Dev Thinking on Balance?

[Zapmeister]

All KO has to say is "Thematic" and if it's set, it doesn't matter how many arguments you throw at it, it is thematic to him and it's his game.

Absolutely. At the end of the day, only the dev's opinion counts for anything. That's why I'm trying to find out what it is.

Originally posted by Zapmeister:

quote:

---

If they are playing VQ's to win and they don't, does that mean that it isn't the design's fault but the player?

Certainly. But if the popularity continues over a period of time (which I believe it has) then it means they probably are winning.

And even if it doesn't, the persistent popularity is a problem in itself, regardless of what causes it, because it reduces the diversity of pretenders in the game.

---

If you're saying that the Pretender selection for competitive games is slimmer than the actual selection of Pretenders, both Human and Monster, then I agree with you 100% and have from the beginning. That doesnt mean I think you should nerf all the Pretenders above the standard or middle ground, but make other pretenders more competitive friendly.

[Zapmeister]

If you're saying that the Pretender selection for competitive games is slimmer than the actual selection of Pretenders, both Human and Monster, then I agree with you 100%

Well, I'm saying more than that, so perhaps we're not in full agreement. I'm saying that the Vampire Queen in particular stands out as the most popular pretender by a wide margin. That's only a subjective view, of course, but it's one shared by many posters to this forum.

In other words, I'm proposing that a nerf to the VQ would be the biggest single balance improvement that could be made, short of reviewing the whole pantheon.

[Pirateiam]

You assume this hasn't been done, as if a month ago when it surfaced it wasn't given a few preliminary tests. Or if it wasn't tested when it was first created in Dom2. I don't have to take ideas to IW, because IW reads these Boards. If a Beta Tester thinks something is a good idea (like say Arralen's Pangaea Mod) then they will try to lean on it to see if the Developers would like it.

If you'd like to assume that Beta Testers only put their own feelings and don't take both sides, there is nothing anyone will say that will convince you otherwise. It's not a them vs you, it's a concentrated effort.

You also have to look at it from IW's point of view. Maybe they don't think there is a problem or there is enough reasonable doubt to not make whatever changes happen to be foaming at the mouth. All KO has to say is "Thematic" and if it's set, it doesn't matter how many arguments you throw at it, it is thematic to him and it's his game and I respect that. If I have a real problem with it, you can Mod it.

I did not assume it was not tested but since it seems to be a major concern with many players I did assume that there would be an explanation of the results of the test? If the conclusion of the betas and devs is there is nothing wrong then I will except it. Have I missed the conclusion, could you lead me to the Posts?

Since I have Beta tested many times before I do not think it is an us vs them situation. In fact it should be a team work effort - betas - devs and customers.

Again if Ilwinter believes it is thematic, it is thier game and I will except it. Just state this and we can move on.

Originally posted by Zapmeister:
In other words, I'm proposing that a nerf to the VQ would be the biggest single balance improvement that could be made, short of reviewing the whole pantheon.

This is where personal opinion differs. My personal belief is the biggest single balance improvement that could be made would be making LI a factor in the game by cost-effectiveness and either battlefield viability or ability. As it represents an entire swath of units in each and every nation/theme.

To each their own and what they feel improvement, I never said you shouldn't have started this thread or your curiosity should not be sated.

[ May 04, 2004, 06:24: Message edited by: Zen ]

Originally posted by Pirateiam:
I did not assume it was not tested but since it seems to be a major concern with many players I did assume that there would be an explanation of the results of the test? If the conclusion of the betas and devs is there is nothing wrong then I will except it. Have I missed the conclusion, could you lead me to the Posts?

Rome was not built in a day and neither are Developer Decisions. You'll have to wait for them to answer your question. Developers are notorious for making you wait for the patch before learning everything they have adjusted.

Since I have Beta tested many times before I do not think it is an us vs them situation. In fact it should be a team work effort - betas - devs and customers.

Then you should also know that a good % of the suggestions both beta and customers are not implemented for any number of reasons and should be able to accept the time frame they are delivered in.

[Zapmeister]

This is where personal opinion differs. My personal belief is the biggest single balance improvement that could be made would be making LI a factor in the game by cost-effectiveness and either battlefield viability or ability. As it represents an entire swath of units in each and every nation/theme.

Oh, sure. I should have said the biggest single balance improvement to pretenders, which is what we were talking about.