436 réponses à ce sujet

[GodlessPaladin]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

GodlessPaladin wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

What do you think of the fact that something has been overnerfed, but not overbuffed?

I think that both overnerfing and overbuffing are bad.

Do you think that fact might have something to do with people getting over reactive when it comes to nerfs?

...Why would it have anything to do with that?

I assume overbuffing means "buffing a weapon until it is too powerful such that it invalidates the position of various other meaningful choices in the metagame" and overnerfing means "nerfing a weapon until it is too weak such that it loses a great deal of relevance in the metagame."  If you mean something else, please clarify.

Both of these things have results contrary to the fundamental game design goal of balance, e.g. "setting the effectiveness of competing options such that they have similar relevance to the metagame."

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 09 août 2012 - 05:09 .

[LeandroBraz]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

What do you think of the fact that something has been overnerfed, but not overbuffed?

I think that both overnerfing and overbuffing are bad.

I would like to know your opinion about the piranha nerf, you think it was enough?

[JaimeBaby]

Fantastic thread.

[Immortal Strife]

I love it, this thread is all the rage. Good job GP, you have a knack for reigning in opposing counsels. I truely believe Bioware tries to do what they think is right both gameplay wise and fiscally; however, I feel they fumble the ball from time to time with overnerfing (Krysae) and overbuffs (Indra). The good news is Bioware seems persistant is their persuit and they are willing to correct errors by performing rollbacks. There is hope still and I see no need to panic and head for the exit.

Modifié par Immortal Strife, 09 août 2012 - 07:07 .

[N7Kopper]

Immortal Strife wrote...

I love it, this thread is all the rage. Good job GP, you have a knack for reigning in opposing counsels. I truely believe Bioware tries to do what they think is right both gameplay wise and fiscally; however, I feel they fumble the ball from time to time with overnerfing (Krysae) and overbuffs (Indra). The good news is Bioware seems persistant is their persuit and they are willing to correct errors by performing rollbacks. There is hope still and I see no need to panic and head for the exit.

"hope still?"
When was there ever not hope? (Well, except the original ending...)

It's because BioWare ignore their community on this subject that the balance people are so good at their jobs. A community isn't a homogenous block. Stats are. And stats aren't liars.

[NasChoka]

Fang92 wrote...

While the guns have been buffed so have the enemies. that should be a consideration.

This.
+
A lot people are just annoyed because of the quantity of changes. Do we really need about 10 changes every week? Maybe the team doesn't get paid if they don't change something every week xD

There are also not many good weapons for gold or platinuum. If you try to kill something with any smg or most assault-rifles you know what I mean. The few good ones are the guns people argue about. If you change the viper for example nobody cares because everybody uses widow bwidow or valiant.

If you change the new (favorite) guns of players who just got them it's not surprising that people react this way - even if according to your post - there are more buffs. 
btw I play biotics or shadow and rarely
use a gun 

Modifié par NasChoka, 09 août 2012 - 08:02 .

[Poison_Berrie]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

You mean outnumber, not outweigh, as it's entirely subjective whether or not someone thinks an extra Prime on objective waves with less chance to be staggered outweighs (insert weapon here's) buffs and nerfs.

The fact is that people throw around the nerfs as evidence that all things are being overnerfed, while claiming that all buffs are meaningless and never did anything.

This thread statistically proofs that point wrong. There have been only seven guns that have been (overall) nerfed and only three of those nerfs actually amounted to something more than added weight. There have been 29 buffs and a lot have been reasonably sizable boosts. 

And I'll repeat my earlier point about buffs to enemies:
They are reactionary to the enemy being too easy, in other words you are already going through them with less effort than you should if all factions were equal in difficulty. 
If you think all weapons should move up to keep doing the same damage against buffed enemies, you don't understand why they buffed the enemies in the first place!

Modifié par Poison_Berrie, 09 août 2012 - 08:16 .

[jackdaniels284]

GodlessPaladin wrote...


TALON HEAVY PISTOL
(+30% of original damage) and shields/barriers damage (+30%)

HURRICANE SMG:
(+41% of original damage)

Thanks for this info dude, i had no idea talon had bonus shield/barrier damage. now i feel i have to find a character to put both these on without the need for weight reduction mods. most likely a infiltrator.

[samb]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

samb wrote...

GP, what is your point here? Are you trying
to show that balance is being achieved? By "proving" more buffs are
present than nerfs?

No, that is obviously not what is being shown.  If you bothered to read my post, you would see what I said was being shown.  I was rather explicit.  What is being shown is that the claims that weapon nerfs outweigh weapon buffs is completely false.  This has nothing to do with whether the end result is actually balanced or not.

I read your opening post and that was what I got. If you wanted us to hold judgement until you finished I'd say fine, but that doesn't mean we can't discuss what has been posted. As has been pointed out, enemy buffs play a bigger role and some things can't be crunched into numbers. Another thing to keep in mind is that people dislike the timing of the nerfs. As if BW was using them as bait and then nerfing them once they served their purpose. 
I'll wait until you get to that point before I say anything then.  While you maybe right about weapon balances, I don't see it translating into a change in player behavior. Most people still use use a carnifex when possible for example. 

[MWaHa]

This is the single best thread in the history of the forum.

[BerryDiesel]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

BerryDiesel wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

cuzIMgood wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

When will the elite realize that not everyone has the ability to solo Platinum with an Avenger?

wtf does that have to do with anything?  Platinum should be hard and guns should be balanced.  There are different difficulties for a reason, go play which one suits you best.

Yeah, and never unlock anything.

Ever.

i played bronze for maybe a week before moving up to silver.  I rarely(if ever) play gold, and my manifest calls you a liar

How many hours a day do you play?

Sorry, went out for some drinking.  Played maybe 2-3 hours to start. 
after a month or so, my playtime went down a lot to maybe 1.5 hours. 
depends on how much work I have to do on any given day.  Could be I'm
one of the lucky ones that RNG favors, yet silver is still a viable
means to unlocking the "elite" weapons everyone is crying about...
although the aforementioned drinking sometimes makes me play for longer

edit: on a side note, more credits for silver matches might be nice, but the unlock system, in conjunction with my desire to play, have kept the MP as one of my preferred games on a daily basis

edit(again; I've been drinking): Thanks to GP for an INTELLIGENT (sorry for caps) thread on the illegitamcy of all the whining "nerf/buff" threads.... so sick of all the tears at this point

Modifié par BerryDiesel, 09 août 2012 - 10:09 .

[soldo9149]

On the piranha nerf, they just rolled its damage back slightly. It was not over done at all and barely shows it was nerfed on platinum and gold. Some will say its to much but its not a game breaking nerf like with what they did to the falcon. How I miss the old falcon and its greatness.

[mcz2345]

You have the piranha stats wrong:
This is the current state of the gun:Damage decreased from [70.9-88.7] to [61.7-77.1]
You wrote:Current Damage: [70.9-88.7]

Modifié par mcz2345, 09 août 2012 - 10:12 .

[SavagelyEpic]

BuckshotSamurai wrote...

Oh come on now. You know damned good and well that the buffs are minuscule but when they decide to nerf something it gets neutered. Furthermore, BW continually refuses to buff weapons that clearly need drastic changes to make them worth consideration on anything above Bronze. Sure, Red John can take a level 1 Human Adept with a level 1 Eagle into Gold and breeze through it in 18 minutes solo, but that doesn't make the HA or the Eagle any less crap for the average player.

BW needs to stop making adjustments based on the best players with optimal setups and give the average player something to work with.

This thread is just smoke and mirrors with numbers. A large amount of buffs by miniscule, negligible percentages are weighted far less than a small number of significant nerfs.

In other news, the impact of game nerfs still vastly outmatches that of buffs.

[Prawny]

You have an unclosed square bracket! Aaah!

[Hulk Hsieh]

I think the damage buff of gears (up to 15%) should also be counted if enemy buff is to be discussed.

[GreatBlueHeron]

BuckshotSamurai wrote...

Oh come on now. You know damned good and well that the buffs are minuscule but when they decide to nerf something it gets neutered. Furthermore, BW continually refuses to buff weapons that clearly need drastic changes to make them worth consideration on anything above Bronze. Sure, Red John can take a level 1 Human Adept with a level 1 Eagle into Gold and breeze through it in 18 minutes solo, but that doesn't make the HA or the Eagle any less crap for the average player.

BW needs to stop making adjustments based on the best players with optimal setups and give the average player something to work with.

This.

And math really only means so much on paper--it's the actual game play I care about. 

[FlowCytometry]

NasChoka wrote...

Fang92 wrote...

While the guns have been buffed so have the enemies. that should be a consideration.

This.
+
A lot people are just annoyed because of the quantity of changes. Do we really need about 10 changes every week? Maybe the team doesn't get paid if they don't change something every week xD

There are also not many good weapons for gold or platinuum. If you try to kill something with any smg or most assault-rifles you know what I mean. The few good ones are the guns people argue about. If you change the viper for example nobody cares because everybody uses widow bwidow or valiant.

If you change the new (favorite) guns of players who just got them it's not surprising that people react this way - even if according to your post - there are more buffs. 
btw I play biotics or shadow and rarely
use a gun 

Since you mention SMGs- they exemplify another example of power creep not related to stat changes: introducing powerful new options. The gear bonus was the most prominent example (~15% overall buff, w/ grenade capacity gear being way overbudget and even more a boost on the relevant classes), but the mere release of more powerful options like the Harrier, Piranha, Acolyte, Reegar, and new gear/mods are their own versions of power creep that outweigh a slew of nerfs.

Take SMGs, for example. All but the Hurri would before be considered no-gos vs. armor, so if ya weren't lucky or didn't want to burn high lvl AP ammo, SMGs were a no-man's land on gold bosses or vs. Reapers. Now w/ powerful new mods (like the pistol UML that *works* and the SMG HVB) you get even more options. Suddenly you can use that Scorp or Talon on a power user w/o much training and still have very fast cds. Suddenly if ur unlucky and ur best SMG was a Hornet ur weapons base sustained damage per second vs. Gold bosses goes from 320 w/ heat sink and HCB to 585 w/ heat sink and HVB (Harrier IV's sustained dps w/ clip and peircing is ~656 vs. Gold armor, for comparison); you could actually bring a Hornet to Gold Reapers or Platinum and not have armored units laugh at you.

Hell, my HSe w/ no weight training can now pack a UML Acolyte for shields/phantoms (since we now know BE's weakness vs. shields is they only get a 100% dmg multiplier vs. them) and a UML Hurri w/ HVB for armor/everything else and still have a 200% cd (since SMG's UML does work if a pistol w/ UML is also equipped). That's pretty f-ing crazy and there def wasn't any option near that power a month ago for the same character.

Modifié par FlowCytometry, 09 août 2012 - 11:07 .

[N7Kopper]

GreatBlueHeron wrote...

BuckshotSamurai wrote...

Oh come on now. You know damned good and well that the buffs are minuscule but when they decide to nerf something it gets neutered. Furthermore, BW continually refuses to buff weapons that clearly need drastic changes to make them worth consideration on anything above Bronze. Sure, Red John can take a level 1 Human Adept with a level 1 Eagle into Gold and breeze through it in 18 minutes solo, but that doesn't make the HA or the Eagle any less crap for the average player.

BW needs to stop making adjustments based on the best players with optimal setups and give the average player something to work with.

This.

And math really only means so much on paper--it's the actual game play I care about. 

I'm assuming "something to work with" in this case means "something that makes Platinum closer to Silver".

[GodlessPaladin]

BuckshotSamurai wrote...

Oh come on now. You know damned good and well that the buffs are minuscule but when they decide to nerf something it gets neutered.

The reality of the track record shows that this is not true.  Larger weapon buffs outnumber large weapon nerfs, and the majority of weapon nerfs have not been anything close to a neutering (5/8).  There are only 3 weapons which have received large nerfs in the 5 month history of weekly balance changes.

Anyone pretending that there is an incessant stream of heavyhanded nerfing and proportionally meaningless buffing turning all the guns in the game into garbage is doing just that:  Pretending.

Modifié par GodlessPaladin, 09 août 2012 - 01:35 .

[atum]

Thanks for this thread, GP.

[Transairion]

Many of the weapons that have received buffs are now meaningful contenders in the metagame, including the Talon, Indra, Hurricane, Claymore, Scorpion, Mattock, and more.

How many weapons that were buffed went from totally worthless to good/great/amazing? None of those listed strike me as doing so, in fact of those only the Indra was ever considered bad to begin with. In fact I've always seen the Hurricane, Talon, Claymore, Mattock and Scorpion as pretty dang good weapons. As you said, the Eagle gained a what... +88% buff but it still sucks hard.

What weapon buffs changed people from never picking up a weapon to taking it all the time? None that I can see, though I've only seen a single Krysae and Typhoon since their nerfs. Lots of little buffs haven't made people pick up the bad-but-buffed weapons that I've seen, yet they've dropped nerfed weapons never to be seen agian.

Nobody seems to be using the Typhoon anymore, but all the Eagle buffs haven't made anyone pick it up as far as I've experianced. Tiny buffs to junk still leaves junk, big nerfs to awesome makes them average and they're dropped.

Still, appreciate all the information, but it's pretty obvious nobody really picks up a buffed weapon if they weren't already using it.

Modifié par Transairion, 09 août 2012 - 01:54 .

[ryoldschool]

GodlessPaladin wrote...

BuckshotSamurai wrote...

Oh come on now. You know damned good and well that the buffs are minuscule but when they decide to nerf something it gets neutered.

The reality of the track record shows that this is not true.  Larger weapon buffs outnumber large weapon nerfs, and the majority of weapon nerfs have not been anything close to a neutering (5/8).  There are only 3 weapons which have received large nerfs in the 5 month history of weekly balance changes.

Anyone pretending that there is an incessant stream of heavyhanded nerfing and proportionally meaningless buffing turning all the guns in the game into garbage is doing just that:  Pretending.

In those three I assume you are including the Typhoon, and if not then you need to make that four.  I do not believe that those 150% factors vs armor/shields/barriers works ( perhaps it did pre-nerf ) and after the nerf is really is not worth taking anymore.   This is a big letdown since its an ultra-rare and it was very good, now just wasted upgrades.  Had the gun just been a rare it would not hurt nearly as much.   We even had a thirty page thread about it, started by bioware, but they have done nothing other that say after the nerf it is still "very powerful".

[ryanshowseason3]

Once again nice job Godless. You don't deny the truth. I was satisfied to see that you did recognize significant nerfs while showing the reality of the buffs.

ME3 MP is not spiraling into a black void of nerfs.