You all should stop careing about "balance" (an argument for prioritising game health)

Blatant Clickbait title I know, but hear me out here. Way to many players seem to care about the game being balanced more then they consider what makes for a good game state. Look Balance > everything is a god awful viewpoint to approach a moba with. Imbalance is necessary to have a fun and successful moba. Let me express my Bias, here is what I want to see in a moba. All champions in the game have a place, Some might only live in low mmr, some might only be good in premade, some exist as a counter pick, but every champion has a spot they do well in. I want all classes to be viable, not necessarily equally viable but all of them should be available in any meta. I want a decent # of champions to competitive picks across various mmrs. The champions don't have to be the same champs across them, but I want to see a semi wide pool in each elo. I want every pick to have counter play, I want all players to have options to deal with anything thrown at them, a lot of folks wont, after all if you don't own a strong counter, or you don't play any then you don't benefit from a counter existing but that's on you as a PLAYER and not the games fault. Overall I feel this makes for a more fun and healthier game. One of the key issues, I think its entirely fair for me to claim that Balance is not well defined or agreed on, many players have a different definition. It can mean 50% win rates, It can mean all champions are on the same power budget, Some want it to mean all champions enjoy the same viability. None of the previous examples are good for the game. 1. Matchmaker is not god, teams are not going to be fair. It can try to make a on paper match that's close, realistically your going to run into games that the teams are not remotely even. Regardless of champion picks, games will be imbalanced just off player skill. 2. Mobas require learning, you need to have simple champions for folks to learn the game on. If everything's super complex it makes the game less accessible to lower skill or newer players. 3. 50% on everything is impossible in a team 5v5 game, again its already impossible to have fair teams so disregarding kits your never going to get all champions at the same win rates. If your asking for this your being unrealistic. 4. All champions on the same power budget removes any incentive to learn complex champions. If the best case usage of a hard champ is the same as the best usage of an easy champ, there's no reward to learning the harder one, and the lower your personal skill the worse your gonna preform on them so you remove complex champions as viable picks in a high % of games. 5. Not every kit is going to have universal viability. Some require teammates, some have bad synergy with other kits, its entirely OK for this to happen. A strong kit with a lot of bad matchups is a bad FP, but it will do well when ya snag it into one of the matchups it does well vs. Its ok for things to not be good all the time into anything, because you always have other options. Your never forced to play X. You do it because you want to, and if your picks not the best, its got a lot of meta counters you can reasonably expect to see all the time, the games not better by making your pick good vs everything or OK vs everything. A lot of folks absolutely hate when a champ can mitigate its weakness, take a look at how folks react to {{champion:157}} {{champion:142}}. Often times there are posts about Champion X being imabalanced, theres a lot of debate in some of these threads. I don't think its a great way to fix game health. the discussions tainted by bias, not everybody views balance as the same definition, and it rarely accounts for MMRS. (silver player complaining about LB. Diamond player, LUL GET GUD NOOB) Adopting a stance of game health first, it means that all MMRs need to be considered, Excessive Outliers need to be addressed in any MMR. Arguments should not be built on skill discrepancies, the assumption should always be between 2 equally skilled players, not a master smurf vs bronze 4. You wanna talk about if Yii is broken in bronze, needs to be a bronze yii vs bronze players. Theres a lot of numerical ways to value balance that will not make for a better or more fun game. Id like to see it get back to a point folks used the boards for posts like, I hate dealing with X rather then OMG BROKEN OP GUT X. I wish folks could ask for help and get a response that's helpful rather then LuL GET GUD. If you disagree with me, that's alright. I would appreciate it if you would take the time to comment however, Provide your definition for what balance is, and please touch how it makes for a better game. If you just cant get over the gut reaction to me calling balance not inherently healthy, take some time and think about it. If you think the point of this post its to say GROSS IMBALANCE IS GUD. BLATENTLY OP IS OK, im disappointed in you, that's not remotely the case and I don't know how the hell you got that view if you actually read this post. Tldr. Making a game that's fun, with high champion viability, for players across every skill is a better priority then numerical "balance"
Share
Report as:
Offensive Spam Harassment Incorrect Board
Cancel