How to Understand Nerfs
Posted 03-24-2009 at 10:28 AM by shiz98
Lots of people have been complaining about TG nerfs and being forced into plate armor recently, and quite frankly they're confused (even if they don't know it 
). I figure it's about time to grab a soapbox and set the record straight.
So nerfs. We don't like them, whether they're deserved or not. If we know we're OP, then it's sort of an "awww, but it was so much fun" thing going on, and if we feel the nerfs are unjustified then it's all doom and gloom. It's not really bad to be bummed about no longer being OP - it's damn fun - but it's unwise to be upset about nerfs you feel are unneeded.
Why? Surely, you say, the TG change is a massive nerf. We're losing 12% damage! With current standings this puts us way below other classes. Big problem, right? Wrong. I'm going to introduce a novel concept:
Nerfs mean nothing. They do not exist. It's sort of like the Tao of WoW. My class gets a buff or nerf, your class gets a buff or nerf - none of it has any impact on the game.
Obviously this statement is only true on some levels. Under the microscope, a 10% nerf is a 10% nerf, no doubt. The problem with analyzing nerfs/buffs this way, however, is that that you lose sight of the big picture. And the big picture is always the same.
Let's look at a common approach people use to analyze nerfs:
1. Ability is nerfed
2. DPS is too low
This is bad. Blizzard will balance you. If you're a pure, you will do the same damage as other pures. If you're a hybrid, you do 5% less. End of story. Whenever you're analyzing a nerf, you have to view it with the end result being balanced DPS. For example:
1. Ability is nerfed
2. DPS goes down
3. ???
4. DPS is balanced (Profit.)
The ??? is all that matters. The ??? will be tweaked until all is right with the world. In short, the ??? is there to prevent you from worrying about nerfs, ever.
Testing
But if we're not supposed to worry about nerfs, what's the point of testing?
Blizzard knows when they're nerfing something (usually - sometimes auxiliary nerfs slip in under the radar). They have a pretty good feel for it, too. Unfortunately, "pretty good" is not good enough for them to work out what ??? needs to be - this is why they have player testing. This is why Fury is still on the PTR with the 10% TG nerf and no compensation. Exactly how much of a damage loss it is needs to be determined. If it's smaller than they/we think it will be, they might not need to tweak any other abilities to make things balanced.
Let's look at a practical (and recent) example: that of the leather nerf.
1. Leather is nerfed, plate is buffed
2. Warriors start wearing plate
3. Plate is itemized badly
4. Warriors get fewer stats.
5. Warriors will do bad DPS.
Again, flawed thinking. The correct way to approach it:
1. Leather is nerfed, plate is buffed
2. Warriors start wearing plate
3. Plate is itemized badly
4. Warriors get fewer stats
5. ???
6. Warriors do balanced DPS
The ??? will come. You just have to be patient
Note: Apologies for the writing/formatting quality. This was written spur of the moment, without much time given to proofreading, etc. In most future blog posts (if/when they come), I'm going to make an effort to put more time into them.
). I figure it's about time to grab a soapbox and set the record straight.So nerfs. We don't like them, whether they're deserved or not. If we know we're OP, then it's sort of an "awww, but it was so much fun" thing going on, and if we feel the nerfs are unjustified then it's all doom and gloom. It's not really bad to be bummed about no longer being OP - it's damn fun - but it's unwise to be upset about nerfs you feel are unneeded.
Why? Surely, you say, the TG change is a massive nerf. We're losing 12% damage! With current standings this puts us way below other classes. Big problem, right? Wrong. I'm going to introduce a novel concept:
Nerfs mean nothing. They do not exist. It's sort of like the Tao of WoW. My class gets a buff or nerf, your class gets a buff or nerf - none of it has any impact on the game.
Obviously this statement is only true on some levels. Under the microscope, a 10% nerf is a 10% nerf, no doubt. The problem with analyzing nerfs/buffs this way, however, is that that you lose sight of the big picture. And the big picture is always the same.
Let's look at a common approach people use to analyze nerfs:
1. Ability is nerfed
2. DPS is too low
This is bad. Blizzard will balance you. If you're a pure, you will do the same damage as other pures. If you're a hybrid, you do 5% less. End of story. Whenever you're analyzing a nerf, you have to view it with the end result being balanced DPS. For example:
1. Ability is nerfed
2. DPS goes down
3. ???
4. DPS is balanced (Profit.)
The ??? is all that matters. The ??? will be tweaked until all is right with the world. In short, the ??? is there to prevent you from worrying about nerfs, ever.
Testing
But if we're not supposed to worry about nerfs, what's the point of testing?
Blizzard knows when they're nerfing something (usually - sometimes auxiliary nerfs slip in under the radar). They have a pretty good feel for it, too. Unfortunately, "pretty good" is not good enough for them to work out what ??? needs to be - this is why they have player testing. This is why Fury is still on the PTR with the 10% TG nerf and no compensation. Exactly how much of a damage loss it is needs to be determined. If it's smaller than they/we think it will be, they might not need to tweak any other abilities to make things balanced.
Let's look at a practical (and recent) example: that of the leather nerf.
1. Leather is nerfed, plate is buffed
2. Warriors start wearing plate
3. Plate is itemized badly
4. Warriors get fewer stats.
5. Warriors will do bad DPS.
Again, flawed thinking. The correct way to approach it:
1. Leather is nerfed, plate is buffed
2. Warriors start wearing plate
3. Plate is itemized badly
4. Warriors get fewer stats
5. ???
6. Warriors do balanced DPS
The ??? will come. You just have to be patient
Note: Apologies for the writing/formatting quality. This was written spur of the moment, without much time given to proofreading, etc. In most future blog posts (if/when they come), I'm going to make an effort to put more time into them.
Total Comments 8
Comments
-
I think people generally like to whine and complain more than to celebrate and rejoice. This is why the bad news is on the front page and the good news is underneath the funnies in section 14C
I celebrate the changes to this game and I look forward to overcoming and nerfsPosted 03-24-2009 at 11:31 AM by Brucimus
- Assuming that a nerf (or buff) takes a class or play style way out of whack from a balance perspective...
The legitimate concern I see is the time frame of ??? and the impact that has on enjoyment of the game. Being patient is one thing. Waiting an indeterminate/indefinate time frame is certainly frustrating. Being nerfed it impacts you and the time you've invested in a character. On the flip side - being OP can be just as frustrating for others in the game.
Not to defend the outcry against nerfs, which seem to easily become an overblown knee jerk reaction.Posted 03-24-2009 at 11:33 AM by Grimsmite -
OMG I R NERFED THE SKY IS FALLING
They aren't done with testing on the ptr... so in my opinion no need to cry yet. I just recently started bumming around in ufry myself.. Poeple forget.. if youhave been raiding with your guild all this time.. they aren't going to ditch you in Ulduar because of one nerf.Posted 03-24-2009 at 12:24 PM by Turelliax 
-
Giving someone 1 cookie makes him happy.
Giving someone 2 cookies and then taking away 1 makes him a sad panda.
End result is the same.....except the second player isn't as happy as the first.Posted 03-24-2009 at 12:26 PM by orcstar - I tend to look at dps buffs/nerfs this way:
Look at your guild's Recount/WWS. Find the median damage done by the dpsers (ignore tank and healer damage). Look at the deviation. I'm betting that the deviation in your guild's dps is a lot larger than the theoretical nerf that you see on the horizon.
Don't panic!Posted 03-24-2009 at 04:06 PM by Finkleroy - Personally, I hate nerfs. And, truth be told, I'm one of those rashly impulsive people who tends to see something and then immediately rage about it without fully understanding.
But here's the problem.
A nerf is a nerf, however much you want to address it and/or justify it. People don't like nerfs, especially when it appears that other people are receiving buffs.
And are they?
Personally, I love orcstar's quote:
But this isn't true in all cases. Sometimes, someone gets two cookies and the other guy gets one as stated. But very often in WoW, no cookies are taken away.Quote:Giving someone 1 cookie makes him happy.
Giving someone 2 cookies and then taking away 1 makes him a sad panda.
End result is the same.....except the second player isn't as happy as the first.
And that's the rub.
I'm biased toward warriors. I always will be, because it's the class I love and the only class I really want to play. But the stats don't lie. Warriors are underperforming in two specs and the one spec that is conceivably over-performing is receiving a flat penalty. Sure, we can grab the moral high ground and say "it'll get balanced/fixed/sorted out"; but I can tell you that most of the complaints that warrior players have had for ages are still there.
Rage flow, for example.
Anyone worth their salt is aware that Fury warriors are doing too much damage because of inflated rage income. On the other side of the coin, every protection warrior is acutely aware that better avoidance is going to cause him a problem with rage and, therefore, threat.
DPS warriors scale too well because of rage. Protection warriors scale badly. The problem here is the normalization of our resource pool, but it's an issue that is largely ignored.
This is where the annoyance comes in.
The warrior community will say "gear differently if you want more threat", but this is another pile of work that other classes are not having to put in. Not to mention, the building of that set (or "downgearing" as I've heard it called) will cause problems in other areas - namely, endurance. This is a bitter pill to swallow because, basically, warriors are the only class penalized for getting better gear, and it's a direct result of our resource pool.
Is this affecting my enjoyment of the game (which is what this all comes down to)?
Well, yes; it can.
While I'm building a threat set, or an avoidance set, or a health set, other classes are not having to and are simply enjoying content.
So, as you can probably see, that's why I don't do it. I build a "jack of all trades set", meaning I have no "master of one" sets (plural).
I could build other sets to compete, but find the logic behind doing so to be morally questionable considering that it's the developers job to sort it out.
Ultimately, I suppose the angst comes from the fact that most warriors (and, yes, I apologise for talking exclusively about warriors) are aware what the real cause of the problem is and they see said cause receiving no attention.
Because the developers aren't dealing with the cause of the issue, I have to deal with the effect. You can tell me to stop crying all you like, but that's an unfair situation to be in.Posted 03-24-2009 at 10:25 PM by Zellviren - Good points about the psychology aspect. Regardless of your resultant performance, it's depressing to see nerf after nerf.
Just a note - the things you mention in your comment aren't so much planned nerfs as they are design flaws. The treatment of them is naturally a little different. Most people who complain about nerfs/buffs are failing to see the forest for the trees (as explained above); that is, they're failing to look at it in the proper context. If they would take a broader look, they would find little reason to complain about a nerf. As I explained in the post, there's not really any reason to. A design flaw, however, should be discussed, complained about, torn apart. What's the difference? A nerf/buff is a tool used to modify the design of a class. It's not wise to lambaste a nerf when the end result will always be the same: balance (on the other hand, nerfs that result in gameplay changes are important to discuss). It is, however, perfectly legit to complain about a class' design. The design is the final product; if you don't like it, get it changed!
Simply put, attack the end result, and not the steps used to get there.
In any case, the promise of balance is one you can hold on to though any rough patch. It's your safety blanket; no matter what's happening with nerfs, buffs, whatever, you can always be certain that you will be balanced, that it will all work out, and that somebody out there is looking out for you. Sometimes it's hard to see the big picture as a player with limited information about what blizzard's doing, but there is a big picture.
Now, is it fair to ask you to wait while your ugly class mechanics are being tweaked with wild nerfing/buffing? Maybe. Maybe not. You get to decide.Posted 03-24-2009 at 11:53 PM by shiz98 - The thing that worries me, mainly, is outlier mechanics that cause a large deviation in DPS depending on player skill, spec, raid stacking, and the like.
While it's easy to balance the regular DPS of a class, if we can call it that, it's hard to balance the DPS that results from signature abilities or synergies. Some examples:
- Playing a mage, I'm worried that a warlock's CoE or Felguard may be OP, or scale too well with buffs.
- Warlocks may reasonably be worried that Arcane Blast or Hot Streak may scale in a way that's OP.
- As a warrior I wouldn't like Titan's Grip being OP as that would force me to use 2H weapons and play that way.
So my fear of buffs or nerfs is that a class may have too many or too few of these badly-scaling abilities. While this doesn't matter much in the very casual game, it matters if you're trying to excel.
In the end of the day the feeling I want to avoid is "I wish I had rolled this other class", or equally bad "I want to play class X but Blizzard tells me I need to roll Y to be effective".Posted 06-17-2009 at 01:29 AM by Machus
