Bioware, you need to get better at class balancing.

[KevinQCowart]

This is not a post requesting a buff for A or a nerf for B. I am talking about the history of class balancing by Bioware which is, in one word, terrible. This is simply not the quality of a game where you expect a recurring payment.

 

So what is the measure of success, how would I define good or bad balance? Community perception, that is all that matters, because humans pay for your product, and we are flawed emotional creatures and the customer is always right. Bioware, when you think about class balancing always ask yourself, is this going to piss most of our customers off? If the answer is yes, then rethink what you are doing. Another problem with community perception is the infrequency of class changes, the long neglected periods without balances makes you appear apathetic, and that makes the players feel apathetic about the game.

 

I would suggest two things to improve the customer perception of class balancing:

1. Frequent balances that players actually want not what spreadsheets tell you.

2. Triage, go after the big outliers instead of these ideological sweeping changes.

 

As an example for class triage look at

http://ixparse.com/stats/

https://torcommunity.com/fr/database/arena-stats

 

There are disciplines in this game that have less than 0.5% representation in operations. Even if your design principles and modeling for these classes are perfect nobody is playing these disciplines because they are either not effective or not fun. In other words, the +/- 5% methodology that you adhere to has completely failed.

 

There are similar circumstances in PvP, if one class composes 20% of your ranked participation while another class only makes up 4% then you know where the work needs to be done.

 

Every month give a gentle nudge to most and the least used classes in the game and monitor the results. There are to many variables to accurately model class performance, but only one variable matters: customer happiness.

Edited September 16, 2017 by KevinQCowart

[KevinQCowart]

Most of the posts on this forum are unintelligible walls-of-text or just angry nerd rage in capslock.

 

I actually took the time to compose a thread for a relevant topic with analysis and constructive suggestions and this thread got buried in less than a day.

 

This is so disheartening. Does real dialog happen anymore on forums or is this just some troll den? This is a serious question, is there any meaningful outcome of discussing game issues with other players and devs?

Edited September 17, 2017 by KevinQCowart

[jedip_enguin]

You want reasonable discussion on an MMO forum?

 

Are you new to this internet thing?

[Amantionus]

Real dialog happens, but you have to find the right people.

 

Community approval, in my opinion, is an important metric, but should not be the only one for determining balance. Also, as I see it, the balance issue is not only multi-faceted, but is caught between the PVP and PVE crowds (while I suspect a large segment of the community do both on a more casual basis, rather than being dedicated to just one or the other).

 

That presents a special problem. How to make each class and each base spec viable for both PVP and PVE work.

 

The first thing to remember is that balance should never mean "all the same" nor "all can do the job well".

 

Rather, it means that using appropriate tactics and equal skill any matchup should be in theory, a toss up. Basically, whoever gets the early advantage or better controls the fight should win. For a character specialized in range combat to beat a melee spec, the ranged fighter has to control range. For the melee character to win, they would have to get in close. The deference should come down to skill and perception. The person that gets the drop on the other should have the advantage and win most of the time (assuming equal skill and appropriate tactics).

 

Where you run into a problem is when you have a jack of all trades type spec that is either:

1- too good at too many things

2- not good enough at enough things

 

If you have a tank that dishes out high damage and packs many healing abilities, it is likely out of balance.

 

If you have a "well rounded" spec that is just not good enough, it will be either a good PVE toon (solo play means you have to do many things yourself) or a nearly unused toon (it isn't capable of doing the many things well enough).

 

In an ideal world, you might be able to separate PvP and PvE balance issues. My experience (mostly out of date, but I did recently resub and started a fresh set of toons) is that all classes are sufficiently able to handle storyline work as they currently stand. Keep the current "weakest" classes as the "baseline" (some missions are a bit tedious, but doable solo). Then go from there to achieve PvP balance (so maybe some of the stronger classes need a nerf, maybe not, perhaps some of the weaker classes need a buff, maybe not).

 

Just looking at most and least used classes and specs might give you an idea of where to look for balance issues, but should not be the sole factor, nor should community approval. Instead that needs to be a guide, if everyone rolls out a new bounty hunter, then maybe there is a problem with the bounty hunter (OP perhaps) or maybe there is another reason (maybe a new SW movie featuring the story of Boba Fett came out). Use the numbers to decide where to look, but then look deeper to see if there is actually a problem or if it is just a spike for some other reason. A greater concern than a rise in the population of a class would be a sudden decrease in the use of a class (if you can track each toon by class and everyone stops playing lightning sorcerer suddenly there is likely a problem, more so than if a bunch of people start a new toon of a given class).

 

Sorry for the rambling, I got to get to church now.

[JediQuaker]

I would suggest two things to improve the customer perception of class balancing:

My suggestion would be for BW to stop worrying about it and stop trying to balance PvP.

 

As long as you have one Republic class that is balanced by one Imperial class, what else do you need. I know some PvP'ers would complain because they want to be able to use their particular class, but really, if one class such as Merc is the most powerful, then just make a Merc and use it for PvP. If one class is best for healing, then, use that class. If one class is best at Tanking, then...etc.

Although variety is nice, you don't NEED it for PvP.

[DavidAtkinson]

My suggestion would be for BW to stop worrying about it and stop trying to balance PvP.

 

As long as you have one Republic class that is balanced by one Imperial class, what else do you need. I know some PvP'ers would complain because they want to be able to use their particular class, but really, if one class such as Merc is the most powerful, then just make a Merc and use it for PvP. If one class is best for healing, then, use that class. If one class is best at Tanking, then...etc.

Although variety is nice, you don't NEED it for PvP.

 

That was one of the dumbest things you could have written no offense.

 

So by your logic everyone should roll merc in pvp because that's the most powerful class right now ?

You really have no clue do you ?

 

What a great way to have class balance for PVP.

[Andryah]

This is not a post requesting a buff for A or a nerf for B. I am talking about the history of class balancing by Bioware which is, in one word, terrible. This is simply not the quality of a game where you expect a recurring payment.

 

So what is the measure of success, how would I define good or bad balance? Community perception, that is all that matters, because humans pay for your product, and we are flawed emotional creatures and the customer is always right. Bioware, when you think about class balancing always ask yourself, is this going to piss most of our customers off? If the answer is yes, then rethink what you are doing. Another problem with community perception is the infrequency of class changes, the long neglected periods without balances makes you appear apathetic, and that makes the players feel apathetic about the game.

 

I would suggest two things to improve the customer perception of class balancing:

1. Frequent balances that players actually want not what spreadsheets tell you.

2. Triage, go after the big outliers instead of these ideological sweeping changes.

 

As an example for class triage look at

http://ixparse.com/stats/

https://torcommunity.com/fr/database/arena-stats

 

There are disciplines in this game that have less than 0.5% representation in operations. Even if your design principles and modeling for these classes are perfect nobody is playing these disciplines because they are either not effective or not fun. In other words, the +/- 5% methodology that you adhere to has completely failed.

 

There are similar circumstances in PvP, if one class composes 20% of your ranked participation while another class only makes up 4% then you know where the work needs to be done.

 

Every month give a gentle nudge to most and the least used classes in the game and monitor the results. There are to many variables to accurately model class performance, but only one variable matters: customer happiness.

 

I have yet to see any MMO actually do a good, consistent, and long term persistent job at class balance. Period. Some are better then others, but in my years of playing.. they all suck.. it's just a question of degree. Some get it right sometimes, and wrong other times. None of them are particularly good at it though in my experience, and so players adapt or give up.

 

Part of the issue is it is actually hard to juggle so many variables and insure they are balanced in all of the many thousands of different circumstances.

 

Part of the issue is players never agree on what = proper balance. Most players are much more concerned about how balance affects them personally, rather then what a balance exercise means for the game as a whole and the broad range of players that play MMOs.

 

This is a no win aspect of MMOs.. both for players and for studios. So I think it will always be a popular topic of complaint in gaming forums.

[Amantionus]

Also remember that the definition of "balance" is a nuanced one...at least as far as game-players are concerned.

 

For one gamer "balance" means their favored class stomps all competition...

 

For another gamer it means that the only variable is player skill...

 

Yet another views it as "he who shoots first wins"...

 

A fourth views balance in terms of "rock, paper, scissors"...

 

You get the idea. The permutations are endless. Without first setting a clear definition of what "balance" is and is not for the game then balance will never be achieved unless all classes are the same (which is not really balance in my book, it is just everyone being the same, in which case, why have multiple classes).

[KevinQCowart]

but is caught between the PVP and PVE crowds

 

I strongly disagree, this PvE vs. PvP narrative is only something forum trolls stir up. I know progression raiders who are also gods in ranked PvP, they would laugh at this non-sense. PvE and PvP prioritize different aspects for balance and they actually complement each other, PvE needs to zero in DPS/DTPS, while PvP needs to balance DCDs, CC and mobility. For a specific example there are 5 new utilities introduced in 5.0 which are the cause of all the PvP imbalance and they need to be nerfed heavily, if not totally removed. These 5 overpowered utilities never existed in any of the previous operations and yet people people still managed to clear them.

 

 

 

I have yet to see any MMO actually do a good, consistent, and long term persistent job at class balance

 

This is some kind of perfection fallacy that MMO players fall into. No reasonable person expects balance in an RPG, the strength of the genre is that classes are so different. The developers only need to tune the hard outliers give and gentle boost/cut to the top and the bottom just to reign things in. This is something Bioware never does, they make changes based on poor ideologies and not the reality of the game. For example reducing the range of Powertech abilities "because its a close quarter fighter" not only did they fail to foresee that a pure melee class needs more defenses they also disregarded the fact that the class still has a 30m taunt, autoattack, and stealth scan which should tell you the original designers exactly intended for the class to be a melee/ranged hybrid.

Edited September 17, 2017 by KevinQCowart

[Andryah]

Also remember that the definition of "balance" is a nuanced one...at least as far as game-players are concerned.

 

For one gamer "balance" means their favored class stomps all competition...

 

For another gamer it means that the only variable is player skill...

 

Yet another views it as "he who shoots first wins"...

 

A fourth views balance in terms of "rock, paper, scissors"...

 

You get the idea. The permutations are endless. Without first setting a clear definition of what "balance" is and is not for the game then balance will never be achieved unless all classes are the same (which is not really balance in my book, it is just everyone being the same, in which case, why have multiple classes).

 

^^ Very much so.

 

And some actually use the lack of clarity and agreement on a definition as permission to go hyperbolic as well.

[Tsillah]

Also remember that the definition of "balance" is a nuanced one...at least as far as game-players are concerned.

 

For one gamer "balance" means their favored class stomps all competition...

 

For another gamer it means that the only variable is player skill...

 

Yet another views it as "he who shoots first wins"...

 

A fourth views balance in terms of "rock, paper, scissors"...

 

You get the idea. The permutations are endless. Without first setting a clear definition of what "balance" is and is not for the game then balance will never be achieved unless all classes are the same (which is not really balance in my book, it is just everyone being the same, in which case, why have multiple classes).

 

I think you'll find that defining balanced especially when you have multiple classes with different types of abilities is already not possible.

 

What people look for is the effectiveness of a class, but that entails so many variables it's hard to define what that is and in which situation. This type of perfect balance wouldn't exist.

 

And besides, if people really take a look inside, a lot of it is people just wanting to win and when they lose they blame something else. It's entirely possible for example that a class is dominant simply because people believe it to be dominant, creating a self-fulling prophecy.

 

Sorc/Sage healers got this treatment. There were people who could manage them in PvP before the nerfs came. But a lot of people couldn't fgure out how to do that, ergo, the class was over-powered...

 

Actual class balance? Not gonna happen, if you ask me.

[KevinQCowart]

For one gamer "balance" means their favored class stomps all competition...

 

That not true in every case. Many players dislike overpowered classes because they are easy, and players who have a long-term main hate it when their class becomes overpowered because it becomes a hipster class.

[Amantionus]

Hyperbolic?...Some of those folks go well beyond that and display more functions than a NASA computer!

[KevinQCowart]

Actual class balance? Not gonna happen, if you ask me.

 

This is that perfection fallacy again, nobody expects "capital B" Balance as if it were some divinely ordained platonic form. I only want balancing, do you understand the difference?

[Amantionus]

That not true in every case. Many players dislike overpowered classes because they are easy, and players who have a long-term main hate it when their class becomes overpowered because it becomes a hipster class.

 

Remember, that is but one example on the list. I do know people that feel that way. Not the majority, but some. Just as others may fall into some of the other examples. There are no doubt many players who do not fit into any of the examples I listed. The point was to emphasize that "balance" is not some universal standard among game players. What is needed is something of a definition or goal that comes from the developer so that the term has objective meaning instead of subjective meaning.

 

If the developer defines balance as: "All classes can complete the heroic missions solo with their companion in 20 minutes per mission" then fine. Or they could define it as, "All classes shall be able to deal a minimum of X DPS and a maximum of Y dps vs static targets and heal between R and S health over a 60 second period". You get the idea I am sure.

 

Essentially, without an authoritative definition of balance (either in defining balance or setting out certain clear and tangible goals) then a discussion on balance is based on moving the goalposts around instead of objective standards.

[DarthEnrique]

They've been stinking at it since 3.0. So mad my lightning Sorc hasn't had any buffs but madness sorc gets nerfed and the lightning Sorc gets affected right along with it.

[LunaticFringer]

I personally don't think we'll ever truly have class balancing in mmorpgs. Ever. When I look back at playing these things since 2003 myself it seems like for the run of a game (and those still going that have been fortunate enough) they're always tinkering with the classes. More notably when new level caps and skills are added.

 

True balancing, to me, would seem to mean that all DPS classes put out the same damage when maxed out (comparable rotations, gear, buffs and so on). Same with tanking and healing.

 

However, it gets mucky when you try to streamline things like that. The whole point of classes in a mmorpg that I have found is to make sure that classes roles are working more so than making sure that other classes heals are the same as mine.

 

I'm not saying we don't need a benchmark of balancing. But it does sometimes confuse me when we see balancing brought up all the time when roles aren't being considered too. A crowd controller probably shouldn't be doing much damage compared to a glass cannon and such. IE... I'd rather know the roles are working as intended more so than getting on the slippery slope of flavor of the month. In that regard, yeap, SWTOR has had a bit of a problem with balancing since the beginning.

[Amantionus]

Very good points there.

 

FOTM is a common problem in any MMO game. Role functions and effectiveness are another area prone to substantial issues.

 

It is fairly easy to balance faction against faction when the classes/roles are duplicated. Balancing various roles against others is a much more complex concept. I am not sure it is even possible.

 

Just how would one define "balance" between a healer, a tank and a damage dealer? Is there even a logical way to do so? For PvP purposes the process could still be simplified if you made the comparable classes/roles from each faction appear in equal numbers and of equal levels. But that would likely freeze out many would be participants (everyone in the waiting list is level 70 and you have a level 50 in whatever role and you would be left out for example). That would also require people to be playing the various roles and classes in similar numbers on both sides...I just don't see that happening.

 

If one team has more damage dealers and the other team has more healers, are they balanced teams? I'd say no, because the damage dealers should, in theory take out the healers while both sides tanks are locked up in a stalemate/battle of attrition.

 

To me, it seems the "baseline" for balance would have to be found on the PvE side of things. Each class should be able to complete their core story lines solo in a similar time frame as each other. If one class is able to blitz through in half the time, it is likely more powerful than the others. If some other class takes much longer to progress, it is likely far weaker than the others.

 

From that baseline you could then define the outliers and buff/nerf them to bring them nearer the "average" for rate of progression. That works for PvE. But would it transfer over to PvP?

 

The biggest problem I see is that some classes/roles are more capable at more things than they should be. But is it to such a degree as warrants a nerf? Or is the appropriate answer to buff other classes? I think incremental adjustments to one class at the time would be the only possible way to achieve some sort of "role based balance" between the classes. Sweeping changes to multiple classes at once throws too many variables into the mix for accurate assessment and results in additional sweeping changes to readjust many things all at once all over again.

 

If the current problem is say "mercenaries deal great damage and have high survivability" then the answer is to either reduce the damage or the healing factors of the mercenary (not both) OR increase the damage output of other classes (to overcome the healing/survivability of the mercenary). Clearly, the first option would be more logical as it requires only altering one aspect of one class without potentially making all the others even more (or less) powerful in the process.

[RaithHarth]

Also Bioware needs to fix the resolve bar in PVP, there is no reason why you should still be getting stun-locked when the white bar is active, it should remove all stun effects period, no exceptions. Edited September 17, 2017 by RaithHarth

[hallucigenocide]

maybe they should follow the trend and reduce the amount of abilities we have to make it easier to balance?

[JediQuaker]

So by your logic everyone should roll merc in pvp because that's the most powerful class right now ?

Basically yes. For DPS. There may be other classes that are good for Tank or Healer.

 

I know, I know, you've spent years perfecting your [insert favourite class] and you want to be able to use it in PvP, but, too bad, so sad.

Edited September 18, 2017 by JediQuaker

[kodrac]

I know, I know, you've spent years perfecting your [insert favourite class] and you want to be able to use it in PvP, but, too bad, so sad.

 

I have no words to describe this statement. Arrogance? Ignorance? Raider elitist? Trolling? I can't decide.

Edited September 18, 2017 by kodrac

[Andryah]

I have no words to describe this statement. Arrogance? Ignorance? Raider elitist? Trolling? I can't decide.

 

Pretty easy to read and understand though.... if you choose to.... and absent your ad hominem.

 

Any player who is a veteran MMO player should know full well that classes change over time.. and sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. And the meme FOTM did not come out of a vacuum..... it came about because for many years now.. studios have been creating the perception with players (right or wrong) with class balance changes such that player seek and crave any class that has some perceived inherent advantage over competing classes.

 

I've heard this same drama for more then 14 years now... class changes take place and some players suddenly feel that their favorite class got neutered and that some other class is now running in "god mode". The truth in most cases is more complex and less extreme than such a superficial assessment.. and this was really the point of the person you are slathering with your complaint at the moment.

 

Bascially, MMOs change over time, and class skills and features is one of the more common points of change over time. Embrace it, adapt to it, move forward. Or don't.... the choice rests with the player.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Andryah

[kodrac]

Pretty easy to read and understand though.... if you choose to.... and absent your ad hominem.

 

No, I just din't really have the words at the time. He's saying "it's PvP, who cares". There's a whole segment of the playerbase that for them PvP Is the game. Just like there's a whole segment of the playerbase that Ops are the game. Just like story, etc. And to completely dismiss it is callous. But it doesn't surprise me. It's the essence of the whole PvP is killing my PvE dispute that's been going on since the dawn of MMOs. Which is a microcosm of attitudes in general: People are selfish.

[Andryah]

No, I just din't really have the words at the time. He's saying "it's PvP, who cares". There's a whole segment of the playerbase that for them PvP Is the game. Just like there's a whole segment of the playerbase that Ops are the game. Just like story, etc. And to completely dismiss it is callous. But it doesn't surprise me. It's the essence of the whole PvP is killing my PvE dispute that's been going on since the dawn of MMOs. Which is a microcosm of attitudes in general: People are selfish.

 

Except none of that is what he actually said. You projected all of that into the comment. I encourage you to go back and re-read what he said.. without a filter in front of it to fit your narrative. His comment was actually centered on people not liking to adapt or not willing to adapt and instead digging in and demanding things be returned to their prior state.

 

Yes.. people are selfish.. and often project their feelings upon others.. when it is not actually accurate. There is a bit of irony for you to reflect upon in this statement I think. The big picture in MMOs is not player specific, nor type of content specific. MMOs are a package of various features, content, and abilities for players.. and in almost all cases... some players like what they see, some do not, and some get outright indignant that an MMO does not meet their personal needs/wants.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Andryah