Buffs and Nerfs

[Cyanobacteria]

https://sb.atlantaned.space/info/winlos ... 2019-08-02

So I understand that some forms of antagonist are actually suppose to be hard to play as and are normally difficult to balance. In order to make my argument as to what needs to be nerfed or balanced, look at the stats.

Win/Loss ratio
Cult: 1/2 (win 33%) win window 40 minutes: loss window 60 minutes
Nuke Ops: 1/1 (win 50%) win window 30 minutes: loss window 40 minutes
Revolution: 1/2 (win 33%) win window 35 minutes: loss window 30 minutes
AI malfunction: 1/2 (win 33%) win window N/A: loss window N/A INSUFFICIENT DATA
Blob: 1/1 (win 50%) win window N/A: loss window N/AINSUFFICIENT DATA

These are the stats for some of the main game modes. I couldn't find many traitor rounds nor could I find blood sucker. AI malfunctioning and blob data had nothing this year on the website for some strange reason, likely a database error, so take what I say about AI and Blob with a grain of salt.

Antagonist are outnumbered by the crew, but, the question is, what should the win loss ratio be for a good antagonist. It's clearly more difficult to be an antagonist then it is to just be a normal crew member. Should the antagonist have as much of a chance of winning as nanotrasen? No. Reason? because the antagonist are the attackers and nanotrasen is the defenders. That being said, most antagonist are actually all overpowered, as they normally come with the same skills anybody else can start with, and more. The issue is that most antagonist players don't know how to play the game and so very unskilled players never become successful antagonist, as there is a learning curve to it and nobody wants to make a legit tutorial on how to play any of the antagonist. Because most forms of antagonist are team based, this means that the entire team needs to pull their own weight to be successful. That being said, this games been around long enough for the common stats to always be so, however some players pride themselves so much on being pseudo intellectual that they wouldn't want anything to change merely for the reason of "because I'm use to it".

What should be done

Because of this, I believe that the average win percentage is too high for nuclear operatives and blobs. 50% is a massive number for much less players involved in any task. Should a blob literally have 50% of the wins while an AI malfunction only has 33% yet their in many ways played by the same number of players in terms of being antagonist? No. Both blob and nuclear operatives need a nerf. The best way to nerf blob is to nerf their rate of growth while the best way to nerf nuclear operatives is to allow for the nuclear authentication disk to have an automated shutter and mass driver system that shoots the ID into the central hall if the captain doesn't move the disk. Not to just prevent solo operatives, but, to prevent nuclear operatives who drop in on an unskilled captain which somehow got captain and still doesn't know how to play. Nuke ops nerf can be done merely by remapping and editing item flags in the map editor, while blob probably only needs one line to be changed to be nerfed.

[oranges]

too long, did not read

[Tlaltecuhtli]

winloss in a rp game is dumb, antags are there to spice up things not to play ranked

[Calibraptor]

winloss in a rp game is dumb, antags are there to spice up things not to play ranked

[MisterPerson]

That's true, but if the antag literally always/never wins, that's not terribly fun either. I'm not sure why a 50% win rate is supposedly too high, though. You would think a 50/50 win rate would be ideal, no?

[PKPenguin321]

That's true, but if the antag literally always/never wins, that's not terribly fun either. I'm not sure why a 50% win rate is supposedly too high, though. You would think a 50/50 win rate would be ideal, no?

I'll take an antag that wins 1 in 1000 times but generates an excellent story through crew interactions every time over an antag that has a perfect 50% win rate but is a bore to play with or against

[Cobby]

AI and Blob don't have winrates because they aren't gamemodes, they're antagonists appended to gamemodes (malf being traitor and blob being any as side antagonist).

It's just how it pulls the stats I believe.

[SpaceManiac]

winloss in a rp game is dumb, antags are there to spice up things not to play ranked

[gallowsCalibrator]

As far as nuke ops goes, at least, I saw a couple suggestions there. One idea I saw was splitting the disk into several disks, with each disk starting in a Head's office. That could be exclusive to a war ops gamemode if that became a thing, too. Also, you could take away the Nuke Ops' own device and make them use the onboard self-destructor in the vault, too.

Personally, I haven't been part of too many nuke / war ops rounds myself, but I'm not sure how I feel about them. They kinda derail the whole round pretty hard, which is the point I guess? But I feel like that's not exactly the most fun possibility either.

[MisterPerson]

That's true, but if the antag literally always/never wins, that's not terribly fun either. I'm not sure why a 50% win rate is supposedly too high, though. You would think a 50/50 win rate would be ideal, no?

I'll take an antag that wins 1 in 1000 times but generates an excellent story through crew interactions every time over an antag that has a perfect 50% win rate but is a bore to play with or against

I was speaking generally but yeah, you're right. I think most people would enjoy being a suicide bomber, for example, even though they never "win". I guess it's not really about win-loss, it's more about being able to succeed at whatever it is you're trying to do and have fun doing it.

[donutstation]

winloss in a rp game is dumb, antags are there to spice up things not to play ranked

what rp game are you talking about?

[PKPenguin321]

winloss in a rp game is dumb, antags are there to spice up things not to play ranked

what rp game are you talking about?

Retard