Why Well-Tuned Game Mechanics Seem Broken

[elixirwithani]

Altitude used to advertise itself as being born of Brood War - built by, balanced by, and played by - the gold standard of balance amongst modern games.

Unfortunately, Altitude never quite achieved the level of popularity that Brood War had. It is survived through a few hundred dedicated players and a few hundred more casual players, just stopping by on their journey through Steam.

This, combined with a meta-game that presupposes a Miranda shall hold the ball for a majority of its team's possession, results in a hyper-incestuous ladder where skilled players are forced to "play down" to their Miranda's skill level.

Jump in the Way-Back Machine™ for a moment. Do you remember the time when Mirandas started toying with the idea of increasing their own possession time dramatically? It wasn't always a strategy. The absolute best Mirandas began holding the ball a LOT. It was a crazy idea, and it worked. The best players were using their plane to extend their team's possessions through multiple spawn cycles, and the effects were impressive. Other players couldn't do it effectively - they would die in spectacular fashion, costing their team valuable map position.

It was around this time that a new wave of players began to play. They mimicked this heavy-possession style of Miranda play. They sucked. They joined ladder. They sucked even more.

Take a gander at ladder some time. If it's the mid-afternoon, you will almost definitely be treated to a game featuring X on one team, and Y on the other. Since they play all the ****ing time. They play Miranda. They play a possession heavy style. Nobody, and I mean ****ing nobody, has ever in the history of Altitude considered these players to be top-tier Mirandas. However, they play Miranda anyways, and they have the ball all the time. Due to the small player base, your team will nearly always end up with one of these players, and the other team will get the other (or Z, or another mediocre player - you get the idea).

What does this result in? The "playing down" effect described previously. Because these Mirandas play this style where they always have the ball, your team - especially the better players - is forced into a weaker style of ball. These players force the game into a "which Miranda will suck less" mentality. Thus, the game becomes focused on Mirandas, and they appear to be too powerful.

Mirandas aren't too powerful. You can read my other thread for the rationale.

The fact is, the player base is too weak. The average ladder player is not good enough to defend even these mediocre Mirandas.

You think anyone would be complaining about how broken Miranda is if there were 500 players of Zz or Void's skill level in ladder? No, because spots one through ****ing 500 would be filled with NOT MIRANDAS.

The player skill level is what's broken, not the planes. If this game had 10,000 more players, the vast majority of ladder regulars would be buried so far down the ladder hierarchy that we would never see them again.

All I see are players pointing out why A, B, and C are too strong. Nobody wants to mention that there exists players who can counter all of these things by the virtue of being competent at the game.

I don't care if anything gets nerfed, I'm good at four of the planes and better than most at the fifth, and more importantly I'm good at strategy. I'll still be good when all is said and done. Nobody has contested my points in my other thread because they are all correct. 'Nuff said.

Nerf the planes if you want to, but just remember it's the player who sucks, and not the plane that's too strong.

[classicallad]

Nice try, bravo sir - firstly the talks of balance aren't aimed at badder or ladder if you so prefer (and if i'm wrong they shouldn't be), and secondly, the size of the community isn't a factor worthy of attempting to play down talks of balance for which many a top player agree is right.

You do however have a poetic presence which could make even Kuja weak at the kness, and THAT is why we love you.

[soccernamlak]

Originally Posted by classicallad

Nice try, bravo sir - firstly the talks of balance aren't aimed at badder or ladder if you so prefer (and if i'm wrong they shouldn't be), and secondly, the size of the community isn't a factor worthy of attempting to play down talks of balance for which many a top player agree is right.

You do however have a poetic presence which could make even Kuja weak at the kness, and THAT is why we love you.

Yeah, I have to agree with classicallad here lix.

You bring up some good points about the evolution of ladder, and I stand by the notion that there is a large issue with how ladder is ranked and how a top-tier player must play the game to keep that spot, derived not just from experience but from my statistical analysis of ladder the past few seasons.

I also agree that people just don't know how to kill a randa (especially TA). There are very few TAs who are semi-unpredictable. But for most randa players, it is quite obvious how they'll move and when they will warp/TA. And yet they survive to score another goal.

However, using ladder as the measure for balance contradicts the point you made about the skill level of ladder players. If you're going to balance a game, you need to try and look at it from a subset of equally skilled players, preferably the top ones, instead of a ladder game where the skill range goes from mediocre to superb to downright awful on the same team.

So, we turn to SL/APL. Or scrims. Or the experience of our top veterans. And, as evident in the State of the Game Thread, it's clear that some changes need to be made in an attempt to balance the game mode, because even when varying skill level is almost all but eliminated, there are still plane setups or team setups that are practically required to win a game, which shouldn't necessarily be the case.

So while I agree on many of your points, and applaud your effort to point out some issues, I think, as classicallad stated, fall short in actually addressing the issue at hand.

[classicallad]

Sox, i think we have both been trolled - dam you lix.

<Cue Radium or Leggo posting a picture of an afro Caribbean dude pulling a silly face>

[classicallad]

-Edit, beat ya.

[leggomyeggo]

[Radium]

hey leggo can you make a tl;dr of this along with another picture
thanks

[leggomyeggo]

tl;dr: Nerf the planes if you want to, but just remember it's the player who sucks, and not the plane that's too strong.

[TRUEPAiN]

We just need to get this game back to beta. The features and potential of this game have a high ceiling that's not being touched!

If you could just experiment with variables live within a server, that'd be a great way to get through this.

Then we add features like, oh i dunno

- customizable avatar pilots!
- customizable hanger rooms for your PLANES!
- clan skins!
- team organization
- chat channels
- dota2 GUI (graphics for tournaments, etc.)
- lobby mini games where your plane avatars do mario things
- 1st person MODE
- spectate spectators (what you spectating bro)
- different view modes for spectators (large POV, player health bars, heat maps, etc.)
- community bosses, where all your achieved weapons and skills in the altitude RPG can be applied to random event bosses that show up to crash servers! the plane community must gather to drop the horde or the MEGAPLANE to save the alti-town and get points and stuff! I'd imagine if your fought inside the plane, it'd be a COOP..even outside, where loopies disable it's defined weapon and each role play key.
- hats
- hats
- hats
- ball skins
- bomb skins
- team goal/base skins
- sound packs or announcers
- microtransactions..take my money

[AzzedariuSuiradezza]

All planes are equal, but some planes are more equal than others.

[Appeltaart]

Originally Posted by TRUEPAiN

- hats
- hats
- hats

We already have a Santa Hat!

[leggomyeggo]

</derail>

Originally Posted by soccernamlak

Yeah, I have to agree with classicallad here lix.

You bring up some good points about the evolution of ladder, and I stand by the notion that there is a large issue with how ladder is ranked and how a top-tier player must play the game to keep that spot, derived not just from experience but from my statistical analysis of ladder the past few seasons.

I also agree that people just don't know how to kill a randa (especially TA). There are very few TAs who are semi-unpredictable. But for most randa players, it is quite obvious how they'll move and when they will warp/TA. And yet they survive to score another goal.

However, using ladder as the measure for balance contradicts the point you made about the skill level of ladder players. If you're going to balance a game, you need to try and look at it from a subset of equally skilled players, preferably the top ones, instead of a ladder game where the skill range goes from mediocre to superb to downright awful on the same team.

So, we turn to SL/APL. Or scrims. Or the experience of our top veterans. And, as evident in the State of the Game Thread, it's clear that some changes need to be made in an attempt to balance the game mode, because even when varying skill level is almost all but eliminated, there are still plane setups or team setups that are practically required to win a game, which shouldn't necessarily be the case.

So while I agree on many of your points, and applaud your effort to point out some issues, I think, as classicallad stated, fall short in actually addressing the issue at hand.

just as a warning, i'm using tbd because i'm more familiar with it. but the sameish thing happens with ball.

tbh, i see this as one of lix's main points. we've evolved our team compositions to fit the metagame. for example (i'm not saying any of this is true or that any of this is false, just an example), let's say randa is viewed as an OP bomb runner in tbd. so, if the other team is competent (which we're assuming they are since this is in league play), they will play a setup that will counteract the randa bomb runner. the randa is not extremely OP, because it can still be stopped by a competent team and team setup, as is the case in games that i've seen or been in.

just as a more visual representation and kind've furthering my point, let's just map out a tbd team setup and atmosphere (assume all players are competent and at a higher than average skill level). it's a dark and stormy afternoon on the east coast US at 2:00 pm and the finals of APL are just starting. we're on tbd_asteroids and the crowd is sitting in silence. here are the teams (maybe not optimal setups, but decent ones):


*ms paint, deal with it.

the lines drawn show how i believe that particular plane's primary focus would be. now, this is not the only thing these planes will be doing, the game is much more complicated than that. however, most planes will be involved in trying to kill the bomb runner or his supporting planes. so, getting back to the point of this. we are still assuming from earlier that randa is viewed as a slightly op bomb runner, but not to the point of making it an insta win. as you can see, all three defense planes on team A will be primarily focusing on the TA randa on team B. also, all three defense planes on team B will be primarily focusing on the trick on team A. also, the trick on team B will be focusing on the trick on team A and the loopy on team A would probably be focusing on the TA on team B when on defense. assuming these are all equally skilled players (which is never the case), these setups should be able to counteract a slightly op plane. a teams defense should be able to stop the teams push and be able to stop the bomb runner.

in my opinion, a games turnout is more determined by skill level and strategy than by setup choices. unless, of course, you decide to pull a dumbass move and go with a terrible setup. which may be your point but..think about it this way: if a team decides to go 1 biplane, 2 loopy, and 2 randa, should they really be able to win? or if a team goes 3 whales and 2 bombers, should they really be able to win? if you have competent enough players and a decent setup, it's more a battle of skill.

IMO

p.s. please tell me if i just babbled. i tend to rant a lot. also there should be a line from DF loopy to the TA.

[classicallad]

Definitely agree that at the top level, team composition (slightly differing on which map) are game breaking, and also that there are specific perks that counter others. All of this is nothing new though, Leggo's analysis would be a great addition to a guide, but doesn't add or subtract anything from the discussion that this is supposed to be relative to imo.

Of course a top player can always kill another top player unless your name is Sinstar, the fact still remains though that miranda has too much of a low risk/ high reward both offensively & defensively in comparison to other perks. The energy bar needs some work either in regen or cooldown and warp damage/ hitbox need looking at.

[leggomyeggo]

Originally Posted by classicallad

Definitely agree that at the top level, team composition (slightly differing on which map) are game breaking, and also that there are specific perks that counter others. All of this is nothing new though, Leggo's analysis would be a great addition to a guide, but doesn't add or subtract anything from the discussion that this is supposed to be relative to imo.

Of course a top player can always kill another top player unless your name is Sinstar, the fact still remains though that miranda has too much of a low risk/ high reward both offensively & defensively in comparison to other perks. The energy bar needs some work either in regen or cooldown and warp damage/ hitbox need looking at.

what i'm saying is that even if miranda is op, there are planes and setups that can counter it. as the game is now, i don't think randa is too ridiculously op. i can agree that randa is slightly op, but not to the point that it breaks the game or causes any real effect on overall gameplay. it might force a general setup, but any plane will do that. for example, if you have a whale on one team, you have to have something to kill that whale on the other team. if you can explain to me how randa affects the overall gameplay negatively and i can agree with it, i'd be in full support of a balance update.

[classicallad]

Originally Posted by leggomyeggo

what i'm saying is that even if miranda is op, there are planes and setups that can counter it. as the game is now, i don't think randa is too ridiculously op. i can agree that randa is slightly op, but not to the point that it breaks the game or causes any real effect on overall gameplay. it might force a general setup, but any plane will do that. for example, if you have a whale on one team, you have to have something to kill that whale on the other team. if you can explain to me how randa affects the overall gameplay negatively and i can agree with it, i'd be in full support of a balance update.

Well yes, all perks can counter,(kill) each other. It's tough to say how much one thinks a perk/s are OP as there isn't a universal OP-Ometer so theres no start or end point, and it would be silly to go down that route (on a scale of 1-10) lol.

I like the fact that each plane has a role in any team, and thats great they should do, and i appreciate that randa is a niche and a gamebreaker/ changer. If we had a gamebreak/chageO-meter, for me, randa features too high on it in comparison to the other perks.

Noone calling for balance is contesting that randas unique role should change but it has too many and far too much utility, its the best choice sniper, the best ball handler/mover, bomb runner, flanker.

Starting to get to the point where i'm just saying the same things in different ways, and still struggling to understand why some question a planes blatant dominance in every mode in the game.

To summarise,

Randa affects the overall gameplay negatively due to its unrivaled utility of its energy and the numerous roles it can champion with that energy.

[leggomyeggo]

Originally Posted by classicallad

I like the fact that each plane has a role in any team, and thats great they should do, and i appreciate that randa is a niche and a gamebreaker/ changer. If we had a gamebreak/chageO-meter, for me, randa features too high on it in comparison to the other perks.

Noone calling for balance is contesting that randas unique role should change but it has too many and far too much utility, its the best choice sniper, the best ball handler/mover, bomb runner, flanker.

Randa affects the overall gameplay negatively due to its unrivaled utility of its energy and the numerous roles it can champion with that energy.

this might just be my view of things, but i don't see randa as having too much utility. yes, randa is very versatile and can almost land itself in any role it wants to. however, the randas that i see in league play generally specialize in one particular area. the extremely good players can sometimes do both on a good team. but, most randas i see stay in one or two roles. for example, as a randa in tbd, i hardly ever run the bomb, i go more for flanking. ribilla, he kills a ****ton, doesn't ever run the bomb and doesn't flank too awfully much. metaknight flanks a hell of a lot and can kill decently, but never runs the bomb. etc etc with the rest of the randas i can think of. most will have one or two areas they specialize in. from this, they just become another one/two role plane. but maybe that's just my point of view as a randa. i'm not saying i'm completely against a balance patch, i just view it as unnecessary.

[ace98]

People talking about a game like it's a buisness. How cute. Anyway, I guess the basic idea is that Alti NEAD MOAR PLAYERS. Now, off to petition Steam for another free weekend!

[FalconZ1]

As a life-long Miranda lover, I agree that the Miranda is all over the place. Personally I have never liked the idea of anything other than the trickster / laser coming out of the plane doing damage. I never use combo kills and find the game play much more challenging that way but also more enjoyable. I also have always disliked Time Anchor especially when used by a bomb carrier. It is just too unfair to the less experienced players who either don't understand it well enough or know how to maneuver to stop a plane that is suddenly somewhere completely different. Miranda can do so much already when it comes to maneuvering that TA is just overkill in my opinion. I'd much rather see things like TA removed or toned down and more recent nerfs undone. Miranda is also perfectly playable without things like reverse or teleport doing damage. To me those perks are already great tactical advantages that don't need the added boost of doing damage to other planes. Continuing to instead keep nerfing Miranda shots is just going to keep making the Biplane more Op over it.

At the same time though I think that Miranda although having a lot of utility is still very much a one on one plane whereas something like a bomber can really stop a big crowd. Miranda needs an arena where it is Op. That is in one-on-one play, esp. in tight places. Explodet is op in defense and tight spaces, Loopy in open areas and offensive, Biplane? more one-on-one, esp. in head on close combat

[zackzingki]

Originally Posted by AzzedariuSuiradezza

All planes are equal, but some planes are more equal than others.

That was so clever I had to respond

[tyr]

I thought this was a known fact for like 2 or 3 years now.
Apparently not.

[Kuja900]

lix how's that weight watchers going?