Are they gonna nerf TF? He's a top ban and pick in tournies.

#21YourJanissaryPosted 4/21/2013 6:35:39 AM(edited)
Bhellium posted...
or maybe the videos written by actual game designers might have points you're not considering or actually addressing correctly lol


Or maybe we can use basic reasoning to show why they are wrong? The claim is:

- Imbalance increases the number of viable strategies.

This is blatantly untrue. By definition, a balanced game has the most possible strategies available.

of course, instead of appealing to authority, you could actually create your own argument explaining why you think we are wrong.
---
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who know about binary, those who don't, and those who didn't realize this joke is in ternary.
#22kaysa13Posted 4/21/2013 6:49:19 PM
YourJanissary posted...
Bhellium posted...
or maybe the videos written by actual game designers might have points you're not considering or actually addressing correctly lol


Or maybe we can use basic reasoning to show why they are wrong? The claim is:

- Imbalance increases the number of viable strategies.

This is blatantly untrue. By definition, a balanced game has the most possible strategies available.

of course, instead of appealing to authority, you could actually create your own argument explaining why you think we are wrong.


Or you're just over-simplifying the video's rationale. While your definition of a balanced game may be true, you're also discounting the community's feedback on balance patches. You're only pointing out the flaws of one video, when in fact, that video was only a continuation of another video, which explains the relationship between what the developers' ideas and the playerbase's wants. I think I've pointed out that in my previous posts. I've had misgivings about Riot's constant release of balance patches, that video just gave a different perspective as to why they constantly do that. Not that I gave up my misgivings, but I understand it now a little bit.
---
This is a signature.
#23MhkaMAthPosted 4/21/2013 6:56:55 PM
From: neon screen | #015
Same thing with MTG. The developers purposefully prevent one type of metagame from dominating by injecting new elements into the system.


"New elements" is banning Stoneforge Mystic and Jace the Win Sculptor?

Or do you mean the forced cycle that does cause the game to shift somewhat.
---
http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/6840/mathz.jpg http://i.imgur.com/iB1sU.jpg
http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a290/juliaxx/Picture56.jpg Free stuff!
#24YourJanissaryPosted 4/21/2013 10:51:32 PM(edited)
kaysa13 posted...
Or you're just over-simplifying the video's rationale. While your definition of a balanced game may be true, you're also discounting the community's feedback on balance patches. You're only pointing out the flaws of one video, when in fact, that video was only a continuation of another video, which explains the relationship between what the developers' ideas and the playerbase's wants. I think I've pointed out that in my previous posts. I've had misgivings about Riot's constant release of balance patches, that video just gave a different perspective as to why they constantly do that. Not that I gave up my misgivings, but I understand it now a little bit.



No, that is effectively the entire point of the video. They mention it right at the beginning: how developers secretly want to create "perfect imbalance" because it increases the number of viable strategies and the longevity of strategic development of the game whereas a balanced game somehow does not. I am not simplifying what the video is discussing, that is EXACTLY what it is going over.

It doesn't matter if the video is a continuation of another video, this video makes a claim and I am going to investigate the truth of that video's contents on its own. If you made a video series on how addition works and said "2+2 = 4" in the first video but then say "1+1 = 3" it doesn't matter how correct the first video was, this one makes an error.

==============

Constant balance patches in an attempt to gain perfect balance is an ideal. it is not an ideal that is likely to succeed, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be strived for. Even if we obtained perfect balance, we could continue releasing patches that seek to maintain balance but change how balance is achieved. All people want is for a game to not stagnate. Imbalance is not the solution, it is simply a product of changing how the game is played.


If you want proof that imbalance does not mean a game will no longer stagnate in strategy, look at warcraft 3. The game hasn't received a patch in forever yet the strategies used by players have all stagnated and the game is more or less decided. Orcs are the best, undead are the worst, and every game you will see people attempting the same strategies because they work and other strategies do not. There is no room left for exploration in warcraft 3. Active patching has completed. Imbalance did not save the game: it was saved only so long as the developers continued to try to change it and bring it closer to perfect balance.

==============

They also bring up chess as an example of a game that is stale and how there are no new strategies being developed for chess unless you are a grand master. The problem with this is that chess has been around for over a thousand years. Tell me of an imbalanced game with that kind of lifetime and i'd be amazed. Chess is stale at a lower skill level simply because the rules haven't changed much in those thousand years. There are no patches in chess. If there were, I'm certain the game would be much livelier.

The problem with this video is that it misconflates a changing game state with imbalance. by definition, imbalance leads to stale gamestates sooner because fewer strategies are viable than in a perfectly balanced version of the game.
---
There are 10 types of people in the world. Those who know about binary, those who don't, and those who didn't realize this joke is in ternary.
#25neon screenPosted 4/22/2013 1:53:16 AM(edited)
Well I just watched the videos on power creep and balancing for skill, I don't see how those relate at all to the topic at hand. Both power creep and skill balancing imply that the game is being constantly updated, an aspect entirely ignored in the perfect imbalance video.

Also players don't really "contribute" to the metagame; they define it. The current meta is solely based on what players perceive as the optimal strategy. Usually this strategy is developed by more skilled or knowledgeable players and gains momentum as it is popularized through word of mouth. This is how FotM's are born.

From: MhkaMAth | #023
"New elements" is banning Stoneforge Mystic and Jace the Win Sculptor?

Or do you mean the forced cycle that does cause the game to shift somewhat.

Both count

Maybe "new elements" isn't exactly the proper wording
#26dennis941012Posted 4/22/2013 1:58:49 AM
From: pinkpantherfan5 | #005
Pick a Card hardly qualifies as high skill curve


yes it is
i don't see noobs instantly locking triple gold cards during fights
---
....
#27KlobziPosted 4/22/2013 3:04:21 AM
TF is super squishy, just get your own AP mid to destroy him. Most APs should have enough burst so that he doesn't even have the time to pop his Zhonya's
#28AeciooPosted 4/22/2013 4:22:25 AM
Klobzi posted...
TF is super squishy, just get your own AP mid to destroy him. Most APs should have enough burst so that he doesn't even have the time to pop his Zhonya's


this is not why tf is good

he's good because you can lose your lane and still mop up because of how good his ult is.
---
http://28.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lcb35gGx0t1qailr4o1_500.gif
http://www.megavideo.com/?v=57N0YAEJ
#29KuoxPosted 4/23/2013 1:59:44 AM
Honestly if they made it so his pick a card cancels when he uses his ult I think it's enough to balance him. As it is right now the ult + instant stun is too OP.
---
Not that bad
#30qqaaxxPosted 4/23/2013 3:07:03 AM
Lowered range on ult and changing passive to +1.

Might be enough to make him irrelevant
---
insert sig here