"Don't nerf, buff everything else" is a bad design model

[Moonlight Knight]

You still have to balance enemies around everything you've made available to players. If something is overperforming to the point that it's trivializing encounters, the answer to people picking it too often is not to buff everything else, because that means you have to raise enemy stats, which can lead to a circular loop of rebalancing.

Sometimes the answer really is just to nerf something. We can have discussions on specific nerfs, like the Slugger losing most of its stagger power, but if you say "just buff everything else" without any thought, nobody who designs a game should listen to you.

[mullacabra]

The, "buff everything else," opinion must be marginal and inconsequential because this is the first time I've heard of it.

[Moonlight Knight]

Originally posted by mullacabra:

The, "buff everything else," opinion must be marginal and inconsequential because this si the first time I've heard of it.

I'm always willing to consider I may just be unlucky, but I've encountered this opinion a really incredible number of times.

[Khloros]

Hard disagree, the nerf the strong things in line with the bad things is even worse.

By doing this you are creating a toxic meta in the game where people are shoe horned into options that are not taken becuse they are an actual viable option, but because they are the only viable option.

Its better to buff other things to bring them up to the level of the stuff everyone is using in order to give options for people. Right now the game is still fresh so there is some heavy balance paces needed, but once things level out, its better to buff then nerf.

[Loot]

I'd rather they buff weak stuff than bring good stuff down to the same level as the weak stuff. If something is OP, bring it down to an appropriate level, but don't just go nerfing everything because the weak guns are underutilised. There's a reason few people use the DMRs, or the Concussive.

[Moonlight Knight]

Originally posted by Khloros:

Hard disagree, the nerf the strong things in line with the bad things is even worse.

Not really, no. There are circumstances where it can kinda work up to a point, but this is not that kind of game, and even in that kind of game, it will eventually become untenable.

Originally posted by Khloros:

By doing this you are creating a toxic meta in the game where people are shoe horned into options that are not taken becuse they are an actual viable option, but because they are the only viable option.

If you actually balance things properly this is not going to happen. We can have a discussion about specific buffs and nerfs, but the idea that nerfing certain things so they can't trivialize encounters creates the problem of people only picking meta gear is wrong on its face. What creates that is poor balancing.

Originally posted by Khloros:

Its better to buff other things to bring them up to the level of the stuff everyone is using in order to give options for people. Right now the game is still fresh so there is some heavy balance paces needed, but once things level out, its better to buff then nerf.

This isn't the kind of game where just buffing everything would work. It's meant to be hard. You're meant to die as often as not. There is a power fantasy angle, but you are also meat for the grinder, narratively. Buffing everything so it was up to the level of the pre-nerf Railgun, for example, would have either ruined the game, or led to a circular loop of buffing weapons, and buffing baddies.

[New To This]

Originally posted by Moonlight Knight:

You still have to balance enemies around everything you've made available to players. If something is overperforming to the point that it's trivializing encounters, the answer to people picking it too often is not to buff everything else, because that means you have to raise enemy stats, which can lead to a circular loop of rebalancing.

Sometimes the answer really is just to nerf something. We can have discussions on specific nerfs, like the Slugger losing most of its stagger power, but if you say "just buff everything else" without any thought, nobody who designs a game should listen to you.

Okay so....Slugger is better than snipers, so nerf slugger damage and stagger.
Snipers still weak.
Arc good at anti crowd at good range.
Nerf range, add stagger.
Snipers still weak.
Improve Incindiary weapons.
Snipers still weak.

Nerf anything you like.
Snipers will still be weak.
Sickle will still be weak.
Primary weapons, according to devs, are all supposed to be weak, feel weak, and make you feel like calling in your strats.
So they all need to feel weak.

But can we at least get them to feel the same level of weak?
Can we get them to be roughly the same level of suck, so that some don't feel worthless?

[Doko]

Except nerfing the strong and not buffing the weak does not in fact make the weak more appealing, it just gives you less options to roll with, so by that same logic, buffing everything is bad, but nerfing everything to make the weak seem viable is also bad and not actual balance.

nerf yes, but also buff others, to actually make for a stable and well rounded balance sheet, instead of just nerfs.

Also the very concept of "balance" is highly subject from person to person on this planet, it is not objective, so keep that in mind.

[Lyrdian]

Originally posted by Moonlight Knight:

Originally posted by Khloros:

Hard disagree, the nerf the strong things in line with the bad things is even worse.

Not really, no. There are circumstances where it can kinda work up to a point, but this is not that kind of game, and even in that kind of game, it will eventually become untenable.

Originally posted by Khloros:

By doing this you are creating a toxic meta in the game where people are shoe horned into options that are not taken becuse they are an actual viable option, but because they are the only viable option.

If you actually balance things properly this is not going to happen. We can have a discussion about specific buffs and nerfs, but the idea that nerfing certain things so they can't trivialize encounters creates the problem of people only picking meta gear is wrong on its face. What creates that is poor balancing.

Originally posted by Khloros:

Its better to buff other things to bring them up to the level of the stuff everyone is using in order to give options for people. Right now the game is still fresh so there is some heavy balance paces needed, but once things level out, its better to buff then nerf.

This isn't the kind of game where just buffing everything would work. It's meant to be hard. You're meant to die as often as not. There is a power fantasy angle, but you are also meat for the grinder, narratively. Buffing everything so it was up to the level of the pre-nerf Railgun, for example, would have either ruined the game, or led to a circular loop of buffing weapons, and buffing baddies.

Ok but that doesnt change that half the guns are trash, 1/4 are fine and 1/4 are overtuned. The 1/2 that are trash need attention before we CHAIN NERF things into the floor. The slugger not breaking containers, fine. The slugger needing damage down fine. But having a shotgun not stagger at all is stupid.

[Moonlight Knight]

Originally posted by New To This:

Okay so....Slugger is better than snipers, so nerf slugger damage and stagger.

Their actual claimed reasoning was "Slugger is better than snipers at being a sniper," which... I never used it, so I can't really say whether that logic holds. I agree that nerfing the slugger's stagger is a bad play and that it should have just had greater damage falloff.

Originally posted by New To This:

Snipers still weak.

The DMRs? Yeah, agreed.

Originally posted by New To This:

Arc good at anti crowd at good range.
Nerf range, add stagger.

Honestly, adding stagger is the weirder choice, to me, though it's still pretty good at crowd control.

Originally posted by New To This:

Improve Incindiary weapons.

THAT felt kinda weird, to be honest.

Originally posted by New To This:

Sickle will still be weak.

To be honest it's really not? Like it's not good at killing heavies obviously, but for something that has functionally infinite ammo, it actually does work.

Originally posted by New To This:

Primary weapons, according to devs, are all supposed to be weak, feel weak, and make you feel like calling in your strats.
So they all need to feel weak.

Considering the kind of gameplay experience they're going for this feels right.

Originally posted by New To This:

But can we at least get them to feel the same level of weak?
Can we get them to be roughly the same level of suck, so that some don't feel worthless?

Gotta give them feedback to do that, but "just buff everything" is not meaningful feedback.

[Quill]

Originally posted by New To This:

Originally posted by Moonlight Knight:

You still have to balance enemies around everything you've made available to players. If something is overperforming to the point that it's trivializing encounters, the answer to people picking it too often is not to buff everything else, because that means you have to raise enemy stats, which can lead to a circular loop of rebalancing.

Sometimes the answer really is just to nerf something. We can have discussions on specific nerfs, like the Slugger losing most of its stagger power, but if you say "just buff everything else" without any thought, nobody who designs a game should listen to you.

Okay so....Slugger is better than snipers, so nerf slugger damage and stagger.
Snipers still weak.
Arc good at anti crowd at good range.
Nerf range, add stagger.
Snipers still weak.
Improve Incindiary weapons.
Snipers still weak.

Nerf anything you like.
Snipers will still be weak.
Sickle will still be weak.
Primary weapons, according to devs, are all supposed to be weak, feel weak, and make you feel like calling in your strats.
So they all need to feel weak.

But can we at least get them to feel the same level of weak?
Can we get them to be roughly the same level of suck, so that some don't feel worthless?

One small issue with that argument

They buffed the AMR in that same patch (30% more damage) and gave the Counter Sniper DMR Medium Armor Pen

[76561198131065017]

buffing everything fixes nothing, nerfing is a term and has been in videogames since the 90's and its very important. just because some whiny little 80iq person wanted something to stay overpowered is his problem, he can go cry in a milk bowl like a little wimp.

[Loot]

Originally posted by Moonlight Knight:

Originally posted by New To This:

Sickle will still be weak.

To be honest it's really not? Like it's not good at killing heavies obviously, but for something that has functionally infinite ammo, it actually does work.

I have a feeling they meant the Scythe. The Sickle is pretty dang good.

[Moonlight Knight]

Originally posted by Doko:

Except nerfing the strong and not buffing the weak does not in fact make the weak more appealing, it just gives you less options to roll with, so by that same logic, buffing everything is bad, but nerfing everything to make the weak seem viable is also bad and not actual balance.

I never said that nerfing everything is better, I said that buffing everything is not a sustainable design model. Buff when appropriate, nerf when appropriate, but "just buff everything else" logic does more damage than good when devs actually heed it.

Originally posted by Doko:

nerf yes, but also buff others, to actually make for a stable and well rounded balance sheet, instead of just nerfs.

Agreed.

Originally posted by Doko:

Also the very concept of "balance" is highly subject from person to person on this planet, it is not objective, so keep that in mind.

Yeah, but Arrowhead clearly has a specific vision of how combat should feel, and there is a logical pathway to that vision.

[Loot]

Originally posted by Quill:

One small issue with that argument

They buffed the AMR in that same patch (30% more damage) and gave the Counter Sniper DMR Medium Armor Pen

Once I gave the AMR an actual chance and learned how to deal with the busted scope, I actually started to really like it, and this was before the patch. Both DMRs are still trash, though. Even with medium pen. This is coming from a DMR enthusiast.

[Quill]

Originally posted by Kirke:

buffing everything fixes nothing, nerfing is a term and has been in videogames since the 90's and its very important. just because some whiny little 80iq person wanted something to stay overpowered is his problem, he can go cry in a milk bowl like a little wimp.

I think the main issue is people don't bother to read patch notes so think everything is just nerfed

When it first dropped everyone whined about the Arc Thrower losing 15m of range and needing 1 whole second to charge... but ignored the fact you can now stunlock Chargers

Or even in this post where a dude said Snipers are weak when they literally just gave the Anti Material Rifle 30% more damage alongside the slugger nerfs