Fantastic video discussing "perfect imbalance" in games



  • e31OSVZF77w

    This stuff may be obvious to some of you, but I think it’s definitely worth a watch. Really interesting points were made (at least interesting to my feeble mind).

    BONUS STUFF!

    EitZRLt2G3w

    “Balancing for skill”

    The way the noobtube is discussed in the video reminds me of the “spamguard” tactic. A lot of people complain about how it requires zero skill to use, but still nets you an incredible amount of success, but I kind of think it is this games “noobtube tactic”. Less skilled players will get a lot of success out of it, but you will never see a high skill player using it because there are much more effective tactics, and 9 times out of 10 a high skilled player will not get killed by a vanguard running around aimlessly swinging their greatsword.

    Holy crap these extra credits videos are good. Hopefully these videos make people at least think about their current opinions on balance in this game, even if they don’t necessarily agree with what is being said in these videos.

    Edit: “Think about their thoughts”? Me fail English? But how?



  • Extra credit = game design for weak casuals.

    It shows you how to into making a good commercial game, not a good game. Notice how he talks smack about chess.

    I really can’t stand that guy.



  • @JCash:

    I really can’t stand that guy.

    omg I thought you loved everyone???



  • @gregcau:

    @JCash:

    I really can’t stand that guy.

    omg I thought you loved everyone???

    I was also shocked and appalled by this revelation.

    https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/6621771776/h1D0E3E1F/



  • @Goatamon:

    I was also shocked and appalled by this revelation.

    https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/6621771776/h1D0E3E1F/

    lmao @ your link



  • @JCash:

    Notice how he talks smack about chess.

    He only points out the problems involved with a perfectly balanced game.

    He pointed out problems on both sides, and advantages.

    I haven’t detected any bias towards any side.



  • I actually linked the video on balancing for skill on my “fun without feinting” video.

    The way the noobtube is discussed in the video reminds me of the “spamguard” tactic. A lot of people complain about how it requires zero skill to use, but still nets you an incredible amount of success, but I kind of think it is this games “noobtube tactic”. Less skilled players will get a lot of success out of it, but you will never see a high skill player using it because there are much more effective tactics, and 9 times out of 10 a high skilled player will not get killed by a vanguard running around aimlessly swinging their greatsword.

    I believe that the smamguard is not balanced for skill and not meant for noobs either. Noobs in chivalry already have a number of mildly efficient ways to get kills that will sometimes trip up experienced players. These include weapons like the maul, grandmace, and halberd or any of the hard hitting weapons. Also simply using a lmb or overhead can grant mildly successful results for low effort.



  • Totally awesome videos and very appropriate for Chivalry :D



  • @NoVaLombardia:

    @JCash:

    Notice how he talks smack about chess.

    He only points out the problems involved with a perfectly balanced game.

    He pointed out problems on both sides, and advantages.

    I haven’t detected any bias towards any side.

    That’s because you always miss the point.

    The video had a clear bias towards “perfect imbalance” being a more interesting way to design a game.

    Anyway, it’s an interesting concept and indeed may or may not be intentional strategy game developers are adding to give their game more… flavor… but I really don’t think it adds too much to the meta-game. At least he didn’t give too much in the way of real world examples of how perfect imbalance enhances meta-gaming. I mean he bashes chess and SCII for having too clear cut of strategies and yet aren’t games about mastering the most effective strategy for your given situation and executing said strategy efficiently? SCII is still a game about predicting/understanding your opponents moves as much as it is about executing them.

    Lots of games have a rock paper scissors undertone to the gameplay. What varies is how hard a given choice (ie rock) counters another given choice (ie scissors). Another variable is how much execution, reflexes, and timing come into play. I feel like these are just the core elements of certain types of games. I like his thinking yet I feel more elaboration and specifics are needed.

    His biggest problem with these videos is he lacks solid real world examples. Referencing one game that sort of fits what you’re saying doesn’t cut it. In the second video where he uses zerg rushing and the subsequent nerfing of it was a really awful example of what he was trying to say.



  • OK, he doesn’t “talk smack” or “bash” Chess.

    He possibly overstates the case that once you play veteran chess players you really need to know a lot of the core strategies and counter strategies. He is trying to make a point after all.

    In any case I found both videos very informative. I think that Chivalry is well balanced in general and that a lot of people should understand this.

    For example, some people seem to think the game would be better if it was only about melee fighting with two handed weapons. Either because they’ve said that directly or because they hate everything else. Here are some common statements thrown around: archers are lame and unfair, shields are lame/for noobs/unfair, MaAs are unfair, one handed weapons are too fast, etc.

    This leads to the conclusion that the game would be better without archers, shields or MaAs using fast one handed weapons. In fact I think some of those people would even prefer the entire game to be just two handed swords.

    To me, that game would be boring. However it could also lead to the problem with “perfect balance” described in the first video. A shield seems to be a n00b defense, something only there to help people who can’t parry and in early levelers it can be. However when we get to very high level players who use lots of combos and feints, it can suddenly become very useful again as it can stop combos and is good against feinters. Of course it comes with it’s own problems so certainly isn’t more powerful than two handed weapons. Same goes with all the different aspects of the game.

    I’ll leave it at that but I’ll also throw this video in because I think some of the stuff it says about “incomparables” is valid here:

    Bxszx60ZwGw



  • @Dr:

    In any case I found both videos very informative. I think that Chivalry is well balanced in general and that a lot of people should understand this.

    Chivalry is balanced around the unsatisfying idea of everything being equally cheap.

    Here are some common statements thrown around: archers are lame and unfair, shields are lame/for noobs/unfair, MaAs are unfair, one handed weapons are too fast, etc.

    All of those things are true. but with a facehug nerf, man at arms dodge nerf, kick changes, and potentially a balance patch where some weapons are fine tuned and shields cost more stam (fingers crossed) all of those things might not be true in future.

    I’ve seen one good EC vid, it was on countering

    BRBcjsOt0_g

    If anything the issue with chiv mechanics is you have a bunch of moves that are satisfying for the person using them, don’t take very much skill to use, and make the person they’re being used ON feel powerless.

    I still disagree with the idea of perfect imbalance being a good thing. I like playing chess way more than rock paper scissors.



  • @JCash:

    @Dr:

    In any case I found both videos very informative. I think that Chivalry is well balanced in general and that a lot of people should understand this.

    Chivalry is balanced around the unsatisfying idea of everything being equally cheap.

    Here are some common statements thrown around: archers are lame and unfair, shields are lame/for noobs/unfair, MaAs are unfair, one handed weapons are too fast, etc.

    All of those things are true. but with a facehug nerf, man at arms dodge nerf, kick changes, and potentially a balance patch where some weapons are fine tuned and shields cost more stam (fingers crossed) all of those things might not be true in future.

    What? Seriously? Basically you don’t like this game because it’s cheap and you seem to hate any tactic apart from your own.

    Also why do shields need an increase in stam? Is it simply because you don’t like them?


Log in to reply