Oh well I use factually wrong because you’re factually wrong. You’re incorrectly defining power creep. When you have to comb through definitions on urban dictionary to get one that possibly supports your argument (if you ignore pick rate), then it’s a good sign you’re just wrong.
Your argument is that increasing average power of weapons across the board and LOWERING the top tier of weapons made DLC weapons stronger. But you also say DLC is pay to win. Which means it has to be the best if it’s pay to win. Not just better than average. You see how bad that logic is when it’s written out?
Just want to clarify that no one is pushing for the tourney rules mod to be used in official. There are some good nerfs in there though, particularly shade is well done.
If you are not able to follow up or to simply admit that you have used the word wrong then there is no point discussing. It seems you can not understand that these positions are not mutually exclusive. The argument is logically sound and there is no official definition of pwer creep. I have even given an example which shows how silly it is to simply define it by bringing in new better stuff.
But yea, I am not going another round here. If for whatever reasons you wish to discuss there is always the PM. Feel also free to flex in the void but don’t say “factually” when it isn’t facts. For the record, THAT was condescending.
Yeah this is kind of where I’m aiming for in that even after sott or moonbow or mwp get sorted there’s still bw and shade that are overpowered and so on.
Mye I recall this being a thing, hence why I’m even more baffled how some of the things put forth ever got past the testing phase.
Either the people picked to test these new additions were not familiar with the mechanics of the game(Not great enough sample of different players) or simply they were not used for testing, or the feedback was ignored to certain extend.
Maybe some of the changes were rather hastily made, due to all sorts of reasons. Recall that some of the weapons in the Forgotten Relics pack were kinda underwhelming in the preview build for that update and changed for the live version in a fairly short amount of time. Maybe something similar happened.
Again, I’ll reiterate what I said at the start of this conversation. Given how they’ve addressed balance updates in the past, I’m assuming that come autumn/winter a lot of balance issues will get touched one way or another. They seem to bundle things in one larger update rather than many smaller ones.
I’ll give Fatshark the benefit of the doubt and hold on to hope that they’ll come back from their vacations (since I believe that’s what’s going on rn) and get back to STARTING to balance the game. I don’t think the game needs a BBB so much as it needs little changes to nudge it towards a good spot to try and find that baseline of good balance we have been talking about.
The Rebalance mod seems like a good place to start, but I think Fatshark will and should come out with balance changes of their own since it’s up to them to steer the game in the direction that they believe is best in terms of balancing or hell unbalancing should they choose to.
I also believe that if wider playerbase were informed about the capabilities of the weapons they wield, it would benefit everyone and bring them into the fold of knowledge about how strong a weapon actually is. “Holy crap I can cleave through a Chaos warrior with GreatSword? I thought that weapon TRASH” is a sentiment I and many in game strangers shared and if it weren’t for players like @Rebel championing the clear strengths AND weaknesses of the weapon, many of us would be none the wiser.
In short:
Nerf/Buff the outliers carefully
Find out what’s not being played and ask if it can be made more fun
Buff Huntsman (haha PLEASE)
I think big updates may be the issue since instead of balancing the game by making sure the small changes don’t widely affect the overall state of the game negatively in any way, they just shift the meta around but keep the game state the same (still unbalanced). Basically I’m not a huge fan of large patches with tons of changes but smaller more frequent ones with less radical or less numerous ones.
I am not a FS developer but I would guess that they want to roll out the rest of the Characters (Saltz and Sienna) first before starting to balance weapons, which would be logic because everything else would be counter productive
Doesn’t have to be something as big as the BBB. But they’ve bundled all sorts of changes together in larger patches in the past, so that’s my speculation about what will happen this time around.
I don’t get in what sense it would be counter-productive though… If they make balance changes and stick to them for the new careers, all is well, innit ?
I agree to an extent. I wouldn’t want to get into an entire balance beta while I was also developing a new game and developing new DLC content. I do think it’d be good if they released a smaller hotfix to tune down some of the ridiculous stuff in the game though.
At least somebody got where I was going with this.
And yes I mean only FS can know what they have planned for the remaining 2 characters and create a patching schedule according to whichever talent they might have or weapons that could impact the game.
I don’t think it would be beneficial to start balancing weapons to a lets say complete state of balance and then having to redo the whole process a month later.
That!s where I was going with this
