Perfect response. (Commented because a heart wouldn’t suffice)
One thing that I will note, however, is that while I also feel that the best solution is for devs to go through the heroes and re-calibrate how much they value each hero/skill in their calculations, there is a small issue with that. Aside from the time required, there is the fact that the game is ‘living’. This is an issue because, as I see it, the relative value of a given hero changes with the addition of each new hero. Typically this is minor if anything, but a good example of how the impact can be significant is Anvil The introduction of Anvil means there is now a strong counter to heroes who use a shield skill. Because there is now an additional hero to counter shield-heroes (and a very strong counter at that) that didn’t exist before, shield-based heroes are now less of an asset, than they were pre-Anvil. To take it a step further, let’s say, next month, a shield hero is added, Anvil’s ‘real’ value will go up since he is a strong counter to that type of hero. And so it continues.
If we agree that additional heroes change the relative value of existing heroes, there are two solutions that I can think of to ensure hero values stay calibrated after a hypothetical re-examination:
Option 1 (manual): schedule a manual recalibration (ie fine-tooth-combing the value of each skill) every X heroes or Y months.
Option 2 (automated) radical proposal but, bear with me, hero values are determined via a market-based solution (not market as in ‘store’ but market as in ‘stock market’). At it’s core, the solution would revolve around the belief that people use strong heroes and ignore weak heroes. If a given hero is used by a lot of players, that signifies that the hero is valued by the player base and, as such, the power value ascribed to that hero increases. If a given hero is never used by players, then its value is seen as low and, you guessed it, the nominal power value of that hero goes down.
Now, I will poke a few holes in this. (1) if this is a truly ‘live’ market, it’s confusing to users why the ‘value’ of their hero is fluctuating when they aren’t doing anything. To that, I say, don’t change values dynamically, do it once a month based on the previous two weeks of use in non-faction events (2) because upgrading a hero isn’t free (in the $, items, or frags sense) it’s easier said than done to just switch to less utilized heroes–they have probably been neglected and can’t be used off the bat. Fair, I don’t have a good response to that. (3) it’s too much work to implement. I actually don’t think it is that outsized of a project given it’s either this or endless recalibration but I also acknowledge that it’s a fair point.
So, now that this post has turned into a proposal of sorts, what other issues exist and/or how could part of this proposal be incorporated into an alternative solution?