Small suggestion: No more nerf herding threads

[pattycake]

Garenteed she was honest; I’ve read that post, we all have ideas on how CoX can be better. It’s not really in our hands to have things developed, it’s definitely not entitlement but some form without the connotations being negative or positive. 

 

There’s a saying in the entertainment industry. “Don’t try to please everyone because no matter what decision you make your going to upset some or another. Create something YOU want and hope to gain the confidence of your fans” it’s actually paraphrase I’m on the bus from work.

 

the homecoming is in charge of what is added and what is not. My take is throw as much ideas out as possible, hoping you inspire one of the devs to take action.

 

my ideas offend people, but it’s all apart of the plan.

 

please don’t stop herding on nerfs, and maybe express your disagreements that dismantle future ideas/inspirations respectfully and try not to be offended for people who put down your ideas too.

[QuiJon]

1 hour ago, TheAdjustor said:

At what point do you say troll ?

 

Oh I came to that point somewhere around page 20, and got a nice warning by a GM.

[QuiJon]

9 minutes ago, ToZ said:

 

There’s a saying in the entertainment industry. “Don’t try to please everyone because no matter what decision you make your going to upset some or another. Create something YOU want and hope to gain the confidence of your fans” it’s actually paraphrase I’m on the bus from work.

 

 

Wow did you make that up yourself. Cause I am quite sure the MILLIONS of dollars companies like WB, Disney, and many more spend per year on hiring research firms to garner the opinions of people on their products so they can make alterations would say that the "entertainment industry" says more or less "find the product the most amount of people will like and make that."

 

WB reshot half of Justice League because of bad receptions to preview audiences even though 1 creator made his vision. Lucasfilm sidelined the director of Rogue One and did massive reshoots, as well as fired the directors of Solo mid movie because of the feedback they were receiving. Fox would not release Dark Pheonix before the merger with Disney was finalized because of how bad reviews said it was no matter if it was the writer/directors vision. And still it seems Diseny will not allow New Mutants to see the light of day. 

 

If you are gonna pull sayins out of your ass atleast have them make sense to what is common knowledge and practices within the industry you are trying to act like you have knowledge of. 

[Infinitum]

15 minutes ago, ToZ said:

Garenteed she was honest; I’ve read that post, we all have ideas on how CoX can be better. It’s not really in our hands to have things developed, it’s definitely not entitlement but some form without the connotations being negative or positive. 

 

There’s a saying in the entertainment industry. “Don’t try to please everyone because no matter what decision you make your going to upset some or another. Create something YOU want and hope to gain the confidence of your fans” it’s actually paraphrase I’m on the bus from work.

 

the homecoming is in charge of what is added and what is not. My take is throw as much ideas out as possible, hoping you inspire one of the devs to take action.

 

my ideas offend people, but it’s all apart of the plan.

 

please don’t stop herding on nerfs, and maybe express your disagreements that dismantle future ideas/inspirations respectfully and try not to be offended for people who put down your ideas too.

Again..... The problem isnt throwing out ideas.

 

The problem is throwing out ideas with no definition or direction as to what "balance is" which in essance is solutions to an undefined an undefinable problem that may or may not exist.

[pattycake]

I don’t think it’s so much of a gold thread that only successful arts have to abide by. And with all due with respect, your talking about large corporations; big leagues, managing a single passionate IP is way different than juggling separate entities. Marvel has been given more control than star wars and blizzard still has some what more control than let’s say call of duty.

 

if there was anything you should of took from what I was hoping to achieve, is please try see see through other people’s points of view. 

 

I think people who express to nerf have every right to, even if poorly expressed still we are all not working on the project, we’re enjoying a game that is dear to us, and we all think we know what’s best. But at the end of the day, we can all sit down and pitch our ideas without hostility. I’m done with this post.

 

I don’t agree with it, if anything and being a better compromise, it should have its own thread so anyone who isn’t interested can simply not go to.

 

by the way you actually had solid points 

[GM Sijin]

Trolling is defined by intent, not effect. Dismissing an idea as an attempt to troll is a fallacy whether you're correct or not. Whether you're correct or not is often impossible to actually prove. Best to stick to arguing the merits of the idea than the intentions of the person.

 

As for the topic at hand, and let me be very clear here:

I speak for myself, not the team at large.

 

I agree that topics that cover reducing the effectiveness of anything are going to be more divisive than those that talk about boosting the effectiveness. That's just the nature of our society.

 

I agree that topics that are blatant calls to nerf something without providing any objective and verifiable reasons for doing so should be frowned upon, and if such reason refused to be provided, moderated if they persist. It is the burden of the person trying to enact change to prove that change is warranted, and if they aren't willing to put in the time and effort to gather enough data for at least a strong starting point it's going to be difficult to make any progress.

 

I disagree that we should issue a blanket ban on discussing whether something is overperforming. This is an important part of game design, especially when there's a PvP aspect to consider. We should expect a high bar for the basis of these discussions. Those bringing the topic up should realize the burden of proof is on them and that that proof must be fairly exhaustively provided and in a manner that can be verified and that both applies to the game in a general sense, and that takes into consideration all levels of play not just a single facet. Solutions should be refrained from being posted before a problem is actually proven. This high expectation goes both ways and if those with the burden of proof are working on gathering information it should be expected that any dissent will be done with the same level of attention to details. By all means, call out what is missing from the data, what considerations haven't been taken. But don't use those gaps as 'proof' that there isn't an issue if you aren't willing to provide the same level of data, especially when what is being provided at least suggests there may be reason for further research.

 

There has been some discussion around 'balancing points' or where the game should be balanced. This has merit in many places, where what to balance around is definitely something that should be established first and foremost. But where there is a balancing point is powerset performance within an AT, attack sets in particular. It isn't a perfect system, but the relative performance within that metric should be considered. There is a median, and there will be those that are above and below that median. It's not difficult to imagineer an acceptable range for that median, and those that fall above or below that should be looked at. That data has to be gathered first, though.

 

A far better solution, although one that is above and beyond far more difficult, is educating the community as to what makes for a good discussion, and what does not. You certainly don't need to get offended at someone's idea to nerf something. You absolutely don't need to attack someone for bringing up an idea that you disagree with. Fallacies should be avoided. Respect should be a given. Seek clarification rather than making assumptions. Avoid hyperbole and exaggeration when trying to make a point. Et cetera. Even divisive topics can be discussed with civility, if people allow for it. It's a choice to react with hostility. 

[ShardWarrior]

6 minutes ago, GM Sijin said:

You absolutely don't need to attack someone for bringing up an idea that you disagree with.

We also shouldn't need to be attacked for disagreeing with the ideas being made in these these posts.  Being told to "just go away" because you disagree with the idea being presented shouldn't be allowed in my opinion.  For what it's worth, there seems to be a very pervasive attitude on these forums by several posters who only want to have people reply who agree with their idea and a concerted effort to silence or shame those who do not.  That's just my perspective and is not representative of everyone on here.

[Infinitum]

1 minute ago, ShardWarrior said:

We also shouldn't need to be attacked for disagreeing with the ideas being made in these these posts.  Being told to "just go away" because you disagree with the idea being presented shouldn't be allowed in my opinion.  For what it's worth, there seems to be a very pervasive attitude on these forums by several posters who only want to have people reply who agree with their idea and a concerted effort to silence or shame those who do not.  That's just my perspective and is not representative of everyone on here.

I concur with this completely.

[Haijinx]

I think it helps to remember we do have a quirky unbalanced game that does not work anything like the original design.

 

That is going to naturally tug at some people's sense of balance.  

 

The alternative to quirky can be mechanically bland though. 

 

Look at something like Champions Online or SWTOR.

 

 

[TheAdjustor]

38 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

I think it helps to remember we do have a quirky unbalanced game that does not work anything like the original design.

 

That is going to naturally tug at some people's sense of balance.  

 

The alternative to quirky can be mechanically bland though. 

 

Look at something like Champions Online or SWTOR.

 

 

At least Champions has a bit of a  build system. SWTOR combines best in slot items, with a heres 3 choices 2 are terrible build system.

[TheAdjustor]

1 hour ago, GM Sijin said:

Trolling is defined by intent, not effect. Dismissing an idea as an attempt to troll is a fallacy whether you're correct or not. Whether you're correct or not is often impossible to actually prove. Best to stick to arguing the merits of the idea than the intentions of the person.

 

 

Not trying to be argumentative or passive aggressive but intent is very hard to discern and it's inevitable as time goes on, not only will these threads get worse but they will result of banning of people that weren't trolls because they simply got too torqued up by the trolling.

 

Edit was trying to think of a neutral way to phrase this but imagine certainly strongly held beliefs being raised in a geology or space exploration forum.

Edited September 28, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[Dropwing]

Calls for nerfs or “slaps on the wrists” for powers or other parts of the game seem so unnecessary. Who is it really affecting and who’s game play experience are you really improving by suggesting such changes? Discussion is cool but these suggestions often come with a tone that the original poster knows best. 

[GM Sijin]

15 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

Not trying to be argumentative or passive aggressive but intent is very hard to discern and it's inevitable as time goes on, not only will these threads get worse but they will result of banning of people that weren't trolls because they simply got too torqued up by the trolling.

 

Edit was trying to think of a neutral way to phrase this but imagine certainly strongly held beliefs being raised in a geology or space exploration forum.

We do not ban people for being heated. We issue warnings, which are temporary marks. Someone has to either cross a line one should not cross, or be pretty belligerent across multiple threads or for an extended period of time before they're going to get banned in this way.

 

As I said, I agree that threads that are created calling for nerfs without providing anything objective to suggest it's warranted, or respectfully calling to gather that information, should probably get moderated. I certainly don't want to see a plethora of NERF ALL THE THINGS threads. Is your concern that we're already at an unacceptable point, or more that we're (at risk of) moving in that direction?

[TheAdjustor]

2 minutes ago, GM Sijin said:

We do not ban people for being heated. We issue warnings, which are temporary marks. Someone has to either cross a line one should not cross, or be pretty belligerent across multiple threads or for an extended period of time before they're going to get banned in this way.

 

As I said, I agree that threads that are created calling for nerfs without providing anything objective to suggest it's warranted, or respectfully calling to gather that information, should probably get moderated. I certainly don't want to see a plethora of NERF ALL THE THINGS threads. Is your concern that we're already at an unacceptable point, or more that we're (at risk of) moving in that direction?

Thank you for your response it's very much appreciated.

My concern is very much that we have started down the slope, and these topics are by the nature very divisive and polarizing, very nearly in the category of "fighting words". While threads requesting new features or buffs may produce disagreement they don't seem to produce animosity. So my worry is that not only do these stir up the community for no good, if by chance the development team is working on something, or is prompted to look at something as a result it will take that animosity up to 11 and beyond. What's more as this becomes a thing, instigating them will become something of a sport for those inclined.

 

[Infinitum]

32 minutes ago, GM Sijin said:

We do not ban people for being heated. We issue warnings, which are temporary marks. Someone has to either cross a line one should not cross, or be pretty belligerent across multiple threads or for an extended period of time before they're going to get banned in this way.

 

As I said, I agree that threads that are created calling for nerfs without providing anything objective to suggest it's warranted, or respectfully calling to gather that information, should probably get moderated. I certainly don't want to see a plethora of NERF ALL THE THINGS threads. Is your concern that we're already at an unacceptable point, or more that we're (at risk of) moving in that direction?

I would say moving in that direction at an increasing rate and also with a seeming grasping at straws mentality to be noticed for bizarre suggestions that would either require rebalancing the whole game or redesigning something that ultimately changes nothing in the grand scheme of things.

 

Ultimately I think homecoming should weigh in at some point with some kind of road map as to what the idea of balance is.

 

IMO the game is balanced well now despite all the accusations of power creep because ultimately there are vast options availible to the player base to set their own difficulty levels by thw actual difficulty settings, slotting, power selection, team selection, and enhancement sets.

 

Thats a robust design that has almost unlimited options that is just very fun and keeps me coming back for more.

 

I'm just not seeing anything breaki g the game in terms of making it so easy its boring.

 

Thats just my opinion from playing many many different ways.

Edited September 29, 2019 by Infinitum

[n00baka]

Considering when this thread was made there was only one thread on the first page of the Suggestions forum calling for a nerf of any kind, I’m inclined to think there is no significant movement in that direction. In fact, the majority of this forum has been a combination of buffs and QoL improvements. Personally, I feel that with there being new developers people have become emboldened about re-asking for things  that the original developers would never do. 

[Infinitum]

8 hours ago, n00baka said:

Considering when this thread was made there was only one thread on the first page of the Suggestions forum calling for a nerf of any kind, I’m inclined to think there is no significant movement in that direction. In fact, the majority of this forum has been a combination of buffs and QoL improvements. Personally, I feel that with there being new developers people have become emboldened about re-asking for things  that the original developers would never do. 

You are technically correct, there are mostly positive suggestions here, but it's like the Adjustor stated the titles of two recent threads is what polarized the discussion from the word go and why perception leaned strongly to trolling/nerfherding.

 

Before that and the titan weapons slap on the wrist thread there were heavy calls for nerfing brutes in the tank brute conundrum thread.

 

And internal to some other threads I didn't dedicate to memory there have been calls to nerf other features in IO sets which was very similar to the hasten thread ie remove or nerf them because too many people pick them.

 

So I stand behind what I'm saying because there were no nerf threads then there was one, then another, now in the space of time in a week or so we have had 2 back to back that IMO were both became polarized monsters targeted at things that would only be a detriment if they were carried out.

 

Thats why I said their frequency is increasing and there is no way from both the titles or the content could anyone expect anything other than a hostile reaction to them.

 

Also in either of the previous 2 there has been absolutely nothing to back up the call to change anything so severely or demonstrate how its breaking the game outside of it being a popular choice.

[PaxArcana]

This thread is nerf-herding.  It's trying to nerf open debate and discussion on this forum.  By it's own logic, it should be banned.

[Hyperstrike]

On 9/28/2019 at 12:57 AM, Burnt Toast said:

Frankly I am tired of all the "buff/change" these powers/options etc to make things easier threads... seriously the game is super easy already, but it seems like a lot of people want an "I win" button. There is a CoH server that offers that.... they need people there so....have at it. 

Me times eleventy trillion.
I don't mind that people suggest fixes for actual problems in the game.
But "I don't like this." doesn't constitute a problem.

Forgive me if that hits a bit too hard on the nose.

[TheAdjustor]

2 hours ago, PaxArcana said:

This thread is nerf-herding.  It's trying to nerf open debate and discussion on this forum.  By it's own logic, it should be banned.

Not a problem as long as it applies uniformly.  Just looking at the next post illustrates  why these are in general bad for the community

1 hour ago, Hyperstrike said:

Me times eleventy trillion.
I don't mind that people suggest fixes for actual problems in the game.
But "I don't like this." doesn't constitute a problem.

Forgive me if that hits a bit too hard on the nose.

It has nothing to do with "I don't like this" there are plenty of people have expressed their concern over the negative effects of these threads.

Your post not only lumps in everyone that disagrees with it, into one group, it's also self aware that it will cause a negative emotional reaction.

 

As an easy way to dismantle the whole "I don't like this idea",  just imagine if general discussion went political.

Edited September 29, 2019 by TheAdjustor

[GM Capocollo]

If you see a suggestion thread and you have a reason why the proposal is objectively bad or unworkable, make your case for why and then leave it at that.  There is no reason to turn a misguided suggestion thread into a 20-page mud wrestling match about people's motives and personal failings.

 

If you see a suggestion thread and you think it's not a good idea but don't have anything backing it up besides a gut feeling, ignore it and move on.  Homecoming Team doesn't uncritically accept every single suggestion made here, and silence is much more effective at evincing the community's disinterest in an idea than a shouting match or accusations of trolling.

 

In the specific case of the thread about Hasten that people seem the most upset about, did people actually read the proposal?  The OP wanted to bake Hasten into everyone's builds because it's impossible to not take it on the majority of builds.  Nowhere did they say that they wanted Hasten removed or all builds that use Hasten to be made weaker.  It turned out that it wasn't a great proposal, but it's impossible to find that analysis in the thread itself because it's buried in a layer of overreactions from people who read the title, jumped to a conclusion and got borderline abusive about it.

[justicebeliever]

18 minutes ago, TheAdjustor said:

Not a problem as long as it applies uniformly.  Just looking at the next post illustrates  why these are in general bad for the community

It has nothing to do with "I don't like this" there are plenty of people have expressed their concern over the negative effects of these threads.

Your post not only lumps in everyone that disagrees with it, into one group, it's also self aware that it will cause a negative emotional reaction.

 

As an easy way to dismantle the whole "I don't like this idea",  just imagine if general discussion went political.

If the whole conversation went political, it would be wildly off topic and therefore inappropriate to this message board.

 

This particular thread is about censuring peoples ability to criticize the game and the game mechanics because they don't like it.  I'm not going to assume you come from the United States, but most of the players do, and at least for me, that runs pretty contrary to my beliefs about free speech and the internet.  I would hope most people ultimately feel the same way and are able to deal with criticism they don't want to hear in a manner that most do, by ignoring it or responding in a manner that addresses the criticism without trying to inflame the conversation.

 

Clearly Homecoming is able to pull this off, because to my knowledge they don't ban people just because they are critical of the game they are caring for.  They either ignore them, or respond maturely.

 

I'm not suggesting it, but my personal wish would be to ban posts were people assume the motivations and the intent of others based on a total lack of intonation, lack of facial expression, personal unfamiliarity and about 1000 word post about one specific item.  Again, my wish, not a suggestion, because while I don't like it when others treat people unkindly in this manner, I can either ignore them or respond maturely instead.

 

[nihilii]

5 minutes ago, GM Capocollo said:

In the specific case of the thread about Hasten that people seem the most upset about, did people actually read the proposal?  The OP wanted to bake Hasten into everyone's builds because it's impossible to not take it on the majority of builds.  Nowhere did they say that they wanted Hasten removed or all builds that use Hasten to be made weaker.  It turned out that it wasn't a great proposal, but it's impossible to find that analysis in the thread itself because it's buried in a layer of overreactions from people who read the title, jumped to a conclusion and got borderline abusive about it.

OP advocated for adding +20% passive recharge to all toons, cutting Hasten down to +25% or so, letting Hasten be doublestacked, changing all NPC HP... This is very different from having a click power doing +70% recharge (with the advantages and drawbacks coming with it). It was demonstrated OP's suggestion would indeed make builds using Hasten weaker, in answer to which OP and a couple other posters adopted the stance "Hasten is overpowered anyway".

I'm not sure whether it makes sense to suggest people didn't read the thread. Most posters were "repeat offenders", and engaged at length with the (imho) increasingly ludicrous suggestions. The constant title edits was a slight topping of silliness on top of an overall crazy thread, not an isolated event bringing out a big bad horde of meanies to mercilessly harass OP.

 

[justicebeliever]

5 minutes ago, nihilii said:

OP advocated for adding +20% passive recharge to all toons, cutting Hasten down to +25% or so, letting Hasten be doublestacked, changing all NPC HP... This is very different from having a click power doing +70% recharge (with the advantages and drawbacks coming with it). It was demonstrated OP's suggestion would indeed make builds using Hasten weaker, in answer to which OP and a couple other posters adopted the stance "Hasten is overpowered anyway".

I'm not sure whether it makes sense to suggest people didn't read the thread. Most posters were "repeat offenders", and engaged at length with the (imho) increasingly ludicrous suggestions. The constant title edits was a slight topping of silliness on top of an overall crazy thread, not an isolated event bringing out a big bad horde of meanies to mercilessly harass OP.

 

It was a change that the OP of that thread suggested.  So it’s not going to work the same as the existing power.  But it was her intent to try to solve a problem, and she did dare to use math, data, and rationale to back it up.  She responded to almost everyone who gave criticism about her math and rationale , and adjusted when errors were pointed out.  She philosophically didn’t agree with the assertion that Hasten is fine the way it is, but that’s her right.  She’s not a game designer on homecoming so i was unclear why so many felt they had to disabuse her of that notion.

 

I thought the title changes were great, because they showed that her ideas were evolving over time.

 

So in summary, the OP of that thread saw a concern, evaluated it, responded to the forums with data and math.  The poster then evolved their idea instead of digging in, and tried to come up with alternatives (again each with math and data).  How is that not a good thing, except for the part where she didn’t agree philosophically about it being broken in the first.  (Which is also ok, or there would never be any changes to the game, ever)

[TheAdjustor]

28 minutes ago, justicebeliever said:

If the whole conversation went political, it would be wildly off topic and therefore inappropriate to this message board.

 

This particular thread is about censuring peoples ability to criticize the game and the game mechanics because they don't like it.  I'm not going to assume you come from the United States, but most of the players do, and at least for me, that runs pretty contrary to my beliefs about free speech and the internet.  I would hope most people ultimately feel the same way and are able to deal with criticism they don't want to hear in a manner that most do, by ignoring it or responding in a manner that addresses the criticism without trying to inflame the conversation.

 

Clearly Homecoming is able to pull this off, because to my knowledge they don't ban people just because they are critical of the game they are caring for.  They either ignore them, or respond maturely.

 

I'm not suggesting it, but my personal wish would be to ban posts were people assume the motivations and the intent of others based on a total lack of intonation, lack of facial expression, personal unfamiliarity and about 1000 word post about one specific item.  Again, my wish, not a suggestion, because while I don't like it when others treat people unkindly in this manner, I can either ignore them or respond maturely instead.

 

The inherent contradiction is outlined in red. The right of free speech in the public square vs speech in private forum. They are not the same thing and never have been. Not wishing to take this further into politics

 

Quote

This particular thread is about censuring peoples ability to criticize the game and the game mechanics because they don't like it.

No it's not. It is entirely about preventing topics that inevitably polarize people, provoke confrontational actions and sow discord.

 

Nerf herding isn't even criticism, it's a demand for harm to be done to how some people play the game. What's more it encourages personal attacks and the personalization of the debate.

 

As it stands the people who dislike the idea of limiting these threads (Perfectly fine position to hold I am not in love with it but see the need for it) , have already fallen to distorting the thread ,creating strawmen, and appeals to emotion to make their points.

 

Your post is a good example to this. The 1st amendment is a true national treasure of the United States. So appealing to the emotion that is associated with it inherently encourages people not to take up the issue but decide it on how they feel about the 1st amendment.  It's also a strawman for the simple reason the supreme court has repeatedly and over a very long stretch of time said it does not say what you are trying to say it does. There are all kinds of speech that aren't permitted under it, fighting words, and incitement are good examples.

Edited September 29, 2019 by TheAdjustor