I Think The Battle Box Update Is Worse Than What Most Think

Status
Not open for further replies.
Dec 8, 2023
8
1
The recent MCCI update includes quite a few new features, most of which are beneficial such as the Milestones and Relics, but one change that has not been taken well is the change to Battle Box's kits.
Originally, there were only a total of 5 slots, with four players on each team, meaning that all but one kit would be selected. Now, what did this do well? Well, it added a reasonable level of strategy. If you had a stronger player on your team, you could offer to switch kits (assuming you took a strong kit) and give your team a stronger chance to win. It also gave every player a definite role in the team, meaning that most average players would get at least one kill or contribute strongly to the team every game. This, however, does not happen very much any more, as the stronger players are almost certain to get a very strong kit, leaving many other players on the team feeling like they did not contribute very much, and were not a part of the team.
What else happens with this change? Well, all of the map's kits (or maps themselves depending on which order either is made) are designed to have only one of each on the map. For example, on Watermill, the Sharpshooter kit has been designed to only have one in every game, and designed to counter the other kits, or at least be balanced. However, with this change, there can now be two sharpshooter kits, and, from experienced, it is not fair at all if the other teams do not have two sharpshooter kits, or just have a below average performance. This can be seen very clearly on Villa. Originally, there could be a maximum of two stone swords in one matchup. This meant that each team needed to make sure a decent player had this honor so they would perform well. But, even if said player with the stone sword has a lackluster performance, the other kits are able to still win the round, even if it is challenging.
Battle Box has had a bit of trouble with balancing kits, and that does make sense, I understand that as a Battle Box player. But, this change does not balance the kits at all, as maps that are designed to only have two crossbows a team, such as Canal, can now have all four players wielding crossbows. Just before the update, a change to one of the sets of kits was made. This kit, is the Gadgeteer on the map Gold Mine. The addition of a second crossbow balanced out the strength of the Sharpshooter kit, making the map overall more balanced and fair to play. This was a very good change, as it helped balance out the map and kits, but it wasn't a very big change. These are more of the changes we need. So, this is what I suggest:
1, Convert the players per kit back to 1, and role out a few kit buffs or nerfs to balance out maps and kits. For example, the Sharpshooter kit on Watermill might lose the spark of speed, or some arrows. Maybe the baller kit in Prison might gain another heal orb, or timed orb of harming. These small changes, even if players disagree with them, would sort of meld with the current Battle Box meta. If these changes aren't enough, then make it a higher priority, or make more drastic changes, but listen to the community. The people who play the game know the game the best and only want the best for it.
2, If you really want to keep the two players a kit change, then fine, you can keep it. However, don't make it a mandatory change. Maybe an option in plobbies, where it would be more fun as you can strategies with people you know to have the best result. Alternatively, you could add it as an addition game mode, like Quads, trios, doubles, ect. This could then open up opportunities for other games and game modes, such as sudden death in Parkour Warrior Survivor. The change, while interesting, is less than optimal and feels a little unfair when your against four skilled players, all wielding crossbows, and also takes away the satisfaction of eliminating the strongest kit from the other team.

The change is unique and interesting, but please, consider taking it back or shifting it to a game mode type deal. Battle Box can become so much more balanced without this change, but it will take work, but will feel to much better than this half thought out solution.

Thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MasTroneP
The 2 players per kit change was made so that 40 player plobbies could work, but I understand your complaints. Until they make plobbies work with 40 players without 10 players per team, there isn’t a much better way they can fix it, so I guess we’re gonna have to wait this out a bit unless they find a better solution.
 
The 2 players per kit change was made so that 40 player plobbies could work, but I understand your complaints. Until they make plobbies work with 40 players without 10 players per team, there isn’t a much better way they can fix it, so I guess we’re gonna have to wait this out a bit unless they find a better solution.
It was not, if it was solely there to support plobbies it would still be 1 kit below 20 players.

I elaborated a bit more on the reasons behind changing to 2 kits in another thread, but I can say that we are hearing community feedback and will make some changes to Battle Box kit balance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Expelly
I think I've been pretty much the only (or at least one of few) people defending the 2 people per kit change. Previously if you had poor internet, or didn't know where the kit was in the menu, you could very easily be prevented from playing your preferred kit in every game. For newer players, they also rarely get a chance to try the kits the majority of the player base prefers, and it could drive them away from the game. Now, it is pretty rare for someone to not get the kit they wanted, and new players can easily try out all the kits they want to. The problem with this update comes with the kit balancing, and has put new focus on that. The change to 2 players per kit made it possible for people who don't or can't instalock to get their preferred kits, and has highlighted how unbalanced the kits are. One of the biggest things to consider is the casual player base, and 2 people per kit is a great thing for them. The only problem is that kits are unbalanced, making games where someone picks one of the 3 bad kits instead of one of the 2 good ones much harder.
 
I think I've been pretty much the only (or at least one of few) people defending the 2 people per kit change.
for me, this is a bandage fix to 2 issues. Kit balance and quick selecting
if kits are on average pretty good you dont need mutlipul of the same kit to be played for everyone to have fun and do well

if people loading too fast is an issue a simple timer of like 5-10 seconds before selecting a kit would be fine easily indicated in GUI with a lock over the select part, it means that a majroity of people who take time to load in are fine

This update did its job ig? but it did it in a way that opened a new can of worms
 
The 2 players per kit change was made so that 40 player plobbies could work, but I understand your complaints. Until they make plobbies work with 40 players without 10 players per team, there isn’t a much better way they can fix it, so I guess we’re gonna have to wait this out a bit unless they find a better solution.
This is I think a reason behind it, but why not just make it exclusive the plobbies? Have 2 players per kit in plobbies, and a mode or just the base game have one player per kit? It would satisfy both wanting one and two players per kit and make it more enjoyable.
 
This is I think a reason behind it, but why not just make it exclusive the plobbies? Have 2 players per kit in plobbies, and a mode or just the base game have one player per kit? It would satisfy both wanting one and two players per kit and make it more enjoyable.
It was not, if it was solely there to support plobbies it would still be 1 kit below 20 players.

I elaborated a bit more on the reasons behind changing to 2 kits in another thread, but I can say that we are hearing community feedback and will make some changes to Battle Box kit balance.
thats alll im gonna say xD
Admins directly responded so we have the answer to this
 
Status
Not open for further replies.