How does the dev team decide what is worth going in the testing grounds? | Forums

[TheUberDome]

Surely such a large change to LB should be put into a testing grounds before it goes live. Isn't that the point of the testing ground? Why have it if you're just gonna throw hero nerfs straight into the live game?

[TheUberDome]

Any time there's a hero nerf, they just throw it out without any testing, and then make the community wait months for any sort of improvement to balance the hero. This is one of the many reasons people dont like the current state of for honor.

[FuncK_D]

As far as I understood/read it, literally all they did was nerf LB damage from being stupid ridiculous high parry punishes to still being the highest parry punishes in the game. What exactly is there to test besides a LB player's excitement level from dishing out OP punishes? Nothing else has changed.

The only thing the LB # changes are going to do is pro-long the frustration of dealing with one.. IN FACT, in that sense LB players can look at this as an indirect buff to their trolling gameplay experience.... you now have the opportunity to dominate and frustrate your opponent from muscle memory punishes for an average of ONE more time per encounter.

[Goat_of_Vermund]

To answer your question, this must be the way. However, in this case, it clearly needs no testing, it is plain obvious it is a must, 50 damage on any parry is ridicoulously unhealthy, and he also has a neutral 400ms attack and the highest hp pool in the game. The question is not that if it is justified, the question is, is it enough? Oh, by the way, he, the raider and the hitokiri came out at the same season. That was a very productive period for the game.

[Psycho-Bandit]

….The question is not that if it is justified, the question is, is it enough?....

The answer is "NO"

[garr1999]

Yea honestly it should be on hero reworks and map changes for TG since reworks and map/gameplay changes are what benefit the
momentum of the game not the nerfs or buffs characters received in the aftermath of it all even tho some of the
reworks are just minor buffs/nerfs which is kinda underwhelming what reworks are supposed to be in the
first place since the devs are reluctant because of the chance of a second coming of Pk or something
of that variety.

[Vakris_One]

LB's change was not a big one. They just lowered his parry punishes from absolutely ridiculous to simply ridiculous. His parry punishes are now exactly as ridiculous as Aramusha's and all other heroes that can dish out 40 damage on a light parry. There was no need to put these changes in TG because they are essentially meaningless and change nothing about the hero. Something like the removal of Raider's stun tap, now that warranted being put into TG first because it was a hug change for the hero which completely removed his follow up offence.

Regardless, the question of how do the dev team decide what is worth going into the testing grounds is a good one and one worth having an official answer.

[Qoissant]

You know i have been following a game called satisfactory for like 2-3 years now. They have something called and experimental branch where they push ALL updates first before moving to the regualr game. This way all bugs can be caught by the community before it affects the real game. I thought testing grounds was to do the same thing as a TTS server was a pain in the butt. But they push literally everything to the game without testing. ALL patches should be moved to testing grounds at least a week before launch unless they are genuine bugfixes with no mechanical changes