PDA

View Full Version : The Credit Changes are Bad For the Game



tymandude1
10-29-2016, 10:02 PM
So let's discuss why these credit changes are bad for the game. I'm talking about the changes to capturing and defending points and to the 100% increase in gold to doing more damage, kills behind enemy lines, healing, and time on the point.
Balance and Champion Scaling
Let's begin by discussing scaling with items and how it effects Champion balance. Here is a graph I made showing how the scaling for each role works as it was last patch http://imgur.com/a/R5HD0. As you can see tanks stop off really strong and have a nice drop off at the end, supports are similar but in a much worse position because Cauterize destroys them, DPS scale up nicely, and Flankers stay consistent.
Here's the graph for this patch http://imgur.com/a/i8HhK. As you can see Tanks fall off much faster and Supports fall off insanely fast due to the change in the amount of credits that can be earned which results in DPS scaling way faster than before leaving supports and tanks in quite the predicament mid to late game.
Snowballing and The Meta
Now you might say "well this change obviously favors DPS so that should be changed" but in reality it's quite the opposite. The easiest to execute strategy in the game is double tank support strats but their weakness is that they need to snowball before the enemy team can come online. The gold changes made to capturing and defending means that the team that is ahead becomes even more ahead this also goes along with the increase credits for doing your so called "role" the winning team snowballs insanely hard. The game becomes about establishing yourself in round 1 on the first point to win.
What Needs to be Done So going off this what changes need to be done? Revert the extra credits on capture and give back the credits on defense. This will allow DPS comps to actually have the time and credits to scale. On top of this "role" credit crap needs to be changed. Hi-Rez basically just increased the overall credit gain which increases snowballing and causes champions to scale much faster than they should be. This on top of punishing Champions like Bomb King or aggro Fernando makes this system pretty atrocious. So either Hi-Rez needs to compensate for the huge credit income increase by increasing the prices of all the items or reduce the overall credit intake as well as changing it so the credit gain increase isn't so punishing towards playing Champions in a somewhat unorthodox yet still effective way.
Final Thoughts This patch has put the games balance way out of whack and should probably be reverted ASAP because as of right now Tanks are gonna snowball all over you, supports are only useful in the early game, Snowballing in general is drastically increased, and it punishes people for playing their Champion effectively.

jaladreips
10-30-2016, 06:01 AM
Emmm... where did the graph come from? I can draw graphs too, that doesn't mean that I'm right

ACorpse
10-30-2016, 06:03 AM
Emmm... where did the graph come from? I can draw graphs too, that doesn't mean that I'm right

But, but graphs! He must be right, he has graphs!!!

I didn't bother reading most of his blather, but one thing I will say is that healing is not giving enough credits for healers to scale up.

tymandude1
10-30-2016, 11:54 AM
But, but graphs! He must be right, he has graphs!!!

I didn't bother reading most of his blather, but one thing I will say is that healing is not giving enough credits for healers to scale up.

I would be nice if you actually read what I said instead of commenting and acting like you know things. I made those graphs as I said to more easily illustrate the way roles scale due to the way items currently scale.

Arcie
10-31-2016, 04:33 AM
I would be nice if you actually read what I said instead of commenting and acting like you know things. I made those graphs as I said to more easily illustrate the way roles scale due to the way items currently scale.

I read it so I feel qualified to respond! YOU HAVE GRAPHS!!! Thank you for creating these completely unsupported graphs. I think I speak for all of us when I say, they impressed us all greatly. Also, I am backing up that statement with the promise to draw a polling graph later showing that I spoke with the entire community and they agreed with my statement.

Okay, now that I have sufficiently kicked the baseless graph pony completely, on to actually responding to your point of view. To sum up your point of view for anyone who didn't want to read, you believe that this game needs a catch up mechanic because you can't be bothered to create a solid team comp and would just much rather all pick damage dealers. In that case, go play Overwatch. If you don't like the idea of games requiring forthought, skill, and team coordination, go play Overwatch. It's really as simple as that.

Now, I don't believe the mechanics are perfect. I think Pip gets the short end of the stick since his role is usually off-healer and utility. It makes it hard for him to snowball when he cannot do his job and get bonus credits. I think that a player should be allowed to chose the role they will assume with their champion when they lock in. A back line Pip and a Damage Dealing Pip are both viable. Allow him to decide what role he will fill based on his role in the team. Ruckus shouldn't be stuck to capture point bonus since he is usually off-tank and pulling some of the best damage on the team. Yes, this would allow these characters when played properly to snowball harder, but it's a reward system, not a penalty system. This is closer to League of Legends, where you get rewarded for playing smart and building smart. If you lose 3 group fights in a row in LoL, your team is at a severe disadvantage because the other team can build more items and push more points. If you can't control Dragon or your jungle, the other team will get more gold and build more items. This is designed to create a need for teamwork to get the reward and win the match.

Now, I will say it again because as much as I want this game community to succeed, as much as I want this competitive scene to flourish, I would still rather every player find the game which they enjoy. In your case, it seems like you want Overwatch. Overwatch is a game where team composition is fluid and always changing. Where there are no bonuses for doing particularly well and no penalties for doing poorly. A team who is losing early on can get their act together at the last second and hold the point, no matter how one sided the first part of the game was because there is no power altering reward for playing well. A 10 kill streak doesn't make a Widowmaker do more damage or pierce through shields quicker. So maybe Overwatch is the game you want. I, personally, prefer games which reward team-play and penalize groups creating teams of all damage dealers. I like knowing that if I go Fernando and the rest of my team goes Kinessa, Skye, Victor, and Androxus, that we are going to lose because I will be completely ineffective without my pocket healer. But I also like to know that if I had picked Barik, our team wouldn't be as useless with a turret heal build.

This game is about choices. The right choices will make you a competitive team. The wrong choices will lose you games. Building Wrecker will win you a game against Barik and Fernando, but won't really affect much against a Makoa. Getting the points to buy those requires planning, skill and coordination. The snowball must be earned and the role based gold gain, while not perfect yet, encourages roles to be filled as needed. It keeps the tank on the point, the healer healing, the damage dealer dealing damage, and the flanker "behind enemy lines".

KicksBrickster
10-31-2016, 08:04 AM
I would also like to know where you got the information for those graphs. Regardless, I think you raise a good point.

There are quite a few champions who don't quite fit into the role they're in: Pip is a hybrid of support, flank, and damage, Ruckus is a hybrid of tank and damage, and Viktor and Cassie both fulfill flanker and damage, and there are of course a few more. By adding these changes on a class level, you give these champions the short end of the stick. Pip, for example, does not get as many credits for healing, and gets no bonus for flanks or damage.

They should have applied this at the champion level, rewarding players who do what that champion is strong in. In this case, Ruckus would get bonuses for both damage and tanking, and Pip would get bonuses from everything but tanking. This would also discourage things like Flanker Fernando, while still reinforcing the class roles.

Brodeo
10-31-2016, 01:39 PM
Guys, I think the graphs are just the OP's way of illustrating the opinion he is trying to put forth in this post. They are based on his own anecdotal evidence and I'm just as a way to see what he thinks is happening.

Now on to the actual points...

I main tanks. Fernando and Barik, to be precise. Both of these guys benefit HUGELY from the new Role-Based credit system. On the flip side, I play a Makoa or Ruckus as a 2nd tank when the need arises, and these guys got dinged hard by the Role-Based credits system.

The same goes with, for example, Ying and Pip. Ying is a phenomenal healer. She is absolutely loving the role-based credits as she gets big numbers. Pip? Eh, not so much. He's a CC/healing mixed support, or a flanker if you need it, or a shield-wrecker, or a heal-stopper. It depends on the situation, but the fact is that he is not, and will never be, a phenomenal healer. He will not put up the numbers that Ying does, and so will not get the credits/growth that Ying does.

Effectively, the role-based credits system is pigeonholing us into specific roles, alienating certain champions, and creating a very forced playstyle.

Solution? Let us choose what "role" we want bonus credits from at champion select screen. And potentially even add in more roles to choose from (CC, finishing moves, etc) if it would help create more viable play styles.

Other Problem. Snowballing.

I hate snowballing mechanics in any game in which you don't create your own full team. I don't choose who I get teamed with, I don't want to be punished because they couldn't get their act together until halfway through the game. I also don't want to be at a disadvantage simply because I don't have a group of 5 friends playing Paladins, and I *definitely* don't want to be at a disadvantage simply because I don't want to put in all the out-of-game effort required to be a part of decent teams who meet specifically for a game. I don't know how much of the player base I represent, and maybe my opinion isn't the same as the rest of you Paladins players, but I just want to open the game, join a solo queue, and be able to have fun even if the game ended at 0-4. And this is only possible if we don't keep the snowballing credits, because it's no fun at all to start a second round knowing your entire team is 600 credits behind, each. Plus all the doubled objective credits the enemy tank picked up, making him even worse to push off the obj.

Shuffleblade
10-31-2016, 02:30 PM
Guys, I think the graphs are just the OP's way of illustrating the opinion he is trying to put forth in this post. They are based on his own anecdotal evidence and I'm just as a way to see what he thinks is happening.

Now on to the actual points...

I main tanks. Fernando and Barik, to be precise. Both of these guys benefit HUGELY from the new Role-Based credit system. On the flip side, I play a Makoa or Ruckus as a 2nd tank when the need arises, and these guys got dinged hard by the Role-Based credits system.

The same goes with, for example, Ying and Pip. Ying is a phenomenal healer. She is absolutely loving the role-based credits as she gets big numbers. Pip? Eh, not so much. He's a CC/healing mixed support, or a flanker if you need it, or a shield-wrecker, or a heal-stopper. It depends on the situation, but the fact is that he is not, and will never be, a phenomenal healer. He will not put up the numbers that Ying does, and so will not get the credits/growth that Ying does.

Effectively, the role-based credits system is pigeonholing us into specific roles, alienating certain champions, and creating a very forced playstyle.

Solution? Let us choose what "role" we want bonus credits from at champion select screen. And potentially even add in more roles to choose from (CC, finishing moves, etc) if it would help create more viable play styles.

Other Problem. Snowballing.

I hate snowballing mechanics in any game in which you don't create your own full team. I don't choose who I get teamed with, I don't want to be punished because they couldn't get their act together until halfway through the game. I also don't want to be at a disadvantage simply because I don't have a group of 5 friends playing Paladins, and I *definitely* don't want to be at a disadvantage simply because I don't want to put in all the out-of-game effort required to be a part of decent teams who meet specifically for a game. I don't know how much of the player base I represent, and maybe my opinion isn't the same as the rest of you Paladins players, but I just want to open the game, join a solo queue, and be able to have fun even if the game ended at 0-4. And this is only possible if we don't keep the snowballing credits, because it's no fun at all to start a second round knowing your entire team is 600 credits behind, each. Plus all the doubled objective credits the enemy tank picked up, making him even worse to push off the obj.

I agree with you on all points.

This game is not about and should not be about the team that first took the objective and thereonforth their success story. It should be a back and forth and that is only possible if the snowballing effect is kept low. Of course some snowballing effect is needed, good play should be rewarded but only marginally or players that have earned a lot of credits should give more to the enemies when killed this would create a back a forth as well.

Anyway this system as it is now pidgeonholds a lot of characters into a one dimensional playstyle and it also makes the game way too snowbally. Making characters play only one way is BAD, 100% bonus credits is waay too much, maybe 20-25% bonus credits would be more in line with giving incentive for players to do their main job while also making a flexible playstyle and flexible characters viable.

ACorpse
10-31-2016, 02:46 PM
I play Fernando a lot and it's a rare game indeed that I don't finish with the highest amount of credits. I've had healers who sped as much time on the point as I do but who rake in half as much, despite doing a ton of healing. I think even given the obvious punishing effect on multirole class characters, the actual task weighting is off as well.

tymandude1
10-31-2016, 10:00 PM
Guys, I think the graphs are just the OP's way of illustrating the opinion he is trying to put forth in this post. They are based on his own anecdotal evidence and I'm just as a way to see what he thinks is happening.

Now on to the actual points...

I main tanks. Fernando and Barik, to be precise. Both of these guys benefit HUGELY from the new Role-Based credit system. On the flip side, I play a Makoa or Ruckus as a 2nd tank when the need arises, and these guys got dinged hard by the Role-Based credits system.

The same goes with, for example, Ying and Pip. Ying is a phenomenal healer. She is absolutely loving the role-based credits as she gets big numbers. Pip? Eh, not so much. He's a CC/healing mixed support, or a flanker if you need it, or a shield-wrecker, or a heal-stopper. It depends on the situation, but the fact is that he is not, and will never be, a phenomenal healer. He will not put up the numbers that Ying does, and so will not get the credits/growth that Ying does.

Effectively, the role-based credits system is pigeonholing us into specific roles, alienating certain champions, and creating a very forced playstyle.

Solution? Let us choose what "role" we want bonus credits from at champion select screen. And potentially even add in more roles to choose from (CC, finishing moves, etc) if it would help create more viable play styles.

Other Problem. Snowballing.

I hate snowballing mechanics in any game in which you don't create your own full team. I don't choose who I get teamed with, I don't want to be punished because they couldn't get their act together until halfway through the game. I also don't want to be at a disadvantage simply because I don't have a group of 5 friends playing Paladins, and I *definitely* don't want to be at a disadvantage simply because I don't want to put in all the out-of-game effort required to be a part of decent teams who meet specifically for a game. I don't know how much of the player base I represent, and maybe my opinion isn't the same as the rest of you Paladins players, but I just want to open the game, join a solo queue, and be able to have fun even if the game ended at 0-4. And this is only possible if we don't keep the snowballing credits, because it's no fun at all to start a second round knowing your entire team is 600 credits behind, each. Plus all the doubled objective credits the enemy tank picked up, making him even worse to push off the obj.

Thanks dude you got the point. It's so much easier to explain how I see heroes scaling in the game with graphs. Apparently someone on reddit tested it and the Snowballing credits were not actually implemented and Hi-Rez said nothing about it. So this leads me to conclude that the new Role Credits are causing the Snowball effect.

I think this is due to the fact they they didn't reduce credit gain at all but just increased credit gain by a huge amount. This results in teams getting items quicker so the team that is winning is further increasing their lead even fast. This is further compounded by the fact that the winning teams tanks are obviously going to have more time on the point resulting in an even further increase in credit gain for the winning team.

KicksBrickster
10-31-2016, 10:29 PM
Burn cards are Hi-Rez' answer to 'champion switching', but it is imperfect and definitely creates snowballing. Before the burn cards were added, countering was done via deck switching, which was done in the lobby before a round began. I highly prefer this sort of system, as it doesn't allow for snowballing. The problem was that Hi-Rez made decks very weak, meaning changing them was unlikely to affect your chances that much.

Honestly, burn cards as they are should be scrapped, and more focus put on decks and deck switching. Perhaps we could have some kind of pre-match choice of 3 'burn cards' that you keep until the match is over and give less significant buffs, but upgrading based on performance needs to go.

jaladreips
11-01-2016, 04:20 AM
Just remove credits and make burn card leveling system independent of performance. Problem solved.

tymandude1
11-01-2016, 06:04 PM
Just remove credits and make burn card leveling system independent of performance. Problem solved.

I like this idea but I also like at least slight rewards for how well you are playing. I'm in favor of increased passive credit gain and a reduction in specific role credit gain beyond them reverting it to OB 35.

Arcie
11-01-2016, 08:45 PM
The burn cards are meant to simulate the systems in place in MOBA style games, which I love. It adds an element of strategy to how you counterpick. The system ends up, just like in any MOBA, rewarding teams for doing well and allowing that dominance, by design. It's not accidental. If you want a catch-up mechanic, go play a different game because I am sick of games trying to make everyone feel good about themselves. It's like a racing game with a speed boost for being in last place or Mario Kart where last place gets the best items. This game is more about skill and strategy. Hindering players who do well does not fit that at all.

What if in a Starcraft match, the player who was winning was suddenly hit by a random nuke to try to balance everything? That is counter intuitive to designing a competitive game. If someone is dominating in a game like Starcraft, they end up with more money to do more stuff with to get stronger, bigger, and snowball. The game is about mitigating your opponent through skill, not items. Those crucial first picks are extremely important. The card loadouts you bring in are extremely important. Your team composition is extremely important. That first clash determines a lot about how the game will go down, but it's not powerful enough a boost to destroy the game for your team. I have had many matches where my team got demolished on the first point, took note of what was happening, and bounced back winning the point and dominating the match. It's about adapting your playstyle and working together. The reward for being effective is getting the cards to handle more situations and essentially shutting the opponents down. If they counter pick correctly from there, it's very possible they will take back the match, even with a slight gold disadvantage. That's how the game is supposed to play.

The cards need some tweaking, but they are fine as a concept.

Rivx
11-01-2016, 10:22 PM
They should push through the change that removes credits for defending and gives extra for capping, because currently it is too easy to stall the game until you get your Caut/Wreckers 3 and nullify half the opponents lineup. That is made even worse with credits inflation, which results in a lot of teams not even playing supports at all.

Snowballing is needed because if you do well enough to capture the point 3 times, but not well enough to push the payload all the way, you should have something to show for your efforts and actually give you a significant edge in the final round, if they want to keep the point system as it is.