1 VS 1 really?

After thinking about this for a long time, I asked myself why would Steven early on declare they won't balance 1 vs 1? It seems odd stating that when we know already from experience that in any mmropg the developers always start meddling into class metas by tweaking their abilities and so forth.

Before you know it, the community will be in up and arms about what's being Nerf and what's getting a buff? After investing for a year or two and find out that your class that your playing will either get Nerf or get a buff will create other players to respond? We've all been on this road before, so you might as well say class balance is just a natural part of an mmorpg development and we will strive to make it fair for everyone.

Because as soon as you start "balancing" class abilities, the 1 vs 1 argument falls apart because you might discover that your class might of gained a buff and now it's viable in combat whether it's 1 vs 1 or in group combat? Also, with the introduction of new gear sets that might make it into the game via expansions, you might find something that will compliment your abilities which you didn't have before and make your class a better competitor.

Also, when everyone reaches end game and are gearing themselves up to the best of what the game can offer regardless of metas, it's a very fine margin of a certain class being good only in groups but not 1 vs 1. From my experience, an mmorpg that I play, most players who have a good dual builds also are good in group PVP. And one of the reasons for that is because the game does not have specific gear for PVP vs PVE.

Another reason why people might start complaining is that a game like Ashes has open world PVP and arenas. So, does that mean the arenas will be limited for only group play like 2 vs 2 etc..? Also, the different PVP systems like siege and guild wars does not mean that you will always be in a group, you might end up defending yourself alone against another person when most of your buddies are resurrecting and on their way. Different scenarios can play out which will make your class equally important for group play and solo.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

mrwaffles

Neurath wrote: »

It is likely the rogue and ranger will be Hard Counters to Mages and Summoners.

as i will create 1 of each of these classes heres hopping lol

Demonhunter1

I was thinking the same thing, say for the sake of argument a rogue which is my favorite class is a hard counter to mage in a 1 vs 1. But I started to level a fighter, and my fighter is only good against a ranger. So this gives an incentive to create alts to counter other classes for 1 vs 1 but the bad part is that you might not be able to play your favorite class. So, I can't play my rogue to counter a ranger or a summoner I have to switch my class.

Songcaller

None of us can defeat all foes. We can blur lines through specs, skill, attributes and secondary. It is natural that a Physical Attacker wont be able to take out a standard Fighter or Tank because a standard Fighter or tank will be in Heavy Armour (Highest Physical Resistance).

I've theory crafted to a certain degree but until we know more about the game my theory crafting has stalled. My theory crafting has guided my decisions so far but there are gaps in information. I dont believe my theory crafting is infallible or complete.

HiddenDaggerInn

I see no problem with it, encourages you to group if your counters might be lurking.

Aeri

valerian wrote: »

So, I can't play my rogue to counter a ranger or a summoner I have to switch my class.

Or, you take the chance and hope your skill on your rogue can overcome any hard-counter-ness of those classes. And if they end up killing you, well, maybe the next ranger or summoner you meet will suck a bit more.

Demonhunter1

I still think we should be able to play our favorite class and have a fighting chance against all other classes 1 vs 1. Skill should be the determinate factor in an ideal world. There are lots of mmorpg's that give you a fighting chance against all other classes provided your same level and gear compare to your opponent.

Songcaller

You will have a chance to succeed but there will be Hard Counters. There would be no strategy if any class can kill any class in 1v1. Everything would boil down to 1v1.

We dont want:

Got 250vs250? No worries. It's just 250 1v1s.

Wouldn't sound exciting, interesting or good to me. Which is why I backed Ashes and appreciate the concepts.

Beekeeper

Think about it like this: Knives are your favourite weapons, ever. They're just the coolest. But if you try to fight someone with a sword, you can't reach properly, the sword is longer and you're at a disadvantage. Ergo, you need to get tricksy if you want to keep using a knife but beat a sword.

That doesn't mean it's impossible for a knife-wielder to beat a sword, just that it's a lot harder. As long as you are aware of your weaknesses, like the inability to burst down heavy armor, you can start working out the tactics and maybe learn to overcome those disadvantages.

Ravudha

valerian wrote: »

and no matter how hard I try I will lose even if our gear is on par.

The way they've talked about gear, level, and class in PvP, I don't think it'll be this extreme; your skill will count and you can still win in these cases.

Aeri

Ravudha wrote: »

valerian wrote: »

and no matter how hard I try I will lose even if our gear is on par.

The way they've talked about gear, level, and class in PvP, I don't think it'll be this extreme; your skill will count and you can still win in these cases.

This.

I imagine it's going to be more along the lines of:

If you are facing another player with an equal skill level, and they are playing a class that is a hard counter to yours, you will lose. Rock beats Scissors

If you are facing another player with a lower skill level, and they are playing a class that is a hard counter to yours, you might lose, you might win. Rock normally beats Scissors, but this Rock is made of gypsum, while the Scissors are made of good steel. Maybe Rock crushes Scissors. Maybe Scissors are able to hold together and split Rock apart.

tugowar

And yet there are 1v1 arenas

HiddenDaggerInn

think about a archer in the movie "Braveheart" if there is a reason they stay in the back at range, because they're protected from the infantry who would waste them, this is why "flanking" was so important to gain a tactical advantage over weaker units and take the element of surprise. Would you expect that aarcher to go toe to toe with a hardened skilled swordsman, if you were honest it would be no.

Demonhunter1

tugowar wrote: »

And yet there are 1v1 arenas

Exactly, but it's not only that it's an open world pvp, meaning you can find a solo player and gank em anywhere in the world or even if that player fights back and you both get flagged then no corruption and you end up dueling that person.

So, the point is that you are allowing 1 vs 1 also in the game but not actually balancing the classes towards it.

Sandman wrote: »

think about a archer in the movie "Braveheart" if there is a reason they stay in the back at range, because they're protected from the infantry who would waste them, this is why "flanking" was so important to gain a tactical advantage over weaker units and take the element of surprise. Would you expect that aarcher to go toe to toe with a hardened skilled swordsman, if you were honest it would be no.

Well there is weapon swapping in the game, a skilled fighter in the game can also use a ranged weapon or a shield and close the gap on an opponent (archer) if he's skilled enough. Besides this is a fantasy game where the combat doesn't exactly reflect "real life" so in a fantasy game your powers are make belief like teleportation to escape or close the gap abilities etc..

NelsonRebel

Aeri wrote: »

Ravudha wrote: »

valerian wrote: »

and no matter how hard I try I will lose even if our gear is on par.

The way they've talked about gear, level, and class in PvP, I don't think it'll be this extreme; your skill will count and you can still win in these cases.

This.

I imagine it's going to be more along the lines of:

If you are facing another player with an equal skill level, and they are playing a class that is a hard counter to yours, you will lose. Rock beats Scissors

If you are facing another player with a lower skill level, and they are playing a class that is a hard counter to yours, you might lose, you might win. Rock normally beats Scissors, but this Rock is made of gypsum, while the Scissors are made of good steel. Maybe Rock crushes Scissors. Maybe Scissors are able to hold together and split Rock apart.

This is how I would imagine it will be.

But then again, we dont know yet how the classes abilties and passives synergize yet. Or how potent each nodes progression path will affect players.

In other mmos you can pretty concretely answer this is a couple ways. But with AoC its harder to determine just because we know that there will be religions and node area progression that will influence a characters power along with any item sets, passives, world skill lines and any temporary buffs from sources like being a city leader.

Ultimately they may not all have a large impact but we'll have to wait and see. People see balance like a kaleidescope depending what their prefered class or style is. Myself included sometimes, though I try to be objective as possible.

Xolzec

BobzUrUncle wrote: »

The wikipedia has a section on balancing and Steven stated that they want the rock-paper-scissors dynamic. That is why they are not balancing 1v1.

There will be match ups in 1v1s where one class will be superior to another; and that application should be a rock-paper-scissors dynamic. We want there to be counter-play between the different classes... Instead it's going to be a group focused balance, where as long as you have the diversity of classes present, that's going to be an equal level playing field. It's going to be very dependent on skill and strategy.[3] – Steven Sharif

I hope the rock-paper-scissors dynamic isn't the same one WoW classic had, where warlocks provided the 4th element (mushrooms) :>

MrPancake

I remember playing Silkroad Online and always losing to the same skill-type. Some fights you can not win. Then again, if I was in a group, I could nuke them easily. I'm glad they don't balance to 1v1 even though I will probably get in a lot of 1v1 situations. There's no risk vs reward anymore in recent games. Anyone can win anything. I like situations where you HAVE TO run because you're a summoner and there's a fighter / rogue coming your way. It makes the game exciting. You either run and outsmart him or he catches up to you and you die. 1 min later you see a solo bard and you rek him.
Sometimes you're frustrated and sometimes you feel invincible. I'm glad Steven realizes this.

Naxxaz

WoW's VP once called arenas their biggest mistake, because it made everything in the game so much harder to balance.

The game, at it's core, is trying to make people depend on each other, not to mention the amount of work that would require.
I mean, the Bard is the best example, they focus on AoE buffs and heals- so do we give them and other classes a 1v1 spec to be on par with others, do we just exclude Bards from 1v1's?

Not to say there aren't positives about balancing for 1v1's, but this game is a really bad place for it, it's very counter intuitive to their entire game philosophy.

Smasher

always a class will have leverage above another but for sure 1v1 should be more or less balanced... eg. if mages can kite 100% a tank/warrior then for sure there should be a gap closure buff for tank/war ... this is present in all MMOs.

HiddenDaggerInn

valerian wrote: »

tugowar wrote: »

And yet there are 1v1 arenas

Exactly, but it's not only that it's an open world pvp, meaning you can find a solo player and gank em anywhere in the world or even if that player fights back and you both get flagged then no corruption and you end up dueling that person.

So, the point is that you are allowing 1 vs 1 also in the game but not actually balancing the classes towards it.

Sandman wrote: »

think about a archer in the movie "Braveheart" if there is a reason they stay in the back at range, because they're protected from the infantry who would waste them, this is why "flanking" was so important to gain a tactical advantage over weaker units and take the element of surprise. Would you expect that aarcher to go toe to toe with a hardened skilled swordsman, if you were honest it would be no.

Well there is weapon swapping in the game, a skilled fighter in the game can also use a ranged weapon or a shield and close the gap on an opponent (archer) if he's skilled enough. Besides this is a fantasy game where the combat doesn't exactly reflect "real life" so in a fantasy game your powers are make belief like teleportation to escape or close the gap abilities etc..

of course he can switch weapons, but he is obvioulsy going to be MUCH more proficient in sword than the bowman, let's not grasp for straws here. In rock,Paper, Scissors people can't have their cake and eait it too. You have to have some weakness.

Nykz

valerian wrote: »

The solo pvp'er is a very large player base also in contrast to group PVP'ers. Given the fact that there are classes who are just going to dominate 1 vs 1 because there are no counter play for it, maybe they will pick up there pitch forks and knock on Steven's door.

I believe the group of arena/battleground players is a lot higher that the amount of solo pvp'ers, I hope the balance PvE content around groups of 8th as stated and PvP contend around 3v3 arena.

Obviously I also hope for some sort of 1v1 balance so one class doesn't destroy you tho you're "a better player".

But as you said, it's basically impossible to make everyone happy.

Aeri wrote: »

If you are facing another player with an equal skill level, and they are playing a class that is a hard counter to yours, you will lose. Rock beats Scissors

If you are facing another player with a lower skill level, and they are playing a class that is a hard counter to yours, you might lose, you might win. Rock normally beats Scissors, but this Rock is made of gypsum, while the Scissors are made of good steel. Maybe Rock crushes Scissors. Maybe Scissors are able to hold together and split Rock apart.

This would pretty much best case scenario I would imagine.

Child Item