Please balance pvp

i keep hearing that intrepid have no plans on balancing classes and there will be a clear advantage in pvp due to picking 1 class over another, i feel like this is a massive mistake, most serious pvpers will spend alot of time grinding dungeons/crafting etc just to be able to duel and participate in open world pvp, not having any balance straight up removes the chance of have any dueling aspect or arenas in this game and if the only real pvp that is happening is seiges the game could get boring super fast at end game, given the fact that the game is still years away from release, intrepid have enough time to resolve this issue and i think it should be deeply looked into if this is being advertised as a pvp game? just my thoughts. what do you guys think?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

D3ATHSPARK

It will be balanced for group pvp, not 1v1. This is an MMO not a dueling simulator. This is the way it should be. You need to think in terms of a group because almost all the content will require one.

Conrad

D3ATHSPARK wrote: »

It will be balanced for group pvp, not 1v1. This is an MMO not a dueling simulator. This is the way it should be. You need to think in terms of a group because almost all the content will require one.

I'm pretty sure Steven also said they won't balance the classes but the archetypes. I don't think this will be a successful balance solution. It will most likely create a lot of mess in pvp

Azherae

There are no current indicators that GvG balance will be terribly difficult, or fail.

Balance normally fails because 'not every option is playing the same game', and those that are 'capable of' or 'best at' playing the 'optimal version of the game', win.

When balancing for rock-paper-scissors, and across multiple groupings, this can be caused to go away.

Using less resource types or 'time based bonuses' helps as well. Simple example:

If one class has a meter that they build up over time and then use to do really big damage, but every other class is balanced around doing slightly less damage than that class, without any meter, then either that class can dominate because it can survive long enough to get the meter and win, or it is 'useless' because it never survives long enough. That class, and the others, are 'playing a different game'. One is 'trying to survive long enough to do big damage' and the others are 'playing for consistent damage'.

Now, give all classes a powerful ability to block damage once. The 'meter build' class is even weaker, even though that ability 'doesn't feel like much' between the other classes. It feels balanced, to them. They're reducing 'big attacks that do 20% damage down to 10%'. If used correctly against the 'meter build' class, then they're 'reducing a big attack that does 50% damage down to 25%'.

The complaints would be wide and varied.

Anyways there aren't any of these in Ashes right now and no indicators based on the types of abilities they've listed, hinted so far, or had in APOC, that indicate this will happen. Except maybe self healing on non-Clerics, and that's probably fine too.

The closer you move to 'all classes being similar and evenly matched' in 1v1, the more you have to push it even closer to 'all classes are basically the same'.

Dygz

Shuiyn wrote: »

I think it should be deeply looked into if this is being advertised as a pvp game? just my thoughts. what do you guys think?

I think Ashes is a PvX game; not a PvP game, and...
This game is focused on large-group objective-based PvP; not duels.

maouw

Just think of pokemon:

all pokemon have weaknesses (with exceptions)
But it's balanced because you create a team of pokemon.

You can do the same in Ashes - create a mixed party to cover each other's weaknesses

Inixia

it seems... idk... a little early to be calling for pvp class balance when we even don't know all the class designs yet?

Certainly will be an issue in the future though (but as others have said probably more based on group mechanics - individual balance is hard given some classes are more designed around infiltrating enemy flanks and picking off weak targets solo (rogue) or supporting other party members (bard), aoe vs stdps, etc...)

Dreoh

Why would you think they wouldn't balance pvp?

Maezriel

If anything Intrepid should scrap the idea for leaderboards in arenas and any other similar instanced PvP. That's exactly the kind of crack that leads people to beg for their class to be buffed b/c their 3 man party just can't win against another 3 man party and no one in this forum can guarantee that Intrepid will hold their ground against all those posts year after year.

When the vast majority of your PvP is in big groups or is just you getting ambushed out in the world the minute imbalances aren't felt nearly as much as they are in something like WoW's arena

Arukoru

Does not a rigid meta form regardless?

I think you'd have to have like an instanced PvP to make this possible since you're trying to balanced the characters in the world they exist. There are a variety of reasons why a class could be exceptionally good in PvP but quite bad in PvE so balancing around PvP may make them totally unviable in group content.

eggus1

The way to keep PvP balanced is to have more than two "sides". Look at Dark Age of Camelot (DAOC). they had three sides. If one became dominant the other two would gang up on them. The other most important mechanic is to ensure that folks can not move from one side to the other during a normal battle period. I am still a big fan of this company and have great hopes.

Dreoh

eggus wrote: »

The way to keep PvP balanced is to have more than two "sides". Look at Dark Age of Camelot (DAOC). they had three sides. If one became dominant the other two would gang up on them. The other most important mechanic is to ensure that folks can not move from one side to the other during a normal battle period. I am still a big fan of this company and have great hopes.

Good thing there's going to be as many sides as there are nodes or guilds or even more

Sathrago

Dreoh wrote: »

eggus wrote: »

The way to keep PvP balanced is to have more than two "sides". Look at Dark Age of Camelot (DAOC). they had three sides. If one became dominant the other two would gang up on them. The other most important mechanic is to ensure that folks can not move from one side to the other during a normal battle period. I am still a big fan of this company and have great hopes.

Good thing there's going to be as many sides as there are nodes or guilds or even more

Sheesh yeah. I'd kill to have no faction-based pvp in WoW. Especially on classic TBC with the horrible queues atm.

Aerlana

Shuiyn wrote: »

i keep hearing that intrepid have no plans on balancing classes and there will be a clear advantage in pvp due to picking 1 class over another,[...] what do you guys think?

If i want fair fight i go on FPS, on Games like For Honor, or any Team versus Team game.

I hated Arena introduction in WoW BC, and continue to think it is a major reason the classes in wow became so poor. With no identity, all really similar to each other

Arena or 1v1 balance needs to class to have less and less specific mechanics. People loved to be able to compete themselves in the arena, and then while there is competition you want it to be fair. And it the more the class have indentities, have specific tools, unique to them, the harder it is to balance game. We all know balance is a hard thing to get. all complained at least one time about balance on their favourite pvp game, be it a mmorpg, a moba, and... hum not in FPS? Because... oh yes, in FPS like CS, like UT, like Quake, all characters are exactly the same... so there is balance.

For Ashes, they clearly said that 1v1 will be all but not balance. right. They also say they want that no class dominates all other. in other word, like a shifumi. the scissor wins against the paper, the paper wins against the rock, and the rock wins against the scissor. 1v1 will be unfair, 2v2 will have many cases unfair. 3v3 a bit better but remains mostly unfair... 10v10 then 50v50 and finally 100v100.
In a shifumi balance system, yes, the low scale PvP fights are unfair, but large scale are fair.

Ashes so chose to have fair game for large scale pvp fight, and prefer having strong class identity over fair 1v1

kevinoozling

I hope for regular(weekly) buffs to the under performing classes and slight nerfs to over performing classes.

We all know how bad it feels when a class/spec is in the bin for a expansion or two. Also getting stomped for the same amount of time by one or 2 classes/specs for the same amount of time

bloodprophet

Good thing they are balancing for groups 8v8 and not for 1v1. Should make it a little easier for them and the rest of us.

Aerlana

kgomodeyb wrote: »

We all know how bad it feels when a class/spec is in the bin for a expansion or two. Also getting stomped for the same amount of time by one or 2 classes/specs for the same amount of time

Again, in 1v1 each class will have its hard counter. it is intended, and it MUST BE THIS WAY

read again what i said just before your post to understand it...

hleV

I feel like this might be a problem when you're solo in open world and engage in PvP. If your class is better vs the opponent's class, you rush him, otherwise your run as you pretty much stand no chance?

akabear

I`m a believer that grouping provides the balance and not so concerned if there is not balance for 1v1.

Light, med, heavy
Close, mid and ranged
Open gear use between classes
Faster lighter hits vs slower heavier hits.
Boosts to others
Seasonal changes: spells that work well in cold and not in heat
Augments

With such a diverse range of classes: Bard, Cleric, Fighter, Mage, Ranger, Rogue, Summoner, Tank, and not knowing so much about each, not even sure where they would start if they did.

To the OP, what area were you thinking?

Azherae

hleV wrote: »

I feel like this might be a problem when you're solo in open world and engage in PvP. If your class is better vs the opponent's class, you rush him, otherwise your run as you pretty much stand no chance?

This is the only reason anyone should be concerned about 1v1 balance, but the OP didn't really post about that. It wasn't ambiguous either, they specifically said that they thought the problem would be 'less PvP' and 'lack of duels'.

But OP also hasn't posted in this thread again...

So unless we wanna convert this into a discussion about 'if you should have to run away', nothing to do but wait for them to answer akabear...

bloodprophet

I don't think the rock , paper , scissors approach and running away is a problem. We don't know yet how far "blurring the lines" arguments and swapping second arechtypes will allow.
What starts as a hard counter maybe can be blurred into a soft counter. Then with gear being agnostic will help as well.

That said I don't think any classes should be balanced 1v1 as was said earlier in this thread that leads to homogenization of the classes and you loose all class identity. I think all the classes should have strengths and weaknesses.

Child Item