In praise of Nerfs!
By
Blind_Minotaur,
Posted on: 2009-01-27 23:21 in CoH and CoV General Discussions
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gently, accurately, buff underperforming sets
Gently, accurately, Nerf overperforming sets.
[/ QUOTE ]
The problem is its easy for us to say the powersets should be more balanced, but the reasons for them being unbalanced in the first place are numerous. You have different damage categories, different resistances, different types of mez or holds. If you balance too much, you render different types useless in the long run because they'll all function exactly the same.
[/ QUOTE ]
never said it was easy. But that shouldnt stop us trying. If fire blast did 10 times as much damage as every other blast, would you say its not worth nerfing, because "you cant ever acheive balance"?
It is perfectly right to aim for balance whist creating differences. That what has been done so far. Perfect balance wont be acheived, but every timethe gap is closed (by either buffs or nerfs), something is acheived.
[ QUOTE ]
balance is needed yes i dont think you'll get a argument there but to use the SS/WP brute as a example you cant just balance it so this combination is less powerfull what you must do is balance SS and balance WP independantly of each other because they can be paired with more than just each other the same go's for fire control and kinetics they may work well togeather (some would say to well)but hows about as indevidual sets?
If you look at them as indevidual sets fire is actually pretty low in the control stakes so perhaps it should be buffed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Again, it is entirey possible to target specific combinations with minimal impact on the constituent sets.
Bearing in mind I am forbiden to call for nerfs to specific sets, so choosing the excellent and balance-challenged SS/WP purely at random, one could suggest, for instance, that Rage crash was included a cancellation of all +regen and +recovery. Whist this would have a small effect on SS, it would specifically target SS/WP the hardest.
This is only one example. To pick another purely random example, the hugely effective and game-straining fire/kin could have fire imps immune to recharge buffs/debuffs, Hotfeet damage unbuffable/un debuffable, or make containment only take controller damage to cap (rather than double cap).
But, as has been said before, if you never have perfect balance then you would shift the FOTM builds away from SS/WP and Fire/Kin (to use those examples) on to something else. With any system where there is no true balance there will always be those who can out-perform others.
And, as I have said, that point is irrelevant. If FoTM build goes from 10% overperformance and, when people swap to the next FoTM, its only 9%, you have acheived something.
Unless you are proposing that the next FoTM combo is equal to or surpasses the first FoTM, which is unlikely as it is by definition "second choice".
[ QUOTE ]
Again, it is entirey possible to target specific combinations with minimal impact on the constituent sets.
[/ QUOTE ]
Of course, if it's assumed that some form of change is needed, then there'll be a variety of possible changes and one of the possibilities will have minimal impact/collateral damage.
But it's not always easy to spot which change that is.
With the number of ATs/sets/powers/stats that can interact (on both the playerside and mobside) the system is probably too complex to spot the 'ideal' change.
That's partly why they'll always be a continuing cycle of minor adjustments - each adjustment has knock-on effects or makes another power/set seem under/over-powered and so a follow up change is required.
Gets worse as some players will exploit any possible advantage they can find - and having many more players than devs/testers means that even the most minor exploit/advantage is likely to only be spotted by the players once it's out in the field.
BTW - I think you'll find that most (if not all) posters are probably for ongoing adjustments by the devs for game balance. But what many are possibly against is:
* Using the word nerf
'Nerf' is a loaded word - and can be loaded differently for different people. If you avoid using the word nerf you'll often get a better reception... Even if you explicitly state that by nerfs you just mean minor scaling back of powers there'll still be some people who read the word 'nerf' and revert to their own personal (and possibly harsher) interpretation of the word.
* Players calling for specific nerfs on the basis of overpowered sets
People have biased viewpoints. Players often call for nerfs on flimsy, partial data/analysis and their own personal impression. Everyone's viewpoint is going to be flawed in some ways - so calling for 'nerfs' based on these possibly flawed views is bound to irritate many. If sets are overperforming, then the devs will notice and will notice when they look at hard data from how everyone actually plays the game.
By my mohawk shall ye know me!
my toons
Funny: Ee-Ai-Ee-Ai-Oh! #3662 * The foul-mouthed Handyman! #1076 * City of Norms #132944
Serious: To Save A Single World (#83744) * Marketing Opportunity (#83747)
[ QUOTE ]
And, as I have said, that point is irrelevant. If FoTM build goes from 10% overperformance and, when people swap to the next FoTM, its only 9%, you have acheived something.
Unless you are proposing that the next FoTM combo is equal to or surpasses the first FoTM, which is unlikely as it is by definition "second choice".
[/ QUOTE ]
Because with balancing you need to have buffs as well as nerfs it is entirely possible that the "second choice" could overperform by 10% or even 20%.
In this instance I think it's a case of leaving the devs alone to do what they always do. For those who say they haven't reduced characters performance in a while, look at what they have done in PVP.
[ QUOTE ]
And, as I have said, that point is irrelevant. If FoTM build goes from 10% overperformance and, when people swap to the next FoTM, its only 9%, you have acheived something.
Unless you are proposing that the next FoTM combo is equal to or surpasses the first FoTM, which is unlikely as it is by definition "second choice".
[/ QUOTE ]
Thats right you will have achieved something, you will have [censored] off another chunk of players for no reason at a time when this game can do without [censored] players off.
With you there, I would never advocate "Nerf" in its original context.. As I said, I was talking about minor shaving off of power, maybe 10% or something.
I have also refrained from calling for nerfs on specific powersets. I have picked a few purely random examples which have been mentioned by other people, im sure. Ill stick my neck out and say Jump Kick should specifically NOT be nerfed, though 
.
You actually seem to be of the opinion that I'm in the majority. Odd, lots of posts here seem to indicate they have no wish for balancing to occur at all. Not that it really matters, the devs of every single MMORPG are of the opinion that it does.
I got an idea...
Nerf it playerwise instead. So for those who want to be nerfed, nerf them, and leave those of us, who think the game is fine as it is, intact 
[ QUOTE ]
I got an idea...
Nerf it playerwise instead. So for those who want to be nerfed, nerf them, and leave those of us, who think the game is fine as it is, intact
[/ QUOTE ]
Which solves precisely nothing, whilst a lovely idea in spirit.
[ QUOTE ]
And, as I have said, that point is irrelevant. If FoTM build goes from 10% overperformance and, when people swap to the next FoTM, its only 9%, you have acheived something.
Unless you are proposing that the next FoTM combo is equal to or surpasses the first FoTM, which is unlikely as it is by definition "second choice".
[/ QUOTE ]Ah but you see the problem there is that it's not the "second choice" any longer and any changes to the FOTM power sets has an impact on every toon that has one of those two sets. That precious 1% of "progress" has also nerfed a wohle tranch of non-FOTM toons with it, they too feel the bite of your 1% (or however much it took to "balance" the FOTM combo) nerf.
In attempting to "balance" one set combo you've nerfed a whole load of non-FOTM toons. The result is a lowering of the average base level of power for that AT. So now you go to "balance" the new "first choice" and the cycle begins again, the next "second choice" becomes the new "first choice" and the average base level of power for that AT drops again. It's even possible that the cascading effects of your "balancing" will widen the gap between the FOTM combo and the average power of the AT overall.
The spiral continues until we're stuck with toons that can't fight their way out of a paper bag, or an EMP/ Defender.
In the final analysis you cannot "balance" any power set based on one specific combination of sets (eg SS/Wp, Fire/Kin, etc.), it always has a detrimental effect on other set combinations that share part of that FOTM combo.
The only way to balance a set is to look at it in comparison to its peers and only its peers.
Firstly, and again repeatedly, I have argued that a constantnerf cycle is just as bad. So you cant say we would get an ever decreasing cycle. You have missed my point there. Its nerfs and buffs. Buffs and nerfs.
Secondly, just as perfect balance would never be acheived, perfect nerfs and buffs wont either. However, if the NET gain from a power change is ON AVERAGE good, one has a victory.
Lastly, and again, I feel im repeating myself, it is entirely possible to target specific combinations - if you need too. Clearly some sets are going to be overpowered, and you just need to nerf the set. Some combinations are going to be overpowered, and, again, it is entirely possible to target those combinations.
Please note (again, Im repeating myself) that I would argue for exactly the same process for buffing. Some sets need buffing, some poor combinatinos could have targetted buffs.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
balance is needed yes i dont think you'll get a argument there but to use the SS/WP brute as a example you cant just balance it so this combination is less powerfull what you must do is balance SS and balance WP independantly of each other because they can be paired with more than just each other the same go's for fire control and kinetics they may work well togeather (some would say to well)but hows about as indevidual sets?
If you look at them as indevidual sets fire is actually pretty low in the control stakes so perhaps it should be buffed?
[/ QUOTE ]
Again, it is entirey possible to target specific combinations with minimal impact on the constituent sets.
Bearing in mind I am forbiden to call for nerfs to specific sets, so choosing the excellent and balance-challenged SS/WP purely at random, one could suggest, for instance, that Rage crash was included a cancellation of all +regen and +recovery. Whist this would have a small effect on SS, it would specifically target SS/WP the hardest.
[/ QUOTE ]
Now see i can tell you've not really thought about your sulution lets say they impliment this idea and a rage crash would zero regen and recovery.
that would cancel out health and stamina for every user of SS when they used rage so endurance heavy sets could well find them selves struggling to maintain there attacks and or shields end result lots of unhappy SS users.
[ QUOTE ]
Thirdly, im working on the proposition that the game is too easy, bordering on collapse upon itself easy.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is your error.
Clearly, the game is not too easy.
If you would like proof of this, I suggest you look back at last weekend, when the server population doubled while the game was even easier.
I rest my case.
Disclaimer: The above may be humerous, or at least may be an attempt at humour. Try reading it that way.
Posts are OOC unless noted to be IC, or in an IC thread.
*Sigh*
Read again, I am also proposing a buff to Rage: Removing its other crash effects.
Also please note, I didnt specify how long:[x] seconds. 1? 10? I dont know, youd have to see.
Lastly, those two poinst are irrelevant: its purely a hypothetical illustration. Im not proposing its implementation. The hypothetical example illustrated that a specific change can have a greater effect (positive or negative) on a specific combination of sets.
For the paranoid amongst you, Im not sure SS/WP needs nerfing, although I suspect the individual sets needs examining carefully to see if they are under or overperforming.
I can keep this up for years, there isnt a hole.
[ QUOTE ]
Lastly, and again, I feel im repeating myself, it is entirely possible to target specific combinations - if you need too. Clearly some sets are going to be overpowered, and you just need to nerf the set. Some combinations are going to be overpowered, and, again, it is entirely possible to target those combinations.
[/ QUOTE ]Yes I saw this in one of your earlier posts and dismissed it as unfounded wishwash. How exactly can you reduce the power of a specific powerset combo without detrimentally affecting other combos that carry one of the sets from that "balanced" combo? I do not believe it is possible.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Thirdly, im working on the proposition that the game is too easy, bordering on collapse upon itself easy.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is your error.
Clearly, the game is not too easy.
If you would like proof of this, I suggest you look back at last weekend, when the server population doubled while the game was even easier.
I rest my case.
[/ QUOTE ]
Lordy. The game wasnt easier or harder. You just doubled the rewards for victory. Easier to get to level 50, not easier to win. .
*Bangs head against wall*
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Lastly, and again, I feel im repeating myself, it is entirely possible to target specific combinations - if you need too. Clearly some sets are going to be overpowered, and you just need to nerf the set. Some combinations are going to be overpowered, and, again, it is entirely possible to target those combinations.
[/ QUOTE ]Yes I saw this in one of your earlier posts and dismissed it as unfounded wishwash. How exactly can you reduce the power of a specific powerset combo without detrimentally affecting other combos that carry one of the sets from that "balanced" combo? I do not believe it is possible.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well, exactly, you can't really can you. That's why the game can never truly be balanced and if you accept this as a premise then you must also accept that what balancing we do have needs to keep going, even though it will still result in an unbalanced game at the end of it.
It is the great paradox of MMO programming.
Again Mr M. you state my position better than I could.
[ QUOTE ]
Again Mr M. you state my position better than I could.
[/ QUOTE ]Not really.
You said, and I quote for clarity:
[ QUOTE ]
it is entirely possible to target specific combinations
[/ QUOTE ]
and,
[ QUOTE ]
Some combinations are going to be overpowered, and, again, it is entirely possible to target those combinations.
[/ QUOTE ]
I asked how can that be done, given that you have advocated that it is possible.
Mr M said:
[ QUOTE ]
Well, exactly, you can't really can you.
[/ QUOTE ]
So what you're saying isn't actually possible is it?
Now I don't deny that some balancing is needed but you seem to neglect that trying to target specific combinations that are seen as "overpowered" can be done without detrimentally affecting other related combinations. But it can't so your statement is false.
Well, firstly, well spotted on the first point.
Secondly, my statement is not false at all, I am arguing for possibility.
Examine again, you can Alter a set so its effect is different but the next effect is zero (maybe even a net buff)
I will use a hypothetical example (Too much resources to do, dont advocate it blah blah blah)
Fire Control gets +25% to its hold and stun durations.
Activating Hot feet makes you immune to +recharge buffs and -recharge debuffs.
Now, how does that effect the combinations:
Anything but /Rad or /Kin:
Woohoo I can hold for 25% longer! I am t3h ub3r!
Wow, im immune to -recharge debuffs. Thats pretty handy!
Hmmm, I cant get sped up anymore. Well, its not too bad, I cant do that to myself anyway
Overall, its hard to argue that this would be anything but an average buff for fire control (heck, Id be pretty pleased with this on my Fire/Storm).
Rad:
As above, with the sorrow that the +recharge from AM would be lost. Overall, Id say toon was about averaged out.
Kin:
[censored]! YOU NERFED MY TOON TO HELL! Em/ TOYS OUT OF PRAM!
Now, im not saying you cant ALTER the effects of sets by "targetted" nerfs or buffs, but you can target the combination (imperfectly). In the above example, One combination is CLEARLY more affected than the others.
Ill give a more extreme example of a buff, as my argument applies equally to this, and it will probably upset people less and make them look at the cold logic:
Say you wanted to SPECIFICALLY buff a DM/Energy Stalker:
ENERGY ABSORBTION:
Activating this power also increases the value of your "to hit" debuffs by 200%.
Bear in mind hypothetical, not avocating, it doesnt need to make sense, etc.
This is clearly a targetted buff. It will also effect those taking Soul Mastery epic (on two powers), but are you really suggesting this is not a targetted buff on the combination DM/Energy?
Oh for crying out loud. Lets just call it what it is: "Fulcrum Shift plus Hotfeet equals overpowered".
Better?
Now in reality it's actually quite possible to target this combination and only this combination.
Whilst I could talk about the Stalker's hide/critical mechanic, the best example of this is probably in Devices. Targetting drone is setup to act differently than normal when combined with AR's Sniper Rifle.
The check for this is detailed in RedTomax's listing for Sniper Rifle itself -
"33.52 Lethal damage Targeting Drone active [Ignores Enhancements & Buffs]"
Therefore a check could be made to HotFeet in the same way (since toggle buffs are identical to click buffs, they just get reapplied very quickly) to see if Fulcrum Shift is active... and only deal the extra "containment" damage if Fulcrum Shift is NOT active (and perhaps also simply deal less than normal damage when Fulcrum Shift is active). The only time this would affect a Fire/ who is not /Kin is if that Fire/ was TEAMED with a /Kin.
[ QUOTE ]
Fire Control gets +25% to its hold and stun durations.
Activating Hot feet makes you immune to +recharge buffs and -recharge debuffs.
Now, how does that effect the combinations:
Anything but /Rad or /Kin:
Woohoo I can hold for 25% longer! I am t3h ub3r!
Wow, im immune to -recharge debuffs. Thats pretty handy!
Hmmm, I cant get sped up anymore. Well, its not too bad, I cant do that to myself anyway
Overall, its hard to argue that this would be anything but an average buff for fire control (heck, Id be pretty pleased with this on my Fire/Storm).
[/ QUOTE ]
Erm, Hasten?
I'd be miffed if I had a Fire/Storm and someone took away my ability to stack Lightning Storm & Tornado.
Fire isn't particularly lacking for Control either, people just seem to think it is for some reason.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Fire Control gets +25% to its hold and stun durations.
Activating Hot feet makes you immune to +recharge buffs and -recharge debuffs.
Now, how does that effect the combinations:
Anything but /Rad or /Kin:
Woohoo I can hold for 25% longer! I am t3h ub3r!
Wow, im immune to -recharge debuffs. Thats pretty handy!
Hmmm, I cant get sped up anymore. Well, its not too bad, I cant do that to myself anyway
Overall, its hard to argue that this would be anything but an average buff for fire control (heck, Id be pretty pleased with this on my Fire/Storm).
[/ QUOTE ]
Erm, Hasten?
I'd be miffed if I had a Fire/Storm and someone took away my ability to stack Lightning Storm & Tornado.
Fire isn't particularly lacking for Control either, people just seem to think it is for some reason.
[/ QUOTE ]
Aren't most Recharge Buffs non-resistable anyway? And designed that way precisely so that sets such as SR which have inherent recharge resistance don't only get 50% instead of 70% from Hasten?
That includes Speed Boost and AM, plus Set bonuses and LOTG Uniques too.
In other words, adding 100% Recharge Resistance won't affect any Recharge buffs. Kin or otherwise.
All this idea would do is give Fire/ Controllers immunity to recharge debuffs.
balance is needed yes i dont think you'll get a argument there but to use the SS/WP brute as a example you cant just balance it so this combination is less powerfull what you must do is balance SS and balance WP independantly of each other because they can be paired with more than just each other the same go's for fire control and kinetics they may work well togeather (some would say to well)but hows about as indevidual sets?
If you look at them as indevidual sets fire is actually pretty low in the control stakes so perhaps it should be buffed?