What's new

Which do you prefer? Buffing or Nerfing?

Would you rather they buff or nerf characters?


  • Total voters
    70

Nickolaidas

Agent of Chaosrealm
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.
I don't. I mean, not everyone plays Sonya like a combo beast and making her combos weaker would make her a poor choice for non-expert players. Like me.
 

NeonGroovyGator

Vampire mommy simp
Obviously tier shifts happen with every single patch, but the intention of balance patches is to make the tier variance smaller, and they nailed it in MK11 imo. We can't build tier lists post-patch yet, but we can say pretty confidently that the gap between the top and the bottom tiers has lessened.
I answered no preference because you need both to have a healthy game.
 

GLoRToR

Positive Poster!
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?
You forgot one option: Both

Extreme example to explain what I mean: If a character has a fullscreen safe advancing launcher that leads to 50% damage for some odd reason, that character will either be nerfed or banned if the rest of the cast does not contest this in a healthy capacity and everyone else has "honest" moves.

If something is so powerful that it has simply no place in the game because every other character does not work that way, then a nerf is warranted.

Otherwise, buffs are better because then nobody feels like they got the short end of the stick.
 

Juggs

Lose without excuses
Lead Moderator
Premium Supporter
Yes, you can do both... obviously. The question is which do you prefer. Meaning buff more often than you nerf, or nerf more often than you buff. I think the there’s a very clear right answer.
 
I am way past my dreams of big top 8s and being great. I just wanna see insane, dumb, meme worthy shit and have a good time while playing so I am all for buffs. If it's not fundamentally stopping the game from being played, fuck it...leave it in and give other characters similar dumb crap
 

Daemantalo

Not Good Enough
Buff characters who are grossly unrepresented, like NRS did this patch. I’m an advocate for nerfs if they do smaller ones at a time and they don’t take a sledgehammer to characters, which as far as I know, they didn’t. Still see Errons, Geras, Sonyas, etc, but I’m also seeing Kollectors, DB Kanos, and D’Vorahs in the pool. This is GOOD for the game.