1.4.5 New Balance Changes "When Ambush Comes To Shove"

[Montessoir]

I'm excited to see how these play out! Thanks for your constant work on the game, and keep it up!

Ps. Especially excited about that harpoon reel in!

[Dev Bubbles]

Guys, you can absolutely criticize us for not communicating better, for not implementing all you guys' ideas, and for failing at the actual changes in some way.  That's totally fine.  The only thing I want to reiterate is that, we did not somehow ignore all the feedback and all the ideas.  That did not happen.  I just wanted to reassure that.  I'm not sure how much consolation that is, but I feel like we take feedback really seriously.  I think if you guys go back to our build history, you can find ideas of all kinds being implemented.  I have to check, but we might be over 1K features or changes implemented based on player feedback (don't quote me on it).  This might not sound huge in DOTA's scheme of things, but I for one am really proud of it.  So if you can help it, please don't feel like you are being ignored. 

Even with the changes with squid and spire that you don't agree, we're not drawing a line in the sand or setting anything in stone.  I do hear your points, and we do consider them. 

Thanks a lot everyone!

[Mythical Donuts]

This, is not a balance. All Muse did is literally crew a lot of stuff up. Lochnagar, DID NOT need the buff, when ever you enter a lobby with anyone that knows how to play, all you will see is loched metamidions, and loched carronades.  Lochnagar is just too overpowered now. Also, these thip changes are questionable. The mobula was the most fun ship for builds, but with these new arcs, nothing will collide. And the pyramidion? Come on muse, shop buffing the good ships and nerfing the bad ones. Pyramidion was already good enough, it seriously didn't need these changes. And the spire? Well it sure as hell didn't need to be nerfed. The spire was so easily countered, by literally everything, it could have actually used a buff!

Overall 2/10.
(+2 is because the harpoon finally got buffed)

At least we actually knew this buff was coming. Thanks for letting us know about it, but next time maybe a democratic vote is needed, for each change.

[nanoduckling]

@nanoduckling I have no doubt you forget more about physics than I'll ever know.  All I am saying is that, from a game development point of view, it is not broken.  When you say broken, that to a game dev means there is a bug.  So I was trying to tell you that there was no bug. 

I'm being generous and assuming the design target isn't physical realism but particular game-play behaviour. I don't want to get into software design philosophy but to me a bug is when the code does something other than what is in the design document. If you are telling me that behaviour is WoD then I suggest changing design targets. Realism really shouldn't be one.

With pyra, I guess it's a difference in thinking on how to approach this.  I feel like a month by month type of shorter iterative adjustment is something I want to avoid.

Okay, but why?

For statistical models, it's really not terribly complicated.  We just want to make sure we don't make decisions anecdotally, and observe emergent patterns, and make sure that when we make a change, we have a way to measure if that change is effective or not.

I'm assuming straightforward linear regressions then. What were the results of your power analysis for these models then? Do you need a years worth of data?

We do more complex regression analysis for the match system (and I'm sure I'll open a bigger can of worm for mentioning it ). 

I'll do everyone the favour of not talking about matchmaker.

[SteamBrains]

How can this be called a "Balance" update?

Really though, Muse I appreciate everything your doing with guns of Icarus, it's An amazing game and I really enjoy it. But there are a ton of major problems with this update, let's start with the pros
Harpoon was buffed which is pretty cool, opens up possibilities of cool new ship load outs. Another good thing (in my opinion) is the new way loch works, it's cool that it can be used in something besides a heavy flak lumber or carro, but that doesn't mean I like it better (FLAKSPIRE PLZ) anyway. that's basically the only good things I can say about his update. time for the fun stuff
THE CONS:
-First of all fanning out the guns on the mobula was a huge mistake. It was not the way to fix the OP cancer mob/cheese mob whatever you call it. (Basically a mob with a merc and at least 2 arts) I loved the mobula because as long as no one in the lobby took a cancer mob, you could experiment with different close and long range builds, for example you old put framers and banshees, Carros all that. (I personally love 2 flaks hades and banshees) but now that the arcs are spread out that destroys the possibility of finding new loadouts
     I believe the correct way to fix the OP mob problem is to nerd the Artemis arc. Artemis are great guns but when you have 2 combined with a merc kinda op. Now if there's just one that opens up the possibility of banshee or flaks which may lead to some more fun matches, than just dunes snipe-fest 2k16.
     Basically why ruin one of the most capable ships of making fun new loadouts when you can just nerd one guns arc and open up so many more new loadouts?
     The second Huuuge problem i see, is the new indirect buff of the meta. I have taken some time to fly around with the new update before I wrote this and I have seen almost everyone flying meta-midions with gat flak + loch. How I see it, is why does the meta get a buff, and ruin the possibility of fun new loadouts.
     Why nerd the spire? I agree the spire was getting too op, but once again maybe just nerf the arcs, also the new Hflak, and lochnagar functions kinda nerfed it in itself, but still spire needs that extreme turn speed, that's what sets it apart. Why not keep the speed decrease and increase the turn speed, if balance is really the goal.
     


   In Conclusion

I think that this update failed what it set out to do. The game was more balanced the way it was before. Why buff the meta, and completely ruin the possibilities of new loadouts? Especially with the Mobula, the fan out really puts a set back that could have been fixed by just nerfing an Artemis a bit.
     Before players were rewarded for trying out new loadouts and experimenting with new gun combos, but now it seems that the direction the game is taking is to just be meta builds all over the place and pointing in every possible direction. I only like 2 of the things this update "balanced" and I do believe they could be easily fixed.
     All in all, the old way was better. Just plainly. It had a few problems, but that could be easily fixed wthout "fanning out guns" and messing with new gun functions or ship speeds

[Richard LeMoon]

I am curious as to what the attempts to balance are aimed at. Like, what is the final goal? I see a lot of mention of numbers, statistics, and win/loss rates. Is the final goal to give all ships an equal win/loss ratio? Give all guns an equal use ratio?

I think maybe a lot of conflict is coming from players not understanding exactly what you are trying to accomplish. For players, it is all about having fun. Statistics and win rates don't reflect that very well. Player retention is a better gauge of that.

[DJ Logicalia]

Loch is super broken. Like, unbelievably so. That needs to change ASAP

[PixelatedVolume]

Loch is super broken. Like, unbelievably so. That needs to change ASAP

What's wrong?  Played a few games earlier and everything seemed normal (besides squid change, and actually having to fight a flak which was great!)

[Dev Bubbles]

@richard, oh good question, sorry this was not make clear.  Yeah in a way.  With usage and win rate, it is to see the distribution of usage rates of different ships and builds and see how they are relative to the mean.  It's pretty similar to how say Valve balances CS:GO.  I mean, how they balance it in actuality isn't my point, it's more like how they look at stats and use them to deduce starting point and measure goals etc. 

[DJ Logicalia]

Loch is super broken. Like, unbelievably so. That needs to change ASAP

What's wrong?  Played a few games earlier and everything seemed normal (besides squid change, and actually having to fight a flak which was great!)

It's super OP in almost every light gun. Loch L.Flak kills better than H.Flak, loch L.Carro pops quicker than H.Carro, It's absurdly strong in gat and mortar. It's silly

[Dev Bubbles]

Ok understood.  In summary, the areas that we need to pay close attention to are:  spire, squid, and loch. 

[ZnC]

Ok understood.  In summary, the areas that we need to pay close attention to are:  spire, squid, and loch.

Sorry that I'm repeating myself, but do review my email for Loch. I specifically address the key issue (DPS) in it.

[Schwalbe]

How can this be called a "Balance" update?

Because AWKM is a Hand Of "Balance".

[ZnC]

After much testing, I have concluded that 'Overpowered > Underpowered' and 'Kill meta > Disable meta' in terms of fun.

LIGHTNING DAKKADAKKA

[Byron Cavendish]

I think a fundamental issue here is the method of testing, the pace of balance, and the amount of changes.

First, let's establish that the time between this patch and the last major was 6 months. Now, I believe that Muse believes it "will keep an eye on the situation". But when we see a patch go through with bad changes, we aren't exactly optimistic about waiting 6 months for a fix that, may or may not come.

Second, the pace of testing is inconsistent. Like I said, it's been 6 months since a major balance patch. Then, out of the blue, we are given a dozen new, hugely impactful changes to test. Testing is done immediately, and we are expected to find out all the issues with these issues in 2 weeks of testing (no there was not 3 weeks of testing Muse, you need to be there for that to count)? And then, as if in a flurry of angst, as soon as the balance is brought up, it's put through. 6 months waiting, 2 weeks testing. Seems a bit fast, eh? As if Muse woke up one morning, and their balance report card was due that day, so they scrapped together something and rushed it in.

How about from now on, we test 1-2 things, really, really, REALLY well, over a few weeks then put it in. Do that all the time, just one or two things, rather 6 months and 12 things.