PvP game balance heals and self heals.

One of the things that needs to be looked at very carefully is defensive cool downs and self heals.  If your class says does pretty good damage and falls short in self heals (unless most class do not have self heals)     or   defensive cool downs in comparison to other classes then that class is out as far is pvp is concerned.  Having the abilty to heal your self a little  or some defensive cool down while at low health  is critical in pvp. A class that is lacking in this area is no good for pvp.  But looks like all class will be able to spec into cleric and get some self heals.

Same thing if a class has an over abunance of selfheals that might present a problem unless they are a healer and is really squishy and does little dps. But DPS with an over abundance could be a problem.  

Just to give you an example if I have a 20 percent self heal that you do not then you have to do 20 percent more dps to kill me and I would only have to 100 percent damage.   Another point is if I have a class that does really good damage but lacks in self heals.......well dead dps is no dps ....they will not live long enought to do that dps.

Point is defnsive cool downs and self heals have to be looked at very closely.  Another example is if I am playing a class that can provide a defensive cool down to a freindly palyer than that class has the potential to be overpowered.

I have been in situations were I know I played my class better than my opponent, doubled and tripled him in dps but lost cause of self heals.  Have to go will finish post later.

Comments

  • I agree, there needs to be a lot of scrutiny especially with XXX/cleric combos. There could also be issues with the XXX/tank combo also, but until we have more experience and more info on class skills then we don't have much to go on. In a PvP centric game, balance is going to be a major factor but there are some very passionate folks involved in Alpha 1 and 2 who are determined to see this game succeed so I'm sure they'll make sure IS are aware of any such issues.
  • I hope there is a reason to bring healers along in pvp and not just everyone healing themselves.
  • I had fun in EQ2 playing a Fury that could kill our resident DPS expert just because of my regenerative healing.

    PvP in Ashes doesn't look like it is supposed to be focused on one-on-one fights.  It's focus is going to be on group fights.  More commonly, guild wars, caravan attacks.....more rarely, sieges.

    So balance is not going to be as important as strategy and tactics.  And in a battle, every role will be important and not measured in DPS/Heal


  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2018

    Just to give you an example if I have a 20 percent self heal that you do not then you have to do 20 percent more dps to kill me and I would only have to 100 percent damage. 
    20% passive self-healing would be a significant advantage (assuming all other factors are exactly the same). 20% self-healing requiring the used of three or more GCDs, not so much. Regardless, I assume that players will have access to healing potions and other consumables as well, on top of whatever self-heal abilities come with their class. So chances are that everyone will have access to somewhere around 20% self-healing.

    That said, I've seen how poorly-implemented healing abilities have skewed the balance negatively in past games... made worse when devs rush out balance changes without bothering to test them properly. Hopefully AoC will take a more incremental approach to balance change in order to avoid the balance disruptions that plague so many other games.
  • as someone in A1+ and planning on maining a cleric/cleric I will be happy to report back to you on how it goes in PvP (FYI I expect to die many many many times).  Not sure I will find this thread though, feel free to hit me up on Discord, or direct message me once PvP testing has gone on for a few days
  • finndo said:
    as someone in A1+ and planning on maining a cleric/cleric I will be happy to report back to you on how it goes in PvP (FYI I expect to die many many many times).  Not sure I will find this thread though, feel free to hit me up on Discord, or direct message me once PvP testing has gone on for a few days
    I plan on testing a variety of Cleric/X sub-classes. I expect that there will be a lot of new threads popping up once the content creators start streaming and posting videos with actual combat footage. I also plan on testing out the Fighter/X sub-classes as well.

    Feel free to call me out for some duels and healing stress-tests. :smile:
  • A few points that I think are worth while.

    If you are setting up a group of three for PvP, you have 262,144 possible class combinations to pick from.

    There is no way Intrepid can balance each of these combinations - let alone maintain balance when you factor in that with each of those class combinations, players have the ability to pick and chose what augments they utilize. We are now talking tens (or even hundreds) of millions of possible versions of just a 3 man PvP team.

    Balancing this using a one by one method is clearly not possible, and shouldn't even be attempted.

    Rather, the individual skills need to be balanced (and then the distribution of these skills balanced between the classes to maintain a form of class balance).

    There absolutely will be cases where a combination of buffs on a specific class will seem OP - just as every other game has builds that seem OP.

    In a game like WoW, they take away all the freedom (and fun) in order to dictate to players that this is what their class is. They have minimal interaction between classes specifically to avoid situations where players may seem OP due to buffs.

    That isn't what Ashes is doing.

    I don't want a game where the developers pigeon-hole every class and build in to a single space, simply to appease a small group of players notion of how balance should be achieved.

    Look at group builds in Ashes in the way many MMO's have character builds. There may well be a build that is OP, but it will still have it's weaknesses, and there will be a counter to that build before long.

    It is simply an extension of the rock/paper/scissors theme of balance that Intrepid are going for.
  • LiquidSky said:
    I had fun in EQ2 playing a Fury that could kill our resident DPS expert just because of my regenerative healing.

    PvP in Ashes doesn't look like it is supposed to be focused on one-on-one fights.  It's focus is going to be on group fights.  More commonly, guild wars, caravan attacks.....more rarely, sieges.

    So balance is not going to be as important as strategy and tactics.  And in a battle, every role will be important and not measured in DPS/Heal


    While this might be a focus for the game.. 1v1 and small SMALL group pvp will be a big deal to alot of the player base. 

    Balance is crucial.
  • not really.  Two people fighting in a box is a way to only balance two people fighting in a box.

    In the real world there will be lots of mismatched fights.  Ambushes.  Meaningful PvP.  Fighting in as a box with an audience is not meaningful.  

    There will be little reason for tanks to face off against each other while the healers heal, and the DPS try to take down the enemy tank.  Everyone is a target in the real world.  When your caravan lumbers down the road, the healers may be the first ones to die.  The tank may be left standing there with lots of hp's and defence, but no ability to hurt......and get picked off by the pack.

    And if the meaningful PvP is fun.....and how can sieges not be more fun then a cage match?  With dozens if not a hundred people duking it out?  Are people really going say cry out 'stop!' He does 4 dps more then me!  The battle is rigged!

    Napoleon said before the Battle of Bordino...The only art of war is to be stronger at a given place.  

    Life isn't fair...the trick is to make it unfair in your favour, and that will be meaningful PvP in game.

    I actually think that over time, the typical archtypes people are used to will fail..A pure healer or pure tank will be useless in the wild fighting other people.  Sure they will be very useful fighting in a raid against a mob too dumb to switch targets...but in the wild....it will be the hybrids that will win, and numbers with timing.  Not because character 'x' can do more dps, or healing or whatever.
  • My personal opinion/five cents and why I don't really like the idea of superbalancing stuff: 

    Isn't it almost always the case that some classes excell at some things, while others at other things.  I personally believe that one of the biggest mistakes occur when it is strived to achieve perfect balance. Someone will always scream that something is "wrong" as they die to it frequently. That is more often than not their problem, and not a balancing issue.  Keep the imbalence, and just make sure that everyone has some sort of weakness.. Healers for example is more often shut down by hard CC, whereas mages often are shut down by high burst and so on. 

    I personally hope for loads of interesting builds, some performing extremely great in certain types of PvP (group vs solo) while others being more lackluster but contributing in other ways. 

    PS, before you ask, I tend to never go for the most" OP  " /flavor of the month type of thing. I personally actually like the underdog role, because of the pure joy of proving something difficult can work ^.^




  • LiquidSky said:
    not really.  Two people fighting in a box is a way to only balance two people fighting in a box.
    I think Torment's point is that any class needs to have a chance of success in a PvP encounter. This does not require perfect balance between the two classes in question, but there should never be a case where encountering a hostile player of a certain class is an automatic loss.

    In any match-up between a good DPS PvP player vs. a mediocre DPS PvP player, the skilled player should be able to come out the victor the majority of the time. There are some exceptions of course: an AoE focused DPS will never be competitive against an ST focused DPS in a one vs one encounter, but I would hope that the AoE player would have the option to spec into a class-subclass combination that allows for more ST focused play in order to be competitive in different situations (besides, being stuck in the AoE role all the time would be tedious beyond my ability to express).

    Healers and tanks should be able to spec into more DPS-focused combinations that allow them to pit their greater resilience (be it via mitigation it self-heals) against the superior damage of opposing DPS. And more defense-oriented Healers and DPS should be able to pit their skill against opposing DPS in order to escape a hostile encounter.

    I'm absolutely not a fan of the rock-paper-scissor school of thought if it means that player skill is secondary to class choice. I'm certainly not against small comparative advantages among the classes, but I feel that they should be small enough to only be a deciding factor when the skill level of the combatants are near-equivalent.
  • TimeLordx said:

    Isn't it almost always the case that some classes excell at some things, while others at other things.  I personally believe that one of the biggest mistakes occur when it is strived to achieve perfect balance. Someone will always scream that something is "wrong" as they die to it frequently. That is more often than not their problem, and not a balancing issue.  Keep the imbalence, and just make sure that everyone has some sort of weakness.. Healers for example is more often shut down by hard CC, whereas mages often are shut down by high burst and so on. 

    I agree with this, in that I like how some class types are more of a challenge than others.  I don't mean this is the sense that some classes have an advantage over others in the adversarial sense - but rather they are more of a challenge to play and thus offer potentially a greater sense of accomplishment when doing things in the game. 

    This is kind of challenge is more evident in PvE content, and that's what I tend to focus on.  However, I don't think it would be impossible to accomplish in the PvP sense either.  But you're right, making each class as easy to play as the other in all content situations is not the way to go.  

    Some of my greatest memories in these games is accomplishing content with my character or participating in "too small of a group" than was either designed or believed to be possible.  Sure, it might take longer, and might result in many deaths while figuring the situation out, but that victory in the end is the best tasting kind! 
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2018
    Nefelia said:
    " I think Torment's point is that any class needs to have a chance of success in a PvP encounter. This does not require perfect balance between the two classes in question, but there should never be a case where encountering a hostile player of a certain class is an automatic loss.

    In any match-up between a good DPS PvP player vs. a mediocre DPS PvP player, the skilled player should be able to come out the victor the majority of the time. There are some exceptions of course: an AoE focused DPS will never be competitive against an ST focused DPS in a one vs one encounter, but I would hope that the AoE player would have the option to spec into a class-subclass combination that allows for more ST focused play in order to be competitive in different situations (besides, being stuck in the AoE role all the time would be tedious beyond my ability to express).

    Healers and tanks should be able to spec into more DPS-focused combinations that allow them to pit their greater resilience (be it via mitigation it self-heals) against the superior damage of opposing DPS. And more defense-oriented Healers and DPS should be able to pit their skill against opposing DPS in order to escape a hostile encounter.

    I'm absolutely not a fan of the rock-paper-scissor school of thought if it means that player skill is secondary to class choice. I'm certainly not against small comparative advantages among the classes, but I feel that they should be small enough to only be a deciding factor when the skill level of the combatants are near-equivalent. "
    That depends on which they prioritize first - Skill, Gear or Leveling
    Intrepid have stated multiple times that they do not want players to freely change their Spec - they want player's choice to matter. And Healers ... based on what we've seen in PAX, Intrepid does not want the Healer to just solely heal

    For example ... many PAX Testers stated that  the Cleric was OP, more so than the Mage or Ranger. But things are likely to change.

    In short, they've said in a few LiveStreams ... that the Cleric will not be managing HP throughout it's time playing - the Cleric will actually be more active 

    Lastly ... to be more specific , Steven did not say " Rock, Paper, Scissors " ...
     Steven actually said ... " Rock, Paper , Scissors Column Style " so to put things in retrospect ...

    ... this is how i see it 
    • " Rock, Paper, Scissors " = 2D
    • " Rock, Paper, Scissors  Column Style " = 3D
    • Along with this Image below ...




    Its very likely that this could be the case until further info is revealed ... and not literallly like the image ... but to as a Generalize/ Vague Representation
  • ArchivedUserArchivedUser Guest
    edited August 2018
    Eragale said:
    That depends on which they prioritize first - Skill, Gear or Leveling
    Intrepid have stated multiple times that they do not want players to freely change their Spec - they want player's choice to matter
    My understanding was that players could not change their primary class, but that they will be able to change their sub-class on a regular basis (with sensible restrictions, of course). Is that not the case?

    Choices should certainly matter. Choices such as race and class will be permanent, while religion and citizenship will likely have some sort of investment involved (be it in time or in-game currency).

    Sub-class, however, absolutely should be fluid. I'd understand locking sub-class during instances, sieges, and caravan assaults, but I would expect the option to change sub-classes in certain locations (freehold, home, specific buildings in nodes).

    Have the devs addressed that issue conclusively?

    Eragale said:

    In short, they've said in a few LiveStreams ... that the Cleric will not be managing HP throughout it's time playing - the Cleric will actually be more active
    A Cleric being more than just a heal-bot is a good thing. I look forward to seeing how the cleric is effected by its sub-class in Alpha 1.


  • Eragale said:

    In short, they've said in a few LiveStreams ... that the Cleric will not be managing HP throughout it's time playing - the Cleric will actually be more active
    A Cleric being more than just a heal-bot is a good thing. I look forward to seeing how the cleric is effected by its sub-class in Alpha 1.
    Just keep clerics away from my undead I've had enough of people casting turn undead
  • @Nefelia
    Swapping  Secondary-Archetype ( https://youtu.be/G4-Sb3dN2hQ?t=37m44s )
    Intrepid PAX version of the Cleric ( https://youtu.be/UYn9in9UrEs?t=32m52s )

    The PAX Cleric, has likely changed when debuted at PAX West, but it does give you an idea of what they were going
  • Eragale said:
    Swapping  Secondary-Archetype ( https://youtu.be/G4-Sb3dN2hQ?t=37m44s )
    We'll have to see where they go with this. I just hope they don't make the mistake of stifling one's options under the banner of "choices matter".
  • Nefelia said:
    Eragale said:
    Swapping  Secondary-Archetype ( https://youtu.be/G4-Sb3dN2hQ?t=37m44s )
    We'll have to see where they go with this. I just hope they don't make the mistake of stifling one's options under the banner of "choices matter".
    "Choices Matter" is basically the mantra of the development team.

    It's one of the core concepts they are developing the game around.
  • Noaani said:
    "Choices Matter" is basically the mantra of the development team.

    It's one of the core concepts they are developing the game around.
    As far as mantras go, it is not a bad one. They just need to remember to leave room for more freedom in play style.

    Between Eragale's link, and the quote a guildie posted in my guild forums, I am satisfied that the devs are going in the right direction here. This is the quote:

    We don't want you to be able to change your secondary class or the augments you have applied out in the open. We want you to have to make a conscious choice somewhere at a NPC. The level of node necessary for that particular NPC to be available will likely be either at the Village stage or above. So, if you are far out in the wilderness exploring – and we have no instant teleportation in the world – you need to be conscientious of what your choices are; and not be able to change them on-the-fly.[18] – Steven Sharif

    I'd suggest the option to allow players to change their subclass in their freeholds as well. Perhaps Clerics could do so at their shrine, while Fighters have Weapon Racks, Bards have a Music Library, etc. Or maybe a simpler solution if this suggestion created too much work - after all, it would only be fair to give additional purpose to the weapon racks and music library since the shrine is a pre-existing building with a purpose wholly separate from subclass switching.
Sign In or Register to comment.