Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
Is Balance All That?
WargfootYV
Member UncommonPosts: 261
I'm reading over on the official Legends of Aria forums where someone suggested that the mages are overpowered and that perhaps the developer should implement the strategy of Rock/Paper/Scissors for balancing the game. Since my gut reaction is to oppose what everyone else is writing and to be a troll, I decided to post a contrary point of view.
So here, for the sake of a discussion and just for a thought exercise, what if we decided that balance just wasn't that important?
I'm not talking about a FPS here - I mean a full fledged MMORPG.
I'm wondering if the attempt to get 'balance' ends up ruining games more than helping and if really doesn't do anything for the player base.
People want balance because they want a fair fight in PvP encounters and they also want to make money in PvE at roughly the same rate as everyone else. When balance isn't in place people end up getting owned (Problem 1) and they end up chasing FOTM builds (Problem 2) which is exasperating for everyone involved.
I submit for your consideration that the solution of Rock/Paper/Scissors doesn't answer any of the problems it pretends to solve.
1: Rock will always get owned by Paper (ownage still happens)
2: Everyone ends up having at least 3 builds, pulling them out as populations change.
^--- In short, even the Gold Standard Strategy of balance ends up accomplishing very little.
In addition to introducing no real solution I wonder if attempts at balance create more problems than it is worth.
1: The expectation of balance (which will never occur) sours the player base.
2: The gameplay is turned to oatmeal - since every class can kills boss X easily there is no challenge along the lines of "sure, you did it with your mage but can you do it with your warrior?" The answer "sure I can, the developers have ensured balance." is BORING.
3: The constant tweaking to get balance is constantly changing the value of skills - I worked hard to get skill X leveled, oh, now it is nearly worthless. <-- LOTRO did ALOT of this for PvP.
It seems to me that chasing the balance unicorn can be more harmful than good.
Maybe just let class X be OP and allow those interested in a challenge/variety pursue the other classes?
So here, for the sake of a discussion and just for a thought exercise, what if we decided that balance just wasn't that important?
I'm not talking about a FPS here - I mean a full fledged MMORPG.
I'm wondering if the attempt to get 'balance' ends up ruining games more than helping and if really doesn't do anything for the player base.
People want balance because they want a fair fight in PvP encounters and they also want to make money in PvE at roughly the same rate as everyone else. When balance isn't in place people end up getting owned (Problem 1) and they end up chasing FOTM builds (Problem 2) which is exasperating for everyone involved.
I submit for your consideration that the solution of Rock/Paper/Scissors doesn't answer any of the problems it pretends to solve.
1: Rock will always get owned by Paper (ownage still happens)
2: Everyone ends up having at least 3 builds, pulling them out as populations change.
^--- In short, even the Gold Standard Strategy of balance ends up accomplishing very little.
In addition to introducing no real solution I wonder if attempts at balance create more problems than it is worth.
1: The expectation of balance (which will never occur) sours the player base.
2: The gameplay is turned to oatmeal - since every class can kills boss X easily there is no challenge along the lines of "sure, you did it with your mage but can you do it with your warrior?" The answer "sure I can, the developers have ensured balance." is BORING.
3: The constant tweaking to get balance is constantly changing the value of skills - I worked hard to get skill X leveled, oh, now it is nearly worthless. <-- LOTRO did ALOT of this for PvP.
It seems to me that chasing the balance unicorn can be more harmful than good.
Maybe just let class X be OP and allow those interested in a challenge/variety pursue the other classes?
Comments
Balance ensures challenge and risk.
Which are the cornerstones of a good PvP game. In a PVP game never should the class/race combo of your opponent determine how hard or easy the fight will be, it should always be a risk engaging in any fight.
When that risk is removed (lack of balance allowing for OP classes and builds) the game become boring, stagnant, if a player can enter a fight and know they have a better than 90% chance to win, then the whole point of PvP combat is moot, they may as well over level a PvE game and get the same experience. And the receiver of said attack by an opponent they have no ability to kill or defend against, will wonder why they are dealing with this in a PvP game as opposed to playing a PvE game as well.
See, the whole point of a PvP game is the challenge of facing another player, a test of skill and ability, when balance is not set up well in these games, it's no longer a test of skill or ability, but about Balance.
In the end the game gets flooded by these OP builds, and everyone that wants to be viable in PvP is now forced to conform to these cookie-cutter OP build, or deal with never having any chance to fight in a PvP game.
Keep in mind, the whole point of having various classes and races in an MMO, is so that players should not have to be playing cookie-cutter builds, poor balance brings that exact problem back. Where you end up with a 'One build to rule them all"
Well those games are short lived, as not everyone wants to play that one build, so they often are left with the choice of being a loot pinata or quit.
Now, that is why Balance is Important.
If players do not feel like they at least have a remote fighting chance, they are not going to stay around in a PvP focused game. End of that Discussion. They simply won't, and the game Dies.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
There are several reasons why melee is always much harder - no developer seems to care.
First, I have to say the phrase loot piñata is a win.
Second, on to the disagreement - while I agree with your point in principle I don't know if it ever actually works out that way. I've not seen a game yet where a 'One build to rule them all' hasn't emerged - this despite the developer's best efforts to achieve balance.
The benefits of balance never seem to be realized. The constant tweaking ends up creating a never ending rotation of FOTM builds that people end up chasing - or simply ignoring FOTM to play their weaker class - the end result being either more work to keep up or resigning oneself to being a weaker class which is exactly the same result of not trying to balance at all.
Again, this is about MMORPGs, not FPS or other games that are only PvP.
So to respectfully push back:
1: I've not seen balance achieved in such a manner that a FOTM hasn't emerged.
2: I've not seen balance achieved such that it is less work for the players.
Generally speaking, perfect balance seems to only occur in games that are one dimensional and boring (checkers), IMHO. I'm toying with the idea that maybe, just maybe, abandoning balance and focusing on making the game fun may be a better approach. Could imbalance be fun?
Talk of balance issues is perfectly relevant at this point.
Apparently in LOTRO (a few years ago, not the current developers) they couldn't bother to test stuff and determine it was OP until everyone had used the store to buy up the latest FOTM only to nerf it back down to what it should have always been.
In short, I think maybe we're getting played here.
RPG = role playing game . . . so classes should serve as roles. The roles don't have to be equal. Important but not equal.
On an American Football team, each position has a role, the quarterback is the most important, but the other roles have to function well to succeed. I think games should be similar. Different roles, roles that aren't even remotely equal, but in combination it is important.
Sort of like how Starcraft 2 plays.
You can see my sci-fi/WW2 book recommendations.
This isn't a signature, you just think it is.
As such, I don't think there will ever be a chance any RPG reaches "perfect" balance, but I feel they should at least strive to balance things to the point where there's valid and legitimate arguments to be had for multiple strategies/classes/builds/what have you.
For me, even in a PvP game, if you give me rogue skills such that I may not be able to kill a warrior or a mage, but I'm a totally pain in the ass to find - as I loot dungeon chests and pick locks - to me that is a form of balance and PvP which is interesting.
Sort of like how a clam wins the PvP encounter when the seagull cannot get the shell open. Sure, the clam will never kill the seagull but the little guy can still win. That type of variety isn't always considered by those who want tit-for-tat damage 'balance'.
I'd like to see more of that.
What if you had a class completely immune to magic but could only do bare minimum damage to a mage? I wish developers would explore these things a bit more.
I can say that and yet affirm it is a great design.
If you broke up the realms into cities (think Shadowbane) then you'd have my interest.
The DaOC realm design is a little too sterile/formulaic/neat & tidy for me.
Think of it this way.
Lets say we all go out to play a game of golf.
We are allowed to pic our gear set up.
We can have. These Following Choices:
Ok lets play a game a game of golf.
Now, I am going to admit, the above looks kinda silly, but that is what bad balance actually looks like when applied to a real situation. The handicap is not a handicap where it matters, it's frivolous and superficial, where the real abilities that affect the outcome of game remain, in every way are unaffected, and in many ways game breaking in power.
Now, sure, some people might take options 2 - 4 for the giggles of it, just to see how bad they do, or even for the novelty of it, or maybe because a really cool hat is attractive. But they won't last, the idea of playing with inferior or even badly aligned equipment will lose it's interest very quickly.
Ok getting back to Balance.
The main key to balance is there needs to be a trade off, or, a counter.
Sure Rock-Paper-Scissors is some kind of golden ideal, but the problem is very seldom does this work, because it all too often ends up with a game full of just Rocks and Paper, because the Dev's never put in a Scissors to that equation.
Lets use this game.. ok Mages are the OP Problem.. so.. what class would/should work well against them?
Then it's simply a matter of laying that class out in such a manner that they destroy Mages, without also killing everyone else.This is often the problem, because they made the Mage OP, so anything that can kill the Mage can kill anyone and everyone else.
This is mainly a result of just flat out bad class/build design.
This is sometimes the result with a theme being OP in it's own right.
a great example of this was the Thief in GW2. They had Stealth, DPS, and Speed, but Mid Armor and HP. This was passed off as "Balanced". reality was, that the ability to jump out of hiding and one attack kill almost anyone was OP AF. But if they removed any single trait, the class a whole pretty much died.
In those cases, sometimes it's better to simply remove the class, and see how balance works then. How does the PvP play out.
Now, I have not met a dev yet that openly admitted that they screwed up with a class. Too much vanity and pride I guess. Anyway.
The other sometimes problem is just numbers are bad. This can be fixed with some simple revisions.
The problem is, when there is a problem, figuring out what the problem really is.
In this case, it would be a question "What is it about Mages that is making them OP" and can this be fixed with a simple number change, perhaps there is a bug that multiplying their damage as opposed to adding it up (This happens a lot in EA), or is the class as it's designed a problem and not synergizing with how the other classes are designed.
That is something they need to work out.
This is what PvP is, at the core of every PvP sits this foundation idea, that the Best GAMER wins, that is the whole point of playing a PvP game to start with, to compete against other players, and test your skill and abilities against them.
In these games, yes, the best skilled, best coordinated players with the fastest reflexes should always win, no different than any other kind of competitive game.
This basic foundation of PvP, and is not going to change, no matter what the platform is.
Some games have tried to address this by putting a focus on large scale battles so they can try to mix the good in with the bad to make for a more homogeneous encounter, but even in these situations, the best players still rise to the top, they get the most kills, they form the best guilds and teams.
Because that is the very nature of PvP.
The Best Players Win.
ya know what
Lets use another game.
Have you played Chess?
In Chess, the game is what would be considered perfectly balanced. Two players, have all the same tools, and the best player wins.
That is an ideal balance, when the tools given to you are the same. Now some may say this stagnant or boring, but the game has been around for a few hundred years and still doing pretty good for itself.
Yes, you will not win a game of Chess against a Grand Master, any more than you will win a game of CS against a Twitch Monkey, or a game of Pick Up Ball against an NBA player. But that is the very nature of what PvP is.
And you will have to come to terms with this if you plan to keep playing PvP games.
Now, on top this, bad balance makes this even worse. Because the best players will always use the best builds to give them the best edge to win.
So promoting poor balance just means you are setting yourself up to lose more and have less choices open to you to pick from if you want to play a PvP game.
There is simply no advantage to NOT having a well balanced game, which is why PvP MMO's are struggling, and games like Overwatch, Fortnight, PUBG, and other MOBA's, Arena Games, and BG's are growing.
Because if you are going to lose, I'd rather lose to a better player, than lose because I didn't play Min-max build XYZ.
1) Players are usually comparing 1v1 PvP, not group PvP, where teamwork trumps balance.
2) Balance makes everything "the same", with different bells and whistles.
I guess in multiplayer games "diversity" is a bad thing
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Balance does not make "everything the same" if it is done well, balance is about power and counters.
There are games that are designed around 1vs1 and others around team play. But, even in these games, balance needs to happen to make things work.
The issue with games that use 'Team" play as an excuse, often citing the Rock-Paper-Scissors balance act, is they all too often just end up with a game full of Rocks and Paper, because they never put in the Scissors.
Let me give you a great example of this unfolding.
Lets Make a Cleric! They can heal, they have Mid Armor, low HP, Low DPS, but.. this is fine.. because they can heal.. right. they will keep the others alive.
Lets make a Thief. Which can hide, does High DPS, moves fast, has low armor and low HP. This is fine, they can do a lot of burst stealth damage, but can't sustain a fight, this is balance.. right?
Lets make a Warrior, that has Mid DPS, High Armor. This is great, because they need the thief to do the Optimal DPS, and the Cleric to heal them in a fight. this is Balance.. right?
Lets make a Wizard. Amazing ranged DPS, can kill anyone but the Warrior in one hit. Low Armor, Low HP.. it's balanced really.. you know.. damage vs armor.
Nope..
What really happens is the Thief comes out of hiding, kills the cleric in one attack barrage, hides and runs away before the warrior or Wizard can respond, than.. pops out of hiding and kills the Wizard, hides and runs away, and finally sets down to play a attrition game against the Warrior, because the thief can fully control the engagement.
Yah.. that rock-paper-scissors worked like sand in an engine block.
See the problem now?
As opposed to classes, You simply have a base Starting Build, and series of augment abilities.
Armor -
Hit Points -
Weapon Melee -
Weapon Ranged -
Stealth -
Healing -
Control Abilities -
Stealth Detection -
Life Siphon -
Magic Deflection -
Retaliation -
Shield -
Magic Negating -
Abilities that Counter/Stop Healing
Physical Damage Mitigation -
Magical Damage Mitigation -
Etc.
Then you give each player a set number of points to put into these abilities and allow them to build whatever they want.
They would be limited in how much they can do and how far they can augment any of these things.. as such no one can have everything.. and there would be no way to know what the Opponent has taken.
How does this work to balance the game?
Well.. for starters, it adds risk to the game.
Which is a core part of a PvP game, that uncertainty of the outcome of a fight.
If a player took stealth and put a lot of points into it and thus depended upon it for them to be able to control the fight in their favor, they have no way to know if their opponent can see though it or not.. until AFTER they start the fight, and if the opponent can see though stealth, they lost all the advantages of stealth.
Equally so, if someone put points into Stealth Detection, and was facing someone who was not using any kind of stealth abilities, the other player may have an advantage in that fight, because they might have put more into straight up combat as opposed to stealth/detection.
While some things may become common or a necessity, other things could be all across the board.
But if you really want to know how to balance a game, give players many options, and allow them to build their own balance in the game.
It might surprise you what some players create and how effective some of their ideas are.
Substitute the word "balance" for Jerusalem.
"True friends stab you in the front." | Oscar Wilde
"I need to finish" - Christian Wolff: The Accountant
Just trying to live long enough to play a new, released MMORPG, playing New Worlds atm
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. Pvbs 18:2, NIV
Don't just play games, inhabit virtual worlds™
"This is the most intelligent, well qualified and articulate response to a post I have ever seen on these forums. It's a shame most people here won't have the attention span to read past the second line." - Anon
Note: In that scenario I die as well.
1: reflexes
2: strategy
3: teamwork
4: puzzle solving
There should be more to PvP then just reflexes, which in the case of Unreal Tournament, it was mostly reflexes.
Really, though, players whining about class balance isn't news. Games should make it so that every class has a point, rather than class A being better than class B in every possible circumstance. But if for every possible pair of classes, you can make a reasonable case for A being better than B, and also for B being better than A, that's probably good enough. If a considerable fraction of the playerbase prefers A to B and also a considerable fraction prefers B to A, then you're set on balance, at least among those two classes.