On balance and accessibility

User suggestions to improve the game

On balance and accessibility

Postby Kittuns » Mon Jul 30, 2012 11:48 am

And why the latter will ensure more of the former, without hasty erratas.

I'll try to make this quick without writing a book, so here's the basic TL;DR version of it:

People whine over crap they think is OPOP because they don't have experience playing the other side of matchups, because if they'd try, they'd find the file they think is just so OPOP has its own set of bad matches, and was just a bad matchup for their original file.

Inaccessibility makes cards that are slightly more powerful (pre-nerf Dilate, Ruuca, Jack, Bringer, Elite Fencer, EXPrim at level -2 /w 0 SP open, etc.) seem like the most OP thing in the world because fewer players make the concentrated effort to obtain those powerful cards, grind, modify, and refine their files to unlock their cards' full potential, and when they do, their RP increases very quickly since too few players have the cards necessary to try and find a counter.

In short, if you increase accessibility, then emergent gameplay will find counters on its own, and what might have been OP only against a field of players lacking the proper cards to counter will now seem quite tame. This is why it's suddenly more difficult to errata set 11--because EVERYONE can use it, so the playing field is much more even than it ever was.

You can't make balance decisions against players that lack the proper cards and experience to stand up against what only seems OPOP. The best policy would be to improve accessibility to let the metagame evolve on its own.
Kittuns
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:39 pm

Re: On balance and accessibility

Postby angelspawns » Mon Jul 30, 2012 12:56 pm

I understand your point of view.

What happens if a player plays both sides, and then whine about crap that's OP? Because i stepped away from Refess to prove a point about Falkow.
Build myself a Diondora file: 27 winstreak on first try. I was surprised and shocked how easy it went compared to my Refess background.
Build myself an Urgant file: 2000RP. Didn't even use the metaversion. I set my target to 2000RP, got there, and abandon it.

I hate both decks and only took them as far as my patience allowed me. If i was anything of a Spike or grinder i'm sure i could take those numbers higher. Unfortunatly i need variation and creativity fluids flowing to keep me motivated playing.


One thing for me was certain: After a long time playing Refess, Falkow felt like childsplay. Having access to immediate solutions (Grims) makes this game 10x easier. There is far less "predicting your opponent" involved and more immediate solutions at your disposal. With Refess you deal with a threat with your field.
When a threat comes you can't just simply 'wish' it away. Field units in order to counterplay your opponents threats requires far more predicting, time openskills with FireArrows/Sakura/DmgSS's/SinSS's, evaluate next turns in order to press standby (and save SP reviving) or do that additional 25dmg. Agi rolls and random hits. And above all: keep SP flowing to keep together multiple units & field more, dispite taking heavy blows on your line of defence and openskills on your support.

After all this evaluating i decided Refess needed more (counterplay) options to respond to threats and strategies faster & better. I decided the power of returns needed to be toned down to create a more even playground. Wether it is with better counters or nerfs, the difference between a rush w. and w/o returns is to damn high and unbalanced.


So there you go. Valuable input of somebody seeing both sides.
Image
User avatar
angelspawns
 
Posts: 1024
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:41 pm

Re: On balance and accessibility

Postby Peralisc9001 » Mon Jul 30, 2012 1:11 pm

pre-nerf Dilate, Ruuca, Jack, Bringer, Elite Fencer

They were OP, because majority of other cards were useless and because they were really winning games on their own. Even if you have accessibility, you still don't want to be restricted to cards XYZ because only those counter cards UVW.

But accessibility does increase balance. Access allows you and your opponent to play on equal ground, make it not a guessing game, but a strategy game figuring out what the other might use and what you could use to counter anything he does use.
~ Retired ~
perhaps until the game is actually improved through change or perhaps forever since there are so damn many other games and better things to do @_@
http://www.educatinghumanity.com/2012/0 ... anies.html
User avatar
Peralisc9001
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 2:35 pm
Location: Agartha

Re: On balance and accessibility

Postby GonFreeces31 » Mon Jul 30, 2012 1:16 pm

Peralisc9001 wrote:Even if you have accessibility, you still don't want to be restricted to cards XYZ because only those counter cards UVW.

Actually, for those "all cards" tourneys, there were pretty wide distributions of cards used. There would always be a small subset of players (the spikes) who pretty much just choose top meta cards, but there was always a pretty significant percentage of people who would just play for run using whatever cards they wanted.
The True Hero / Callonia
User avatar
GonFreeces31
 
Posts: 9322
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2009 7:20 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: On balance and accessibility

Postby Icyman2 » Mon Jul 30, 2012 1:30 pm

We need to have more of those card tourneys with rules and restrictions. Make them pull out of a hat (same units for everyone) rather than all cards.
Image
User avatar
Icyman2
 
Posts: 1829
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 8:22 am

Re: On balance and accessibility

Postby Kittuns » Mon Jul 30, 2012 1:43 pm

angelspawns wrote:I understand your point of view.

What happens if a player plays both sides, and then whine about crap that's OP? Because i stepped away from Refess to prove a point about Falkow.
Build myself a Diondora file: 27 winstreak on first try. I was surprised and shocked how easy it went compared to my Refess background.
Build myself an Urgant file: 2000RP. Didn't even use the metaversion. I set my target to 2000RP, got there, and abandon it.

I hate both decks and only took them as far as my patience allowed me. If i was anything of a Spike or grinder i'm sure i could take those numbers higher. Unfortunatly i need variation and creativity fluids flowing to keep me motivated playing.


One thing for me was certain: After a long time playing Refess, Falkow felt like childsplay. Having access to immediate solutions (Grims) makes this game 10x easier. There is far less "predicting your opponent" involved and more immediate solutions at your disposal. With Refess you deal with a threat with your field.
When a threat comes you can't just simply 'wish' it away. Field units in order to counterplay your opponents threats requires far more predicting, time openskills with FireArrows/Sakura/DmgSS's/SinSS's, evaluate next turns in order to press standby (and save SP reviving) or do that additional 25dmg. Agi rolls and random hits. And above all: keep SP flowing to keep together multiple units & field more, dispite taking heavy blows on your line of defence and openskills on your support.

After all this evaluating i decided Refess needed more (counterplay) options to respond to threats and strategies faster & better. I decided the power of returns needed to be toned down to create a more even playground. Wether it is with better counters or nerfs, the difference between a rush w. and w/o returns is to damn high and unbalanced.


So there you go. Valuable input of somebody seeing both sides.


How many counterplay options do you want? You have grims to dodge any SS on the planet, an AoE fieldwiping tank that can't be taken down by max HP attacks, the most numerous and best support units outside of EX Yuni and Sumer, multiple units that give you level ups on open depending on tribe (folrart lady pally and the new 60 HP SK respectively), and your sphere's one and only weakness is that when you play units loaded up on HP and defense that have trouble hitting a 30 HP blue squishball, you get sent packing. I'm sorry but that doesn't mandate overhauling the entire game for one sphere that can use those same strategies with the best proxy and one of the best moxies in the game.

In this case, it's an agree to disagree over the state of Falkow. See, normally, I'm an aggro player. I like to play the up-tempo, quick-and-violent games files. But I acknowledge that Refess whining got Gowen destroyed--Jack (Refess hates its support units getting blasted out), Bringer (oh noes, he one-shots my level 3 support!), Rhino (waaah Refess isn't supposed to be out-tanked!), and now you're working on trying to get Falkow nerfed too.

Yes, why don't we just award everyone playing SKs or buncles or big refess 2K RP automatically while we're at it too, why doncha?

And @ Icyman2:

We've had limited tourneys before--the better players made the best metas they could there too, and the best players still won. I came in third in the first limited tourney and fourth in another in the male/female split tourney. Blacksun and GonFreeces have normally done very well in these as well. So has worthing. You still can't accept the fact that it isn't the cards--it's the players. And until you acknowledge that you simply aren't good, no amount of balance changes will allow you to win more. The better players will still beat you, just with different cards.
Kittuns
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:39 pm

Re: On balance and accessibility

Postby Icyman2 » Mon Jul 30, 2012 2:15 pm

Kittuns wrote:We've had limited tourneys before--the better players made the best metas they could there too, and the best players still won. I came in third in the first limited tourney and fourth in another in the male/female split tourney.

I don't remember which one was the first limited tourney. I came in first in the male/female split.
Image
User avatar
Icyman2
 
Posts: 1829
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 8:22 am

Re: On balance and accessibility

Postby AquasFire2 » Mon Jul 30, 2012 3:40 pm

wow this thread is interesting.Dg i understand your point of view and but i disagree because then some cards wont be used.Thats why people want eratta. Be easier to nerf a few cards then buff a lot.

Angelspawn i agree with everything you said.

Also dg when you talked about refess have countering tanks to max hp hate and other things you are referring to set 11 which is getting nerfed. also this set wasn't even fully tested.

also limited tourneys i really liked those. I did really good in them got 6 th place in one of them and 8th place in another one(or some rank like that cant remember).another reason i like them is because, I realized i work better when have less options, because i am so indecisive.
Image
User avatar
AquasFire2
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Fri Jul 29, 2011 4:52 pm
Location: Flordia

Re: On balance and accessibility

Postby Kittuns » Mon Jul 30, 2012 4:18 pm

Aquacks, it isn't about buffing cards to be top metas. It's about buffing them to the point that they're not just sitting around collecting virtual dust. It's about buffing to the point that someone decides to take them for a spin and feel they have a decent chance unless they run into a top-tier meta at which point they say "I'm not playing a deliberately fun and different file, just a bad match for me". Nobody gets mad at buffs because no card will ever get buffed to top tier meta status since you'd have to try to make a card so powerful that it breaks the current meta.

On the other hand, nerfs are a very real slap in the face, especially if they're on cards that are A) extremely difficult to collect B) the linchpin of entire strategies. A 5* takes months of point card collection, or tens (if not hundreds) of dollars to obtain, or hours of grinding and a whole lot of level up luck. But so far, errata has been "oh I'm sorry, did you lose that card you spent so many resources to get? How unfortunate. Suck it up."

Well, that's happened to me on four separate files. Pegasus Kingdom (and I suppose all variants of WK), serpent (30/30, bog, snake nerfs, and Vosrot though I never had him either), Gow Fierte (Rhino nerf was disastrous, ditto RFA, though I think this file was also obsoleted through power creep with better rush units on a whole that Gowen didn't really participate in), and BKR/Jack (the loss of Jack star was an utter disaster, since he covered the file's agility weakness). Some might argue "it's for the good of the game". Except I argue that "what game?" The players left are core players, the ones who spend time and effort to obtain certain cards and refine certain strategies. Sure, it might hurt to see that "oh hey now you can get a 5* for 30 PCs", but at least we can take advantage of that going forward as well. But seeing our current collection get reduced with nothing to compensate for it is just a slap in the face. It's like "oh hey you hit 2200 RP. Well, that's not because you're a good player, but because you're using IMBA!".

As Logress said, if you move heaven and earth and recycle your entire account to get one meta and then it gets nerfed, that's a disaster. Well, he's not too far off from what happens to free and low-spending players. They basically have to pool all their resources to making one exceptional file, and what file more exceptional than the one that gets the gold stars? To just slam a nerf on that one meta is basically tantamount to theft, in my eyes, because not only do you take that card away, but also render meaningless all the effort that came with obtaining it.
Kittuns
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2012 1:39 pm

Re: On balance and accessibility

Postby Peralisc9001 » Mon Jul 30, 2012 4:42 pm

The all card tourney has one major fault. Players that are used to the superior meta will still have a higher chance to win it. See? It dosn't matter if you have all cards if you don't know how to use them.

Sealed ones and all set restricted ones were all luck based. Ofcourse there were still noobs that pulled 3x copies of top cards and were getting the beating from a crappy crest theme deck like mine.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Broken cards shouldn't be broken to the extent they usually are.


oh hey you hit 2200 RP. Well, that's not because you're a good player, but because you're using IMBA

I'd say it's both, but most of the time when someone gets into top RP they brag like hell about it and sheeplets go along and agree that he/she is skilled.
~ Retired ~
perhaps until the game is actually improved through change or perhaps forever since there are so damn many other games and better things to do @_@
http://www.educatinghumanity.com/2012/0 ... anies.html
User avatar
Peralisc9001
 
Posts: 1949
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 2:35 pm
Location: Agartha

Next

Return to Safiria's Planning Bureau

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 2 guests

cron