|
|
Post by wolfchild on Mar 18, 2018 9:30:32 GMT
Looking at a lot of the things coming through CID, albeit a few nerfs, most of what’s coming through is enjoying a power creep.
Ive also spotted that a LOT of the feedback especially in terms of battle reports is written by players using the new/edited stuff, rather than an even mix of players going against them.
Any survey where documented review is seen majoratively from one side is a clear bias.
The general trend is that players don’t appreciate quite how good the things they’re using actually is, especially at the early stages where they’re less familiar with them and their nuanced synergies, and so unless really obviously OP, they’re more likely to report UP details and request greater potential from their models. Opponents to the new things are going to be unfamiliar and more critical to things that appear to them OP, far less likely to request a boost in power.
PP has already demonstrated in MkII and now in MkIII that they test play far less than they’d like us to believe, hence the addition of the CID cycles. So the perception bias toward powering up new/edited models is a real concern (it will also drive sales of the new stuff as it becomes stronger in the meta and often ‘must haves’ in the next tournaments).
What do u guys think?
Im just worried that PP is buying a bit too much out of GWs power creep stable and using CID to cover their backs saying the player base chose it.
|
|
|
|
Post by thimnwitt on Mar 18, 2018 11:43:25 GMT
I think the purpose of the CID is to make all the models compelling. As far as I can tell, the CID process has been great thus far in that department. As time goes on, I fully support all the models getting CID treatment.
So I suppose I don't view it as power creep at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by greenjello on Mar 18, 2018 11:44:20 GMT
Any specific examples of power creep? I think it's hard for a company to avoid, but at least PP has no problem also nerfing stuff. You also have to keep in mind that some of the stuff going through CID is either UP, or has a bad rep, so it's going to get a bit of a bump.
|
|
Haight
Junior Strategist
Posts: 396 
|
Post by Haight on Mar 18, 2018 16:05:21 GMT
If you are referring to limited factions being the power creep, then there's an alternate point.
Limited factions are going to get much, much fewer releases. CoC so far has enjoyed a merc (Garrity) and a caster (Orion) and have another in the works (Locke). This was not a CID faction fwiw. However i think the lesson learned by CoC's release was that you need to do some future proofing not only the balance factor of such a limited release faction, but the power curve.
I think we saw this made manifest with Grymkin. They came out tight and strong from CID, and i think that's because the idea is that they won't be getting much in the near future and there's zero plans to "catch them up". CG will be similar by all accounts.
So the notion is they are probably going to come out of the grinder strong, but with less overall options, and that will not change relatively proportional to time.
The counter argument of course is "well CoC didn't do that". Correct. My counter to that would be CoC was their first limited faction, took 4 years i believe to get their first additional model, and i think they saw the issues with release model ; namely that a faction dropped balanced at release slated to get zero releases for years to come may not be balanced a couple years out. Counter to this counter: Well (warmachine bigname here, probably J. Watt) plays them in tournies and wrecks face.
Taking a single, or a couple even, known hyper skilled players as exemplar is probably not the best data sample. Years ago the Sub-Optimals were a group of players nationwide committed to bringing janky shit to regional and national events, and they've placed with them too. I remember in MK2 when gators were considered "terrible", until the quad of players that rolled face with Gator-Done (one of which is a RL very good friend, and i've played WM with the other three in the past). In a 6 week span the body politic of warmachine did an about face on Gators. So the counter to "Watt wrecks face with CoC so Grymkin / CG don't need to come out with any future proof padding" is combated by "good players can make a surprising amount of stuff work better than even above average players".
PP wants these factions to sell and wants the "mini faction per year for forseeable future" model to work, so i would expect mini factions to come out of CID with a bit of future proof padding. Right or wrong, i'd expect that to be the relative outcome for most mini factions moving forward, CG included.
I am not sure if its still power creep or not, but i'm pretty sure that's the idea behind the way Grym left CID and how CG ultimately will as well. You sort of need a lesser number of tools to be capable of a greater number of jobs.
|
|
skormedlover87
Junior Strategist
Desperately searching for days off to game...
Posts: 517
|
Post by skormedlover87 on Mar 18, 2018 16:15:17 GMT
Better power creep than Zerg creep.
|
|
|
|
Post by Charistoph on Mar 18, 2018 16:33:29 GMT
Better power creep than Zerg creep. Zerg creep is only a problem if you aren't Zerg, and the perception that wolfchild is presenting is that all CID is doing is putting out various forms of Zerg creep. In short, Zerg creep is still power creep, just restricted to whose creep it is. I can't say for sure because I have not been on the CID forums, but the real question is how many people are providing Battle Reports of a situation where something is ridiculously broken against numerous, contradictory situations and it isn't being addressed in CID? |
|
skormedlover87
Junior Strategist
Desperately searching for days off to game...
Posts: 517
|
Post by skormedlover87 on Mar 18, 2018 16:42:30 GMT
Way to not get the offhand joke...
But going with the theme, I'm a Skorne man myself, so my creep is in the far unknown future. Where Cygnar and Cryx probably each get another CiD or 3 first. You know, late 2019 or so.
|
|
joedj
Junior Strategist
Posts: 513
|
Post by joedj on Mar 18, 2018 18:01:38 GMT
As an owner of many factions I appreciate the CID process, however I don't have nearly the time to test all. A interesting consideration is the fact that true faction fans are the most likely to CID test that particular faction/model set and recommend adjustments or not, while us dabblers cheer or jeer on.
I was active in Trollblood testing, but have left it on faith that my Khadoran and Legion brothers and sisters will provide good testing data to support compelling AND competitive reasons to field those respective models which I also own, but which have been languishing.
If CID results in a relative power creep that allows models I already own to be more compelling, I'm all for it. If a new faction comes along that is so excessive in power that it leaves all others in the dust (aka 'codex creep'), I suspect sales across the entire game platform would suffer, which is just bad business.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gamingdevil on Mar 19, 2018 9:51:37 GMT
I've been following all of the CIDs so far and have usually played/reported at least one game in each of them (lack of time and/or viable opponents doesn't always make it easy) I must say that some things do come out slightly overtuned, but nothing obviously broken. They do have a tendency to start high and adjust downward for new things though, as made obvious again with the current CG CID, which are slowly being reigned in. For existing things, they are usually looking at making things that see little play more compelling, so they often adjust upward. Then people playtest these things (and it does happen often that the playtest against existing things) and give feedback about what felt right or not. It's in the nature of most people to ask for as much as possible, just in case, but generally feedback is relatively on point and the devs are good at weeding out the more outlandish claims.
In general I think that for some things there is a slight power creep, but not in so much that you have to play the new stuff or go home. It's just that models might be slightly above the curve to be more compelling, which is common across the game anyway (some are above the curve, some below)
The most difficult things to balance is the new factions, as was said before.
|
|
|
|
Post by wolfchild on Mar 19, 2018 13:13:39 GMT
Gamingdevil I’m not too fussed about looking into new/limited factions, rather just the overall trend that new stuff is distinctly above curve on power maybe to weather time/attrition from future power creeps/meta). Although there’s been a few nerfs, mostly things have seen a boost (as u say, they’re focusing on bringing the under used forward), but often a step further than necessary, to shift the meta and drive sales perhaps, rather than just to find balance. It’s definitely a factor that if u bring one thing forward, (to make it shine again), knowing that ur gonna bring other things forward (for the same purpose), that the power creep is going to be present and unignorable. It’s great that PP is devoting so much energy into this system, but I imagine it’s largely due to an ever shifting meta driving sales rather than that much balance. CID however more balanced than previously still suffers from a bias of company sales and player bias wanting that bit more out of their own things than their opponents. I’m not sure how to encourage or achieve more balance in the evidence provided by reporting players as Gamingdevil has evidenced, we’re more likely to both try out and report on the new stuff if it’s our own faction. Less so if we just played against it.
|
|
mazog
Junior Strategist
Walking and talking
Posts: 748
|
Post by mazog on Mar 19, 2018 13:41:07 GMT
I think part of the power creep perception, whether it is true or not, is that new shiny toys are unfamiliar and it takes time to work out counters for them. As a troll player that typically only gets one game a week, I've played Storm almost exclusively since it dropped, but that's mostly because I'm still working out how it works and what is bad at. I love it for letting me play scenario where I was terrible at that before, but I'm starting to seriously consider putting another theme in my tournament pair because, while it does a credible job at most things, it doesn't answer everything, or allow old models that I love.
|
|
|
|
Post by Trollock on Mar 19, 2018 15:00:07 GMT
For power creep to be an issue, the "new" models have to invalidate the old choices. I think that the things coming out of CID are generally better than they were before, but they were also GARBAGE before. Now they are attractive options, but they do not replace what you used to play.
pre CID for trolls i basically only played PoD for a whole year. PoD is still fine, but now i have BoH and SotN to play as well! KC is still awful, but that is because it didnt go through CID. Trolls have gotten more valid options, but the new ones did not invalidate the old ones, and thus there is not problem imo.
|
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Mar 19, 2018 16:47:22 GMT
For power creep to be an issue, the "new" models have to invalidate the old choices. I think that the things coming out of CID are generally better than they were before, but they were also GARBAGE before. Now they are attractive options, but they do not replace what you used to play. pre CID for trolls i basically only played PoD for a whole year. PoD is still fine, but now i have BoH and SotN to play as well! KC is still awful, but that is because it didnt go through CID. Trolls have gotten more valid options, but the new ones did not invalidate the old ones, and thus there is not problem imo. This. I highly doubt MOW are going to replace or approach ghost fleet in rage and loathing. That said the sooner the khador playerbase can put the vlads away and embrace the actual infantry casters the more likely they are to appreciate AK |
|
|
|
Post by macdaddy on Mar 19, 2018 16:49:42 GMT
For power creep to be an issue, the "new" models have to invalidate the old choices. I think that the things coming out of CID are generally better than they were before, but they were also GARBAGE before. Now they are attractive options, but they do not replace what you used to play. pre CID for trolls i basically only played PoD for a whole year. PoD is still fine, but now i have BoH and SotN to play as well! KC is still awful, but that is because it didnt go through CID. Trolls have gotten more valid options, but the new ones did not invalidate the old ones, and thus there is not problem imo. This. I highly doubt MOW are going to replace or approach ghost fleet in rage and loathing. That said the sooner the khador playerbase can put the vlads away and embrace the actual infantry casters the more likely they are to appreciate AK yeah MoW doesn't seem to be an issue. I will say Crucible guard is looking like grymkin 2.0. I have a bad feeling of the impact they will have on the meta if unchanged |
|
|
|
Post by mcdermott on Mar 19, 2018 16:51:14 GMT
This. I highly doubt MOW are going to replace or approach ghost fleet in rage and loathing. That said the sooner the khador playerbase can put the vlads away and embrace the actual infantry casters the more likely they are to appreciate AK yeah MoW doesn't seem to be an issue. I will say Crucible guard is looking like grymkin 2.0. I have a bad feeling of the impact they will have on the meta if unchanged CG has too many moving parts IMO. They've got one, maybe 2 above the curve units and everything else looks good "if you manage to land all the buffs and debuffs" Kick one peg from their combos and its not nearly as impressive. |
|
