New balance patch with each new DLC character?

[Zorai]

So is it going to be a routine thing now where we will get a new balance patch with each new character?

This looks like the route Nintendo is taking with all the support they're giving the competitive side of this game (with sponsorships for tournaments and responding to the 'nerf diddy' campaign).

If so, maybe the community should try to reach out to them and let them know exactly what we think of the game's meta as it continues to develop.

 

[LancerStaff]

Looks like it, although this one was fairly light as far as changes go. Only two or three characters had any significant ones.

 

[Raijinken]

To be fair, as the balance process continues, we'll only need slight changes each time to see improvements.

Anyways, I think that'll largely be determined by the frequency of new characters. Balance patches so far have been on Nov 17th and April 15th (not counting 1.053D, which invalidated replays and local, but didn't change balance in any way we discovered), which was a five month period. It's too short between now and Lucas's planned release, but if the Roy/Ryu information is accurate, we could see more later (five months would indicate mid-September, a kind of anniversary patch as far as Japan is concerned).

While I wouldn't mind more frequent patching, I don't really expect it with each DLC character. But we'll have to see.

 

[SalsaSavant]

We'll see.

But I think it's more that, if they determine they need to rebalance, they will with new characters, because they want to do everything at once.

I think patching when Lucas comes out will be too soon though, unless there's some major, Meta Knight level issue.

 

[Zorai]

Frequent patches would be amazing in my opinion.

I think this patch that just rolled out is only the tip of the iceberg. Nintendo is testing the waters, trying to see if tourney results will change when high tiers are made more balanced. They will definitely be looking closely at EVO.

I support what they're doing. I'm not sure if the balance changes are made on Japanese opinion alone, but either way I really hope Nintendo isn't afraid to make more drastic changes in future patches. It would be nice if they made every single character in the game viable.

If anyone remembers vanilla SF4, it was nothing like the SF4 we have today.

 

[mario123007]

Personally, I hope future will just be glitch fixing rather than character balancing all the time. If they will release patch for every new DLC character.

 

[Fluorescent]

I feel like having a balance patch every time a DLC character comes up provides us with some balance to the game every few months which in my terms, is great!

All in all I feel like though it may take some time to find a reasonable meta for the game if they kept balancing things often. Though, as I may be one not to concern myself with the meta too much, just a thought I made up.

 

[GspotJackson]

Honestly I feel like the game is now balanced pretty well. I've seen a multitude of characters place high in tourney.

Now granted there will always be characters that have an advantage over others, but as of now I see skill as the reining determinate in who is better.

 

[Purin a.k.a. José]

I hope so! Those patches need to be quite constant. We never know if the balance is close between everybody, so everybody need adjustments. It's amusing how fair things are getting with Smash 4.

 

[Romans]

I could see this being really healthy, but I get the feeling that Nintendo won't consistently patch and if they do it will be in areas that are not ideal.
But at least they realized the Diddy problems and fixed those, but I still think luigi, sheik, zero suit, and rosaluma needed a little leveling. At least they didn't nerf greninja though.
What I think would really balance things out is add slightly more hitstun to some of the slower (and thus inevitably lower tier) characters in order to make them more viable.

 

[ForteX]

I could see this being really healthy, but I get the feeling that Nintendo won't consistently patch and if they do it will be in areas that are not ideal.

The character poll, to me suggests that Nintendo is all about supporting this game for the long run. For the first time ever, Nintendo jumped onto supporting the competitive Smash scene because they finally realize just how big it is, and I think when they look at the love Melee's had, they recognize that they can make Smash 4 last effectively forever because the bottom line is we buy new Smash games for new characters.

The thing about supporting a game for the long run like this is that while it's fresh and new to the casual audience, eventually the average joe is gonna call it quits on buying character DLC. This isn't like Mario Kart 8's DLC, it's just one character - the casual consumption of Smash is probably going to end the second Splatoon comes out. However, those of us who are competitive about Smash are going to buy those characters as a necessity. For instance, if they were to add Krystal (God forbid), I wouldn't necessarily be too hyped or even want her, but how would I keep any of my friends who might like her interested in coming over to my place for friendlies? I most certainly wouldn't be able to bring my Wii U along to help a local tournament out. So, point in case, Nintendo sells me a character I would have rather never existed because I have to stay current.

This is how TCGs remain relevant and popular - ban lists, new sets, evolving metas. The difference here, that I feel puts the power in our hands, is that Nintendo will basically have to cater balance patches to our whims past a certain point, or else just drop support for the game. TCGs will always have a kid buy a booster pack and play with their friends because they watch the television show, or that obsessive collector guy will always buy a billion packs. If Nintendo screws over the people who buy DLC characters though, they'll eventually kill the market and we'll either never update our Smash 4 again, or the worst case scenario happens and everyone just goes back to Melee. Again.

I think they're on the right path right now. I don't see a future where they're going to make balance patches that aren't "ideal". Is it gonna suck when your favorite character takes a hit? Yeah. Is it bad in comparison to letting the metagame stagnate? No.

 

[Cool]

There will be patches as long as there are complaints. We haven't seen otherwise, or at least yet.

 

[Pyr]

They can balance the game any time they want. Just don't let the average player dictate ANY of the changes. Let results do that. I can handle a Sheik-level Bair change on most of the characters as far as nerfs go. That seems to be Nintendo's preferred level in non-Diddy level cases.

 

[Big-Cat]

Frequent patches in a fighting game are NOT a good thing. This isn't like an MMO where RNG is a factor and that requires a lot of tweaking. You have to give fighting games AT LEAST six months before you even consider balance changes.

Look at Capcom. The most frequent they've done it with SF4 is yearly. Speaking of which, adding characters to the game does not mean there will be a rebalancing. All the console characters added for Vanilla SF4 came in with no changes to the arcade cast. Likewise, when Arcsys added Makoto and Valkenheyn to BBCS and Elphelt and Leo to Xrd, there were no balance changes to the roster at the time of their release.

Mewtwo coming with a patch is more of an anomaly in comparison. If we do see another balance patch with Lucas, expect the changes to be very minimal. From what we've seen of the Mewtwo Patch, a lot of characters saw no changes. Expect even more to not change if there's a Lucas Patch.