Which do you prefer? Buffing or Nerfing?

[Juggs]

So the patch has finally dropped for MK11. I think they did a good job and I’m fine with how they handled it. But, with that said, I much rather they buff than nerf. Or rather, buff far more characters than they nerf.

When you nerf good characters and the good stuff they have, it doesn’t have the desired effect, imo. The purpose is to make them more balanced and fair compared to the rest of the cast. But what it actually does is make people just not want to use those characters anymore. So now you’re back where you were to begin with. Only difference is there’s new top characters and all you accomplished was tier shifting.

When you buff the weaker characters, the characters that were already good will still see a lot of play. It’s just now, the weaker ones beforehand are now also being played and can now actually compete. This accomplishes balance the same way but it’s better because as I said, more characters across the board will be played.

I feel nerfs are designated for moves that are way too good and dominate the meta. It seems like instead of taking this approach, they nerf several things about a top tier character so they just aren’t top tier anymore. To clarify, not saying the characters that got nerfed are now no longer good or even top tier. I think most of them are still fine actually. My point is they will inevitably see less play because they aren’t as good and some of them are a lot different now.

So long story short, I prefer buffing over nerfing. I think they did an awesome job with the balance patch regardless. What are y’all thoughts?

 

[Vslayer]

I think minor nerfs and buffs are both good. Like what they did to Frost or D'vorah and Kano's Dirtbag were needed. It practically adds more options without adding new characters.

 

[xenogorgeous]

No major preference .... what is fair, is fair !

Overpowered chars : nerf them !
Underpowered ones : buff them !

only when developers do the contrary , that you know the real shit will come up with pain, hehe

 

[Kiss the Missile]

I don't think the nerfs were too severe. I was fully expecting Erron to get the Deadshot treatment.

 

[JSF]

Buffing. if prepatch Geras and Sonya can exist and be seen as ok to a certain extent then buffing the shit out of 10 other characters to compete with them wouldnt ruin the game

 

[Cobainevermind87]

You need both. For simplicity's sake we'll say you only have three characters in the game. One is a 10. One is a 5. One is a 1. It's much more efficient to make smaller changes to the 10 and the 1 and bring them closer in line to being a 5 than it is to buff the 1 and the 5 to a 10.

I know I over simplified it but I was just making an example. I couldn't imagine trying to buff every weaker character in the game to Geras' level.

 

[Vhozite]

I voted no preference. Everyone always talks about "buffs the low tiers" instead of nerfing high tiers, and i don't necessarily disagree. However I feel like it's an unrealistic request.

It's a more difficult approach and devs are either less likely to do it and if they do there is a bigger chance to fuck it up. If out of 5 characters we have 1 out performing the other 4 by a large margin, it easier to bring the 1 outlier in line that to tweak the other 4.

Not saying it's the right way to do it but it is something to consider.

 

[stokedAF]

I would have been happy if they kept top tiers the same and buffed everyone else. I don’t like the idea of nerfing because somebody gets screwed and that no fun. Unless it’s scorpion because that’s hilarious. I think you can buff in a way that everyone wins.

 

[Dreamcatcher]

Buff, no question.

The new Cassie amp glow kick and Jacqui's clinch recovery times make me want to throw up...

 

[Marlow]

I'd prioritize buffs over nerfs, but I think depending on the situation both can be necessary.

 

[C-Sword]

They should've just reduced Sonya's damage, not being able to extend her combos with amplified Air Control pisses me off

 

[kcd117]

Both are necessary, but in doubt, I'd much rather play a game full of Kanos than a game full of Errons.

 

[Johnny Based Cage]

I like when they try to nerf but end up buffing lol #GerasBoiz

 

[MrArcher15]

Need a both option

 

[Kanalratte]

nerfing, we don't need all characters on steroids. i'm fine with all characters being kano level. that way, less cheese and braindead characters. but thats my personal opinion.

 

[SaltShaker]

Both are needed to achieve maximum balance, but I prefer nerfing. What would be more fun? A game full of 25 launch versions of Geras, Erron, Jacqui, Sonya, and Scorpion? Or a game full of 25 launch versions of Kotal, Kano, D'Vorah, Shao, and Kollector?

If you had to play one of these two games, the answer is obvious for me.

 

[Arqwart]

No preference as it's completely subjective to the situation. A good middle ground should be established prior to either happening to dictate where the developers want the game to be. After that goal is established, buffs/nerfs come according to whichever is needed.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

There isn’t a buffing vs. nerfing competition. You nerf when things are ridiculous enough to make them oppressive or too one-note to be interesting. You buff when characters need help to be able to compete with the majority of the cast.

Balancing just requires doing to each character what they need in order to be reasonably good, but not oppressive. It’s definitely on a case-by-case basis, according to the meta.

‘Tier shifting’ is a buzzword someone invented that is actually meaningless. Every patch will adjust character tiers. It’s just how balancing goes. It’s hard to predict the effects of every single change of an entire patch with complete certainty.

 

[One Inch Punch]

i would say nerf, cause some stuff is spammable and shouldnt.

 

[MKF30]

Depends, some characters need nerds others need buffs.

 

[NRF CharlieMurphy]

I think once again NRS loves to make no sense.

The poke changes are all good
the jailing is now good.

But they still have bad female hitboxes.

characters still whiff randomly on mids
KBs are still WILDY stupid for requirements.

FBs still recharge.

We still have projectiles with no visual cues

We still have character with "buff" moves that are just useless as all piss.

We still can't use all the moves alloted to our characters.

The character specific stuff is just whatever, when these other things should take priority.

They clearly do not.

But free SZ skin!

 

[LawAbidingCitizen]

It depends on the characters tools, if something is truly broken and destroying the meta I'm all for minor nerfs to remove the broke shit.
But if the game is playing as intended but characters are just high tier then I feel buffs are the best corset of action to the lowers.
To me characters felt limited in MK11 from the start so I'm not all for taking away tools from any character unless its actually broken. Its more fun to have more options with characters than less and when characters are overnerfed they become incomplete/stale.
For example :
I am not a fan of Sonya but I disliked her losing her combo extender which removed depth from the character. I'd rather she got a damage nerf by scaling than removing the comboabilty paths.

Its even worse when we put time and effort into a

 

[ColdBoreMK23]

Buff

 

[Tony at Home]

"What do you prefer, a hammer or screw driver?" Depends on what the problem I'm trying to solve is.

 

[Nickolaidas]

I want balance, above all. Whether it is achieved by nerfing or buffing doesn't really matter, unless by nerfing we mean 'everyone becomes weak and slow as f*&k'.