Proof the Bombshell should be nerfed?? Check out this game I just had...

[worldfamous]

(12-07-2012 05:26 AM)Ricky_KK Wrote:  

(12-07-2012 05:08 AM)worldfamous Wrote:  You also could've taken out the shell on turn 8. Heavy kills soldier, soldier hits shell, spawn runner to finish shell, move medic to spawn to prevent shark from spawn sitting.

Lol look, I'm not saying there wasn't a way to kill the bombshell.. I'm saying there wasn't a way to kill the bombshell AND survive.

Had I done what you just described, the heavy down low would've stepped on my spawn wit and I would have only had a heavy, solider, and 1 runner to defend my base and kill his heavy. Don't think that would've turned out well for me.

I won't argue anymore but I do think you should take a closer look at the replay and what I said.

[joelduque]

If Scallywags get nerfed, then it has to be well justified. You did not play a perfect or great game. There was definitely room for improvement.

[blckace]

Hey guys
I Watched the game and I can't comment on how bad you played but the least to say is your play style doesn't support your claim, no offense, watch super titan replays and practice some more.

What Harti wrote stands true and I always think about how to fix the bombshell? There's no easy fix without upsetting most of the bombshell players because whatever that's coming is gonna be a nerf, some of the changes I propose
1) No splash damage on base ever, this must be implemented as soon as possible, and anyone who disagrees doesn't understand the game.
2) Splash damage that kills units doesn't generate wits that's if a bombshell kills two units with one hit it won't get two wits simple and fair.
3) Don't change the unshelling and shelling cost at one wit it's very good if it's gone this thing is unstoppable.
4) The 2 movement instead of three seems very reasonable but I don't know how scallywags players feel about it? is it a big nerf? it seems like the logical thing considering how strong it's (like a heavy except stronger)
5) Best solution ever 2 hp shelled unhealed, 3 hp shelled healed this would make everything so good (every other special goes up to three hp why does this one go up to four? it's god damn invincible) it would make them think twice about where they place it!

I just broke the top 20 recently but I honestly don't know how much further I can advance

1. Terenceshiu2005 (scallywags?)
2. Alvendor (scallywags? but great with everything!)
3. ..Sir3.. (feedback loyalist)
4. joelduque (scallywags?)
5. poweewee (scallywags?)
6. pokhs (unknown)
7. Zero_killer (feedback loyalist)
8. el*tabasco (scallywags?)
9. ren8585 (scallywags?)
10. garcia10000 (scallywags?)
11. Gavin Wins (feedback)
12. blueswimmer95 (adorables loyalist)
13. Harti! (adorables)
14. p1noyboypj (scallywags currently)
15. cherylto (feedback?)
16. Dada Fett (unknown)
17. AleXwh87 (unknown)
18. awpertunity (scallywags)
19. blckace (feedback)
20. white dr4gon (feedback)

2 adorables 6 feedback 9 scallywags 3 unknown

Things get way more competitive when you reach this threshold, I can't start as many games as I'd like because I'm afraid of losing, what if I match against a scallywags player as p2? Every loss has to be made up for asap, if I can't make up for the losses I know my rank will drop, so I can't start more than one game with the same player (this week 2 losses, 1 win), I'm not saying winning is impossible but when I match against someone like garcia10000 (easily one of the top 5 players) he doesn't make mistakes he like playing a slow game and building an army he never rushes, winning seems nearly impossible (BUT I WILL DESTROY YOU IN OUR NEXT GAME) and there are players like ren8585 he's very aggressive with his bombshell placement always a bombshell out on his third turn, obviously since I know this now I can easily beat him (I've had one game against him on long9 easy win 2 losses on sfi 1 loss on reaper 1 win on reaper) it seems like he selects small maps on which bombshells have a significant advantage but can't say for sure, I would call for no small maps in league but that would take a lot of the variety of the game out. Anyways my last point is I'm advancing very slowly and struggling just because I can't dish out the same number of wins as scallwag players. I hope this doesn't offend anyone and maybe I don't know what I'm talking about and making false claims. Obviously I can't prove any of this, but consider this out of all my losses since promotion to super titan all of them has been to scallywags except one to adorables! that in addition to all the whining on forums and the sinking feeling you get in your gut when you match against scallywags surely means something.

Edit two more good suggestions from garcia and harti


5) ANOTHER thing: on maps like Thorn Gulley, where you put the bombshell in the "hole pocket", often you don't have vision out to range 4. What this means is that the guy can put a sniper at range 4 and you have no way of knowing, which makes the bombshell vulnerable there. HOWEVER!! Actually, you do know, since the "bomby" icons appears on squares where there are enemies. Suggestion: The "bomby" icon doesn't show up. Instead, you can shoot the ground and if you were right you will hit.

I think that it's both possible and justifiable to lower the chance of getting a small map to 25 per cent, maybe even for Super-Titan League only. Also it should be impossible to resign an empty game without consequences. This would nerf the Scallywags in a very vague way.

[Harti]

I can't believe I went through your whole post but luckily I did!

(12-07-2012 06:50 AM)blckace Wrote:  I would call for no small maps in league but that would take a lot of the variety of the game out.

I think that it's both possible and justifiable to lower the chance of getting a small map to 25 per cent, maybe even for Super-Titan League only. Also it should be impossible to resign an empty game without consequences. This would nerf the Scallywags in a very vague way. There's a 3 in 4 chance you're getting a map that's probably not imbalanced for your Bombshell.

[CombatEX]

Brief Game Commentary
I see that many people have already commented so I don't think I need to do any extensive analysis at this point. I'll just say this though - I'm happy when my opponent puts a forward bombshell so early (by turn 4). It's always easy to deal with because they haven't had a chance to fortify it and it is exposed. Your critical mistake was turn 4. You shouldn't have moved your soldier up so far without any vision. Then you spawn another soldier and move it right next to your first? If you had kept your soldiers back you would have been in a much stronger position. It's too risky to do the play that you did without any knowledge of your opponents movements.

Balance Discussion
As for 'overpowered' discussions, I find it largely useless until OML releases actual data. I switched from mostly scallywags to mostly feedback in the past month and here's what I have to say. Yes, I now fully realize just how annoying bombshells can be (no, not second turn forward bombshells as in your game, those are trivial - rather, defensive bombshell turtling into a slow push or a delayed forward bombshell on particular maps). However, in the case of an attempted slow push setup, I feel that it is the goal of the feedback/veggienaut/adorables player to finish the scallywag player before this happens. It is good that the different races have different play styles, strengths, and goals. Scallywags prefer surviving until the late game where they will build an advantage while other teams such as Feedback want to finish the game earlier.

Frustration and Bias
Now, that being said, Scallywags may still be too strong. But, we really need OML to release data (preferably matchup and map data if possible) before we can be certain. In the meantime no rash balance decisions should be made. Until then, I do agree that Scallywags can be a huge annoyance to deal with on particular maps and it's extremely frustrating facing a well constructed turtle. However, I've realized that this can also create a bias against them out of frustration (firsthand experience) even if they may not actually be overpowered. Losing to a turtling scallywag player is probably one of the more irritating losses, but this could also cloud perception.

To be completely honest, since switching to maining Feedback, even I find myself wanting bombshells to be nerfed from time to time. However, then I remind myself that doing so without the complete picture provided by OML would be premature and potentially detrimental. If nothing else, having more detailed statistics would guide the proper changes to correct balance issues if they exist.

Informed Balance Decisions over Hasty Appeasement and Importance of Map Balance
And finally, I've said this in the past, but no harm in reiterating - there should be a focus on map balancing. This also ties into my comments above about not making hasty decisions without data. For example, say that it turns out Scallywags are balanced on Sweetie Plains despite being too powerful on other maps. Then, we would be able to make better informed choices in addressing the issue. For instance, dropping or modifying the problematic maps (Peekaboo - please go away ).

Of course, it could also turn out that Scallywags are too strong all around. In this case nerfs to the bombshell will be necessary. However, I highly doubt that the imbalance, if one exists, will be equal across all maps. Let's say that Scallywags do turn out to be overpowered across the board. 80-20 Peekaboo, 60-40 Sweetie Plains, 70-30 all other maps (Note that these are completely made up). In this case, say you only nerf the bombshell. Will that balance the game? Most certainly not. If you balance the bombshell to fix the balance on Peekaboo, the Scallywags will then be underpowered on the rest of the maps. If you balance the bombshell around Sweetie Plains, the Scallywags will still be overpowered on the rest of the maps. Now, this is a simplification as there are map dependent factors that will come into effect depending on the specific change to the bombshell, but the basic point stands. Simply modifying the bombshell isn't going to fix balance without addressing specific map issues.

Bottom line: Regardless of how overpowered Scallywags are (or aren't), map modifications and/or map replacements will always be required to achieve true balance.
The only time this wouldn't be true is if the match-ups percentages are miraculously the same across all maps.

Suggestions (Tangent)
This probably should be in its own thread but I'll probably just put this in the beta forums or a PM at some point
On a side note, OML is currently working on implementing seasons so I thought I'd propose a feature request. Map veto (like in Starcraft 2). Now, I know what you may be thinking. "You shouldn't be able to get out of playing maps just because you don't like them." Well, my reason for this request is two fold.
NOTE: You can't just veto as much as you want, there is a limit to the number of maps you can veto. In Starcraft 2 this number is 3, but it could always be changed for Outwitters.

1. Sometimes there are genuinely terrible maps as I think most top level players will agree is the case with Peekaboo. Players shouldn't have to endure 100 turn+ turtle matches with Scallywag players.
2. OML can use the veto data to quickly see which maps players dislike and can switch those out for new maps when a new season arrives. This is what Blizzard does with map veto data. When planning map lineup for new seasons they consider which maps players veto often as well as which maps have the worst balance issues using their map specific match-up data.

My final suggestion would be a map editor. This can be sold for additional, much needed monetization as well as save OML the effort of designing balanced maps. These maps obviously won't be in the league play initially. However, OML can use a similar approach as Blizzard does with Starcraft 2. It's largely agreed that Blizzard 1v1 maps are terrible in Starcraft 2. Many tournaments utilize tested and highly acclaimed community made maps. Some of these maps eventually get incorporated into the official ladder. This makes for an all around more enjoyable, competitive experience and saves work for Blizzard after their initial investment into a map editor. Now, I understand that this isn't a trivial task, but just one of those far future suggestions. If nothing else, it's another source of income down the road as purchases of the uber pack and individual teams die down.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

blckace Wrote:1) No splash damage on base ever, this must be implemented as soon as possible, and anyone who disagrees doesn't understand the game.
2) Splash damage that kills units doesn't generate wits that's if a bombshell kills two units with one hit it won't get two wits simple and fair.
3) Don't change the unshelling and shelling cost at one wit it's very good if it's gone this thing is unstoppable.
4) The 2 movement instead of three seems very reasonable but I don't know how scallywags players feel about it? is it a big nerf? it seems like the logical thing considering how strong it's (like a heavy except stronger)
5) Best solution ever 2 hp shelled unhealed, 3 hp shelled healed this would make everything so good (every other special goes up to three hp why does this one go up to four? it's god damn invincible) it would make them think twice about where they place it!

When the time comes for a decision, if a nerf is required, these suggestions should be kept in mind. I do like your first and second points. I don't think anyone ever considered the buff you state in the third point, this is about nerfs, not buffs right? It would be insane to remove shelling and unshelling costs! So yes, I agree as do all other mid-high level players I imagine. Now, I disagree with the fourth point. It could fix some aspects of the bombshell, but it also could create problems. Namely, limiting movement could promote further defensive play with bombshells (turtling) since it's harder to be aggressive with them in a forward position. As for point five, this could work. All in all, good suggestions.

[blckace]

(12-07-2012 07:01 AM)Harti Wrote:  I can't believe I went through your whole post but luckily I did!

(12-07-2012 06:50 AM)blckace Wrote:  I would call for no small maps in league but that would take a lot of the variety of the game out.

I think that it's both possible and justifiable to lower the chance of getting a small map to 25 per cent, maybe even for Super-Titan League only. Also it should be impossible to resign an empty game without consequences. This would nerf the Scallywags in a very vague way. There's a 3 in 4 chance you're getting a map that's probably not imbalanced for your Bombshell.

^_^ I remember you asked for TLDR version in vivafringe guide
Anyway that's a very good good suggestion!

[aaronINdayton]

That's interesting, I think in this new +wit for kill environment that's making snipers and heavies viable, the scrambler and mobi are better than the bombshell. Bramble I don't know enough about, might be great against some and poor against others.

But, I tend to be wrong about these sorts of things *shrug*.

[Ricky_KK]

Thanks for all the tips/recommendations/advice. I agree I have room for improvement. Much of the purpose for my post was that I wanted to see if my concerns were legitimate, which is a "not really". However, it's interesting to see the discussion going on concerning the bombshell team.

[game_taker]

(12-07-2012 07:25 AM)aaronINdayton Wrote:  That's interesting, I think in this new +wit for kill environment that's making snipers and heavies viable, the scrambler and mobi are better than the bombshell. Bramble I don't know enough about, might be great against some and poor against others.

But, I tend to be wrong about these sorts of things *shrug*.

(I am a feedback player, however play as veggies sometimes 2)

Not to be mean, but that is absolute bs (as in bull shit not bomb shell).

@CombatEX, you are right that before nerfing the bs we need DATA. Although anyone who says that a game against an experience bs player as feedback in peekaboo is practically over before it starts is lying to themselves. PEEKABOO NEEDS TO BE BALANCED. I have two proposals for this. (1) Add another row or two of movement spaces so that one bs can't take up the entire field. (2) Move the the barriers in the centre, where? ANYWHERE just get them out of our soldiers way!!

In regards to large maps I find bs to be fairly balanced. Although I will admit I have not yet played a game in a large map w/ over 2 bs.

The features of the bs are interesting, he can attack at a range of 3 however can dmg units at a range of 4. This allows him to hid the shade and it seems very op. Although I argue that it is not as op as most people claim 2 be. This is because scramblers, soldiers, snipers, and mobi really have a range of 4. This is created by moving them as far as possible then attack/scrambling/tp. HOWEVER, their is an aspect to the bs's 4 range that is overpowered. That is, he does not risk himself by attacking units 4 spots away from himself (Explained very well by Harti @ pg 2, {the really long post}). With all others they most be moved, closer to enemies putting them at a higher risk.

As a nerf option, what if we stopped the bs from hitting nothing?

[garcia1000]

Hey guys,

When I saw this thread I thought, "This game is probably on Peekaboo." AND LO AND BEHOLD I WAS CORRECT.

So anyway.

1) Peekaboo is a terrible map. One person went so far as to try to get super-titans to soft-ban it. Let's not include it in discussions.
2) I think Scallywags are slightly overpowered, although the effect is not as large as the FTA that previously existed.
3) blckace suggestions are very good from a gameplay perspective. On the other hand, elegance seems very important to the OML guys.
4) How about main bombshell attack does 2 damage instead of 3? What effect would that have?
5) ANOTHER thing: on maps like Thorn Gulley, where you put the bombshell in the "hole pocket", often you don't have vision out to range 4. What this means is that the guy can put a sniper at range 4 and you have no way of knowing, which makes the bombshell vulnerable there. HOWEVER!! Actually, you do know, since the "bomby" icons appears on squares where there are enemies. Suggestion: The "bomby" icon doesn't show up. Instead, you can shoot the ground and if you were right you will hit.