August 13, 2019

August Balance Patch #2

Not even two weeks after the last balance patch, there's another one. Again without any in-app message to inform the normal casual players that don't read Reddit, follow Captain Benzie, or read my blog.

So, let me put this straight first: Dear Devs, it's not just highly unprofessional not to communicate your balance changes to the players. It's also highly disrespectful. You don't seem to care whether someone painfully learns about a nerf or buff whilst playing, costing her or him a frustrating loss. This is absolutely inexcusable, as it's a very low effort to post the existing patch notes into your in-app messaging system.

Now, to the balance changes:

Nerfs:

  • Cyborg & Zone Trooper attack speed halved, damage doubled. This is a revert of a previous change from July. It's a nerf in practice despite nominal DPS staying constant, as especially against infantry (and GDI Drone Swarms), the higher attack speed is really useful.
  • MLRS Infantry damage decreased by 34%. This is a significant nerf and surprises me, because even before this change, a single Missile or Laser Squad could walk up to an MLRS and easily kill it.
  • MSV Reload boost time reduced by 50%. This is another MLRS nerf (there is no other vehicle with reload time). I am confident that it would have been better to just do this nerf. Without the MSV, I never heard anyone ever complain about the infantry damage of the MLRS.
  • Shatterer speed reduced from fast to average. Significant nerf, as the key matchups against Grenadiers and Marauders are heavily dependent on defender's advantage, so getting into posiiton quickly is crucial for the shatterer
  • Chem Buggy vehicle damage reduced by -25%.

If you read my blog, you know that I'm a big fan of Rivals and generally very positive about Rivals and the devs. But the non-communication around the recent patches really lets you doubt about the seriousness with which the development team approaches this game.

1 comment:

  1. Couldn't agree more. EA is acting very unprofessionally there.

    ReplyDelete