GBX will work on making comebacks easier after upcoming patch

This is something a dev (gkRants) said when responding to a poster on Reddit concerning surrending:

I will start by saying I will ping the team about surrender times. However, I want to take a moment and try to address this behavior…

In the grand scheme of things, I think players are thinking the game will go on and eventually they’ll lose so why not just end it quickly. There’s a very linear thought process: “bad thing happened” -> We will lose -> Surrender.

What we would like players to think is “Bad thing happened” -> Let’s recover and rebound -> Alternate strategy -> Overcome adversity -> Good thing happened

The problem is our game modes and mechanics aren’t clearly providing players options to “recover and rebound.” And once a player is down, they don’t feel like they can come back. We’re going to be addressing this after our next patch and try to empower some of the alternate strategies. Some potential changes include:

•Better Super Minions to purchase for the shard gatherers
•Being able to counter-pick and make better choices will picking your character
•Allow different characters to thrive instead of just relying on one class to lane clear
•Provide opportunities in modes for a late comeback to occur

So, we want players to have the freedoms to do different things in our game and be rewarded. Right now there’s a strong incentive to do one thing and yield the greatest reward. If we can provide incentives for other areas of gameplay, we’ll score big wins there for all types of players. Edit for formatting.

10 Likes

So is that implying being able to see the enemy team pick, or am I misinterpreting?

2 Likes

Interesting but…

How is that allowing easier comebacks?
I mean… If one team win, they can enforce this better than the losing one. As the wining team usually got the big shards secured while the losing one starve.

What make comebacks possible in the usual MOBAs are:
-Jungle (Maps are too small in BB for this)
-Rosh pit (Big AI with big exp/important item)
-Super amazing item of death but super risky of death (Divine Rapier -Dota)
-Rat strategy (A bit hard to do in BB)
-Late game characters (But we already have those)

Personally i think the lack of Comebacks mechanic is due to the maps being a bit too straight forward and too small.
They are not big enough to allow more strategies (You can’t gank or make a surprise attack), or for devs to put more comeback gimmicks in it (Rosh pit, jungle, etc) or allow more way for the losing team to earn exp and shards if they are losing the lane game.

I might think too much in terms of MOBA, but still…

1 Like

I honestly have no clue for either of these. You could try to ask him for clarification, but remember that these are only ideas and that they are subject to change.

Edit: I would assume the super minions might only be available if you’ve already lost the first sentry. Otherwise, you’re right in that it would serve the winning team better.

@Corrsk

What is a rat strategy?

@Corrsk I agree completely on the small map thing. It’s one lane, as opposed to tradition, as well as being mono objective. In a regular moba, there are three rows of towers. And three deep. I can understand them wanting to do something new, but… They should have a third section. I’ve thought that since release. It’s just middle, fight area one, base.
Also, think jungle is thralls. And rather than buffing the killer, they gave money, an instant wave clear, and a minion all in one. But the fact that they’re easy to steal when pushed? Kinda kills that.
I’d like a minion that spawns and can do a ton of damage, but actually dies before the second sentry, creating a harder defensive line for their minions/solo pusher. Like a rickety ronin bot that falls apart once it hits a safe distance. This would give the defenders slightly easier exp and a chance to not lose in one stupid mistake that let their team get wiped.

2 Likes

It’s when you push the lanes without committing to Team fights.

For a quick example, in Dota, there is some characters who can make illusions/clones.
The idea is to make those clones go through one lane and attack the enemy creeps with them, but the real character stay in a safe area (Or attack somewhere else) So the enemy team got to defend his lane against, basically, nothing.
There is other way to do it, but that’s just one example.

1 Like

They can keep the one lane idea (Or two, in Meltdown), it’s just that the maps being that small don’t allow much time to do something else than either attacking or defending the lane.

Quick example:
In Overgrowth, the point from where the enemy minions are still safe (Under the Sentry), is really close to where yours are still safe (Same thing).
Basically, the “frontline” is really small. So usually, if your wave get killed, the enemy minions will attack your Sentry before another one come in, or way too late.
In Dota, if one wave is killed, there is still enough distance for another wave to come in.

Also, another thing that doesn’t help, is that in BB, you don’t lose when your base is dead, but when your sentry have less health than the other.
So even losing 1% on your sentry is dramatic if you have a hard time controlling the frontline. Because you are actually losing, and peoples know it.
In Dota, you lose when the throne/fountain blow up.

I personally think they should change that, so you only win if you still have more sentries than the other team. Sentries health doesn’t matter.

As for the jungle, yes the Thralls do count towards it, but they are just at an arms length (exaggerating a bit), sometime in direct sight from the lane. So whoever control the lane, control the thralls. And trying to get them is risky if not impossible on some maps as it take only a few seconds to reach the middle camp.
What they should do, is smaller thralls too, who only give exp and shards, so you could farm them if needed, but far away from the lane(s), so you got to choose between jungle or lane.
And hide the Middle Thralls a bit better, so a losing team can sneak on them, and when the winning team realize it, they have to choose between defending the lane, or attacking the thralls.

Same for the big shards. On Overgrowth and Echelon, if you control the middle, you got the big Shard(s) too.
If they were far away from the lane, the losing team could try to take it without taking as much risk. And if the winning team want to get them, they’d have to be away from the lane for quite a long time, allowing the losing one a possible push (Same if the winning team go for thralls camps)

In the end, those would allow peoples to have some more dedicated role when losing, even if there is still only one lane.

As an example, when you are badly losing, most melee characters are utterly useless. Either you don’t know it, and you get killed over and over while trying to get a few minions on the lane, or you just sit behind doing nothing except taking some meagre shards on the ground.
With bigger maps, and minions to farm in the jungle, they could instead go there as the rest of the team keep defending, then come back (Literally) with more shards and exp and try to turn the table.
The winning team, on the other hand, since the map would be bigger, would have more walk to do, therefore it’d be much more risky to farm small creeps without losing the lane.

Metldown is somewhat fine in terms of comeback, as winning mean your minions got to go further to score. But making them slightly bigger would help even more.

4 Likes

I should clarify, I’m fine with one lane. It’s two sentries that really bugs me. I could see the rest working alright. Pendles would get so much exp…

Overgrowth has ass comeback mechanics but the other maps are decent at it.

This is why I run a genny in most of my builds. That way I can still contribute (and farm) when I’m having an off game (and my games can get REALLY off). Doesn’t solve the problem entirely, but it definitely helps.

My single biggest gripe with Overgrowth (less so on Echelon, but still present). The entire map is basically a ‘win more’ scenario. Once you start winning it’s stupid hard for the enemy to get back into it without putting themselves at extreme risk. At the same time you basically get a free epic every couple of minutes. It’s also the reason I can’t really consider Overgrowth to be the most balanced map.

Back on topic
I’m happy GBX is looking into it. While a sad fact, it’s still a fact a lot of people need the painfully obvious ‘if losing push this button for comeback’ (a little hyperbolic, I know, but essentially true). I’m just hoping they don’t make the comeback mechanics too strong, which would undoubtedly result in stalemates and further reinforcement of overvaluing kills for score.

1 Like

I’m sure it’s been said, but I think more shard clusters should be in bases. So that way if one team is steamrolling another and trapping them in their base, they aren’t cutting them off from nearly all the shard clusters. I know starving the other team out from shards is a strategy, but it just makes winning teams win harder. With more shard clusters in bases at least the pinned down team can buy deployables, gear, minions, and get exp from that as they won’t be getting it from killing enemies most likely.

I find comebacks nearly impossible just because winning teams get more shards and exp. Losing teams will quickly become underleveled and lack the gear and shards for deployables. I’m not saying punish winners, and reward losers. But make it easier for losing teams to get shards and exp even when pinned down in their base.

In my opinion.

2 Likes

Gonna preface this by saying that I am not a huge player or fan of PvP. I’ve done it, I’m decent/good at it (I can wreck face pretty reliably with Alani), but it’s not an aspect of the game that I particularly enjoy playing. I do, however, enjoy theorycrafting and discussing strategy for it, since there’s a lot more there than in PvE.

There are two big “sentry cascade” issues that I see in PvP.

The first is that, as soon as your sentry dies, all of the buildables around it die too. In a single instant, you lose everything you might have spent defending your sentry. This is particularly bad because it almost means that you’re also likely to lose control of that area since you no longer have anything nearby to support you, and it’s expensive to bring back.

The second is that, since you likely end up losing your first sentry area and are fighting at your second sentry, your opponents now have control over the center as well as reliable access to “your” resources (shards and thralls) that they were previously denied by having a big angry death tank in the way. When you can throw out triple thralls and an elite minion at once, your opponent is kind of screwed (I’ve done this more than once), you’re not only getting more resources for yourself, you’re denying those same resources to your opponents, which is doubly penalizing.

Now, I fully support the idea that board control should shift when a sentry dies (to use tabletop parlance). That’s part of being on the offensive: denying your opponents options. The problem is that there isn’t really anything to offset the board control. When your sentry goes down, your opponents resources go up and your resources go down (to explain more, each map starts with 1 set of resources, thrall and shard, for each side and a third contested set; when a sentry dies, it shifts to a single contested set near the remaining sentry and 2 for the currently winning side; even if you consider the middle still contests, that’s 2 contested and 1 for the winning side).

In my experience, PvP matches are won as much by resources as they are by anything else. If you can deny your opponents thralls and shards, you’re putting your opponents at a significant disadvantage (especially since resources translate into xp, since buildables and thralls both reward significant amounts of xp). This is why Pendles can be so devastating when played as a saboteur. Since killing a sentry alters the resource game to be so incredibly one-sided, it ends up preventing comebacks.

As mentioned before, if the “comeback” options/tactics are too strong, you’ll just end up stalemating. To me, a comeback isn’t so much about becoming stronger when you’re on the defensive as it is about getting into a position that you’re no longer forced to be on the defensive. I also like the whole “divine rapier” thing from Dota, wherein you’re able to take an incredible risk with a potentially incredibly payout that could very easily lose things for you (which, you know, if you’re on the defensive, you’re already worried about losing anyway).

My idea would be for some option to be enabled something like 2 minutes after your first sentry dies to be able to move your second sentry from it’s back position to the front position. In the front position, it’s much more exposed and easier for opponents to get to but it’s there able to return the board to equilibrium.

This would, of course, be an option. It’s extremely risky, but it brings control of the map back to balance, which is what a comeback should be about: you take a risk you otherwise wouldn’t be willing to take in order to get back to equal footing.

4 Likes

It does go to show the main PVP game that everyone plays, the OP doesn’t specify a game type yet everyone infers Incursion, or just mains that type so that is what they discuss :grinning:.

I do think that some mechanism for easier comebacks is needed, though not sure what that would look like.

*reduced build cost on sentry destruction/Initial appeasement on Meltdown/50% capture points
*Or increased shard generation
*Or both

*I like the idea of Super minions, that don’t die in about 5 secs if someone focuses on them

Well, in my experience, there isn’t much problem with comebacks on Capture or Meltdown. If it’s a reasonably close match, it’s generally going to be close the entire match because Capture and Meltdown are both modes of incremental achievement. When you start winning those, it doesn’t really end up cascading into a victory because it doesn’t put you on the defensive.

Capture is just capture the entire time. The board doesn’t change at all because the entire game is about board control and there’s a minimal number of other elements that tweak that.

In Meltdown, when your team hits 250, it actually becomes harder to score points because your minions have to travel further. It’s also a game of minion escorting, so it’s not particularly difficult to interfere and take out your opponents minions in the additional minute or so they have to spend walking in order to score points.

I think I prefer both of those game modes because they don’t value massive team fights as much. Incursion involves massive team fights that, if you win, allow you to get a good push with minions and thralls/bots that stands a chance of breaking the sentry shield. You can’t really push your minions through and get to their sentry if the opposing players are actually all present and fighting. Capture does this as well, but, once again, incremental; if you can come back and wipe the opposing side, you’re able to make a big contribution to your score by capturing all 3 points. Meltdown is the really good one because you can actually end up getting more points than your opponents even after losing a massive team fight. More than either of the other 2 modes, Meltdown is about working the objective; if your opponents aren’t working the wave clear but you are, they can be kicking your asses in combat and still end up losing (I know this because I’ve been in games where my team is getting all of the kills and we’re still losing, and vice versa).

I still don’t understand the appeal of Incursion all that much. Capture I can see being really meh because it’s a pretty boring mode that’s got very little to do other than fight your opponents; there’s not much going on that isn’t other players. Meltdown I absolutely love because it’s got a great mix of fighting against players combined with fighting against and working with the map itself. It’s pretty much the opposite of a deathmatch because you should be more interested in assistance and interference than in killing (killing helps, but it’s not necessary).

1 Like

A helpful an easy fix that will go a long way is don’t despawn the turrets when the sentry is destroyed.

You know what would be fun? (maybe)

Lets say your sentry got destroyed, but your team has like 3k shards in their pockets. You know that shard collector thing from the Archive mission, when you toss there 600 (on normal) or 1k (on advanced) and it spawns a sentry for the mission?

The exact same thing could be implemented in incursion. There could be an indestructible shard collector only for your team on whose side was it in at the start of the game. You can fill it in like 2k shards and the new sentry spawns in the area where it was destroyed before. That way, you could re-establish the balance of the map and once again have a pretty balanced team fight for the rest of the match.

Well, you get the idea.

Of course they would need (maybe) to increase shard spawn rate or make more shard spots on the map, because you will need much more shards if you want to comeback.

2 Likes

It’s called change the map from one lane.

None of these will really do much. If you can buy it, they can buy it. I don’t see 2 as doing anything but making the games harder. Three is a balance nightmare as even the wave clearer now have to much clear.

As for number four, right now the only thing that provides a come back is: staggered death timers, and the 30’s strat of killing the sentry. They seem to over look the extreme natural control you get over the map for being ahead.

You have to give the behind team space to take some objectives or get picks. Right now they just end up stuck at the sentry twiddling their thumbs as they slowly lose.

To be honest, I’m fine with them NOT making comebacks easier. A comeback should be something that your team earns by fighting hard and playing well, not some mechanic built into the game to hose the winning team out of a position that they earned. I think Meltdown does a good job of changing the goals partway through in order to help the losing team close the gap a bit, but without giving them an advantage that they didn’t earn the way that some games do. It’d be nice if Incursion were changed to not necessarily give the losing team any kind of boost to let them come back, but to also not punish them by letting the winning team not pen them in by building on their territory.

2 Likes

Apparently, they made it so your buildables die so the winning team really feels like they did somethong, and that there’s a power shift. Unfortunately, they were right about what would happen, but not about it being a good thing.

3 Likes