-
If you are reporting a bug, please head over to our Technical Support section for Bannerlord.
taleworlds does not care about the experienced players multiplayer scene
- 主题发起人 Lincoln_Hawk
- 开始时间
正在查看此主题的用户
Actually dont think balance should be up to the entire playerbase. Noone wants their class to get nerfed unless they're into competetive.
Yes, I've been thinking about that too. Competitive players are obviously more competent to talk about balance than others, that doesn't mean that casual players should have no say in this particular matter.
Ye just saying you'll have a hard time then since balancing for a game without e-sports is hard. Casuals don't know what makes broken stuff broken so things that are a problem for competetive players are unlikely to be one for casuals and vice versa.
Shield HP is currently a great example.
Shield HP is currently a great example.
The devs don't have to rely only on one type of data and judging from their earlier responses they aren't going to. Getting data from as many sources as possible is beneficial.
getting data from as many sources as possible is not beneficial when it comes to balance.
Certainly not when someone claims cav needs a buff!
最后编辑:
Says you?
yes says I. when it comes to balance, do you really think the feedback of new players is helpful? do you really think a random guy on TDM knows which classes or perks are too strong, or what mechanics are being abused and are dominant? they might have ideas about these things, probably some correct ideas too, but that doesn’t mean that kind of feedback is necessary for proper balancing. you’re more likely to get higher quality and more accurate balance feedback from good competitive players. that doesn’t mean their feedback should be unquestionable or taken as an absolute truth, but you could successfully balance the game with only that kind of feedback. look at valorant for an example of that.
What's wrong with using both? It might show interesting correlations. Then we look at the stats gathered from public and ranked matches and we might start seeing the bigger picture.
It's inefficient especially at thimes like this when change is needed but not delivered.
In statistics, a high quality small sample of data produces superior interpretation and conclusion compared to a low quality large sample of data. A small sample of data collected in controlled conditions is preferred to a larger observational sample of unknown provenance.
Valorant, though, was created with the goal of it being a competitive game. This really isn't the case. I agree that new players have no proper idea of balance and it wouldn't be the best idea to let them shape classes etcetera. This could be easily countered by creating strictly competitive class setups and perks, though I would love to see a system where both are the same.
My original suggestion was aimed more on topics like combat and class system than balance.
Agreed, but sadly, I don't think that developers would like to remove 95% of the player-base from the vote if the vote was to happen.
最后编辑:
I would argue that it's inefficient to only use one source. For example if my assumption that heavy cav is a noobstomper is correct then we'll see that it overperforms in public but is weak or mediocre in ranked. It gives a bigger picture than if we used only ranked or only public, since one calls for nerf and the other for buff.
I wouldn't agree it's a good comparison, but even if we accept it for now that is correct if I had to choose. But if I could have both then why not?
Because there would be a stronger correlation in the high quality sample of data and less variance. A larger observational sample, especially in this case were we are trying to sort out balancing issues, will only end up polluting the sample with unnecessary data.
Both of these make absolutely no sense to the point.we'd care actually but they don't communicate so noone knows
