What do you think "Balance" actually means?

[Suromir]

balance in an mmo is an oxymoron.

 

unless everyone has the exact same moves/skills/powers/etc there will NOT be "balance"

 

and it get's even worse the more varying classes you add.

 

people don't seem to understand that.

 

best you can do is try and keep them as close as possible without making one class totally destroy another with no contest despite any player "skill" involved.

[LordArtemis]

When I say FPS, I mean the old school level playing field team deathmatch stalwarts like Quake/UT/CS rather than stuff like Team Fortress or Planetside, obviously as asoon as you introduce 'classes' (for want of a better word) all bets are off.

 

Ah, I stand corrected then. My apologies.

 

Team Fortress. Good memories there. The power of mods. Just goes to show what fans can do.

[Rafaman]

I remember at Blizzcon one time, someone on stage, probably Ghostcrawler, I don't remember for sure, ask "how many people in the room think a class is OP?" Everyone in the room raised their hand. Then he asked, "How many people think the class they play is OP?" Nobody raised their hand.

 

If this was either entirely PVP or entirely PVE game, it would be a lot easier to balance. But classes can be either very powerful for PVP and weaker in PVE or vice versa.

 

I also think balancing for PVE only is much more simple.

 

I think most people want a team to not have a bias against their class. A lot of that ends up being exaggeration, but there are a couple of classes that you really can't ignore the disparity, even if it isn't necessarily a game breaking thing.

 

Heh. That's perfect, and to be honest, that is why there are ALWAYS balance issues in an MMO. It is in the eye of the beholder. And where there is an instance where most everyone agrees then, there is a real issue.

 

I certainly do think however that class uniqueness is important ie. special abilities and skills. So, not all classes should be the same in the same way. If you take my meaning.

[Dathilbor]

I think that PvP and PvE should never be balanced together. EVER. When it does, you get this game. Certain things that are awesome for getting away fast in a raid are considered OP and whined about in the PvP community. When they nerfed a class that had high burst dmg in PvP, it makes it unviable in PvE. If you want to balance it, make some abilities register different values inside the instanced war zone. In owpvp (yes I know it's dead) shouldn't be an issue, deal with it if it's not. Just silly that they broke a completely great game. I've slowly withdrawn from playing this game almost completely. I'll continue to sub in hope that they fix it and I'll play again when arenas drop, but if it's worse, then I'll bow out in hopes of a future rebirth (and hopefully a new frigging engine).

 

Tl;Dr... Jussayin, can't balance both PvE and PvP together, have to be smart and reign in some of the op PvE moves in a PvP environment instead of Breaking the game like they did.

[Andryah]

Balance should mean that every class is fun to play at the role they are designed for. Balance should also mean that any class will offer something that a mixed group of classes needs.

 

Today's MMO players apparently want to solo primarily though, and making all classes "balanced" for solo play just means that they want all classes to be generic Jack-of-all-trades, whether they realize it or not.

 

Balanced PvP is Doom or Duke Nukem. Nobody will ever be able to balance varied classes for PvP and it's a waste of time to try.

 

We agree.

 

must run and /check for the blue moon.

[LordArtemis]

They have found ways to prevent certain abilities and procs from firing off in PVP. IMO this should be the paramount importance item for development.

 

PVP would have a real viable future, IMO, if they could find some way to make abilities work differently in PVP. The two rule sets idea...that way balance can be struck in one side of the game without effecting the other.

 

A good example is the animation trigger change...where the effect fires before the animation ends. Worked great for PVP, but was considered, by many folks it seems, one of the worst changes for PVE. It broke most of the cool animations for combat, one of the few jewels the game had.

 

This is where PVP only changes could have come in handy...if you find some way for those specific animation triggers to proc differently in PVP, you can provide the instant effect while it remains at the end of the animation in PVE.

 

PVP combat stances could be one way...adjustments to stats and abilities based on a stance that only works in PVP....the stance would have no effect unless you are flagged for PVP.

 

Just a thought.

[mmjarec]

I dont like rock paper scissor. I dont think your viability should be tied to a class. What if a team of rocks come up against a team of paper? Paper rerolls rocks.

 

Take a page out of shadowbane allow vast customization to where you can pick up skills to augment yoyr weakness or bolster your strength ala runes.

[CosmicKat]

I dont like rock paper scissor. I dont think your viability should be tied to a class. What if a team of rocks come up against a team of paper? Paper rerolls rocks.

 

Take a page out of shadowbane allow vast customization to where you can pick up skills to augment yoyr weakness or bolster your strength ala runes.

 

All RPG's are designed around the concept of rock, paper, scissors. All RPG's are also designed around the concept of group play. That's where the problems with today's MMO's lie. They are trying to use concepts developed for a team game in a solo game environment.

[mmjarec]

All RPG's are designed around the concept of rock, paper, scissors. All RPG's are also designed around the concept of group play. That's where the problems with today's MMO's lie. They are trying to use concepts developed for a team game in a solo game environment.

 

Not all of them shadowbane wasnt. Uo wasnt. Id rather be self sufficient in open world encounters and bring something to the group. Like shadowbane type char building. Still the most robust ive ever seen and certain classes could fly.

 

Just be ause most mmos do it doesnt mean its the besf and just cuz it has group play doesnt mean it has to be rock paper wcissor cthey could add something like when grouped eith certain other classes it augments your skill. Say fire mage and knight the knight would have flaming weapons etc etc. balance could be achieved this but its always relative to the person i may see it as balance others may not

 

But like i said id prefer every class be able to kill ever other class in one v one. The easiest eay and i dont see why devs dont do this would be to just have seperate rulesets and buffed/nerfed different ability powers while in pvp

[Andryah]

Not all of them shadowbane wasnt. Uo wasnt. Id rather be self sufficient in open world encounters and bring something to the group. Like shadowbane type char building. Still the most robust ive ever seen and certain classes could fly.

 

Referencing MMOs from a decade ago is not a credible basis to make demand/claims. If Shadowbane was the cat's meow.. where is it today?

 

Markets change. I'm a old school DAoC player.. but I understand that markets change, and not always for the better (from any given players perspective).

 

The genre does not exist just for you.. and you are not a market force. You are just one persons anonymous opinion on the internet.. as am I, and as is CK.

[mmjarec]

Referencing MMOs from a decade ago is not a credible basis to make demand/claims. If Shadowbane was the cat's meow.. where is it today?

 

Markets change. I'm a old school DAoC player.. but I understand that markets change, and not always for the better (from any given players perspective).

 

The genre does not exist just for you.. and you are not a market force. You are just one persons anonymous opinion on the internet.. as am I, and as is CK.

 

Who are you to state whats credible. It was said ALL mmos were rock paper scissor. I was pointing out ones that werent. A decade long timeframe wasnt given. And there are also classesless mmos that dont follow that format.

[annabethchase]

It means not getting excluded from groups due to your choice of class.

[kirorx]

I dont like rock paper scissor. I dont think your viability should be tied to a class. What if a team of rocks come up against a team of paper?

.

 

Then you would have team of only 1 class, the idea is that classes can all benefit each other which encourages more group play.

[Andryah]

Who are you to state whats credible. It was said ALL mmos were rock paper scissor. I was pointing out ones that werent.

 

Ones that don't exist anymore. Brilliant. Brilliant I tell you.

[mmjarec]

Then you would have team of only 1 class, the idea is that classes can all benefit each other which encourages more group play.

 

No you wont because one class wouldnt be capable of taking all necessry skills. Other games have done it just fine either bioware doesnt want to or cant. It doesnt HAVE to be rock paper scissor

[AlexDougherty]

On every MMO forum people talk/argue/debate about class balance. But not everyone has the same understanding or opinion of what that word actually means. Some folks say that balance means that each class should stand an approximately equal chance of defeating each other class 1 on 1. Other folks say that balance means "rock, paper, scissors", meaning that each class can be beaten by some other class, but not necessarily every other class.

 

What do you think "balance" actually means?

 

Something of a mixture of the two. No class should completely dominate another class, nor should any class be obviously more powerful than the others.

[Alec_Fortescue]

What is balance to me?

 

Dummy dps leaderboards:

 

3597.14 - Gorband - Annihilation Marauder

3535.06 - Evrydayimsmggln - Hybrid Gunslinger

3459.89 - Invinc - Lethality Operative

3433.71 - Handcuff - Telekinetics Sage

3409.33 - Ranick - Carnage Marauder

3354.07 - M-nightrider - Balance Shadow

3341.92 - Pizza'da'hutt - Pyro Mercenary

3340.79 - Nithnuro - Marksman Sniper

3322.893 - Tianna - Lethality Sniper

3247.68 - Mruniverse - Hybrid Vanguard

3233.87 - Marisi - Arsenal Mercenary

3210.85 - Pelara - Balance Sage

3111.18 - A'jantis - Focus Sentinel

3107.50 - Vepres - Vigilance Guardian

3049.35 - Aerre - Infiltration Shadow

3047.994 - Drekkin - Assault Vanguard

3035.00 - Kishekzun - Focus Guardian

2780.15 - Ylira - Tactics Vanguard

 

(assembled by KBN)

 

For PVE dps balance is when those numbers are very close to one another. Not when there is almost 1k gap between the top and bottom.

[Grayseven]

True balance within an MMO is a myth, a hopeful panacea that will magically make everything better. You cannot hope to achieve balance much in the same way that absolute zero can not be reached. You can get very, very close but never will it be achieved unless every class is exactly the same.

 

Balance in classes within an MMO is more than just a few hard data points like DPS. It involves too many intangibles such as defensive abilities and utility abilities to be accurately measured. It will also have different meanings between PvP and PvE.

 

To paraphrase Morgan Freeman, balance is just a made up word created to give people an excuse to complain that their class is too weak and their opponents class is too strong...

[Cidanel]

On every MMO forum people talk/argue/debate about class balance. But not everyone has the same understanding or opinion of what that word actually means. Some folks say that balance means that each class should stand an approximately equal chance of defeating each other class 1 on 1. Other folks say that balance means "rock, paper, scissors", meaning that each class can be beaten by some other class, but not necessarily every other class.

 

What do you think "balance" actually means?

 

Easy...balance means whatever class I have as my main is better than yours without me having to try too hard.

[Vandicus]

What is balance to me?

 

Dummy dps leaderboards:

 

3597.14 - Gorband - Annihilation Marauder

3535.06 - Evrydayimsmggln - Hybrid Gunslinger

3459.89 - Invinc - Lethality Operative

3433.71 - Handcuff - Telekinetics Sage

3409.33 - Ranick - Carnage Marauder

3354.07 - M-nightrider - Balance Shadow

3341.92 - Pizza'da'hutt - Pyro Mercenary

3340.79 - Nithnuro - Marksman Sniper

3322.893 - Tianna - Lethality Sniper

3247.68 - Mruniverse - Hybrid Vanguard

3233.87 - Marisi - Arsenal Mercenary

3210.85 - Pelara - Balance Sage

3111.18 - A'jantis - Focus Sentinel

3107.50 - Vepres - Vigilance Guardian

 

 

(assembled by KBN)

 

For PVE dps balance is when those numbers are very close to one another. Not when there is almost 1k gap between the top and bottom.

 

If you're trying to compare top dps for all classes then the chart should look more like this(a representative of every AC is in that range). In this case the gap is 500, but this assumes that the people on this list are either representative of optimal dps(situation dependent on crits and procs for near best possible circumstances) or representative of reasonable optimal dps(dps that most people can achieve with the same rotation and gear). Given that the top dps spot is held by an AC and spec that is never repeated in the table despite a range of 500 dps, it would appear that the sample size used is far too small. I would hazard a guess at reasonable optimal dummy dps having a range of 300 within which ACs lie, and a wider range when specs are compared(pvp specs are obviously not meant for dps'ing dummies).

 

Now this hypothetical range of dps of 300 is about 10%. Bioware has their stated goal being a dps range of 5% or less, and their statements seem thus far seem to indicate they are still trying to reduce the existing dps range.

[JimG]

There is no such thing as class balance. It's a myth. The only way you're getting class balance is if everyone plays the same class with the same abilities.

[CosmicKat]

It means not getting excluded from groups due to your choice of class.

 

In a challenging game, that never happens. In a challenging game, the quality of the player is far more important than the class's strengths/weaknesses. A smart player with an "underpowered" class can be far more effective than a stupid player with an uber class.

 

In a simple game, tactics and strategy are purely basic and a monkey can be trained to push buttons when they refresh.

[Sir-Coffee]

In a challenging game, that never happens. In a challenging game, the quality of the player is far more important than the class's strengths/weaknesses. A smart player with an "underpowered" class can be far more effective than a stupid player with an uber class.

 

In a simple game, tactics and strategy are purely basic and a monkey can be trained to push buttons when they refresh.

 

Scrapper.

[gorstram]

I remember at Blizzcon one time, someone on stage, probably Ghostcrawler, I don't remember for sure, ask "how many people in the room think a class is OP?" Everyone in the room raised their hand. Then he asked, "How many people think the class they play is OP?" Nobody raised their hand.

 

If this was either entirely PVP or entirely PVE game, it would be a lot easier to balance. But classes can be either very powerful for PVP and weaker in PVE or vice versa.

 

I also think balancing for PVE only is much more simple.

 

I think most people want a team to not have a bias against their class. A lot of that ends up being exaggeration, but there are a couple of classes that you really can't ignore the disparity, even if it isn't necessarily a game breaking thing.

 

I'm pretty sure that was GC, I was at that Blizzcon. It was an awesome spectacle, and I never questioned class balance again after that.