Note: thanks for reviving this topic, I was about to make a post here. Now I don't need to Necro it.
Truth be told, the more I think about Perfect Imbalance, the more I think it's Poppycock.
It sounds extremely nice on paper, "it makes META evolve beyond parallel, adding imbalance that creates new strategies that try to fight it into a new balance ". But at the end of the day, does that really happen?
The answer seems no, it instead adds a conceptual stagnation to the META: everything gravitates around the broken elements (or its counters). It eliminates variety or unusual approaches, making everything fall under the category of meta and anti-meta.
As explained by Macroroni, it creates the "flavor of the week", making carbon copy game where the broken element appears all the time. If the game is unlucky enough not to be updated every few weeks (like League of Legends is), that would result in a completely stagnant game with only 2 or 3 gameplay strategies.
Bare in mind that, as explained by EC, Perfect Imbalance does not simply imply asymmetrical gameplay, but also means that the balance in utility/power/or whatever makes a character/race/class useful. It's not far fetched to aspire to make your asymmetrical game as perfectly balanced as possible.
do you know if the authors ever look at the comments here? i really think this one video is kind of misinformative in its examples
There is no way to know if they look at them or not. (They claim they do)
What's sure is that they are not an active part of these forums, and out of the 4 cast members, only Dan may perhaps (VERY rarely) reply to any topic at all.
It's interesting because I would definitely agree that on paper, perfect imbalance is definitely a cool idea - "everyone can be useful AND different!", and although I wouldn't quite say that it's completely wonky, I would say that trying to control it
Because in a very simplistic level, perfect imbalance is in a lot of games - if you look at a game like Super Smash Brothers Melee, who has the characters Fox and Falco (often times considered clone characters) with very distinct differences (Fox's lasers come out faster but do no knockback, Falco's are more laggy and semi-stun enemies, shines shoot enemies up or down and other moves have differing properties), you have two extremely different characters that have enough differences that players who are good at Falco might not enjoy Fox's gameplay and vice versa, but both characters are relatively well balanced to the point that the matchup between them is approximately 50:50 (with their matchup having changed constantly from Falco once being considered a Fox-counter to recently Fox considered a Falco-counter and then now them being considered pretty equal despite having zero balance patches).