11-04-2021, 01:13 PM(This post was last modified: 11-04-2021, 01:13 PM by spooked.)
11-04-2021, 11:41 AMRomanesEuntDomus Wrote:
11-04-2021, 10:55 AMcaltroit_red_flames Wrote: Arch swapping. That's a thing in PBE. It's like 3 mil and I think you can do it twice in a career.
But then people could just chase the new metas again, using their one or two archetype-swaps per career on that.
And when you make that archtype worse by lowering their max on important stats? And then you keep doing that every season or two based on results? All of a sudden you can tweak things to tailor the meta to a more balanced place
Here's the other alternative I can think of that could help. Remove sliders. But imo that's a pretty shit idea.
I'm open to hearing other suggestions, but really all I'm hearing is either support or "that won't work". It'd be nice to hear some alternatives from those who think this is not a good idea.
11-04-2021, 01:11 PMhonkerrs Wrote: We would be better off just assigning random stat distribution of your TPE of your player every season and making GMs figure out what type of role every player is than this archetype meta.
11-04-2021, 01:42 PMcaltroit_red_flames Wrote: Here's the other alternative I can think of that could help. Remove sliders. But imo that's a pretty shit idea.
I'm open to hearing other suggestions, but really all I'm hearing is either support or "that won't work". It'd be nice to hear some alternatives from those who think this is not a good idea.
I mean we did give you an alternative or more. My official answer is that fixing regression will make much more of an impact and a lot more simple to solve.
I agree builds are boring but this is a video game, no matter what there's always going to be a meta unless like I said you get assigned random attributes or something. No other way around it
11-04-2021, 01:42 PMcaltroit_red_flames Wrote: Here's the other alternative I can think of that could help. Remove sliders. But imo that's a pretty shit idea.
I'm open to hearing other suggestions, but really all I'm hearing is either support or "that won't work". It'd be nice to hear some alternatives from those who think this is not a good idea.
I mean we did give you an alternative or more. My official answer is that fixing regression will make much more of an impact and a lot more simple to solve.
I agree builds are boring but this is a video game, no matter what there's always going to be a meta unless like I said you get assigned random attributes or something. No other way around it
I'm fully in favor harsher regression, let's do it!
I've offered ways of incrementally fixing new metas popping up. Do you just believe that's not possible or do you believe that the people who would be put in charge of that would do a bad job?
11-04-2021, 02:07 PM(This post was last modified: 11-04-2021, 02:09 PM by honkerrs.)
11-04-2021, 02:00 PMcaltroit_red_flames Wrote:
11-04-2021, 01:57 PMhonkerrs Wrote: I mean we did give you an alternative or more. My official answer is that fixing regression will make much more of an impact and a lot more simple to solve.
I agree builds are boring but this is a video game, no matter what there's always going to be a meta unless like I said you get assigned random attributes or something. No other way around it
I'm fully in favor harsher regression, let's do it!
I've offered ways of incrementally fixing new metas popping up. Do you just believe that's not possible or do you believe that the people who would be put in charge of that would do a bad job?
All I've seen you say is that "we will make periodic balance changes". Sweet that sounds great on paper but let me just reiterate again Why "just balancing" won't work:
1) teams that are bad at tactics will still be bad. Tactics and sliders are a big driver
2) we blame HO for being biased. Can't wait for the balance team to have people on buf and ham for people to bitch at when suddenly their archetypes are OP
3) we can't even do things fast enough like the index, trading cards, punishments . You really expect a balance team to decide on balancing to prevent a meta from forming? This isn't a dig at those departments, this is a for free website, but just letting you know what in reality will happen
11-04-2021, 02:17 PM(This post was last modified: 11-04-2021, 02:27 PM by goldenglutes.)
11-04-2021, 02:07 PMhonkerrs Wrote:
11-04-2021, 02:00 PMcaltroit_red_flames Wrote: I'm fully in favor harsher regression, let's do it!
I've offered ways of incrementally fixing new metas popping up. Do you just believe that's not possible or do you believe that the people who would be put in charge of that would do a bad job?
All I've seen you say is that "we will make periodic balance changes". Sweet that sounds great on paper but let me just reiterate again Why "just balancing" won't work:
1) teams that are bad at tactics will still be bad. Tactics and sliders are a big driver
2) we blame HO for being biased. Can't wait for the balance team to have people on buf and ham for people to bitch at when suddenly their archetypes are OP
3) we can't even do things fast enough like the index, trading cards, punishments . You really expect a balance team to decide on balancing to prevent a meta from forming? This isn't a dig at those departments, this is a for free website, but just letting you know what in reality will happen
adding onto 1), the best FHM teams will also always be the quickest to find the "best" archetypes every time there is a rebalance
Signatures by Vulfzilla, Jepox, Jess, rum_ham, Ragnar, and myself
11-04-2021, 02:00 PMcaltroit_red_flames Wrote: I'm fully in favor harsher regression, let's do it!
I've offered ways of incrementally fixing new metas popping up. Do you just believe that's not possible or do you believe that the people who would be put in charge of that would do a bad job?
All I've seen you say is that "we will make periodic balance changes". Sweet that sounds great on paper but let me just reiterate again Why "just balancing" won't work:
1) teams that are bad at tactics will still be bad. Tactics and sliders are a big driver
2) we blame HO for being biased. Can't wait for the balance team to have people on buf and ham for people to bitch at when suddenly their archetypes are OP
3) we can't even do things fast enough like the index, trading cards, punishments . You really expect a balance team to decide on balancing to prevent a meta from forming? This isn't a dig at those departments, this is a for free website, but just letting you know what in reality will happen
1.) This is a huge issue, and unfortunately the only solution I see is removing tactics/sliders.
2.) This is pretty simple, we just need to have multiple teams represented in the Balancing Department.
3.) I take exception with this point. I'm not saying you're digging at the devs, but I think this shows you don't understand software development. Which is fine, 99% of people don't. Trading Cards and the index are both projects that require specialized skills that generally require you to attend a university to work on, those aren't things the average person can do. That wasn't a matter of HO moving slow or organizational issues, it was literally that all of the devs working on the index already have 40 hour a week jobs and the last thing we want to do is come home and write more code for website that is supposed to be a fun hobby. But we did it anyway. Punishments not being done fast enough is certainly something you could use an example of lack of organization.
11-04-2021, 02:07 PMhonkerrs Wrote: All I've seen you say is that "we will make periodic balance changes". Sweet that sounds great on paper but let me just reiterate again Why "just balancing" won't work:
1) teams that are bad at tactics will still be bad. Tactics and sliders are a big driver
2) we blame HO for being biased. Can't wait for the balance team to have people on buf and ham for people to bitch at when suddenly their archetypes are OP
3) we can't even do things fast enough like the index, trading cards, punishments . You really expect a balance team to decide on balancing to prevent a meta from forming? This isn't a dig at those departments, this is a for free website, but just letting you know what in reality will happen
adding onto 1), the best FHM teams will also always be the quickest to find the "best" archetypes every time there is a rebalance
Glutes pls we would improve the archs until the metas disappear I've addressed that like 5 times. If we're just going to act like it's impossible to prevent teams from cheesing FHM forever then we should just give and quit because then there's no point in being in the league.
11-04-2021, 02:17 PMgoldenglutes Wrote: adding onto 1), the best FHM teams will also always be the quickest to find the "best" archetypes every time there is a rebalance
Glutes pls we would improve the archs until the metas disappear I've addressed that like 5 times. If we're just going to act like it's impossible to prevent teams from cheesing FHM forever then we should just give and quit because then there's no point in being in the league.
I personally just think it's going to be a neverending cat and mouse game, just like how IRL security researchers are constantly trying to fix exploits that are developed by hackers
I don't know if there is a good solution to introducing more build diversity and player agency, but I think that harsher regression is the best solution to most of our problems and would:
1) introduce more parity at the top of the league since dynasties like HAM/BUF will no longer last 10 seasons
2) lowers the timeframe for team rebuilds which will make GMing for a bad team much less daunting (since number of GM applications are now an issue)
3) (debatable) shorter careers will be more attractive/less daunting. my player's been alive for 3 IRL years at this point and is still at 1600 TPE. this is a massive commitment that I probably would not have made if I had known about how long player careers would be back when I joined
Signatures by Vulfzilla, Jepox, Jess, rum_ham, Ragnar, and myself
11-04-2021, 02:26 PMcaltroit_red_flames Wrote: Glutes pls we would improve the archs until the metas disappear I've addressed that like 5 times. If we're just going to act like it's impossible to prevent teams from cheesing FHM forever then we should just give and quit because then there's no point in being in the league.
I personally just think it's going to be a neverending cat and mouse game, just like how IRL security researchers are constantly trying to fix exploits that are developed by hackers
I don't know if there is a good solution to introducing more build diversity and player agency, but I think that harsher regression is the best solution to most of our problems and would:
1) introduce more parity at the top of the league since dynasties like HAM/BUF will no longer last 10 seasons
2) lowers the timeframe for team rebuilds which will make GMing for a bad team much less daunting (since number of GM applications are now an issue)
3) (debatable) shorter careers will be more attractive/less daunting. my player's been alive for 3 IRL years at this point and is still at 1600 TPE. this is a massive commitment that I probably would not have made if I had known about how long player careers would be back when I joined
I would love to shorten careers with regression, but won't that just lead to shorter careers with the same meta builds?
11-04-2021, 02:26 PMcaltroit_red_flames Wrote: Glutes pls we would improve the archs until the metas disappear I've addressed that like 5 times. If we're just going to act like it's impossible to prevent teams from cheesing FHM forever then we should just give and quit because then there's no point in being in the league.
I personally just think it's going to be a neverending cat and mouse game, just like how IRL security researchers are constantly trying to fix exploits that are developed by hackers
I don't know if there is a good solution to introducing more build diversity and player agency, but I think that harsher regression is the best solution to most of our problems and would:
1) introduce more parity at the top of the league since dynasties like HAM/BUF will no longer last 10 seasons
2) lowers the timeframe for team rebuilds which will make GMing for a bad team much less daunting (since number of GM applications are now an issue)
3) (debatable) shorter careers will be more attractive/less daunting. my player's been alive for 3 IRL years at this point and is still at 1600 TPE. this is a massive commitment that I probably would not have made if I had known about how long player careers would be back when I joined
Also the point you make with the cat and mouse between security researchers and hackers isn't a great one. We haven't stopped improving security algorithms because it's hopeless, the opposite in fact. Security in computer software is a booming industry because it's such an important thing. If you want to take that approach then everyone would be on board with making archetypes because it'd make it more difficult to find the new meta. And again, that point ignores the goal of eventually having archetypes that are balanced to the point of hopefully a meta not existing OR the meta builds only being marginally better and therefore not being as crazy of an advantage as they are now.
Harsher regression also ignores the fact that teams with lower TPE are still winning the cup over teams with almost maxed TPE due to meta builds and tactics.
11-04-2021, 11:41 AMRomanesEuntDomus Wrote: But then people could just chase the new metas again, using their one or two archetype-swaps per career on that.
And when you make that archtype worse by lowering their max on important stats? And then you keep doing that every season or two based on results? All of a sudden you can tweak things to tailor the meta to a more balanced place
this is why I proposed a solution a few seasons ago where archetypes grant a permanent +1 *on top of* your regular stats. So if you got an 18, it's a 19 now, but still costs 50 TPE to increase the stat, instead of 55. Meaning you could possibly get a 21 in a particular stat (or 22 in some cases). Gives more agency to builds via archetypes, but GMs are still able to deploy you as whatever archetype they want and mess with sliders.
personally, I like tactics and sliders. It's fun to try to run a team, to find the edge in a playoff series, to run tests and find out the best possible answer given what you know, but also being able to counter or feint on a game by game basis.
11-04-2021, 02:26 PMcaltroit_red_flames Wrote: Glutes pls we would improve the archs until the metas disappear I've addressed that like 5 times. If we're just going to act like it's impossible to prevent teams from cheesing FHM forever then we should just give and quit because then there's no point in being in the league.
I personally just think it's going to be a neverending cat and mouse game, just like how IRL security researchers are constantly trying to fix exploits that are developed by hackers
I don't know if there is a good solution to introducing more build diversity and player agency, but I think that harsher regression is the best solution to most of our problems and would:
1) introduce more parity at the top of the league since dynasties like HAM/BUF will no longer last 10 seasons
2) lowers the timeframe for team rebuilds which will make GMing for a bad team much less daunting (since number of GM applications are now an issue)
3) (debatable) shorter careers will be more attractive/less daunting. my player's been alive for 3 IRL years at this point and is still at 1600 TPE. this is a massive commitment that I probably would not have made if I had known about how long player careers would be back when I joined
It very well could be a never-ending game of rebalancing, people figuring out a meta, and then rebalancing around that. But wouldn't that be better than just sitting here with the same meta builds perpetually? Yeah we might never find the "perfect" balance solution but imo it's worth it to at least try because archetypes changing every once in a while would at least keep things interesting.
I'm also in favor of a harsher regression, but I think archetypes can be part of the solution as well.
spooked![[Image: doubtfulalpha.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/doubtfulalpha.gif)
![[Image: 0XJkcN5.png]](http://i.imgur.com/0XJkcN5.png)
![[Image: sN8N4xa.png]](https://i.imgur.com/sN8N4xa.png)
![[Image: 639861613880541184.png]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/emojis/639861613880541184.png)
Cal Juice ![[Image: RyzkmSj.png]](https://i.imgur.com/RyzkmSj.png)
![[Image: Eo2nBCt.png]](https://i.imgur.com/Eo2nBCt.png)
Tomas Zadina ![[Image: snacnei.png]](https://i.imgur.com/snacnei.png)
Brady McIntyre ![[Image: ice-level.svg]](https://cards.simulationhockey.com/images/ice-level.svg)
![[Image: honkerrs.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/honkerrs.gif)
![[Image: OPTIMIZED.png]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/268946899795443729/833026899462586428/OPTIMIZED.png)
![[Image: glutes2.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/glutes2.gif)
![[Image: 9vAsr7c.png]](https://i.imgur.com/9vAsr7c.png)
![[Image: tkMQzhf.png]](https://i.imgur.com/tkMQzhf.png)
![[Image: tdKmZA0.png]](https://i.imgur.com/tdKmZA0.png)
![[Image: fishyshl.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/fishyshl.gif)
![[Image: czechpp.png]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/537644128066994197/593617273575440433/czechpp.png)
![[Image: czechup.png]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/537644128066994197/593618761756704779/czechup.png)
![[Image: rankle.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/rankle.gif)
![[Image: 9rbVE0N.png]](https://i.imgur.com/9rbVE0N.png)
Chomp Chomp Water Dog 
Scarecrow Noises ![[Image: EePsAwN.png]](https://i.imgur.com/EePsAwN.png)
![[Image: eaex9S1.png]](https://i.imgur.com/eaex9S1.png)
![[Image: vo5yF0X.png]](https://i.imgur.com/vo5yF0X.png)
![[Image: ekovanotter.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/ekovanotter.gif)
![[Image: premierbromanov.gif]](https://sig.grumpybumpers.com/host/premierbromanov.gif)
![[Image: sXDU6JX.png]](https://i.imgur.com/sXDU6JX.png)
