A level playing field means not having people being able to buy a better sword with a RMT. It means no one class totally outclassing the others in PvP. It does not mean that we have to fight naked on the battlefield.
I wouldnt care that much if it was even 40/60 between each class, possibly switching the numbers to your favor depending on what class you're playing as and against, but as it is now, it's like 20/80, in every class based MMO I've played. And it doesn't matter which number I have, neither is fun.
I'm pretty much refusing to PvP in a class based game at this point.
There are rare, epic battles, usually against the same class, but most of the time it's a total one sided fight. Some of that probably has to do with player skill, but when a class/spec consistantly get's owned across the board or is consistantly successful across the board, regardless of who's playing, that's a pretty blaring signal that something just isn't right.
I don't have high hopes that good balance will ever be acheived in class based MMOs if it still hasn't been done after a decade
I like both. I do not however, like skill based combat in my MMORPGs, though for an FPS it's fine. Mixing the two would feel like mxing milk with orange juice, it just wouldnt be that great.
That's called orange cream and quite popular in hard candy and smoothies a.k.a. Orange Julius.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
In a dream world, it would always be 50/50, but in most MMOs as they are now, there's just too many variables to accomplish this. It's often one ability that gives one class a great advantage over another, then there's character stats, then there's gear, and these are never going to be equal across the board in MMO PvP, unless there's no advancement at all, pretty much reducing it to a FPS.
The only way both players could ever have a 50/50 chance is if their characters are clones, the rate of combat doesn't even play a part in this, slower paced combat will just mean a sower death for the disadvantaged character.
Think of it like this, if two people were playing chess, and one of them started with only 1 knight and 1 bishop. There's a possibilty he can win, but he's at a slight disadvantage. Take this and randomly remove different pieces each time the player plays a different opponent. This is the way I see MMO PvP.
True it may be a dream world, but I did say that it should start there and then all those factors should come into play and tip the scales.
The problem is that most games now use a mortal combat style of twitch combat that makes skill choice and strategy not matter since it is who can mash the buttons in the right order the fastest.
As for the class skills that tip the balance, that is where devs being honest about what it is balanced around comes in. Blizzard said Rock-Paper-Scissors, while it did not play out this way, at least people had a basis then that caster would always beat warrior would always beat rogue would always beat caster, ect, ect.
this is where your chess analogy works well. In chess both sides start with the same number and type of peices, hence the balanced MMO PVP battle. Now things like understanding of the game mechanics, the stratageies, and such come into play. One player may know something the other doesn't giving them a slight advantage. The other may have a better stratagey giving them an advantage. That is what I was talking about.
What you're asking for is impossible IMO unless there is no variation at all between characters, I don't see where you're getting your starting point if the characters are planned to be different classes with different abilities, stats, etc.
Taking the actual players knowledge, and strategy, etc, out of the equation. One class will win all the time or most of the time against others. I think a good way to test this would be with some good AI, since they would behave exactly the same, giving developers an idea of what abilities need to be changed around for better balance. That's one of the major problems I think developers have, is that they use humans to test the effectiveness of classes where there is an oceans worth of extra variables to deal with, not to mention, lying players, biased players, etc.
Team Fortress 2 has "progression" that is offered as choices rather than an advantage. When you gain an ability, you have to choose to use that one over a previous one. The classes remain basically unchanged since the choice of weapons does not unbalance gameplay.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
Comments
A level playing field means not having people being able to buy a better sword with a RMT. It means no one class totally outclassing the others in PvP. It does not mean that we have to fight naked on the battlefield.
Doesn't matter.
By skill based do you mean player skill or game skills like UO,pre-NGE SWG, DF etc. ?
If it's player skill based then I'd say your vote is obvious, if it's game skills then it can still be about gear vs. even playing field.
Again, MMO buzzwords being used just as buzz words and have lost all of their meaning.
Your opinion is immaterial.
I wouldnt care that much if it was even 40/60 between each class, possibly switching the numbers to your favor depending on what class you're playing as and against, but as it is now, it's like 20/80, in every class based MMO I've played. And it doesn't matter which number I have, neither is fun.
I'm pretty much refusing to PvP in a class based game at this point.
There are rare, epic battles, usually against the same class, but most of the time it's a total one sided fight. Some of that probably has to do with player skill, but when a class/spec consistantly get's owned across the board or is consistantly successful across the board, regardless of who's playing, that's a pretty blaring signal that something just isn't right.
I don't have high hopes that good balance will ever be acheived in class based MMOs if it still hasn't been done after a decade
That's called orange cream and quite popular in hard candy and smoothies a.k.a. Orange Julius.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
In a dream world, it would always be 50/50, but in most MMOs as they are now, there's just too many variables to accomplish this. It's often one ability that gives one class a great advantage over another, then there's character stats, then there's gear, and these are never going to be equal across the board in MMO PvP, unless there's no advancement at all, pretty much reducing it to a FPS.
The only way both players could ever have a 50/50 chance is if their characters are clones, the rate of combat doesn't even play a part in this, slower paced combat will just mean a sower death for the disadvantaged character.
Think of it like this, if two people were playing chess, and one of them started with only 1 knight and 1 bishop. There's a possibilty he can win, but he's at a slight disadvantage. Take this and randomly remove different pieces each time the player plays a different opponent. This is the way I see MMO PvP.
True it may be a dream world, but I did say that it should start there and then all those factors should come into play and tip the scales.
The problem is that most games now use a mortal combat style of twitch combat that makes skill choice and strategy not matter since it is who can mash the buttons in the right order the fastest.
As for the class skills that tip the balance, that is where devs being honest about what it is balanced around comes in. Blizzard said Rock-Paper-Scissors, while it did not play out this way, at least people had a basis then that caster would always beat warrior would always beat rogue would always beat caster, ect, ect.
this is where your chess analogy works well. In chess both sides start with the same number and type of peices, hence the balanced MMO PVP battle. Now things like understanding of the game mechanics, the stratageies, and such come into play. One player may know something the other doesn't giving them a slight advantage. The other may have a better stratagey giving them an advantage. That is what I was talking about.
What you're asking for is impossible IMO unless there is no variation at all between characters, I don't see where you're getting your starting point if the characters are planned to be different classes with different abilities, stats, etc.
Taking the actual players knowledge, and strategy, etc, out of the equation. One class will win all the time or most of the time against others. I think a good way to test this would be with some good AI, since they would behave exactly the same, giving developers an idea of what abilities need to be changed around for better balance. That's one of the major problems I think developers have, is that they use humans to test the effectiveness of classes where there is an oceans worth of extra variables to deal with, not to mention, lying players, biased players, etc.
Team Fortress 2 has "progression" that is offered as choices rather than an advantage. When you gain an ability, you have to choose to use that one over a previous one. The classes remain basically unchanged since the choice of weapons does not unbalance gameplay.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.