A note on balance philosophy [Balance]

Velasan··4 votes·803 views

Let me know if I'm way off base here, but I wanted to post a few thoughts on the current philosophy of balance in League of Legends. This is a long post. Heads up.

First, I've played a lot of games. Always been somewhat of a gamer. I've played most of the Blizzard games, dota at one point, magic online, etc. While we know that Riot says they don't want to play "whack-a-mole" with nerfs this is a prevailing aspect in every game with any unequal parts (in this case champions, but can apply to multiple races, cards, hero classes and so on).

What tends to happen is with so many players there is a constantly evolving meta which usually starts when someone notices one aspect of the game is particularly strong. They start winning a lot with that champion, create a meta, then a counter meta is created and the wheel turns. Sometimes it's not the champion that's overpowered, but the meta we find it in.

So, for example, in an assassin heavy meta if you have a champion who excels against assassins due to being very tanky or reflecting damage that champion will look seriously OP. The usual response is to promptly nerf said champion, because their win rate shoots up in the current meta. The issue of course, is that this "OP"ness only lasts as long as the current meta is favorable, and as soon as assassins for example aren't popular anymore this counter champion goes back to being regular run of the mill. Except when it becomes unpopular again it stays that way with extra nerfs applied.

When these kind of nerfs are flung around it makes certain champions much less playable. It seems to be a strategy to drop a champion to it's lowest power level where it is still functional, but not able to pull off the kind of plays it used to. In other words, good enough to pick up kills, but not take over a game. This is fine, in theory, but it also means that people just keep on gravitating to whatever stays more consistent. If you nerf the potentially strongest champion, people move on to the next one while that old champion stays under-powered for months to years at a time.

What does this mean for league? I'll start by saying some champions definitely are NOT balanced out in this game (and a completely balanced game becomes stagnant rather quickly). I don't mean OP, but that some champions are clearly easier to use and more consistent and several are obvious bottom of the barrel picks. I hope Riot will pick up on this and fix those champions (hi Urgot, and Zac), but I want to talk about the reasoning behind nerfs here.

Recently, Warwick has been nerfed several times. Yes, WW was overpowered during the introduction of skirmishers saber. Some point to the devourer enchantment, but feral flare was still around in S4 and often in use. This was the meta though and not the champion who had been very under-powered in previous patches and almost completely unpicked. He's also countered by a lot of the most popular junglers. So, fine he was overpowered and they nerfed the saber. Then they went right on to nerf WW multiple times. His ultimate damage has been severely dropped, and the cooldown on it increased multiple times, and his W doesn't last as long. Ok... great so he's not OP anymore, but he's not really as playable now (I mean he can still win but will be much less consistent) and the item that made him OP isn't the same anymore.

This has also been true of several other champions. This is not a QQ buff Warwick or against Riot post. It happened to Shyvana, Rengar, Aatrox, and several others. The point here is that champions shouldn't be nerfed into the ground in case they **might **be OP, but just let more champions be strong all at once and have players create the meta. Let Shyvana be strong with her fire shield, let Rengar get off more power with his Q, and all that. It gives the players more options. More options creates a healthier meta. It's ok if some things are "OP" in the current meta. It's only a problem when the character itself is ridiculously OP for some reason (and lets face it some were like that and stayed that way anyways for the whole s4).

TL;DR: Let more champions be strong. Give us, the players, more options to enable a changing and evolving meta. The best thing you can do for players is let them have fun playing what they like the best. Don't get scared into swinging the nerf bat just because something might get to be too strong.

4 Comments

Teridax682 votes

While I agree that champions shouldn't be nerfed just because they're favored in a certain meta, I think most of the above only applies in a situation where the meta would be free-flowing enough so that any dominant comp, strategy or champion would have a good enough answer to just evolve naturally. Ideally, this is the state of balance League will ultimately settle into, but we're not there yet. Some comps or picks just happen to be overly good, and sometimes the game just isn't well-equipped enough to deal with a particular strategy, and that's when Riot needs to step in and tune the gears to the figurative wheel so that it can turn again. Preseason 5 has gone a long way in enabling lots of alternative strategies, which were until now unhealthy, difficult to put to full use, or both (counterjungling is a big example), but even then there's lots more to figure out and update. Until we arrive at a state where all champions, items, and strats are brought up to modern standards of design, and are well balanced enough, Riot's gonna have to chip in to get things running a little smoother.

FantasySniper1 votes

{quoted}

Recently, Warwick has been nerfed several times. Yes, WW was overpowered during the introduction of skirmishers saber. Some point to the devourer enchantment, but feral flare was still around in S4 and often in use. This was the meta though and not the champion who had been very under-powered in previous patches and almost completely unpicked. He's also countered by a lot of the most popular junglers. So, fine he was overpowered and they nerfed the saber. Then they went right on to nerf WW multiple times. His ultimate damage has been severely dropped, and the cooldown on it increased multiple times, and his W doesn't last as long. Ok... great so he's not OP anymore, but he's not really as playable now (I mean he can still win but will be much less consistent) and the item that made him OP isn't the same anymore.

WW was a strong pick throughout late S4. This is a horrible example to use for proving your point, as his power resulted not from the meta, but from the ease of his kit and later on his extreme synergy within the new environment that is the S5 jungle.

I get what you're trying to say, but pick something else for explaining this.

Velasan2 votes

Ok how about the 4 other champions I mentioned? Also Warwick was not a popular pick in s4. From what I hear he wasn't a popular pick in s3 either. His win rates supported this.

He was also countered by junglers like Vi, who were very popular at the time. At what point was he a strong pick?

Was he playable? Yes. That doesn't make him OP or a strong pick. He's still a champion that to do anything has to connect with and chase the opponent. Most of his damage is in his ultimate.

However, if you don't want to use WW as an example, how about Aatrox? His attack speed was severely nerfed. What about Shyvanas fire shield being reduced by a couple hundred damage?

I'm sure you yourself can cite several examples. I still feel like WW was over nerfed either way. The thread is about enabling more champions though. Not whether WW needed nerfs (and even if he did, why so many?).

FantasySniper1 votes

{quoted}

Ok how about the 4 other champions I mentioned? Also Warwick was not a popular pick in s4. From what I hear he wasn't a popular pick in s3 either. His win rates supported this.

3, and you'd need to provide individual context for Shyvana and Aatrox, as I wasn't around when they were strong. WW was very popular and strong near the end of S4.

However, if you don't want to use WW as an example, how about Aatrox? His attack speed was severely nerfed. What about Shyvanas fire shield being reduced by a couple hundred damage?

Again, you'd need to supply the individual context. Why were or weren't their nerfs justified?

I'm sure you yourself can cite several examples. I still feel like WW was over nerfed either way. The thread is about enabling more champions though. Not whether WW needed nerfs (and even if he did, why so many?).

Fiora got hurt without compensation. Yi can do what she does, but better, and they let her fall flat. Making her worse in teamfights is okay, but they also hurt her dueling at the same time by nerfing the AD ratio. WW got his nerfs because he was impossible to counter. QSS may let you get rid of the suppression, but the damage doesn't stop, and if they're smart, they built tanky so that they could fight you as long they wanted to. It was a nightmare to shut down WW, and even when he was behind he still proved a threat with his targeted ult and team AS boost.

More from Gameplay

More by Velasan