Fundemental Changes for a Better Experience:
-
I'd like to preface this thread by stating Bleeding Edge is its own game and should remain as such. I will also admit my gaming resume is limited when it comes to third-person titles, particularly that of the MOBA, RTS, and Hero Shooter genres. So, forgive me for doing the unspeakable and hear me out until the end. I am going to highlight a major difference between Paladins and Overwatch and how I feel recognizing that difference could mold a better future for Bleeding Edge. Let's keep all comparisons and discussions in-house, relating only to why or why not certain features should be adopted for this game we're all excited about. There's a lot to unwrap here so I'll do my best to tackle every topic with a straightforward approach.
The Relevant Difference(s) Between Paladins and Overwatch:
~ Overwatch allows freely changing characters, much like Bleeding Edge, in the middle of the match whereas Paladins does not.
~ Paladins has a loadout system, much like Bleeding Edge's mods, alongside item (perk) purchases while Overwatch does not.Yes, Overwatch is irrefutably the better and more successful title. However, I believe the Paladins model is superior regardless of which side of the fence you may sit on and I'll wager a lot of folks who have played both will concede this. My stance is simple; Bleeding Edge already shares many traits with Paladins and I think they'd benefit from going all-in by tailoring said similarities specifically for our game in a better, unique way.
A Brief Overview of Loadouts & Items:
Loadouts are practically identical to Bleeding Edge mods as I mentioned above. Every character has a base kit, with which you are able to create a custom deck from various cards that, in many cases, dramatically change the way your character can be played. This introduces variety to the game and adds a sense of identity - the freedom to adjust a character's role and playstyle to your preference.
Items that are purchased in the middle of the match (specifically the spawn room before starting) are passive buffs and debuffs you can earn with credits. Credits, in summary, are experience points obtained for playing your role appropriately throughout the match. Examples of these items include some of the following: Increased healing received, faster base movement speed, lessening the effects of crowd control abilities against you, reducing the cooldowns on your abilities, and so on. I love this system because it incentivizes playing your role and the objective, allows the losing team a chance to adjust the balance of a match with reactionary counter purchases, and opens up the floodgates to countless but subtle new builds and playstyles. Overall, a perk system should be complementary; functioning solely as a means to earn some statistical buffs or mitigate the effects coming from a pesky opponent.
Now that I've covered the bases, let's drop the talk about these two games and move on.
A Potential Skill Gap Problem Coming to Bleeding Edge?
It is likely too soon to draw conclusions and I will not make this claim, but it should be concerning that this topic has been echoed by a significant portion of the playerbase (and many reviewers) while the game is still in its infancy. Given the limitations of the parry system, the combo mechanics, and most importantly a lock-on system with high time-to-kill, I can certainly see how an individual's skill could become borderline negligible in a lot of scenarios. I adamantly believe these problems, should they arise, will be compounded if we are left with the ability to change characters after a match has started. This could lead to linear 1-for-1 trades, leaving the player with little reason to consider an alternate strategy when they could simply just switch to the best possible match-up for dealing with someone. 'If the enemy team is running 'x' character, then we're going to swap to 'y' character next. If you are playing this character, then your job is to do this and only that.' With our team sizes being 4v4 and the roster list fairly low at launch, I don't see it taking very long before we could enter a state like this.
If the Bleeding Edge team deliberately aims to create an experience where communication and teamwork is the biggest variable (to a greater extent than in most games), I will respect that vision and give it a fair shake. However, I think that decision is a risk that could diminish our sense of individual accomplishment. I find the thought very discouraging and frustrating from a competitive standpoint. I, as the great player who has invested a lot of time practicing, should feel that my skills and game sense can carry a team to victory from time to time. I should not be bogged down by limitations of the game or entirely at the mercy of my team's effort. This is a really tricky area and I sure hope the developers take a long, hard look at it.
A Variety of Ways to Address This Problem:
1. Remove the ability to change characters during the match, or implement a system where changing characters is conditional.
-
I believe team composition is something that should be a commitment, something that requires clear planning and communication with your team, and something that leads to more diverse, interesting, and balanced matches. 'How could you possibly say this? What if my team chooses bad characters or doesn't pick a healer?' It's obvious, and I've witnessed it first-hand in a lot of games. If you are unable to freely change characters, you must and will inevitably end up putting more thought into your selections. Nobody likes losing before the match has even started and more often than not, you'll find people suddenly being more cooperative and mindful of their roles when every choice matters. Alternatively, I would also propose the idea of conditional character changes. It could be implemented in countless ways. For example, only allowing a character change if your team is lacking a particular role, greatly increasing the time to spawn after changes, only allowing character swaps with selections your team committed to, or requiring some form of currency or score progression before a change can be made.
-
If changes were removed entirely, those hard counters and the idea of expected 'jobs' I mentioned previously will be scrapped. If the enemy team has someone you are having a hard time dealing with, but you can't opt to change on the fly, you'll be in a position where you have to improvise and come up with a new approach as a team. I think this system absolutely needs to be present in the competitive scene. Being able to easily recognize and analyze what compositions have worked well rather than trying to remember who played what, who switched to who, or why you lost a particular team fight is invaluable. Try to imagine how difficult it must be to look at match history, leaderboards, and replays (assuming we get features like these added) if you can barely distinguish what composition either team ran with.
2. Expand on the mod system, implement perks & streaks, and consider reworking power-ups.
-
The proposals here are pretty self-explanatory. A new system with perks that can mix up the feel and pacing of every match would be welcomed. Rewards and buffs for capturing objectives, earning streaks, and so on could introduce new advantages and excitement. Increasing the amount of slots available with the mod system from 3 to 5 would greatly influence a character's playstyle and make encounters with said character less predictable and redundant. It broadens the amount of variables in any given fight, thus making the approach and outcome more skill-dependent. Finally, I believe power-ups could use some polishing. Perhaps reward them for reaching point thresholds? Change the way they work, where they spawn, or what you can do with them? I'm brainstorming aloud here now, but figured it's worth dropping as a suggestion. The community has already started to leave a lot of good feedback for these.
3. Add many abilities with free aiming in the future and overhaul parrying and stamina mechanics.
- Gizmo's bomb toss is the best and only example I can think of here. While it may seem insignificant, having an expansive roster with capabilities to aim some of their attacks will broaden the skill gap from player to player over time. With regard to parrying and stamina, I won't even begin to pretend I'd know where to start. All I know is that many players seem dissatisfied with the way they currently function, and its likely the first place I would look if I wanted to make engagements more challenging and skill-dependent.
I appreciate anyone that has taken the time to digest all of this! Do feel free to share your thoughts.
-
-
After all that I don't know if I could lol. Some things I agree and disagree/netrual with.
-
For the powers ups yes they do need some polish on it.
-
The Parrying does need some work
-
Then there's the role changing during mid game. Yes you get those players who don't what so ever pick a tank or a healer, so I really don't mind switching cause I Mastered almost every hero. Some people just don't use headsets anymore due to everyone being so sensitive and getting banned for the smallest things you say. So them have a role change is great during mid game, for example if hero "X" is not cutting it then you have the chance to pick another hero to counter hero "Y"
Then there's the problem when having 2 healers and 2 DPS is just straight out crazy so if you lock in heros it's just a mess, you don't even need a tank so DPS would need a Nerf so tanks can be more useful. I do like the idea what you suggested about switching when you really need that is a good idea.
So we'll see what happens man but awesome job on giving your feedback in detail
-
-
I think the "chess" aspect of picking counter fighters mid-game adds another positive layer to the overall competitiveness. I'm also not a huge fan of games cutting off any and all experimentation. I think the concept of having freedom as a player and not being force-fed certain limitations is extremely important.
There are genuine counter picks in the game, E.g. Cass -> Zerocool, Maeve -> Cass. If you are being obliterated by an enemy Maeve as Cass or if a Zerocool is earning the freedom of the map unchallenged, I think it would be very unfair and frustrating to not be able to counter-pick against it, especially as you don't know what the enemy composition will be while you pick yours.
I ultimately think it's important not to limit and constrict players, especially this early in the game's lifespan. I also think having the option to regroup as a team and coordinate new team compositions on the fly embodies the competitive spirit of the game and represents its core values.
I'm still surprised at the amount of criticism towards individual skill gaps. I think a large portion of the skill gap is just derived from different aspects of the game compared to where the skill gap is on an Overwatch or Paladins. Most obviously, this game features auto-lock, so any aim skill is largely nullified.
The skill gap comes from positioning, learning solo combos (which isn't just as simplistic as mashing "x"), combo cancelling e.g. keeping enemies in melee proximity rather than launching them away, learning to maximise the use of your stamina, learning enemy cooldowns and maximising opportunities to capitalise on miss-plays/misuses of their abilities.
It takes a lot more time than a couple of hours to distinguish whether or not there's a skill gap. As I've said in a few other threads, there seems to be a general perception before playing the game that doesn't match the reality of it.
And once again, all of the above is without covering the small but intricate potential for mod set-ups, and the most important factor - TEAMWORK! - which is the real core fundamental of the game. There is giant skill gap for teamwork - synergies (team comp, supers, abilities), map awareness, peeling, protecting healers, decision making, etc etc.
I'm far from the greatest player on the game but I've had solo-queue games where I've ended with 0 deaths compared to the rest of my team having 5+ deaths and we've won the game by a very small margin - to me, that does give me a great sense of accomplishment as without some smart plays we probably would have lost the game. Another person playing in my position in that match may have lost the game.
-
@x-AmberPrice said in Fundemental Changes for a Better Experience::
I think the "chess" aspect of picking counter fighters mid-game adds another positive layer to the overall competitiveness. I'm also not a huge fan of games cutting off any and all experimentation. I think the concept of having freedom as a player and not being force-fed certain limitations is extremely important.
There are genuine counter picks in the game, E.g. Cass -> Zerocool, Maeve -> Cass. If you are being obliterated by an enemy Maeve as Cass or if a Zerocool is earning the freedom of the map unchallenged, I think it would be very unfair and frustrating to not be able to counter-pick against it, especially as you don't know what the enemy composition will be while you pick yours.
I ultimately think it's important not to limit and constrict players, especially this early in the game's lifespan. I also think having the option to regroup as a team and coordinate new team compositions on the fly embodies the competitive spirit of the game and represents its core values.
You raise some fair points. This is probably a subjective preference, but for argument's sake I'll share some more of my thoughts. The way I see it, and continuing with your chess analogy, there isn't actually anything chess-like about being able to change your characters (your pieces) at the snap of your fingers because the game isn't going in your favor. I'd view that option more like rigging the table from the beginning. As you've acknowledged, there are already clear character counters. Why would anyone need to improvise, develop a new strategy, or adapt to a composition when you can instantly choose the best case scenario for dealing with it? A change made to deliberately counter one pick is exactly the type of 1-for-1 exchange I envision leading to a monotonous, predictable meta where everyone is essentially 'role locked' into specific responsibilities for dealing with specific characters. I would much prefer there to exist a soft perk system that can slightly shift the balance of a match while leaving team composition a crucial element of teamwork and strategy. Furthermore, I think it speaks volumes that a lot of games that typically do allow role switching mid-match have restrictions placed or the functionality replaced entirely by draft+ban phases in their ranked competitive modes.
That said, I can certainly see both sides to this, but we may have to agree to disagree. If Bleeding Edge keeps things as is, I really will be eager to see if this becomes the first game that's changed my opinion on it. To this day I haven't encountered any game where role swapping has sat well with me, though. Oh, and lastly, good points against the skill gap being limited, but I'm still not sure I'm convinced there's enough variation to noticeably separate two good players from one another. Again, my fear being the biggest differences will come down to character/counter selection rather than personal ability or a customized, purposed build in the mod system.
Time will tell! Hoping for the best.
-
Being unable to switch from a character or a role is just invassive, no casual player will ever have fun again because of the same thing that happens in overwatch, long queue times to play the only fun role, so you gotta decide if you wanna play the game, or have fun once every 10 minutes
-
These are interesting theories, but I feel like we haven't nearly explored the breadth of what this game has to offer. I don't even think we are playing the "competitive" mode if I'm being honest, I feel like as a community we shouldn't do anything too sweeping as the gane has yet to mature. Taking just one look at the tier list discussion and others taking place on these forums it is becoming clear that the skill gap is already staggeringly high, with people undervaluing core mechanics such as the parry, jump attacks, and combo extension. I plan on opening up some topics for individual characters moving forward, so hopefully we can get these guys out of the woodwork to discuss even more going into Beta 2.
-
@AmazingVector said in Fundemental Changes for a Better Experience::
These are interesting theories, but I feel like we haven't nearly explored the breadth of what this game has to offer. I don't even think we are playing the "competitive" mode if I'm being honest, I feel like as a community we shouldn't do anything too sweeping as the gane has yet to mature.
Oh, I don't disagree with that. I was trying to convey that these are just concerns and preferences of mine - potential problems I could see coming to the surface in the months following the official launch and of course how I believe they could best be dealt with. Some good ol' meaty feedback. But truth be told, I hope I end up being dead wrong and the competitive core of BE holds strong. It's not like I want any major changes to be necessary. Just a tad bit nervous is all.
I'm looking forward to those character breakdowns you want to work on! Keep 'em coming.
