Ludia Forums

There is a Potential Critical Issue with the Balance Poll

I have reason to suspect the poll was not interpreted correctly. Here is what I believe might have happened.

There were plenty of options for changing IndoG2 and Procerath. Let’s just say for this example, there were 5 options. There was also an option for status quo. There is a reason to suspect that status quo might have received a major vote, however the total number of votes for adjustments outnumbers the status quo option, as they are spread out between several various options.

For visual people, this is what I’m referring to.

Status Quo: 48%
Option 1: 10%
Option 2: 15%
Option 3: 15%
Option 4: 7%
Option 5: 5%

As you can see, while the majority of the vote is for stats quo, the totaling of the votes for adjustments are higher than the status quo option.

This is further backed up by the quote from the maxima segment.

“The plethora of options that were given to users means that we did not get a clear cut tendency towards one solution or another.”

This seems highly suspect. Therein lies the issue with the survey, or one of many. If you’re going to present one option to change nothing, have one option to change SOMETHING. Don’t give 10 different options on how to change something. Just do a cut and dry “should we change it?” This prevents confusion in data interpretation. Not to mention, this leaves the freedom for readjusting to the team at Ludia, free from bias of the playerbase.

But, feel free to prove me wrong. Go public with the poll results. This should clear up any confusion.

17 Likes

I hear you, as many others do. The problem is Ludia doesn’t really care. Sorry, but it’s pretty clear they just did whatever they wanted and that the poll was just to try and make people feel good about giving input.

13 Likes

Pretty sure a company that loves its analytics designed the survey intentionally this way.

2 Likes

I didn’t look at it that way, but it makes sense😓.
The mods definitely need to see this.

It seems there should have been separate polls for change vs status quo, and the various changes vs each other.

1 Like

But instead of re-doing it, they can re-analyse the same data. It shouldn’t be too difficult.
All they need to do is add up the votes for changes, and see if it outnumbers the votes for status quo. If it does, they can then put the status quo votes aside and look at which change was most voted.

1 Like

This makes very good sense, but let’s be realistic here, as the others have said, Ludia chose to do what they did regardless of any broken survey.

They knew there was upset regarding Cautious Strike and Procera, along with the previous change to Maxima, so to show that they are “listening” they offered us a survey. That was a smoke screen. They did it just for show and tell, to make it look like they care.

Then, after many couldn’t get it to work, they closed it and decided on what they wanted, which they originally knew what they were going to do before making the survey.

It’s all games to them, they had no intention of making changes.

6 Likes

I totally agree.

Or we could be optimistic and assume they were just being dumb (no offence intended, I’m on your side here Ludia).

Either way, the logical thing to do, regardless of whether or not they deserve the benefit of the doubt is to bring this to their attention asap. It’s in our own interest after all.

Occam’s razor: All things considered equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the right one.

That being said, I think the survey didnt line up with their plans so they just did what they wanted to do all along anyway.

The survey was just a shill to placate the player base for a while. Kind of like how the forum is like a giant stress ball for the vocal minority…works wonders too haha!

2 Likes

@Ludia_Developers If there wasn’t a clear cut choice for a specific change, do the logical thing - Take all the votes for the various changes, add them all together, there you go! Thats the number of votes for change vs status quo!

3 Likes

Exactly. But you said it better.
In fact, if you remove the “and”, you’ve got yourself an easy-to-remember rhyme!

2 Likes

The question is change what exactly. I assume they thought majority voted for no change the rest have no idea what they wanted so why change anything?

Assuming the survey in the example is close to accurate, making a change would be less democratic than just status quo. Kinda like the guy getting 48% of an election winning but getting slammed for not being the one who had the majority.

I wanted Cautious Strike changed but would be annoyed if they changed something silly like removing the strike or the dodge

This is a bit of a tricky situation.
I think having one poll for change vs status quo, then another for option A vs B vs C… vs none of the above would have been the best case scenario.

The solution of seeing whether more voted for change in general and then picking a change accordingly is debatably a bit undemocratic, and regardless Ludia would be in a morally defensible position if they chose to leave things as they are and stick with status quo.

So perhaps this solution isn’t as viable as I first thought. I guess we might as well request a redo, but this time without buggy access, and with better framing. That would be the fairest way out in my opinion.

It could be framed as I described above, with a “none of the above” option to prevent people from voting status quo just because players dislike the options. That way Ludia can use their own discretion to rebalance the moves/creatures if the community can’t decide.

1 Like

How could they think the rest have no idea what they wanted? What they wanted is what they voted for. If the majority of votes overall was for some form of change compared to no change at all, then they should have looked at the votes for change and determine the best compromise between them.

They also said that people’s views on this forum would be taken into consideration as well but they ignored everything that was said here, just like they are now because it goes against their own plans.

1 Like

The thing is, it’s possible people only voted for a change because they wanted that specific one.

For example, a foolproof version would have had a vote system where you list the options according to preference, if you get what I mean. A player might then have had status quo above any other change than the one they voted for.

I guess the point is, treating the poll results in any way other than originally intended—the way the voters were promised it would transpire—wouldn’t be fair, even though it may be logical. We may be undermining the reasons for which the voters cast their votes.

Actually, perhaps that’s the way it could be redone, listing according to preference. Ignore my previous suggestion, lol.

With actions like this, Ludia cries out for her players to go play Pokemon Go or Path of Titans.

2 Likes

I fully agree with the sentiments expressed here.

With so many options it was obvious it would be leaving it as it is as a clear winner.
So many players have it and use it so why would they vote for it to be nerfed?
And those so wanted it nerfed spread their votes across all the choices, thus making it easy for Ludia to blame us for the final decision.
Just like they did when they changed the boosts.

If they had wanted to reach a fair conclusion they would have asked a simple question such as
‘Should CS be nerfed or left as it is?’
Then do what’s necessary .
Same with Yoshi, Maxi, and Gemni.
A simple pick one or the other answer.

Problem with Ludia is they over complicate things and CS is the perfect example of this.

2 Likes

Very good chance you’re right. Remember Halloween? And how Irritator was snubbed but we only ended up getting it a week later? I’m convinced they ignored the votes for irritator just to keep Magna uber exclusive and hard to get., despite what the community voted for.

1 Like

Gemini wasn’t in the survey though. Neither was that rending thing. Those two ludia did on their own.

I have and use both IncomeRaptor2 and Yoshi. Both have boosts. I still voted for the nerf and had fully expected to only get 50% of the boosts back. It’s a typical LootzYa strategy. “We hear what you’re saying and will now change the game (or not) and just do what we planned in the first place.” The fact that the poll did not even work and they did not care is a pretty good indication of how much they give a hoot about what players think.

3 Likes