 

Only when paired with specific other characters of the next tier above.  And even then, that is just your opinion.  There was a time that 3* iron man was a "great pick" over a lot of 4*, and no one complained that i can remember. 

There are now 40 5*, and in a pick 2 environment, bishop works well with about 5 or 6.  Pair him up with over 20 and let me know how those matches go.

I think you dont know what bishop does if you think he needs specific teammates to punish every 5* characters basic match 3.

It is not an opinion to say that when a 5* champed character makes a match 3, bishop will jump to the front take that hit throw the damage back roughly 200% then gain 5 blue ap. That's in game fact.

Well, yes, that part is a fact.  I am not disputing that. 

But that isn't the point.  If he keeps doing it, he dies.  And when he is dead, he is no longer helping or doing anything.  You aren't winning every match if you pair him with most of the next tier above.  

Daredevil217 said:

Rocket ONLY pairs well with Kitty.  Worthy ONLY with Hawkeye (2.5% of the tier). "Only" 6 people is still 15% of the tier.

Obviously no one is pairing Bishop with Wasp to Call that Swarm earlier (shame really).  Bish not being paired with a lot of 5s says more about how power creep has past many of them by and speaks to the weakness of those 5s- it is not a commentary on Bishop.  This is why we need buffs of those lower tier 5s as well as a Bishop nerf. Not one or the other.

Pair Bishop with any top-tier 5 and he dominates.  Especially if they have a top tier blue, which luckily only Strange and BRB have (jury is still out on Sinister, though I'm sure that pairing will be a thing).  I've also seen him with Jess, Thor, Kitty, Daredevil, Iceman, Okoye, Professor.  Bishop/Top Tier 5 is what people's queues are clogged with after a certain point.

The point is that Bishop is the best 5* in the game right now and that's evidenced by what everyone is running.  It's not even close.

I still dispute this.  You say the queues are clogged with bishop, and that may be the case, but i am willing to bet that more often than not, it is because of the **** mmr matchmaking showing the same people. 

Since this thread, i have been paying even closer attention to opponents, and most of the people i see, 45-50 people that i may see in a pvp, are not running bishop.  It is usually 2 or 3 people, and i see that team pop up between 3-10 times, depending on where i am in the event and how i skip around them.  They are just as worthless to me as the low point matchups, because they aren't worth my time.  If pvp were made up different, where speed wasn't a factor, and i wasn't getting hit on my climbs by half a dozen people in the time it takes to use my 4*, i would hit them more often.  But as it is, when i am given three choices at a time, and they are all worth 45-50 points, i look to hit the ones that take the least amount time.  The only time i hit them is when i am lucky enough to see them early in the event, when they are worth 75 points and i am not working on my climb.

And so, in that scenario, everyone wins.  I get to use my 4* once or twice every few events, i still hit top rewards with the least amount of time and matches, and i don't care about how they play or how they get a "free" shield because it has zero impact on me.

And by the way, i did try running wasp and ock, and i lost more than i won, and even then a couple of those wins i had to use whale team ups with.  

Second side note.  Just ran jj, halfthor and bishop against kitty, hammer and valkyrie and couldn't take them out.  Hammer isn't limited to *only* Hawkeye.  I then took those 3 (val, kitty, hammer) against okoye, profx and strange.  It wasn't even a contest, i was annihilated. At least when i was fighting hammer, i was able to down him.  Against that team, i didn't even make a dent.

@fightforthedream has it right, the game has a pretty decent situation of rock/paper/scissors going on right now (which is kind of unique for the life of this game) and all people keep doing is complain about how rock keeps beating scissors without acknowledging that paper even exists.