Lessons from New World MMO (Role Balance Between PVE/PVP)

After playing New World off and on since it launched one aspect of their game that I am curious how AGS will approach the issue in their game is how to balance builds, weapons, roles, between PVE content and PVP content so that each role or build is viable and fun to use in both forms of content.

In New World balance issues are a very real struggle. I'm mostly a pvp player but even in the pve I run it's clear that many roles/builds aren't viable for endgame pve.

In pvp many builds have no semblance of balance and feel really bad to interact with as you can't trade with them in a fair way so running and hiding is the only option.

I'd like to see AoC take a much better approach with much more forethought into combat design than a New World 'throw things at the wall and see what sticks, and even if it doesn't don't balance weapons/roles more than a couple times per year while leaving them in a broken state either unusable or completely dominant and oppressive to others'.

I'm a bit jaded after playing New World with games that don't have a clear picture of how they will balance roles/builds somewhat fairly so they all have a place and function in the game and are viable.

There's a long list of other issues with NW obviously as a game that I hope Intrepid learns from and avoids, but this one stands out for me of late. How would you all like for Intrepid to balance builds/roles between PVE/PVP content?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Songcaller

We will mash the combat out in the tests. Right now the devs listen to our feedback. We should get a decent hybrid system and decent combat based around group play.

What we don't want is the wildstar approach of walling the feedback and forcing scores of kicks in pve (kicks are good just not dozens in rapid succession). The massed pvp in wildstar was also a cluster fuck despite all the warnings given in testing.

Other than that I hope fir a much improved wildstar/tbc hybrid combat game. Action from wildstar and tab from tbc.

Arya_Yeshe

Balancing doesn't just simply happen, this takes time and tools for measuring performance.

Lark Wyll

Neurath wrote: »

We will mash the combat out in the tests. Right now the devs listen to our feedback. We should get a decent hybrid system and decent combat based around group play.

What we don't want is the wildstar approach of walling the feedback and forcing scores of kicks in pve (kicks are good just not dozens in rapid succession). The massed pvp in wildstar was also a cluster fuck despite all the warnings given in testing.

Other than that I hope fir a much improved wildstar/tbc hybrid combat game. Action from wildstar and tab from tbc.

What's a kick? A form of boss interrupt to prevent a big ability?

Songcaller

Yes, sorry, I realise kick had multiple meanings. I meant kick backs, yeah.

Lark Wyll

Arya_Yeshe wrote: »

Balancing doesn't just simply happen, this takes time and tools for measuring performance.

What I was getting at really is should AoC design abilities to have different performance in PVE compared to PVP and list the differences in tool tips? Or have the abilities behave the same in both and do the same value damage/performance regardless of content type.

Solvryn

Lark Wyll wrote: »

After playing New World off and on since it launched one aspect of their game that I am curious how AGS will approach the issue in their game is how to balance builds, weapons, roles, between PVE content and PVP content so that each role or build is viable and fun to use in both forms of content.

In New World balance issues are a very real struggle. I'm mostly a pvp player but even in the pve I run it's clear that many roles/builds aren't viable for endgame pve.

In pvp many builds have no semblance of balance and feel really bad to interact with as you can't trade with them in a fair way so running and hiding is the only option.

I'd like to see AoC take a much better approach with much more forethought into combat design than a New World 'throw things at the wall and see what sticks, and even if it doesn't don't balance weapons/roles more than a couple times per year while leaving them in a broken state either unusable or completely dominant and oppressive to others'.

I'm a bit jaded after playing New World with games that don't have a clear picture of how they will balance roles/builds somewhat fairly so they all have a place and function in the game and are viable.

There's a long list of other issues with NW obviously as a game that I hope Intrepid learns from and avoids, but this one stands out for me of late. How would you all like for Intrepid to balance builds/roles between PVE/PVP content?

Devs cannot design meaningful pvp or pve with the other being an after thought. They will always have to be designed together and based around the characters.

Also AI will help with good PvE.

Mag7spy

New world combat and balance shouldn't be considered since it is non existent. Game and pvp and pve but isn't balanced for pvp or much of anything. If someone is copying new world its a bad sign. I could get into all the details but i don't feel i should need to ...

unknown

This content has been removed.

Noaani

Lark Wyll wrote: »

After playing New World off and on since it launched one aspect of their game that I am curious how AGS will approach the issue in their game is how to balance builds, weapons, roles, between PVE content and PVP content so that each role or build is viable and fun to use in both forms of content.

In my opinion, doing this is detrimental to the game.

Kilion

Relevant context from the Wiki:
PvX Environment
Hybrid combat system
Dodge / Evasion
Game Balance / Rock-Paper-Scissors

Let me start by saying there are still a lot of things missing in regards to information to make any conclusive statements here.

PvE & Econonomy

The purpose of PvE in Ashes is to introduce players to the world they are a part of especially from a lore perspective via quests/dungeons/etc and to create natural incentives for PvP (like leveling Nodes, gain materials) while PvP is there to redistribute resources/accessibility to areas of the world, basically to create incentives for PvE, even completely new ones (to get into that catacomb raid, you need to destroy a Tier 5 or Tier 6 Node) - because why fight over something that holds nothing of worth?

NW initially intended to have people fight over resources, which had informed world design etc. but since they then turned to a PvP flagging system it basically ruined the economy. Since Ashes never intended to have people solely be able to compete over resources wherever they are being farmed, the flagging system is not making Ashes economy susceptible to the same kind of failure. The game aims to provide plenty of opportunities along the way of a supply chain for these resources to get lost, which - if balanced reasonably - should lead to PvE content generally staying relevant.

The combat system (so far)

Regarding the fighting system in general, the most recent source to evaluate the current state of the PvE system would be reuploaded Tank Reveal, where you can get a decent look into what a lv 15 group might have at their disposal in regards to number of skills (only applies to tank, other classes were limited to their previous "sneak peek" skill set). Regarding what the full number of skills may look like, I may quickly quote this from the Hybrid Combat System Wiki entry: "It may not be possible to be able to fully spec into just action or tab targeted skills. There might be a 75% cap on choosing skills from any one type." Depending on what skills we choose to fill our hotbar with different ways of mitigating them might become more or less viable. Action dodges would probably be a bit more effective against action skills while tab target skills might just be easier to block via stat buff abilities (due to overall less damage potential - again. this is me speculating).

Balance

This is where it gets highly speculative. As far as I've read into it, Intrepid tries to avoid having an unbreakable meta through characters having access to all types of defensive gear (light, medium, heavy armor) and augments that could overturn the initial advantage one class would have over another. Since both things might lead to a shift in demand in the economy, so would gathering and production shift, which could mean movement of players in the world or a significant shift towards the areas which provide the "anti meta" resources. All this movement is supposed to give another set of classes the upper hand by shifting the landscape of the game. [Again - this is speculation, I concluded it from the sources above and my understanding of economics in general] how well that will actually works will only be seen once we get our hands on A2, the Beta or the full game.

And I'll finish this off by saying that everything I wrote is to be taken with a grain of salt, go the extra mile and look at the wiki (and the sources that it links) as well. Or you will have to wait patiently for more information or a playable version of Ashes to become available to gain more information.

I hope this helped a little.

Lark Wyll

Mag7spy wrote: »

New world combat and balance shouldn't be considered since it is non existent. Game and pvp and pve but isn't balanced for pvp or much of anything. If someone is copying new world its a bad sign. I could get into all the details but i don't feel i should need to ...

Yeah, my point was that combat balance (both pve/pvp) needs to be a focus and not glossed over as an afterthought. They need to have a plan for it. NW is an example of, the winging it approach being a disaster. AoC has said they'll balance around the group for combat balance (8-person squad?). I hope they have a plan for that as many formats will not be much larger or smaller interactions as well.

Lark Wyll

@Kilion My post was mainly concerning combat mechanic balance, not the overall systems of content. NW's combat balance as others have mentioned is scant.

Mag7spy

Lark Wyll wrote: »

Mag7spy wrote: »

New world combat and balance shouldn't be considered since it is non existent. Game and pvp and pve but isn't balanced for pvp or much of anything. If someone is copying new world its a bad sign. I could get into all the details but i don't feel i should need to ...

Yeah, my point was that combat balance (both pve/pvp) needs to be a focus and not glossed over as an afterthought. They need to have a plan for it. NW is an example of, the winging it approach being a disaster. AoC has said they'll balance around the group for combat balance (8-person squad?). I hope they have a plan for that as many formats will not be much larger or smaller interactions as well.

Yup they winged it pretty hard lmao, that is exactly what happens when you rush development and make huge changes without testing anything. Thankfully IS is taking their time and getting feedback, trust they have a solid and passionate team to make a great product.

Depraved

Lark Wyll wrote: »

After playing New World off and on since it launched one aspect of their game that I am curious how AGS will approach the issue in their game is how to balance builds, weapons, roles, between PVE content and PVP content so that each role or build is viable and fun to use in both forms of content.

In New World balance issues are a very real struggle. I'm mostly a pvp player but even in the pve I run it's clear that many roles/builds aren't viable for endgame pve.

In pvp many builds have no semblance of balance and feel really bad to interact with as you can't trade with them in a fair way so running and hiding is the only option.

I'd like to see AoC take a much better approach with much more forethought into combat design than a New World 'throw things at the wall and see what sticks, and even if it doesn't don't balance weapons/roles more than a couple times per year while leaving them in a broken state either unusable or completely dominant and oppressive to others'.

I'm a bit jaded after playing New World with games that don't have a clear picture of how they will balance roles/builds somewhat fairly so they all have a place and function in the game and are viable.

There's a long list of other issues with NW obviously as a game that I hope Intrepid learns from and avoids, but this one stands out for me of late. How would you all like for Intrepid to balance builds/roles between PVE/PVP content?

is good that some builds are better for PVP and some others for pve. you don't haveto make every build equally useful in every situation. there is more than one way of balancing things.

Lark Wyll

@Depraved - In New World many weapons are simply not even viable in end game pve currently and have been that way since launch of the game (Musket). If a player uses that weapon their team suffers.

I agree that weapons and builds can shine in one form of content or another. They all need to be viable though especially in a game where you're not classless.

In NW ranged weapons have near unlimited range based on render distance or beyond for the bow. It makes it so that in pvp in open world or any open areas it plays like an fps game vs melee builds with very limited mobility typically. It makes it so that ranged can kite forever and are uncontested and combat interaction between roles is very poor due to the design of uncapped range. They're also machine gun firing from render distance so you get peppered with high damage shots.

In pve the bow is viable to a degree but not desired for the highest pve difficulty. Musket is not viable at all so players that main it either don't do endgame pve or are forced to switch to a different build to be invited to a group.

You all may not understand what I'm getting at without experiencing New Worlds endgame combat both pve and pvp. Its a mess.

Depraved

Lark Wyll wrote: »

@Depraved - In New World many weapons are simply not even viable in end game pve currently and have been that way since launch of the game (Musket). If a player uses that weapon their team suffers.

I agree that weapons and builds can shine in one form of content or another. They all need to be viable though especially in a game where you're not classless.

In NW ranged weapons have near unlimited range based on render distance or beyond for the bow. It makes it so that in pvp in open world or any open areas it plays like an fps game vs melee builds with very limited mobility typically. It makes it so that ranged can kite forever and are uncontested and combat interaction between roles is very poor due to the design of uncapped range. They're also machine gun firing from render distance so you get peppered with high damage shots.

In pve the bow is viable to a degree but not desired for the highest pve difficulty. Musket is not viable at all so players that main it either don't do endgame pve or are forced to switch to a different build to be invited to a group.

You all may not understand what I'm getting at without experiencing New Worlds endgame combat both pve and pvp. Its a mess.

weapons get buffed and nerfed. FYI the musket (along with the fire staff) was the most op weapon in NW pvp during alpha. there was a specific build that was 1 shotting players from so far away that you couldn't even see who hit you. and at the same time, it was the worse weapon to kill bosses, or to even level up your character. which reinforces what I said, not everything needs to be equally useful in all forms of gameplay. some weapons are better for PVP, some are better for pve, and some are better for different aspects of either pvp or pve. some are easy, some are hard. there are different ways to balance a game.

also, several patches ago, the sticky bomb was doing 10k aoe in outpost rush. there's even videos T_T and the DoT build would one shot you if your pots were on cd. not sure how it is now tho, but the musket just really needs those specific perks and stat more than any other weapon, which makes up for having the ability of hitting you from so far away and being a hitscan weapon that you cant really do much about it. imagine a coordinated musket firing squad hitting the same target at the same time. people would get one shotted.

Lark Wyll

@Depraved Yes, the range of balance is too broad though in New World and needs to be tightened up as a take away for Ashes of Creation. Ashes isn't going to be classless so the base roles need to be viable.

I'd also like to see nerfs to a weapon for one purpose (pve or pvp) not ruin the weapon for the other form of content. It would be better to scale weapons for pvp and pve separately.

Spif

In NW your "class" was your weapons since they determined your available skills. You could always change weapons, although re-gearing was a hassle. Sidenote, god I hated the RNG crafting system in NW

In AoC your archetype will determine your available skills, and your base archetype cannot be changed. This raises the stakes for "balancing". Every archetype is going to need at least one viable PvP spec and one viable PvE spec, and preferably several for each. The actual weapon selected will be a very small part of the spec. I don't think we know if weapon types (EX shortbow vs longbow vs daggers vs greatsword) or armor types will be more or less impactful than secondary archetype. At least they should be easy to swap out.

But I think it's unreasonable to expect all 64 classes to have "meta worthy" specs for PvP *and* PvE. But as long as (using a random example) mage/rogue is great for PvP, mage/cleric is great for PvE, and mage/bard is good for both PvE and PvP then I think that the mage archetype will be in a decent place. Yes, mage/fighters might be pissed off that they don't PvP as well as mage/rogue, and don't PvE as well as mage/cleric, but that's something the next patch might fix.

AoC can always do something heavy handed like giving each archetype a powerful group buff to encourage using all classes. "He's a mage/fighter, should we take him? Well, we need a mage...."

Arya_Yeshe

I still think that having 64 classes will be a massive challenge to the devs, I would rather have 36 classes and spare the effort.

Skip Tank and skip Summoner, only bring those in the first expansion.

Songcaller

I think you can skip summoner and Bard- summoner is jack of all trades and Bard is just buffs, but, I'd rather keep all 64 options. Tank is required for top tier pve.

Child Item