Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Balancing around 1v1 vs group PvP
Wandering Mist
Member, Founder, Kickstarter, Alpha One, Alpha Two, Early Alpha Two
As someone who rarely engages in PvP in mmorpgs I'd like to hear everyone else's opinions on this. Often times class balancing revolves around either 1v1 or group play (very rarely can you do both). The question is, which do you prefer? Would you rather all classes be balanced around 1v1, meaning that any class can beat any other class based on skill level? Or would you prefer classes be balanced around group play?
Hypothetically of course, since we all know that true balance in games is both almost impossible and undesirable.
Hypothetically of course, since we all know that true balance in games is both almost impossible and undesirable.
0
Comments
I don't mind playing solo in an MMO or close to it. you can always do pick up groups, and makes online friends that way. as far as the balance goes; if you try to make an open world PvP balanced on both a PvE and PvP you do harm to your game in 2 ways.
1. The Attributes of the game as well as the mechanics of what you can do and how you can move around and manipulate the environment needs to be kept to a minimum to ensure both a PvE and PvP balance can lead to boring stagnant gameplay over time.
2. You cut back on half your game; keeping the diversity low, players won't need to work on separate builds and turn the game into a glamour war.
I really like this approach tbh. I hated it, when they started to homogenize all the classes in WoW. No class should be able to fill every niche.
A rogue should be superior to a cloth wearer because that is what they are supposed to do, while they should fail against plate wearers, because they are NOT designed to fight against armoured enemies. Rangers should be strong against tanks because they (hopefully) have the mobility to kite them and wear them down.
Yeah I only played a little bit of BDO and that's the way it felt to me and I never played it sense, its like all classes are DPS classes with different ascetics and slightly different game play mechanics
Diablo 3 is much like this as well, the game needs to be played the way the devs want you to play depending on the current season. although hardocre/softcore kinda matter. it doesn't fit the MMO template
As a player who enjoys small group pvp play I am very much looking forward to the class reveals and how they play.
There will always be talented players that rise above.
I also hope the game is based on active abilities when it comes to theory crafting rather that stats. For example if you look at eso everybody claims that they have a unique build with different stats yet the active abilities are excacly the same like everybody else
In this game, 6v6 team based shooter, there are certain classes that excel at various things. Slower but tankier characters are countered by quick or high damage characters for example.
You have characters who are strong against others, and will usually best them simply because of the tool belt they have negates or out performs that other class.
This is a hard counter.
You then have others, who will do okay against the other class, but they aren't at a huge advantage. They will probably beat that class, but best done with support.
This is a soft counter.
Now some hard counters can be turned into soft counters because of support skills from your team, as well as some soft counters can be hard counters because of their team.
You see your class hard counter coming, boom, you now have support class buffs from your teammates, and the fight is on.
This is the essence of team PvP for me. Having group cohesion, allowing for your weaknesses to be filled in by other's strengths. Even though your class may be weak to one, it can be strong to another, and you should know which is which in order to have your group prioritize.
There are of course some drawbacks, and I could get more in depth but I hate writng books on here if I can help it. But this system I feel lends itself to true meaningful team play.
It also allows for balance of 1v1 on the macro scale. There's just some enemies you will really struggle with, and some you won't. It will in theory make people pick their battles and encourage grouping.
Also, even the 1v1 PvP combat isn't really balanced for classes. There will be some rock-paper-scissors issues there.
When you try to balance many classes for 1v1 they all just become too similar.
Classes in an RPG should be designed to fit in a fully fleshed out world, with combat, utility, and personality-based skills, not constricted to being designed for arena simulations.
The three strongest pvp classes are Ninja>Warrior>Lancer
Lancer is a tank with a giant shield and spear (spartan basically) and is a monster in pvp with chains that can pull and stun as well as a few abilities that allow for almost permanent stun locking if you are setup correctly and know the proper rotation. the downside is they are not very agile.
Warrior is a dual-wielding sword user and is basically Kirito. It is a very quick and single-target focused class. Also capable of stun locking anyone and if you get caught by a warrior then you are dead unless you are a ninja or lancer.
The ninja was designed to be a pure pvp class. It is not very useful in pve, but could get by. I have watched skilled people play ninja and walk through 5-10 people before being caught and brought down in arena pvp. They are extremely agile and has a lot of aoe, cc, and evasion skills, as well as some skills that make them completely invincible for 2-3 seconds at a time. They are naruto in a nutshell XD BROKEN AS FUCK
This sounds... Terrible.
Why go any other class than Ninja if you're going to PvP?
And perma stun locking is dumb. I was glad when they addressed this on the last live stream and said it wouldn't likely be in AoC.
Because ninjas get kicked from many pve activities for being near useless.
There are a lot of people that would take the buff healer mystic instead of a ninja because they will buff AND do more dps half the time. PVP-wise the ninja may be the best at killing, but if you want to make someone rage and throw their pc out a window even if they are a top tier pvp player in the best gear, then play a priest
The stun lock is a bit much, but for the most part every class has pro and a con. Like ninjas, they may be the best class for pvp (some argue it is a the warrior and in some situations I admit they are), but can be put down easily since they are cloth wearers and only need to be caught once and they die nearly instantly.
Technically each bracket although similar is a differtent game. For example a class could be over powered in 1v1 an not in 5v5 or 3v3. Oddly enought just going from 2v2 to 3v3 brackets requires a jump in skill and different strategies.
So Ideally there should be pvp game balance per bracket. So the class that is great and over powered in 1V1 will be nerfed in 1v1 but since it would be impractical to have the same class as part of your 3v3 then they would get buffed in 3v3. But this gets into a lot of game mechanics. Same thing for bigger maps like 100vs100
Whatis true in 100vs100 might not be true in 3v3 as far as comps and which is best class to have.
But think Steves statement about balancing pvp around the 3v3 bracket is a sound choice without getting over involved with game mechanics.
I'm curious as to where you got the 3v3 figure when it comes to balance. Last I heard it was just a general "group" focused balance, without a specific size mentioned. Can't find anything on the wiki either.
The only thing I can find that this could be taken from is this quote.
"The idea behind the system is that you're kind of skirting the line through these augmentations of your role, right. We have the traditional holy trinity that's present in class designs for MMOs and it's often that those either are not deviated at all or completely deviated from entirely. The augment is to kind of offer a balance between that where you still maintain the semblance of that trinity system while offering the opportunity to customize your play experience towards one of the other angles in the triangle." – Steven Sharif
Pulled from https://ashesofcreation.wiki/Roles#Balancing
Holy Trinity is however not the same as 3v3 but could be where OP got it from,not knowing what the term really means.
In a game with Open-World PvP .. 1v1s are going to happen inevitably. However, there's another way to look at this.
Group-Play incentivizes more PvE-play ( more so than Solo-play )
Solo-Play Incentivizes more PvP-play ( more so than Group-Play )
such as .. DaoC, ShadowBane and DarkFall being more PvP-oriented. And EQ and SWG being more PvE-oriented ( or PvE-friendly) .
Very similar to that saying … " both sides of the same coin " ( but with (slightly) different results )
At the end of the day, Group-Play is more prevalent in both PvE and PvP ( Arena-PvP & Open-World PvP ). The major difference being that PvE has a .. better track-record of retaining more players.
Neither is preferred over the other - I like group-play and 1v1 equally.
But group-play has the potential to add diversity for 1v1s - they both intertwine.
Rather than thinking that 1v1s & group-play function in contradiction with each other … they could function in a way that compliments ( or assist ) one another ( the image below )
I really hope this makes sense
EDIT: And if this just a rough-representation of the Base/Primary Archetypes, imagine what the this might look like with the Secondary Archetypes included :0
Cleric in the back healing, send in the rogue to take them out quickly. Tanks pushing the front line, have the mage rain a fiery death from above. Rogues sneaking around, send in the rangers to light them up.
xD
its not a literal representation of the real thing, its just to give an idea as to what their going for ( or so i think )
I always felt it was necessary to have good & bad match-up against classes. When facing your counter, even if the defeat is unavoidable, the skill would permit do die honourably by giving a hell of a hard time to the opponnent.
I hope that in AOC the classes will be made in a way where even if the fight is hard, there is enough depth to the mechanics that you can make some sort of comeback. You see those fights were you wait for the one & only opportunity to overturn the situation and take the control of the fight are the best ones.
Regarding the group pvp, I can't think of a "balance" at all, what is a balanced group fight in your eyes ?
I mostly did group fights like 6*max vs X ennemies and very rarely large scale battles. And depending on the current situation & many aspects, it was different everytime.
To me the "group balance" would not depend on how the classes are made but how one is able to synergyse with it's teamates and make the best use of their tools. Be it like wombo combos, tactics, or even strategies in large scale battles.
To summ it up my view of balance would be that knowledges & mastery would bring greater power than things like bad match-ups, stats etc... So the classes would be balanced in the way they all provide very a high skill ceiling. Basicaly if you know the game & how to fight, then you may be able to win.
at 40:15
Not quite sure were you are comming from. Forums are designed to discuss things do not see screaming or ranting kind of like a child I suppose you were trying to implicate.
You will get it and you will play it Yes seen this type of post from you on numerous times. Most of the time bringing down the hammer on ideas that are contrary Ashes of Creation. Think you are on some Crusade to stand up for Ashes of Creation thing is no war going on here.
In my last post just wanted to say that I was not mistaken or fed this forum inaccurate information. He actaully did say that. Does not mean I am making demands or ranting or screaming. Maybe it is all that is in your head. I type one way and you read another way.
As far as it is not going to impact anything at this point heard that before I tried to to tell you this but you will not listen.
The point at which were most things do not have any impact is Beta By that time they are just polishing up the game making final tweets and testing it out on real servers. So No I do not expect to many changes at that pont.
Further more I like to add game balance is not finalized at luanch by any means. One of the devs said PvP game balance is an ongoing thing like for the next 50 years. It is not like asking for an undead campaign. PvP game balance is cheap and not so time consuming. It is all game mechanics.
So Even after launch posts like this could have an impact on the game and I will gaurantee you players will be posting about pvp gamebalance for the entire life the game.
Really do not know where you get this do not post does not make a difference mentallity. Cause it has already been decided. Seen you do those types of posts before. I remember you making a post about how people sound like cry babies too or something like that to just take the game as is. Maybe it is in your mind.
Really which posts do think are ranting and screaming. Now before you answer you will not be telling anything about the posts you will only be telling me How your mind perceives what you read.
You made this statement about balance being around 3v3 brackets. While they have said multiple times that balance is going to be a constant process and that they plan on basing it on group dynamics, no one else remembers it being "3v3 brackets". You were asked to provide a citation and gave the "I know I heard that before." excuse. Now if you can find it I will admit that is something I and many others may have missed, but I think like usual you are just spinning shit to fit the narrative you want to happen. The problem that is to be avoided is newer people looking for information then quote you and bullshit takes on a life of its own.
Can we get citation for this 3v3 bracket being what balance is based around?
I have most citations, but I don't have this one.
That's for instanced-based PvE, but I don't know if that will apply to PvP or not.