Jump to content

4.9.3 - Pre-patch Discussion


Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Acnowlogia said:

What I mean is some heroes will obviously be used more than before at the expense of other heroes falling off the meta. Some heroes that are already strong will become stronger and some heroes that are niche will become weaker within that niche. So some tradeoffs are actually biasing instead of counterbalancing.

 

Don't you agree that balancing and biasing go hand in hand though? It's called the meta. 

You can call it whatever you want, the end result is still largely the same. And again, I mentioned that any required changes will be addressed. The meta needs to shift first before it can be addressed. 

The larger goal of all these changes is to also address stale homogeity among the heroes. 

Edited by ElementUser
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no long run ,i doubt there are actualy new players and the existing ones play less and less (if not stop altogether) cuz they work and have family and stuff.Im not attached to the past ,its literally a fact that 2 years ago people would play any hero and barely anyone was complaining about anything ,and in high tmm if there was a specific player playing a strong hero too often then people would know and ban it.You are obsessed with what u think is balance but in the end of the day people will always get annoyed when they lose games and smurfs will be able to 1v5 with no matter what hero and 'frustrate' their enemies.You just get more people annoyed by nerfing/reworking their favourite heroes/items every patch 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, die`x3 said:

There is no long run ,i doubt there are actualy new players and the existing ones play less and less (if not stop altogether) cuz they work and have family and stuff.Im not attached to the past ,its literally a fact that 2 years ago people would play any hero and barely anyone was complaining about anything ,and in high tmm if there was a specific player playing a strong hero too often then people would know and ban it.You are obsessed with what u think is balance but in the end of the day people will always get annoyed when they lose games and smurfs will be able to 1v5 with no matter what hero and 'frustrate' their enemies.You just get more people annoyed by nerfing/reworking their favourite heroes/items every patch 

I disagree.

People have been saying the game is dead for 7 years. It lives on. 

I personally love that this game has patches every two months. I believe that balance changes and updates are one of the main reasons this game has endured for so long.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, die`x3 said:

There is no long run ,i doubt there are actualy new players and the existing ones play less and less (if not stop altogether) cuz they work and have family and stuff.Im not attached to the past ,its literally a fact that 2 years ago people would play any hero and barely anyone was complaining about anything ,and in high tmm if there was a specific player playing a strong hero too often then people would know and ban it.You are obsessed with what u think is balance but in the end of the day people will always get annoyed when they lose games and smurfs will be able to 1v5 with no matter what hero and 'frustrate' their enemies.You just get more people annoyed by nerfing/reworking their favourite heroes/items every patch 

You can think of it that way, but that's because you saw HoN as perfect back then and you didn't want change. 

If HoN literally did not have any changes since about 2 years ago, I don't think the player base would really be around anymore. 

It's 2 sides of a coin - change will keep things fresh enough without fundamentally changing the game and will keep players interested. No change may mean the game is more stable to those few people, but the game dies way faster if left stale for a long time. 

You may not understand the side of change and leads you to how you see things. I manage the game to extend its lifetime as long as possible -- if I thought the way you did, I don't think this game would be here for as long as it is. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It's just me or Fayde SOTM is too strong on paper??.

A instant blink strike and can used 3 times, cant be target in 1 seconds after used and also slow the enemy. Like, are you serious ??

---

Edited:

 I rewatching the spotlight and figure out that you cant attack another hero after using Faux Bow because the coding. Ok, that's fine but i remember back then Andromeda have a similar skill (W) but it work fine even when she attack another heroes who dont got hit from her W??

Edited by w3wstarboy
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Just a random thought, how about if Adeve's Cloak has 80 seconds application cooldown and has 30 seconds cooldown? This application cooldown prevents incoming damage, debuff & stun duration reduction, and damage output to apply on bearer so only health regeneration and mana regeneration applies upon triggering the item.

The reason of this idea is because Nihil Crystal has 30 seconds cooldown but Adeve's Cloak has 80 seconds cooldown as its upgrade. Though I admit both Adeve & Nihil have entirely different mechanic to each other, making my random thought pretty much irrelevant. Even so, let me stretch the idea more behind the spoiler.

Spoiler

Besides the current state of Nihil Crystal, there are the proposed changes:

  • Passively while off cooldown, taking damage from player-controlled enemy sources starts a 3 second timer on the item and starts accumulating damage. The timer is refreshed each time you take damage from player-controlled enemy sources.
  • If the accumulated post-mitigation damage exceeds 40% of your Max Health or 350 (whichever is higher) while the timer is active, the item is placed on cooldown and Nihil Crystal effect is applied for 3 seconds.
  • Nihil Crystal regenerates 8 health per second and 4 mana per second.

 

Edited by datfizh
editing a bit about the sentences behind spoiler

If anyone wonders about my intelligence regarding this game, then consider yourself visiting this thread:

Alternatively, visit this blog below to see the compiled version of the threads/posts I made on this Official HoN Forum:
newerthbrainstorm.blogspot.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

No. Overcomplicated. 

 

That's like trying to preserve whispering helm effects when upgrading to symbol of rage. You don't do it because the effects are way too different. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair answer. Though I have another random thought from that answer, what if Ioyn Stone is a component to Adeve's Cloak instead of Nihil Crystal. The reason behind the thought is because Ioyn Stone seems to be unpopular item recently so giving it an upgrade possibly makes the item more desirable.

Nihil Crystal will be fine with no upgrade I guess because Golden Apple no longer provides mana regeneration so it still has demand. 

If anyone wonders about my intelligence regarding this game, then consider yourself visiting this thread:

Alternatively, visit this blog below to see the compiled version of the threads/posts I made on this Official HoN Forum:
newerthbrainstorm.blogspot.com

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/23/2021 at 2:18 PM, ElementUser said:

 

Don't you agree that balancing and biasing go hand in hand though? It's called the meta. 

You can call it whatever you want, the end result is still largely the same. And again, I mentioned that any required changes will be addressed. The meta needs to shift first before it can be addressed. 

The larger goal of all these changes is to also address stale homogeity among the heroes. 

Well literally what you are doing is jumping from one side of the scale to another. It does not help much the balancing of the game overall, it just shifts the meta so the majority of player base follow the trend of the powerful heroes. 

I thought the idea of balance patch is literally to balance the power of all heroes, i.e. all heroes share the same average power and thus will be picked on average at equal rates, not just to shift the meta back and forth?

To reach balance, one simple way is to anchor around a hero that is widely perceived by the community as balanced, then twitch other heroes following this baseline.

I assume that as a Frostburn staff, it is easy to access the database of the game and the database of players/match history. If so, breaking the matches into brackets and analyze them hero-wise will give a lot of insights into how a hero perform in different bracket. Also, i'm sure many higher-tier players would be willing to discuss what heroes they think is over-/under-powered with clarifications. So you can use that as inputs while trying to make the heroes easier to play for the mass. This approach surely will help you achieve balance more efficiently, receive less critics from the public once the changes are finalized based only on a small sample of testers (who are mostly low ratings).

  

On 5/23/2021 at 3:11 PM, ElementUser said:

You can think of it that way, but that's because you saw HoN as perfect back then and you didn't want change. 

If HoN literally did not have any changes since about 2 years ago, I don't think the player base would really be around anymore. 

It's 2 sides of a coin - change will keep things fresh enough without fundamentally changing the game and will keep players interested. No change may mean the game is more stable to those few people, but the game dies way faster if left stale for a long time. 

You may not understand the side of change and leads you to how you see things. I manage the game to extend its lifetime as long as possible -- if I thought the way you did, I don't think this game would be here for as long as it is. 

This justifies your reason for making the changes as you did, and I find it quite convincing. The purpose of balance change is thus, align with my inputs above, focusing on keeping the casual player flow stable (by making things exciting) instead of balancing the game overall.

Edited by Acnowlogia
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Acnowlogia said:

Well literally what you are doing is jumping from one side of the scale to another. It does not help much the balancing of the game overall, it just shifts the meta so the majority of player base follow the trend of the powerful heroes. 

I thought the idea of balance patch is literally to balance the power of all heroes, i.e. all heroes share the same average power and thus will be picked on average at equal rates, not just to shift the meta back and forth?

To reach balance, one simple way is to anchor around a hero that is widely perceived by the community as balanced, then twitch other heroes following this baseline.

I assume that as a Frostburn staff, it is easy to access the database of the game and the database of players/match history. If so, breaking the matches into brackets and analyze them hero-wise will give a lot of insights into how a hero perform in different bracket. Also, i'm sure many higher-tier players would be willing to discuss what heroes they think is over-/under-powered with clarifications. So you can use that as inputs while trying to make the heroes easier to play for the mass. This approach surely will help you achieve balance more efficiently, receive less critics from the public once the changes are finalized based only on a small sample of testers (who are mostly low ratings).

That's not really how it works. Theoretically I can change numbers until every hero is 50% across all brackets and you would say that's balanced, but that's not actually what the facts would be, because the results would be drastically different in each skill bracket. 

You have to have some kind of tolerance factor for all skill brackets. And that's just talking about raw numbers too, when in fact there's hundreds (if not more) of other factors in play. Some examples are ping dependency (ie why old Nitro does not work in our game), consistency, hero performance when they have varying states and magnitudes of advantage or disadvantage, team compositions, ban rates, effort to reward ratio (skill factor, skill expression), team dependency vs self sufficiency, level of counterplay, reasonable counterplay frustration factors, hero identity, uniqueness and contributions to a team, playstyle, hero pick factors, etc. Oh we didn't even talk about the meta, not to mention that the players are biasing the meta as well. Let's not forget that the stats are determined by the players themselves too (large sample size over a long period of time). Let's throw in homogeneity in there as well since we have over 130 heroes in the game. 

There's even fun factor to consider - over the course of literally 10+ years, it's simply a fact that players gravitate towards certain heroes (Rampage, Solstice, Flint Beastwood, Scout, Devourer, to name a few) no matter what we really do to them balance-wise. It's largely impossible to balance pick rates to be roughly equal for all heroes, never mind actual balance statistics. 

The list goes on and on. Most of the time, if you only balance by numbers you're not solving root issues of the hero. And the whole game is influenced by the rest of the game. 

So to say that I'm jumping from 1 side of the scale to the other is simply an exaggeration on all fronts. You can still think what you like, I'm just laying down many factors that players don't consider.

Edited by ElementUser
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's impossible to balance any moba game. Some heroes will always be "meta" as they are in a strong state or capable of snowballing easily due to their kit and thus are favored over others. The only thing that can be done is keeping the balance between some acceptable threshold. If that's done, you will still have to change the meta at some point to simply add some variety and freshness to the game. 

I think HoN's hero balancing state evolved rather well. Lots of heroes were released in a broken state kit wise and have been reworked to a better one. Balancing is a process that is not meant to be ever completed/considered done imho.

Link to post
Share on other sites

That new item that adds infinity range and bonus atack speed seems pretty OP on papper. I dont kanow... if i pick a bubbles and he uses that on me, i can surf again and use pk, like 2000 range away from the carry, and he still can kill me? Lol i could never go away with bubbles or magmus, if iam low life, cuz they will kill me whatever i went. Seems pretty broken, i dont know if i understand wrong the item

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, devoautist said:

That new item that adds infinity range and bonus atack speed seems pretty OP on papper. I dont kanow... if i pick a bubbles and he uses that on me, i can surf again and use pk, like 2000 range away from the carry, and he still can kill me? Lol i could never go away with bubbles or magmus, if iam low life, cuz they will kill me whatever i went. Seems pretty broken, i dont know if i understand wrong the item

Try it out when it goes live.

You need vision on them somehow to still attack them from afar. And you need to be within 700 range to even apply the effect on them in the first place.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, i know they need to active the item ( 700 range) but if they do this... and i go away like 2000, and its a place that is warded... They kill me? Even 2000 range...

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

General positives
Increasing experience and money for killing enemies is something that should have been done for a long time! thanks for this.

Positive things about changing heroes
Kane - the staff for him is definitely a good change, but there are doubts that the reduced bonus attack by 2 times is too strong a nerf, will it turn out that taking damage will turn out to be only a soft bonus, and not a reason for buying a staff
King Klout - again a good change, I personally created a topic about adding a staff with a decrease in the cooldown of the ultimate and strengthening the goblins, then you referred to the fact that the hero is already very strong and sent the topic to the archive, and now you yourself did what I said, just a few months later, weird, where are my honors and awards? but oh well, I'm glad
Adrenaline - the adrenaline buff is a 100% correct decision, but this buff is so insignificant that even the most recent nerf will not fix it. not to mention the previous nerfs.
Empath - Mana regeneration and the ability to use items on me are what the empath was missing.
Gauntlet - reducing the recharge of the hook is a kind of restoration of justice, I never understood the reasons for such a long recharge of this skill.
Gunblade - I won't say that this is a mandatory thing, but in principle, the change will make it more convenient.
Pearl - returning the old heal is very good, in general, in principle, I am against adding a blinker for Pearl, but at least she won't use it so often
Prophet - the return of the heal to the target is what you need!
Shadow Blade - adding attributes per level is great, but the previously added stun is unnecessary, it should have been removed
Devourer - this hero is already one of the most pleasant and interesting, I did not think that he needed any bonus, but I am still glad, because this is my # 1 hero in terms of the number of games.
Brutalizer - I like the changes related to the brutalizer, because I generally love when something is upset, but I would not say that the item is rarely taken, it is just that few people need it. And those who needed him were good enough.
Runed Cleaver is a return to the old, again completely for.

Now let's go through the dubious changes.
Forsaken Archer - from time to time it seems to me that her ultimate is either very weak or strong, perhaps this happens at some stages of the game, but the character himself, his characteristics, farm potential were already very good, so his buff is very doubtful, perhaps the chance of skeletons was an extra buff, but we'll see that later
Slither - This character was heavily buffed by the appearance of the Spell Sunders item, and still deals huge, lethal damage. Don't you think his buff is too high?
Ichor - this character was already very strong and impenetrable, with the addition of true damage in the area and such a large boost to the attack speed will make the character one of the best pushers, on an equal footing with the deadlift.
New cloak - don't you think its bonuses are at least too high for its value? will this item cut the potential of gankers? however, the item has an 80 second cooldown, which is very long, as a result of which it will only be enough to give a certain skill to the enemy in order to make the item work, and after 3 seconds (or the rollback of your skill, just attack and kill him), that is, this item sways from very strong to very useless.
Golden apple - I bought apples in every game, because this is passive mana regeneration, 4 apples (280 coins) were enough for me to add 1 mana regeneration, changing them to 2 attacks will make me abandon them and use tears to instantly replenish mana, the more they are improved in this patch. I think that apples will first try to buy farming characters, and for the rest they will be rotten.

Negative changes
Thunder Bringer is a character who is currently one of the strongest mana nukers, I expected to see this hero's nerf, as a result we see a very strong boost for this already blue character, +10 running speed + 100 combat range + range lightning and microstan duration + accelerated recharge of the harass skill, which stacks with Spell Sunders and the 3rd passive skill.
Dawnbringer - the nerf of this item, both in terms of slowing down and burns, is very doubtful, I would even say that I have a negative attitude towards this, still when buying this item you can hear that "you wish you bought something better", this item is not appreciated by players, although I love its potential.
Codex - Visual effects and improving it at the initial stages are all great, but its final strengthening, reduction in price and change of characteristics will make even more scouts, Night Hound and Blood Hunter with codes appear, let alone Fayde, which received not only a buff herself, but now he will arm himself with this pleasant and convenient object.
New bow - I participated in beta testing, and already saw an analogue of this item in action, it caused the wildest imbalance, I like its +30 attack speed and +70 for 4 hits when used, but the global attack range? you save his ally with a hook, but the enemy still kills him, because blows still fly after him, now it will become even more frequent and worse, because while he is flying, he can still be seen and you can shoot ...
Changes in the attack range, I am very skeptical about this, and I already see moments of imbalance, again with the same arachna, it had a range of 575, that is, 25 below the norm, and now it has 550 (the current norm, like gunblade and others, that is, under the current nerf of rangers, among the rangers themselves, arachne gained a boost, equal to the range with other carries without such wild slowdowns.
That's all I wanted to say
P .S. Where is my reward and honor for King Klout? (>-_-)>

Edited by Rage_100
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/23/2021 at 9:15 PM, ElementUser said:

I could have just made EW's E disarm if that was the case, much simpler solution. Most people are reaching for the design intention of 625 range, and while this could be a reason, there are better ways of addressing it. You won't always attack at max range... 

Disarm would make the E uncounterable by oneself as an enemy though 😛

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
19 hours ago, ElementUser said:

That's not really how it works. Theoretically I can change numbers until every hero is 50% across all brackets and you would say that's balanced, but that's not actually what the facts would be, because the results would be drastically different in each skill bracket. 

You have to have some kind of tolerance factor for all skill brackets. And that's just talking about raw numbers too, when in fact there's hundreds (if not more) of other factors in play. Some examples are ping dependency (ie why old Nitro does not work in our game), consistency, hero performance when they have varying states and magnitudes of advantage or disadvantage, team compositions, ban rates, effort to reward ratio (skill factor, skill expression), team dependency vs self sufficiency, level of counterplay, reasonable counterplay frustration factors, hero identity, uniqueness and contributions to a team, playstyle, hero pick factors, etc. Oh we didn't even talk about the meta, not to mention that the players are biasing the meta as well. Let's not forget that the stats are determined by the players themselves too (large sample size over a long period of time). Let's throw in homogeneity in there as well since we have over 130 heroes in the game. 

There's even fun factor to consider - over the course of literally 10+ years, it's simply a fact that players gravitate towards certain heroes (Rampage, Solstice, Flint Beastwood, Scout, Devourer, to name a few) no matter what we really do to them balance-wise. It's largely impossible to balance pick rates to be roughly equal for all heroes, never mind actual balance statistics. 

The list goes on and on. Most of the time, if you only balance by numbers you're not solving root issues of the hero. And the whole game is influenced by the rest of the game. 

So to say that I'm jumping from 1 side of the scale to the other is simply an exaggeration on all fronts. You can still think what you like, I'm just laying down many factors that players don't consider.

I understand the complexities involved in the balancing work, even though it is nowhere close to the depth of the actual person who manages it.

Given such vast complexities, how is it even possible to 'balance' the game?

I tend to approach balance from the player's perspective, and I think it's the only thing that matters since the players are the ones who perceive and value the game. And from the player's perspective, I think that over the last several years playing HoN, overpowered heroes are always very easily identified and all of those eventually received adjustment in the end. To name a few, Engineer, Riptide, DR... are the obvious ones. While these changes are justifiable, I don't see the point of adjusting other heroes that do not receive complaint from the public. For example, at one point Bubbles is nerfed because his surf is too fast, as if it has ever been a factor affecting the balance of the game.

So on the one hand, changes are good against obviously unbalanced heroes as widely agreed by the mass. But changes to other heroes under the justification of 'balance' basing on a few opinions or your own approach is not always very convincing from the players' perspective.

Nevertheless, it was just an opinion on the 'balancing' part, overall you have done a really great job promoting the game that nobody else would have been able to.

 

========

 

On a different note, the infinite range item does indeed look broken. It can be a selective mid/late game item for a hard ranged carry to secure kill on someone. In addition, it works so well when coordinated with heroes that provide vast vision. I can already see a Klanx killing people by abusing the skills of Blood Hunter / Tundra / Grinex or simply just a flying courier. Ranged heroes will be way stronger than others now, and ranged heroes with extraordinary survivability (Klanx) will even be more impossible to kill.

Also, this is going to give rise to a twisted strategy for a ranged carry, which is to buy a portal key, walk in range, use item ability, blink out and right click.

Or a DR that can fly in and fly out and people die.

Edited by Acnowlogia
Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that I am writing here off-topic, but you could not do something in the MVP sign, it appears suddenly and accidentally pokes at some n deserving MVP player, for example, you need to poke and then confirm the voice

Link to post
Share on other sites
×
×
  • Create New...