fight4thedream said: @Akoni: Interesting argument. It begs the question though: What do you consider to be an OP or "broken" character? I only ask because presumably an OP character would check off all the points on your list since they would be head and shoulders above the rest of its tier and would thus be ubiquitous in game. So where do you draw the line?Nerfs should always be a last resort, when the dev team has reached the conclusion that a character does too much for its tier and viable counters would only be more "broken".
Kolence said: Yes, I too would like to hear from OP what would be considered broken.Especially on that 3rd point. How many health (packs) should we expect to lose each fight? Some characters I wouldn't call broken on their own, mechanically. But paired with someone else, they suddenly can beat teams 100 levels stronger and win fights twice as fast as the next best thing? Of course everyone has to use that same team then, at the very top.
Akoni said: fight4thedream said: @Akoni: Interesting argument. It begs the question though: What do you consider to be an OP or "broken" character? I only ask because presumably an OP character would check off all the points on your list since they would be head and shoulders above the rest of its tier and would thus be ubiquitous in game. So where do you draw the line?Nerfs should always be a last resort, when the dev team has reached the conclusion that a character does too much for its tier and viable counters would only be more "broken". I would consider a character to be nerf worthy if that character fulfills a role that is far above and beyond what devs expected making it almost impossible for players to counter. Using Polaris as an example, though she can be lightening fast, I do not believe she is overpowered because she is easily countered by players. If she were to have high health, therefore, making it difficult for other 4* players to take her out, I would then consider her overpowered. Kolence said: Yes, I too would like to hear from OP what would be considered broken.Especially on that 3rd point. How many health (packs) should we expect to lose each fight? Some characters I wouldn't call broken on their own, mechanically. But paired with someone else, they suddenly can beat teams 100 levels stronger and win fights twice as fast as the next best thing? Of course everyone has to use that same team then, at the very top. On the topic of health packs, some characters are meant to take a little bit of a bruising depending on the team they are on. Sticking with Polaris as an example, I expect to use 1 HP each time I use her. She's just too squishy. For a character like Juggern4ut, I expect to use 1 HP every 3-5 battles. It really depends on how the character is designed. Tanks are built to take a lot of hits. When going up against tanks or heavy hitters, I expect to use more HP. I'm not saying that burning through HP should be the norm. We're too smart for that. We will always find ways to conserve resources and get more out of what we have. Nerfing a character comes into question when the only way to win against a specific character is to burn through all of your resources.To your second point, teams complicate things. Okoye on her own is good. iHulk on his own isn't horrible. Together, they are amazing. Are they unstoppable though? I would argue not. In another thread, someone posted all of the teams they have used to beat it that weren't Hulkoye. Ridiculously good doesn't necessarily mean broken. I think a team would have to be even more ridiculous across the board in order to be warranted as overpowered. @Srheer0, for example, referred to Bishop doing a multitude of things off of a passive power. Though devs had a vision in mind for Bishop, he just did too much which required a nerf.
entrailbucket said: You're basically making two arguments here that don't necessarily agree. First you say that devs should only nerf when a character is so dominant that they literally cannot be beaten by players ever. We've never seen a character or combo like that in this game, I'm not sure what they'd have to do to make one. I hope to never see it!The second argument is that devs should nerf when a character's usage in practice disagrees with their vision. That's a lot more interesting, though of course we can never know exactly what their vision was. It seems to me that this would generate a lot more nerfs...players find interesting ways to use characters all the time that aren't necessarily what the devs intended.
entrailbucket said: This only takes defense into account, which is a common theme from players. But can't a character be overpowered on offense?What about the Sentry/Hood combo from the earlier days of the game? That combo reliably ended every single fight on offense in 2-3 moves, but was very weak on defense. All PvP matches during that time could be finished in a minute or two at most, and it was common to see scores in the 4000-5000 point range. But any team could easily beat Sentry on defense.Should they have nerfed Sentry? In retrospect most current players who were around at that time think it was the right move, because the game had become ridiculous. But many, many others argued back then that he was fine -- since he was easy to beat and played fast, it wasn't a problem.
Wonko33 said: there is no such thing as roster diversity , whatever you do , people will always play the best character, period. It is impossible to make them all equal , people will play the best ones
entrailbucket said: Wonko33 said: there is no such thing as roster diversity , whatever you do , people will always play the best character, period. It is impossible to make them all equal , people will play the best ones The answer is, apparently, to make the best ones change every week!
TheEyeDoctorsWife said: entrailbucket said: Wonko33 said: there is no such thing as roster diversity , whatever you do , people will always play the best character, period. It is impossible to make them all equal , people will play the best ones The answer is, apparently, to make the best ones change every week! Good idea , the devs have been boosting a set of characters every week , what if they also banned a different set of characters every week?I’d love a give and take balance to weekly boost/ sidelined
fractalvisions said: During the anniversary they have a poll to see what our favourite characters are. Perhaps, just for fun, they could have a post anniversary event where they lock out the fan favourites.