Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Printable Version +- Goonstation Forums (https://forum.ss13.co) +-- Forum: Discussion (https://forum.ss13.co/forumdisplay.php?fid=6) +--- Forum: General Discussion (https://forum.ss13.co/forumdisplay.php?fid=7) +--- Thread: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input (/showthread.php?tid=16344) |
RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - babayetu83 - 05-10-2021 disregard, put foot in mouth there is just one change i dislike and that is the removal of traitor pipebombs RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - pali6 - 05-10-2021 (05-10-2021, 09:32 PM)babayetu83 Wrote: a problem i feel is that a lot of changes i see being pushed through are treating symptoms rather than the problem itselfWhat is the problem itself which hasn't been treated in some recent changes? RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - KikiMofo - 05-13-2021 (05-10-2021, 11:27 PM)pali6 Wrote:(05-10-2021, 09:32 PM)babayetu83 Wrote: a problem i feel is that a lot of changes i see being pushed through are treating symptoms rather than the problem itselfWhat is the problem itself which hasn't been treated in some recent changes? Not enough anime references. RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Technature - 05-14-2021 (05-13-2021, 07:19 PM)KikiMofo Wrote:(05-10-2021, 11:27 PM)pali6 Wrote:(05-10-2021, 09:32 PM)babayetu83 Wrote: a problem i feel is that a lot of changes i see being pushed through are treating symptoms rather than the problem itselfWhat is the problem itself which hasn't been treated in some recent changes? ^ RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Katzen - 05-16-2021 I generally think PRs should be used for organisation and simplifying feedback but on the flip side I also think it's fine to change things and try the changes live and not spend days arguing hypotheticals. RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Theunsolved-puzzle - 06-03-2021 (05-07-2021, 07:20 PM)Chickenish Wrote: So, I was provoked to start this thread by a large number of significant changes made by developers without Pull Requests* and without asking for player input, with this one directly impacting me:lets begin. nitroglysirin, aerosol, port-a-sci, curare, probably many others ive forgot about. just WHY? these werent additions, of which i have no problem with, these were tweaks and changes to long exisiting systems. (05-08-2021, 09:06 AM)Mopcat Wrote:(05-08-2021, 08:55 AM)Flaborized Wrote:okay, here's the thing(05-08-2021, 08:16 AM)Mopcat Wrote:(05-08-2021, 06:24 AM)ZeWaka Wrote: https://mikemcquaid.com/2018/03/19/open-source-maintainers-owe-you-nothing/ it certainly does have a corolation that much you cant deny (05-10-2021, 11:27 PM)pali6 Wrote:(05-10-2021, 09:32 PM)babayetu83 Wrote: a problem i feel is that a lot of changes i see being pushed through are treating symptoms rather than the problem itselfWhat is the problem itself which hasn't been treated in some recent changes? shitters not being taken care of, or the culture of goon to kneejerk respond to something when people have done a gimic for over two weeks RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Mordent - 06-03-2021 Quote:lets begin. nitroglysirin, aerosol, port-a-sci, curare Quote:the culture of goon to kneejerk respond to something when people have done a gimic for over two weeks What makes you think any of these changes were "knee-jerk"? RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Theunsolved-puzzle - 06-03-2021 (06-03-2021, 05:32 PM)Mordent Wrote:Quote:lets begin. nitroglysirin, aerosol, port-a-sci, curare many of them are in reaction to trends that are recent, and not long standing issues the community had (if they had any issues with them in the first place) aerosol and nitro's removal specifically. They were spammed yes, but they were also relatively recent occurrences, I agree they were a nuisance, but I don't think gutting the system's entirely was a constructive response to the problem's. It could have possibly sorted itself out, or perhaps admin interventions could be used, even a temporary suspension, but that wasn't what was done (from the perspective of a player). It is true to say I'm not entirely within the loop, but I know many who were... disappointed to say the least when they saw these changes. RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - aft2001 - 06-03-2021 As someone who has been playing for 4 years, I HIGHLY disagree with the notion that aerosol has not been a long-standing issue. For years nerds have been using it to just melt the AI Upload/Armory walls and waltz on in with 0 issue or delete blobs instantly or ruin Medbay for the entire round. The fact that it *duplicates* chems *and* applies them to the floor *and* applies it to people via TOUCH and even inhalation was frankly absurd and allowed for the spamming of hellmixes over a very large area and through walls. Nitro always just seemed like a 'once or twice a week a nerd will discover nitro and for the next few rounds chemistry will be unusable' and I rarely ever saw any practical use of the stuff, since everything else is just better than an overly sensitive explosive that only has an effective range of a 3x3 area. RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Mordent - 06-03-2021 (06-03-2021, 05:35 PM)Theunsolved-puzzle Wrote: many of them are in reaction to trends that are recent, and not long standing issues the community had (if they had any issues with them in the first place) aerosol and nitro's removal specifically. They were spammed yes, but they were also relatively recent occurrences, I agree they were a nuisance, but I don't think gutting the system's entirely was a constructive response to the problem's. If you think aerosol being spammed is a recent occurrence, you and I have very different perceptions of the game. I don't have much anecdotal evidence for nitroglycerin other than "nitro explosions happen frequently enough to cause eyerolls when I see them". The joy of open source is that if you would like to try to work out a way of re-adding something in a way that is better than it being removed, you are welcome to do so. You can collaborate on that with members of the community, solicit for ideas, get feedback, iterate, etc. At this time I personally (with the note that I didn't do any of the changes you listed) think their removal is an improvement over them not being removed, for the sake of keeping the game fun. I don't personally find "haha a new chemist made nitroglyercin but didn't know how to not explode and now chemistry is gone" a particularly engaging game mechanic. RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Theunsolved-puzzle - 06-03-2021 (06-03-2021, 05:44 PM)Mordent Wrote: If you think aerosol being spammed is a recent occurrence, you and I have very different perceptions of the game. I don't have much anecdotal evidence for nitroglycerin other than "nitro explosions happen frequently enough to cause eyerolls when I see them".aerosol was used all the time absolutely, it was one of the building block chemical reactions, something would be wrong if it weren't, as for nitro, chemnerds killing themselves with it was a common occurrence sure, but that's because it was a relatively easy death chem to make. scientists still kill themselves with chems regardless of nitros existence, just as staffies will kill themselves with biblefarts, is it annoying, depending on your perspective yes, but it was part of everyday life on goon, it gave it flavor, made it interesting. What I'm referring to is the dual removal (yes they were separate removals, but so close together in removal of each other they might as well be paired) of nitroglyercin and aerosol which seemed more like a reaction to the trend of nitro-aeroing the shuttle than it was a removal based on long standing grievousness towards the chems themselves. RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Mordent - 06-03-2021 Assuming your statement is true (namely that their removal was in response to them being used to nitro-bomb everyone in the shuttle more regularly), I would argue that "the {feature/system/item/combo} is overpowered and people have caught on and are doing it much more" leading to "that system being removed or nerfed" is just patching a hole that wasn't previously easily visible. Assuming (again, if) this was the thing that sparked the change, why is that inherently bad? RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Theunsolved-puzzle - 06-03-2021 its far too drastic a reaction to the problem, and it cut content from the game instead of looking for other ways to remedy the situation RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Lady Birb - 06-03-2021 chemistry has been massively unbalanced for years. any chemistry nerfs are 100% justified. RE: Discussion Thread: direct commits of balance changes without player input - Mordent - 06-03-2021 (06-03-2021, 06:05 PM)Theunsolved-puzzle Wrote: its far too drastic a reaction to the problem, and it cut content from the game instead of looking for other ways to remedy the solution Balance is a balancing act. If the scales tip too far one way, sometimes it's easier to tip them the other way to see how that feels, then resolve to something in the middle. Aerosol, for instance, had received a nerf to reduce its effectiveness not too long before (making being further away reduce the amount of chem that affected you), but it didn't really alleviate the problem. "Cutting content from the game" is not in itself a bad thing if that content is deemed to be bad/unfun/poorly balanced/etc. Developers have the ability to make changes directly because we (the staff) think they have a good head for what are good changes. Sometimes things get reverted, sometimes things get tweaked a bit after introduction, sometimes there's a bunch of knee-jerk negative feedback (I feel that "knee-jerk" is correct here because it's generally immediately following the change rather than "hey, this change has been in for a few weeks now and I don't think it's working out, here's how it could be improved...") but people adapt and things end up fine. Sometimes, removing content is adding to the game. |