#Games contain inferior options# A lot of games that I have played contain some optimal options and some clearly inferior ones. Sometimes, like in Heroes of Might&Magic IV, it could happen due to the limited time the developers had to balance it (e.g. Academy benefits so much more from choosing Gold Golems and then Genies rather than Magi and Naga that there is no reason to go the second way).

#Sometimes it happens for no apparent reason# However, it often happens that the developers clearly had enough time to polish the game, didn't go bankrupt after its release etc., but it is still full of "trap" options that sound cool, but are actually inferior to something always available in the same situation, or almost always available in similar situations.

There are just so many examples of such, almost every game has something like that. For example, Age of Wonders I began a successful series thga, but a lot of abilities to be chosen for the heroes are clearly underperforming, and a lot of units have clearly better alternatives on the same levels in the same factions.

It is important that while some very overpowered stuff often gets nerfed (like it also happened in AoW I), the obviously underpowered choices often stay as they are (as it also happened there).

So, I ask: Why do game developers create clearly inferior options in their games and don't rebalance them? Is it intentional? If it can be avoided -- how?

Games contain inferior options

A lot of games that I have played contain some optimal options and some clearly inferior ones. Sometimes, like in Heroes of Might&Magic IV, it could happen due to the limited time the developers had to balance it (e.g. Academy benefits so much more from choosing Gold Golems and then Genies rather than Magi and Naga that there is no reason to go the second way).

Sometimes it happens for no apparent reason

However, it often happens that the developers clearly had enough time to polish the game, didn't go bankrupt after its release etc., but it is still full of "trap" options that sound cool, but are actually inferior to something always available in the same situation, or almost always available in similar situations.

There are just so many examples of such, almost every game has something like that. For example, Age of Wonders I began a successful series thga, but a lot of abilities to be chosen for the heroes are clearly underperforming, and a lot of units have clearly better alternatives on the same levels in the same factions.

It is important that while some very overpowered stuff often gets nerfed (like it also happened in AoW I), the obviously underpowered choices often stay as they are (as it also happened there).

So, I ask: Why do game developers create clearly inferior options in their games and don't rebalance them? Is it intentional? If it can be avoided -- how?