Why Has Nothing Changed?

[Korlie]

1 minute ago, Mr.Mulk said:

I get the "dozen other columns" argument but it's not supplementing the fact that this column is completely valid, but could be fixed by Klei and thereby remove some of the shade they can throw. Sure its accuracy doesn't justify them being jerks, but just saying "well there's always gonna be jerks so we can't do anything about it so we shouldn't do anything ever" seems like letting them win, to be honest.

Changing the game to remove inefficient things just to satisfy them isn't doing something about it, it's giving in. Doing something about it is standing up to them when they try to talk down on your playstyle. There's nothing valid about criticizing a person for playing a less efficient character, games aren't about min-maxing they're about fun. The character people choose to play as is their own business unless that character is explicitly damaging the group; which no characters in this game do.

They aren't getting upset that your character is hindering the group, they're getting upset that your character isn't supermeta that makes the game easy mode. Thus, they will continue to look down at you for playing Willow or Woodie even if they get buffed, because even with buffs Willow and Woodie are still not meta and thus do not contribute as much to the game as any of the meta characters.

[Mr.Mulk]

Just now, Korlie said:

Changing the game to remove inefficient things just to satisfy them isn't doing something about it, it's giving in. Doing something about it is standing up to them when they try to talk down on your playstyle. There's nothing valid about criticizing a person for playing a less efficient character, games aren't about min-maxing they're about fun. The character people choose to play as is their own business unless that character is explicitly damaging the group; which no characters in this game do.

They aren't getting upset that your character is hindering the group, they're getting upset that your character isn't supermeta that makes the game easy mode. Thus, they will continue to look down at you for playing Willow or Woodie even if they get buffed, because even with buffs Willow and Woodie are still not meta and thus do not contribute as much to the game as any of the meta characters.

I genuinely understand what you're saying, but it still does not seem to be an argument against buffing the characters. I don't understand how buffing them is "giving in" to what the elitists want, often they've made it clear they want and are happy Willow and Woodie are bad, it justifies their behavior in their eyes, helping allow for them to continue being prejudiced. I've stated this before, I don't view buffing as a panacea, I'm not naiive, however it would certainly help overall.

Everything else you're saying I'm fine with, I just don't see how leaving Willow and Woodie in their current nerfed states would be beneficial to the community at all. It seems like the opposite of what could be done to help quell some of the toxicity.

[DarkXero]

4 hours ago, Mr.Mulk said:

What I'm suggesting is that the elitists do have a point (whether you think it's petty is up to you) BUT they do have a valid argument, whether we like it or not. However, just because you are right about something does not give you the ethical allowance to insult other people for their decision to play a character who is inherently less efficient. Yet they do, and what I'm suggesting is that if Klei removes that valid argument in its entirely (via buffing the characters in question), it would be a good thing for the community.

"Pointy Richard is a meanie because Wolfgang is OP. Pointy Richard has a point. I agree with Pointy Richard. We should nerf Wolfgang / buff everything else. That way Pointy Richard doesn't have a reason to be a meanie anymore."

No, I understood the thread correctly.

My problem here is two-fold.

The first part, the obvious one, is that no matter what you do in terms of balance, Pointy Richard will be Pointy Richard. You will make farms with dragonfruits and pumpkins and they will crucify you. You will take cover from hounds among beefalo and they will be horrified you allowed the beefalos to continue existing.

Your argument that rebalancing "will help with toxicity" is false. You can empirically check it with absolutely all games on existence. The meta changes, the elitists adapt. If you played Chess (le re balanced game xd) with Pointy Richard and started moving a pawn on a corner he would scoff at you for not using Le-Avantgarde-SwitchAndHit starting movement. Remember, all animals are equal, but some of them are more equal than the others. It happens everywhere. League of Legends buffs and nerfs some champions and now you can pick 2 more champions without getting annihilated in competitive chat! Ah, but you have to go to the bottom of the map. Ah, and you need one of these two builds. Ah, and you need to follow the exact strategy -TSM-Nooblord did on the tourney. Else, we kill you. Ah, and before I forget, if I suck, then it's your fault too.

 

Now, the second part we were all waiting for.

4 hours ago, Scaltra said:

just because a forest is onfire doesn't mean its not a reason to bother throwing a bucket of water on it.

Your forest fire.

4 hours ago, Mr.Mulk said:

they do have a valid argument

The valid argument.

 

The forums discussed a trillion times the balance of the characters. It boils down to this situation.

We have character A and character B.

A and B have different playstyles.

B is more powerful than A.

We have two factions of players here:

1) The efficientists: "I want to play A and B. Because B is more powerful than A, I don't have fun playing A."

2) The differentists: "I want to play A and B. Because A is different than B, I have fun playing both A and B."

These two factions collide.

The efficientists want to buff A or nerf B until balance is achieved.

The differentists don't want to buff A or nerf B.

The efficientists think that only through perfect efficiency you may have fun.

The differentists think balance will equalize the characters and they won't be different anymore

The factions can only agree to disagree.

The efficientists don't know what perfect balance means for Don't Starve.

The differentists don't know if characters will be different under perfect balance.

The truth is, we don't know which faction is right or wrong.

We had tons of threads discussing this. And they just keep coming, just look at this one.

We can only provide feedback about how we feel, and let Klei do the rest.

 

What I am questioning is if the forest is actually on fire, and if the valid argument is actually an argument and not something subjective. You're all welcome to post suggestions and feedback about which faction you belong to, we are all here to have fun. The truth is, we wouldn't be here if we didn't have any fun at all playing the game. Also, refrain from slapping the whole community with changes arguing "omg just look at the elitism and the griefing". That's on the same level of "why somebody won't think of the children?". Of course, you can still argue in favor of the efficientists: just say that you have fun with min-maxing strategies.

I leave this as a final note:

 

[Loopy Ouroboros]

Concerning the argument that Willow should remain without her signature fire immunity, I say that it has needlessly limited the character for legitimate players who would have used that ability in a meaningful, non-malicious, and even genuinely helpful way for the whole team. Why should Willow even have fire resistance at all, if fire immunity is far too dangerous for a griefer to take advantage of?

 

At least there is hope for her further down the road. I'm eager to see what Klei might have in mind for her in the wake of event #2. Until then, she'll remain as my beloved main, bottom of the meta chart or not.

[Scaltra]

30 minutes ago, DarkXero said:

"Pointy Richard is a meanie because Wolfgang is OP. Pointy Richard has a point. I agree with Pointy Richard. We should nerf Wolfgang / buff everything else. That way Pointy Richard doesn't have a reason to be a meanie anymore."

No, I understood the thread correctly.

My problem here is two-fold.

The first part, the obvious one, is that no matter what you do in terms of balance, Pointy Richard will be Pointy Richard. You will make farms with dragonfruits and pumpkins and they will crucify you. You will take cover from hounds among beefalo and they will be horrified you allowed the beefalos to continue existing.

Your argument that rebalancing "will help with toxicity" is false. You can empirically check it with absolutely all games on existence. The meta changes, the elitists adapt. If you played Chess (le re balanced game xd) with Pointy Richard and started moving a pawn on a corner he would scoff at you for not using Le-Avantgarde-SwitchAndHit starting movement. Remember, all animals are equal, but some of them are more equal than the others. It happens everywhere. League of Legends buffs and nerfs some champions and now you can pick 2 more champions without getting annihilated in competitive chat! Ah, but you have to go to the bottom of the map. Ah, and you need one of these two builds. Ah, and you need to follow the exact strategy -TSM-Nooblord did on the tourney. Else, we kill you. Ah, and before I forget, if I suck, then it's your fault too.

 

Now, the second part we were all waiting for.

Your forest fire.

The valid argument.

 

The forums discussed a trillion times the balance of the characters. It boils down to this situation.

We have character A and character B.

A and B have different playstyles.

B is more powerful than A.

We have two factions of players here:

1) The efficientists: "I want to play A and B. Because B is more powerful than A, I don't have fun playing A."

2) The differentists: "I want to play A and B. Because A is different than B, I have fun playing both A and B."

These two factions collide.

The efficientists want to buff A or nerf B until balance is achieved.

The differentists don't want to buff A or nerf B.

The efficientists think that only through perfect efficiency you may have fun.

The differentists think balance will equalize the characters and they won't be different anymore

The factions can only agree to disagree.

The efficientists don't know what perfect balance means for Don't Starve.

The differentists don't know if characters will be different under perfect balance.

The truth is, we don't know which faction is right or wrong.

We had tons of threads discussing this. And they just keep coming, just look at this one.

We can only provide feedback about how we feel, and let Klei do the rest.

 

What I am questioning is if the forest is actually on fire, and if the valid argument is actually an argument and not something subjective. You're all welcome to post suggestions and feedback about which faction you belong to, we are all here to have fun. The truth is, we wouldn't be here if we didn't have any fun at all playing the game. Also, refrain from slapping the whole community with changes arguing "omg just look at the elitism and the griefing". That's on the same level of "why somebody won't think of the children?". Of course, you can still argue in favor of the efficientists: just say that you have fun with min-maxing strategies.

I leave this as a final note:

 

Throwing everyone in to one group or another is very...restrictive and I just think that is a very bad way to think of people even in a community, I don't care about the toxicity like Mr. Mult does, in fact I don't really care because I completely agree that it won't ever go away but I get his point in what he said regarding it. I just want to have fun, I have no problem playing a character like Wes and having fun he is a challenge.

He is interesting and unique. I think willow is currently boring and uninteresting same with winnona, I can't say much for Woodie he seems really interesting honestly but if others think he needs adjustment I'm for it because I trust the oppinons of people with more experience. 

This has nothing to do with being an elitist or a "differentist" I don't know exactly how Mr feels but I know he just wants his character to be fun again and I want it to be fun again too. I've always been a person who likes playing the whole roaster of characters even if they aren't considered great. 

I don't think willow is interesting even by reading her intro card and if someone who mostly plays that one character thinks they should be reverted, damn well so do I. Willow is boring subjectively and doesn't compare to the other characters objectively. You are saying this like willow is an interesting character that is fun to play and the only reason i wouldn't have fun with her because I'm too focused on winning and either everyone feels that way or doesn't care and every character is fun because they are "differentists"

[Mr.Mulk]

48 minutes ago, DarkXero said:

"Pointy Richard is a meanie because Wolfgang is OP. Pointy Richard has a point. I agree with Pointy Richard. We should nerf Wolfgang / buff everything else. That way Pointy Richard doesn't have a reason to be a meanie anymore."

Yes, people are always going to be jerks in the community, but I still don't see how this is a valid argument against buffing. I'm going to suspend myself for a second and think even if it doesn't help the community it still isn't a justification for why they should stay nerfed.

The argument "there's always gonna be jerks so let's not do anything to prevent them" seems pretty darn pessimistic, and while it may hold an important amount of truth to it I think it's silly to suggest this is fine justification for inaction on Klei's part. Personally I disagree with you that it'd not cut down toxicity in the community, at least on the overarching public level, (perhaps not as effective on the individual level). The issue is, we won't really know until something is done in earnest, whatever that may be.

Addendum: Since this appears to be a fairly contentious viewpoint I'm going to take some time to re-examine it and re-consider my stance. Several people have made excellent arguments against it, and while I don't think my counters fall flat, perhaps I'm making a mountain out of a molehill in this situation. Even if it does or doesn't positively affect the community in terms of hate and prejudice, this doesn't invalidate the argument, but perhaps does shed light on some details I hadn't previously considered. I'll post an update if seemingly desired later.

27 minutes ago, Scaltra said:

This has nothing to do with being an elitist or a "differentist" I don't know exactly how Mr feels but I know he just wants his character to be fun again and I want it to be fun again too. I've always been a person who liles playing the whole roaster of characters even if they aren't considered great. 

I don't think it could be said much better to be honest. At the end of the day I just want the game to feel more justifiably balanced and fun, that is all.

[Scaltra]

7 minutes ago, Mr.Mulk said:

I don't think I could have said it better myself

I don't know you probably could have said "like" properly haha

[Mario384]

Honestly, I feel everyone can agree on the idea that all the characters should be fun in their own respective ways, and then balance should be second priority.  I feel "true balance" can be worried about after all the characters get their individual issues fixed of being "not fun" to a large majority of active and retained playerbase.  Once again, this really falls on Willow, Woodie, and Winona, with the Shadow Duelist being a part of Maxwell who otherwise is a great harvester.  To be frank, I don't care if Maxwell is better than Woodie at chopping trees, as Woodie in DS really wasn't all that efficient at chopping trees as a human.  After all, he didn't eat any of his produce, but he did turn into a beaver with less effort.  To me, the beaver was always Woodie's big thing, and what drew in a lot of people to him was the Werebeaver, is very likely the most unique perk in the game, at least by my standards.  Now, they made the Werebeaver bad, and all that's left is the lumberjack side, which is fine and all, but the complete package is ruined because the werebeaver is so brutally punishing to players who'd like to use it for more than 2~ or less minutes, and no rewards are to be reaped. 

Willow's main thing was her fire immunity, which gave her access to a lot of strats which nobody else could utilize, but now it's gone, so what made her really special was just removed entirely, very likely due to "griefing concerns".  Funny thing is, anyone can make a torch, and even worse, anyone can use the Werebeaver to smash your base without a hammer (and then die to 3+ terrorbeaks you couldn't see at dusk because it's in a dark forest) so the argument doesn't really stand anymore.  Winona was never good, rather, just squandered potential of what could've been a really cool and new character.  Duelist is just useless, but Maxwell himself is pretty alright overall, so it's not so bad, whereas Werebeaver nerf ruined half of Woodie's package, the Duelist is only about 20% of Maxwell's, so it doesn't hamper him as much.

Overall, Klei needs to do what they do best and look at the fun factor here, and tune these characters up.  They just need some love and I don't think anyone will complain if Klei gives them a little sugar for all they've been through.

[Scaltra]

I wish I could like twice

[DarkXero]

22 minutes ago, Scaltra said:

I've always been a person who likes playing the whole roaster of characters even if they aren't considered great.

You are one of my differentists.

They just have fun with what they have instead of staying bitter the other characters don't have enough DPS.

You like different experiences. Some of them may not be good (like Willow, and Woodie, and even I agree).

You find Wes unique and challenging.

Other people think he's dumb, because why play him when you can win even more with Wolfgang?

I agree labeling people is restrictive (since Pointy Richard may play Wes to showoff how good he is at min-maxing), but I was just trying to sum up like a hundred pages of different topics where people complain about characters and balance. This is what came up, and what will come up again in the future.

21 minutes ago, Mr.Mulk said:

Yes, people are always going to be jerks in the community, but I still don't see how this is a valid argument against buffing.

It's not my valid argument against buffing.

It's to show that YOUR argument FOR buffing (or nerfing) is lacking, taking toxicity as a factor.

21 minutes ago, Mr.Mulk said:

The argument "there's always gonna be jerks so let's not do anything to prevent them" seems pretty darn pessimistic, and while it may hold an important amount of truth to it I think it's silly to suggest this is fine justification for inaction on Klei's part. Personally I disagree with you that it'd not cut down toxicity in the community, at least on the overarching public level, (perhaps not as effective on the individual level). The issue is, we won't really know until something is done in earnest, whatever that may be.

I never said to not do anything. I already agreed to push changes to Willow, Woodie, and Winona.

The only relevant part of the thread is remembering that people have asked for changes, and anything has yet to come.

Everything else of "elitism", "griefing" and "protecting the meta" is unsubstantiated, absolutely out of place, and turns your rebalance request into absolute nonsense.

Right here where you say "it's silly to suggest this is fine justification for inaction on Klei's part", I don't know what action should have come from Klei. Rebalancing characters? Anti-griefing measures (or toning down elitism)? You mixed them up.

Also, as a matter of fact, we do know what's very likely going to happen, and you said it yourself:

On 3/18/2018 at 6:57 PM, Mr.Mulk said:

The short of it is that griefing didn't justify the initial nerfing, and still doesn't justify.

They changed Willow and it didn't work.

 

14 minutes ago, Mario384 said:

Overall, Klei needs to do what they do best and look at the fun factor here, and tune these characters up.  They just need some love and I don't think anyone will complain if Klei gives them a little sugar for all they've been through.

See, we should let this guy here do the talking. Everything else in the thread is absolute bologna.

[Mr.Mulk]

Let's keep it civil please. I haven't called any of your stuff "bologna" or nonsense and I'd expect the same respect back. You didn't account for my Addendum in my last post, I'm considering what you've said in more depth as I think about a lot of differing factors that play into this discussion.

Also to surmise that everything else here posted by anyone but Mario is useless is kinda an overstatement, but to be fair that's your own subjective opinion. I'd hazard it's safe to guess most people don't hold this sentiment, considering the feedback I've received to this point.

@DarkXero

[DarkXero]

3 minutes ago, Mr.Mulk said:

Also to surmise that everything else here posted by anyone but Mario is useless is kinda an overstatement, but to be fair that's your own subjective opinion. I'd hazard it's safe to guess most people don't hold this sentiment, considering the feedback I've received to this point.

Don't worry. It's just banter.

[Toros]

The most interesting part of character balance discussions is usually impeded by needing to convince a surprisingly large group of people that there even is a problem.

It’s not a problem mechanically per se, because every character is fully viable.  Anything you might struggle to do has been done faster by wes.  It’s definitely not a problem with toxicity because even though it really doesn’t matter who you play, if you play on pubs you’re gonna run into jerks.

Do I support nerfs/reworks to the godly three?  Absolutely, and I’ve already written and published mods that do so.

Do I support buffs to Willow/Woodie/Winona (and Wilson)?  Absolutely, because I think they have untapped potential to be a lot more fun than they are currently.  Forge Wilson was a core member of all but the most coordinated groups, and fun to play too.

At the end of the day, fun to play is what matters most and this silly set of buzzword “groups” doesn’t really make any sense.

Woodie doesn’t appeal to min/maxers because Max does his job better.  He also doesn’t appeal to people interested in the theme of the character because werebeaver gameplay is kind of bland and unsatisfying.  As a result Woodie is one of the least played characters.

Interestingly, while Wolfgang and Wigfrid have a similar mechanical relationship, Wigfrid is fun and satisfying to play and quite popular.

At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is that the characters are fun to play and tbh there’s not much reason for klei to spend time and resources revisiting old characters.  Newbies don’t know the difference and veterans already bought tons of klei content already.

[Korlie]

9 hours ago, Mr.Mulk said:

I genuinely understand what you're saying, but it still does not seem to be an argument against buffing the characters. I don't understand how buffing them is "giving in" to what the elitists want, often they've made it clear they want and are happy Willow and Woodie are bad, it justifies their behavior in their eyes, helping allow for them to continue being prejudiced. I've stated this before, I don't view buffing as a panacea, I'm not naiive, however it would certainly help overall.

Everything else you're saying I'm fine with, I just don't see how leaving Willow and Woodie in their current nerfed states would be beneficial to the community at all. It seems like the opposite of what could be done to help quell some of the toxicity.

Oh I'm not arguing against them being buffed because it would placate elitists. I'm just saying your main reason for them getting buffed should be because they're underpowered, not because you're sick of elitists looking down at you. You mention it quite a bit and it's just not a solid foundation for trying to call on balance changes.

 

7 hours ago, Toros said:

At the end of the day, the only thing that matters is that the characters are fun to play and tbh there’s not much reason for klei to spend time and resources revisiting old characters.  Newbies don’t know the difference and veterans already bought tons of klei content already.

That is the point though. The fact that Willow and Woodie's combat advantages were taken away significantly reduces how fun they are to play as because combat is the most proactive element of the game, so when a character doesn't have unique combat abilities they are significantly less interesting then characters that do. It's the same with Maxwell, Maxwell's only combat advantage is extremely underpowered which makes him far less fun to play as because his primary benefits are resource gathering and sanity regeneration, which are not exciting gameplay features.

And Winona doesn't even have anything other then "I CAN MAKE A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT VERSION OF SOMETHING ALREADY IN THE GAME" it's like on the day they were going to draw up all the concept design for Winona's gimmicks, everybody in the office was sick and just couldn't be bothered.

[Mr.Mulk]

2 hours ago, Korlie said:

Oh I'm not arguing against them being buffed because it would placate elitists. I'm just saying your main reason for them getting buffed should be because they're underpowered, not because you're sick of elitists looking down at you. You mention it quite a bit and it's just not a solid foundation for trying to call on balance changes.

That's fair, I understand now. I've taken some time to rethink it and I agree, it's not as solid of a foundation as I initially surmised.

[Cpt. KatKit]

The fear of players joining a server just to burn down bases as Willow was a failure imo because of :

1) No one with half a brain is going to build their base close to a portal these days. By then every single character will have access to torches.

2) Players already in-game have a hilarious number of ways and tools to grief new joiners, there was even one on the top of this forum bragging about locking the portal with skeletons and others about surrounding it with spider nests, those aren't going to go fine with a lot of people especially if they aren't good enough to get away alive (and they won't stay for long to force existing players to give them a heart to end the stress from ghosts.

Willow can begin griefing faster than others if she immediately joins new servers and keeps following players around, but by then she'd probably get kicked for being too obvious or any other character gets away with burning a science machine or a bad base and a few materials in chests. Not to mention the caves, worm holes and ruins all make it harder for someone to just join to burn a base.

I think the problem is some characters having upsides with way too many downsides that get in the way while others have stronger non-siutational abilities as well as no meaningful downsides to make up for them. (Like wolfgang's extra 10% stress when he is going to be ending fights faster than everyone else and the number is so low it won't make a difference from any other character fixing it -looks at webber who is a nightmare fuel magnet in distriss)

[Korlie]

35 minutes ago, Cpt. KatKit said:

1) No one with half a brain is going to build their base close to a portal these days. By then every single character will have access to torches.

I've done it and seen it done multiple times now and never got griefed. But with a spawn base, any player can join in any season and have a decent chance of surviving.

Like really, if a griefer joins your game they're going to find your base and burn it. Unless you put it in a really obscure place, it's going to happen since that's why they show up is to track your base down and destroy it. Far easier if you have a moonlens on your base, which you probably will if you want normal players to actually find it. You aren't actually avoiding much by basing in most other places unless you normally don't use a moonlens and set up in a far off place, otherwise your base will get found regardless.

If not basing in the spawn was an effective way to avoid griefers, griefers wouldn't be nearly as much of a threat to begin with since most people don't base at spawn.

[Cpt. KatKit]

I admit my choice of words was too harsh, but it is still way easier to grief a close base than one in any of the 8 directions you can run to at spawn and call people who survive a few days to your base.

[MondayNight]

Klei could make some charts (in the vein of Forge ones, at least for Klei official pubs) with what characters are/were used the most at torching player-made structures; then we would have hard numbers about said griefing phenomenon (and its prevalence), no more speculation. But it won't happen as Klei doesn't even touch upon the very idea of "griefing" (otherwise trolls like Clouds and their bot accounts would have been long ago banned from game).

[DatShadowJK]

6 hours ago, Cpt. KatKit said:

1) No one with half a brain is going to build their base close to a portal these days. By then every single character will have access to to torches

Oof I remember doing that back in the good ol’ beta days

[EuedeAdodooedoe]

On 18/03/2018 at 10:36 PM, Dreamscape18459 said:

No. Its not a disparage between the characters balance that is causing this toxicity. Its the players them self causing this toxicity. Lieutenant Volx is a pretty friendly DST streamer despite the fact the characters may have massive unbalances compared to others. Even if the characters were more comparable to each other in balance this doesn't prevent the toxicity. Toxic people will still remain toxic and judge others for how they enjoy playing the game regardless of how balanced it is.

There are plenty of friendly people who play DST, Stream the game and produce video content or make mods for the game. There are also plenty of friendly people who willingly admin servers to provide you a better DST experience. I would suggest ignoring toxic players who want you to play the game as dictated by them and surrounding yourself with more friendly individuals who enjoy the game.

Toxicity... I'm sure the level of toxicity will often depend on how much the game encourages a player to be toxic. A professional can easily get annoyed from newbie mistakes when the game gives them no challenge and they have gotten used to building mega bases and reaching 1000 days and ongoing. This will depend from person to person, but the way a game flows is how the player will see the game, unless it is changed enough to make a certain kind of people think differently.

This is probably why a lot of shooters have become increasingly more basic and dulled down, recycling the same content over and over again; the players expect the same kind of content that doesn't challenge the player and so they will continue wanting that, and getting that. In essence, profit breeds repetitiveness, repetitiveness breeds comfort, comfort breeds profit, and it's just a cycle that continues until the repetitiveness becomes a little too repetitive and dull.

On 18/03/2018 at 10:36 PM, Dreamscape18459 said:

That thread you linked has around 10 likes. A quick check of Steamspy says the game has around 348077 unique players in the last two weeks. Do you have another source showing a larger demand for rebalances? Even better one suggesting a legitimate actual majority (174039 players or more) want rebalances to characters? If you don't then it doesn't sound like much demand at all, let alone a majority of players, actually want rebalances to characters.

Here is a link to Steamspy for those curious about stats. https://steamspy.com/app/322330

I could bet you, a lot of those players are either:

* people who don't want to bother with forum and just want to play a game

* people who have just joined the game to try it out

* people who go on forums but rarely post, because they don't think there's any point for one reason or another 

* don't know what a forum is

* didn't think to use a forum

 

On 18/03/2018 at 10:36 PM, Dreamscape18459 said:

Then get involved with one of the many rebalance mod projects undergoing development. Klei does value your feedback but there are plenty of modders who would love your input in their project. If you feel like many mods are poorly made and don't encapsulate a healthy buff why not get involved with one and improve it? Whats stopping you from making one yourself?

Its great that you care about the game and want to help Klei improve it. Mods can do exactly this. Even if it doesn't get added to the game directly it gives Klei information they can use for future development which is extremely valuable.

 

Again its great you care about the game and no disrespect to you but I think the work you put into these posts doesn't accomplish much and that effort spent on these could be spent on more productive things. Its ultimately your decision if you feel its worthwhile to continue these types of posts.

Also if you do make more posts like this you need better math and sources. If you are suggesting a "Majority" of players want rebalances to characters then you really should have legitimate math to back up your claim if you want anyone to take you seriously. I would suggest looking at multiple balance mods for characters (that you think are reasonably well made) and looking at the subscriber count would be a good starting point for your future endeavors. =)

There are a few problems with that though...

* You can't play on any server that isn't modded or doesn't have that mod to play with your character the way you think is reasonable.

* Showing the modding section to people who don't like the way something is balanced encourages Klei not to balance things more and more.

* Makes a lot more content that is complete garbage seem like divine bread sent from heaven itself.

On 19/03/2018 at 1:18 AM, JoeW said:

I don't think you're putting enough thought into how big of a change an entire rebalance on characters is and how much that would affect literally everybody who plays the game, those who want changes and those who don't. Believe it or not, that takes a lot of work, and when most people are fine with it the way it is, it really has to be justifiable work. So it would need to be really cool and for a good reason.

Here's a suggestion:

* Check what people seem to suggest the most

* Add what you think is most reasonable, based on the feedback

* Put out the changes, see the response, tweak if needed

* If you ever think you should get back to it, say, if people ask for another change, then repeat the above process

Sorry to be passive-aggressive, but the idea of leaving something to be badly balanced just because you "can't find the one thing that will make things best for everybody right now" is ludicrous, that is just not how you can feasibly make good content and keep people satisfied.

Is that really how you go about things? One set of people want this, others don't care, others want this, welp, better not make any changes at all and put it at the bottom of the priority list.

Besides, if a lot of people can see that something isn't done well, but some are fine with it, it doesn't mean that those who are fine with it would rather prefer, amongst everything, to have things left the way they are. They are just okay with it. If Willow was added more fun mechanics that are balanced in their own right, I'm sure people would like it better for most people, if not everybody.

[Mr.Mulk]

@EuedeAdodooedoe

I agree with some of the stuff you said (not all) but a lot of it makes sense.

1 hour ago, EuedeAdodooedoe said:

Here's a suggestion:

* Check what people seem to suggest the most

* Add what you think is most reasonable, based on the feedback

* Put out the changes, see the response, tweak if needed

* If you ever think you should get back to it, say, if people ask for another change, then repeat the above process

Is that really how you go about things? One set of people want this, others don't care, others want this, welp, better not make any changes at all and put it at the bottom of the priority list.

Besides, if a lot of people can see that something isn't done well, but some are fine with it, it doesn't mean that those who are fine with it would rather prefer, amongst everything, to have things left the way they are. They are just okay with it. If Willow was added more fun mechanics that are balanced in their own right, I'm sure people would like it better for most people, if not everybody.

These specific sections are pretty well said, not gonna lie. Unfortunately it seems like we may have to wait until the next event before any changes are even potentially considered, which will likely be removed afterwards unless they just prove to be some sort of panacea. The key is that action is in fact logical, which is why I'm happy to see this post help reinforce awareness on the subject.

[TheKingofSquirrels]

bump

[Rellimarual]

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but when it comes to changing things, it’s good to remember that people who don’t want to see changes don’t tend to create long forum threads explaining why they like things the way they are. The existence of long or even many forum threads complaining about this or that aspect of the game is only evidence that a very motivated minority is dissatisfied. That’s not to say that there may not be a lot of people who share that dissatisfaction, but the amount and length of forum posts proves nothing.

It would be very offputting if DST were subject to frequent significant change every time somebody got vocal enough about a preference on the forums that the devs felt obligated to comply, and then the rest of us were supposed to test it out afterwards and then maybe it would change back or some other change would be made. That’s basically a perpetual beta or even an alpha version of a game that’s supposed to be more or less done. It’s also a system that could be easily trolled.

The changes people want to make to Willow and Woodie seem small to me, but I don’t play those characters so I really don’t know. It comes up enough that the devs have certainly considered it, and they also seem to have reservations about it. I also know there have been a lot of forum posts demanding changes that would definitely make me less interested in playing the game, but not everyone wants to get into arguing about that with people who are like a dog with a bone when it comes to their pet ideas and special preferences. For all I know, there are a lot of players who would strongly object to changing Williow and Woodie, or there would be repercussions that people here haven’t anticipated but that the devs have to take into consideration. 

 

[Mario384]

6 minutes ago, Rellimarual said:

I don’t have a dog in this fight, but when it comes to changing things, it’s good to remember that people who don’t want to see changes don’t tend to create long forum threads explaining why they like things the way they are. The existence of long or even many forum threads complaining about this or that aspect of the game is only evidence that a very motivated minority is dissatisfied. That’s not to say that there may not be a lot of people who share that dissatisfaction, but the amount and length of forum posts proves nothing.

It would be very offputting if DST were subject to frequent significant change every time somebody got vocal enough about a preference on the forums that the devs felt obligated to comply, and then the rest of us were supposed to test it out afterwards and then maybe it would change back or some other change would be made. That’s basically a perpetual beta or even an alpha version of a game that’s supposed to be more or less done. It’s also a system that could be easily trolled.

The changes people want to make to Willow and Woodie seem small to me, but I don’t play those characters so I really don’t know. It comes up enough that the devs have certainly considered it, and they also seem to have reservations about it. I also know there have been a lot of forum posts demanding changes that would definitely make me less interested in playing the game, but not everyone wants to get into arguing about that with people who are like a dog with a bone when it comes to their pet ideas and special preferences. For all I know, there are a lot of players who would strongly object to changing Williow and Woodie, or there would be repercussions that people here haven’t anticipated but that the devs have to take into consideration. 

 

I've played on a lot of different servers, with a lot of different people.  Never met anyone who could at the very least survive Winter say Woodie and Willow are fine as they are.  If Klei needs proof, put a survey linked in-game to let people share their opinions, and then we'll see how people feel.