They should increase the quality of Experimental changes, and decrease the quantity

General Discussion
1

When Blizzard makes an experimental card, they usually have multiple heroes changed. While it looks good for balance, because it is balancing multiple heroes in one patch, it has a lot of down sides to it as well.

One big downside to having many different balance changes in one patch is that the general indent that these changes left in the game is a little confusing. Let’s just say, for the sake of the argument, that Blizzard buffed Winston, and nerfed Brigitte in one patch. When people would play on the experimental patch, they would be confused as to whether or not dive is dominant because Winston is overpowered, or Brigitte is too underpowered, so that she is unable to keep dive in check.
Experimental cards are like science experiments, in that they each have a set amount of controls (unchanged heroes), as well as independent (Patch changes), and dependent variables (Game balance). In experiments, scientists generally have a rule that, at best, there should only be one independent variable. This is because, like in the aforementioned experimental card, having less independent variables means that you can have certainty that you will be able to tell that the changes that happened to the dependent variable are a direct result of the changes in the independent variable. Since these experimental cards are themselves experiments, Blizzard should operate with the same rules.

This is especially true, because if they took effort away from making many balance changes, and put all of their energy into making one, the balance changes that we could get could be much larger. Instead of just some simple number changes, we could instead expect to see, perhaps, some reworks to how characters function. Blizzard could figure out ways to fix some fundamental problems with certain heroes, like how Bastion is super good in the lower ranks, but really bad in the higher ranks.

I hope that this post comes across a developer, or two, because following what other people who do experiments do can really help improve the quality of the game, and make more fun for everyone.

TLDR: Experiments are preferred to only have one change of the environment that it is in, and Blizzard should prefer the same thing in their experiments.

2

While you make valid arguments you are forgetting about the video game fun factor that the experimental play card must also follow, which is making sure that there is enough heroes changed to give a variety so that anyone who plays the experimental play card has a reasonable chance to select one of the heroes that has received a balance change.

A little while back there was an experimental play card that only had one or two changes and unfortunately that cause a lot of issues with players being able to play with that hero. Because of this there was bad leaver behavior during that experimental play cycle.

2 Likes
3

I guess it is a problem that players leave whenever they don’t get to play the hero that the card changed. That just kind of ruins the purpose of these experiments in the first place. I didn’t account for that.

That might’ve been because many Overwatch players didn’t really understand how they were supposed to act on the experimental card. They treated it as if a new hero was released, which bloated pick rates, and games that were shut down.

I think that maybe if there was a disclaimer about how the players were supposed to act in the experiment, then they would better understand how the experiment worked, and why, instead of pushing to play the specifically changed hero, they should play their own favorite hero instead, or try to see how different compositions play out.

Although, maybe I’m giving the Overwatch community too much credit, and in reality, they wouldn’t even bat an eye at the disclaimer, instead going back to their usual antics of leaving games.

Either way, thanks for replying! It means a lot to get direct feedback from the developers about the community’s ideas, as it shows that the Overwatch team is active in its forums, and cares about its fans.

4

While I do appreciate the comment and I am not one of the Overwatch Developers. They will post in Orange Colored text and any other Blizzard Entertainment representative will post in blue color text. Those in green like myself are Forum most valuable posters. We are highly respected members of the community acknowledged by blizzard to help provide others with accurate information about the game. I responded based on past statements that I have read from the development team.

In any case this is constructive feedback any Overwatch Community team does collect this information to help make decisions to better improve Overwatch.

5

Couldnt they, in theory, test the experimental cards with no limits mode activated? Or something like increased limits?

6

In theory yes they could however since balance changes are planned based on the 222 rule set, I think they like to maintain that rule set when running the play mode.

1 Like
7

That would defeat the purpose tho

how will they know if it’s balanced if the game is in no limits

8

Yes, but I sort of assume they have that data? I mean they are doing some inhouse testing, I’d think?

9

Of course they do in-house testing. They did a lot of In-House testing when they released Brigitte right? If they only relied on just in-house testing the experimental play card would be unneeded. I would also note that the Experimental card is also more or less a beta to make sure any proposed changes are not going to be severly impacting the meta game in ways they did not anticipate before. For example, there was a buff proposed for Moira to be able to fade out of any stun or crowd control, however it was rejected because it was clearly demonstrated by the community to be OP.

1 Like
10

Exactly, so if they are testing for fun factor, they could make limits to how many characters can be played less restrictive… This wouldn’t force anyone to play the characters with the changes but people could do so if they wanted to try it. They could also test the experiments part of the week with less less limits and part of the week standard role lock format.

11

Maybe they could make it so that there could be an FFA with the balance changes, along with the normal 222 role queue. That way, everyone could test the new changes to specific heroes, as well as the new interactions that they have with the unchanged ones.

12

this doesn’t make sense to me. like if people specifically go into experimental to test changes for 1 particular hero, they’d still end up leaving if they don’t get the pick they wanted irrespective of whether there are many other heroes that have also been changed or not.

e.g. if they changed like sym, bastion, torb and genji at the same time in 1 expC, I highly doubt people that go in for expC to test out genji changes and will necessarily go “oh they changed these other heroes too, I’ll play them instead if I didn’t get to pick genji” instead of leaving if they’re the type of people that’d leave when not getting their desired pick if only said pick was changed in an expC.