What data do the devs use to determine a nerf or a buff?
Serious question, because as it stands it appears they pick killers at random and nerf/buff based on perceived strength/weakness but what data do they use to determine that a killer needs a buff or nerf?. It can't be kill rate percentage alone, so what is that INGREDIENT that the devs use to say "Ok, this killer needs some adjusting, lets put it on the roadmap for the next update"?
Your thoughts?
Comments
Game design is extremely complicated, so there are likely multiple factors at play.
1: It's a live service game, so shaking up things every so often is just normal.
2: Someone just gets an idea. I imagine they have round tables and brainstorming sessions. If someone has a good idea, it probably pops onto a roadmap.
3: Do they know a way to improve it? Just because you know something is causing problems, doesn't mean you know a way to fix it without causing more problems (I wouldn't be surprised if this is what happened with Twins).
4: Player satisfaction. Are people having fun with the game. I doubt they go off the forums or reddit much, more in terms of what people actually do in the game.
5: Kill rates and game results. I suspect this is last unless it gets way out of whack.
Number 4 is probably the highest priority, but also the most complicated. What some people like, others dislike, while most people's views on how to change the game don't take into account all of the factors that need to be considered.
Number 2 probably has a lot more weight than people think.
I suspect there are way more than just the five I listed, and those five can also be broken into more specific detail. People really underestimate these types of decisions and tend to think there is one key factor that determines what gets changed.
The problem from a general perspective is the inconsistency of a balancing approach that we all can see and look at and so "Oh ok, I get why this needed a bit of tuning". Pig is a great example, buffed (nerfed) her ambush but took away box auras. They seem to have noticed based on whatever info that her ambush wasn't getting used a lot or that it felt weak or that when it was used didn't land any hits so it needed a buff but why simultaneously did they feel a counter was needed to such a weak "buff" that box aura should no longer be a "thing" and what data did they look at to come to this conclusion. It would be nice to know these things.
They seem to have noticed based on whatever info that her ambush wasn't getting used a lot or that it felt weak or that when it was used didn't land any hits so it needed a buffI think you are presuming there is some math equation or numbers that they use to determine things like this. I don't think balance was a huge issue (though it would still be one). More likely they saw people weren't using the power, if a power isn't being used that means the killer and survivors probably aren't really enjoying the killer and the uniqueness it is meant to bring, so buff ambush to get more people to use it.
The headtraps were just a different change. They probably had some data that people didn't find the headtraps at their timer an enjoyable mechanic so they wanted to change it. On the PTB they originally tried a mass increase to the timers, but after they got a lot of push back on that they went to the change of making the aura boxes invisible.
BHVR isn't that worried about balance, making them unlike a lot of multiplayer games. They have a target number, but don't seem that concerned if they miss it by 5 points in either direction. I think the changes are much more geared toward 'fun' then 'this killer needs to be slightly stronger to be in line with the others'.
So to go back to my answers, Pig was likely a combination of 1, 4, and 5.
I don't know exactly what they use but Peanits posted this before.
"We don't make decisions solely based on kill rates. Kill rates only show us where a problem might be, they don't tell us whether or not there is a problem or what that problem is. We spend a lot of time gathering feedback and watching gameplay before committing to changing something."
I can link to the thread if need be.
I imagine if one side just overwhelmingly finds something unfun then they will probably try and change it. In terms of skull merchant I'm guessing it's nothing to do with strength. Just that people would rather not even play when they get matched against her.