Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
"Rock Paper Scissors"
tochicool
Member Posts: 153
"ROCK PAPER SCISSORS"
I'm talking about class balance. I've taking the points of many ideas to come up with is. Credits to the ancient game of "Rock Paper Scissor".
Some peple say class balance is good as PvP would be a lot fairer so melee healers wouldn't pre-own everyone. Others say class balance will ruin the whole "group finding" tradition to get the perfect group and would make all classes basically the same.
My Idea is that, I'm using three as an example, some classes, although equal in level, would be better versus other types yet weaker against another.
For Example;
(Stronger) Melee > Magic
(Powerful) Magic > Rogue
(Faster) Rogue > Melee
So classes are still different and "gathering a perfect group" will still be needed but in FFA PvP, you will need to choose your opponents wisely.
Edit: I'm not not saying that one class would completly overpower the other, infact, the other class could still win if the player tries hard enough. It's almost like a difficulty setting; rock fights paper if the rock is pro at PvP and rock fights scissor if it's new yo PvP. But if you're looking for a fair duel, rock will fight rock.
It's in team PvP it with be interesting; players having to work together...
FEEL THE FULL
FREE-TO-FLAME
FANTASY.
Comments
The major problem with paper, rock, scissors is when you are playing rock and you get attacked by paper.
Unless you have a scissors to help you out you are kinda screwed. It isn't too fun to lose because you fought the wrong type of character, and the game becomes a practice in avoiding characters that can trample you and attacking the ones you can trample.
All men think they're fascinating. In my case, it's justified
Isn't that kinda the thing in nearly every game with PvP out there? Engage in situations where you can win and avoid situations that you cannot win.
This is not even unique to MMORPGs.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
The major benefit of RPS class balancing is it reduces the skill of PVP.
The major problem with RPS class balancing is it reduces the skill of PVP. Players looking for truly meaningful PVP will find their decisions aren't important as class counters decide battles. Meanwhile in other games, skill will determine victory and smart decisionmaking is highly rewarded.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
No, it is not that straightforward. RPS can bring a deck building, a planning aspect to the game and it can make group dynamics a bit more interesting. Actually, I think it can promote teamwork and encourage playing in groups.
EDIT: For example, MTG was still very much a skill game despite the heavy RPS.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
It's in team PvP it with be interesting; players having to work together...
FEEL THE FULL
FREE-TO-FLAME
FANTASY.
So, any other objections?
FEEL THE FULL
FREE-TO-FLAME
FANTASY.
I choose Parer. Doesn't that beat rock and scissors? Or perhaps the Parer sheathes the scissors???
I'm sorry for being a jerk, but I spend a lot of time, sometimes hours, correcting my typos and editing my posts to be as profesional (or grammatically correct) as possible.
Having the word "PARER" in huge text in the OP is an insult to everything I do as a forum poster.
Sorry about that; I posted it on my mobile.
It's weird how I, and the other readers, didn't see something that massive.
FEEL THE FULL
FREE-TO-FLAME
FANTASY.
I will spill a little bit about the combat system. I believe we can learn a lot from Rock Paper Scissors, but not in its simplicity-- in its basic function. The general idea is that there are counters to different classes. The simplcitiy is that there are only 3 choices, and they are very, very basic.
My combat system is designed around a Skill Based system, full of talents, learned skills, abilities, techniques, upgrades, stats, and a heavy character creation system very similar to a Pen & Paper game. Even a character's race takes CCP, in addition to taking advantages or disadvantages (which give CCP).
Although the game is quite complex, it can be simplified to say there are 5 Focus Levels. Each Focus allows a player to choose a skill set, which are mostly attributed to archetypes. These archetypes were originally classes, until it was decided by many players (popular vote) to give players more freedom by allowing a skill based system. Anyone can be anything.
These archetypes include Armor (Leather to Plate), use of Shields, Parry/Dodge mastery, dual wielding, combat magic, pure magic, support, bardic skills, pets, mounted combat, etc.
Although the majority of combat is NOT meant to have weaknesses in the design (I'm sure they will come naturally) there are some situations which weaknesses are involved. For example, Undead cannot be healed using healing magic, so a "Cleric" type of character (any player with holy healing magic) damages undead in addition to healing their realm. Rare races have well-known weaknesses (such as a Fire Elemental player is weak against Water/Ice spells, Vampires are vulnerable to some weapons/spell types, etc.) or archetypes have weaknesses (Any player who chooses to become Calvary, which transforms them into mounted combat, are immediately weak against polearms such as spears.
With power, comes cost of power. If you are a race with more advantages than a human, there are weaknesses (or a higher CCP cost, meaning less skills and slower progression). If you are an archetype, then your weaknesses will add on with every focus level.
For example, someone who only goes 1-2 focus levels of wizardy can take other focuses to not be weak against offensive melee characters. However, someone who goes entirely 5 levels of arcane magic, and their spell choices (limited choices) are not melee or survival based (such as a pure fire wizard, focusing entirely on fire bolts) will be much weaker due to his cloth armor, no magic protection, etc. Meanwhile a wizard who puts all his spell points into Counterspelling and Reflection magic, will be the most powerful anti-mage in the game, able to throw back and counter all magic but will be very weak against melee. A fully armored platemail warrior with shield and parry mastery will be hard to kill (even with magic) but will be weak against faster moving targets due to his slow speed, as well as any magic that bypasses armor or shields.
So in essence, it's more like RPS x Infinity, with players choosing how to design their characters. A balanced character won't have weaknesses, but won't have strengths either. A well formed group can support each other, making sure their weaknesses are countered by the other's strengths. This makes a RPS system act more along the lines of a group being all 3, and more.
A warrior with shield mastery and loads of armor protection can absorb and protect an ally entirely (a pure defense focus allows for absorbing 100% damage, in addition to reflecting and blocking it) while the protected bard can sing their songs to support, heal, and buff their allies. A wizard wouldn't work due to not having LoS because the tank is in the way.
In addition to this, there are many other variables which directly effect combat, such as PvP maps designed with narrow passageways to victory points, where 3 warriors can link together to block off a pass, which no one can go through. This is due to tank (defensive) players having a solid existence in the world which enemies cannot bypass, in addition to the area above and below them (or right/left) being blocked as well if specialized in these defenses.
It will probably not be the most balanced system in the world due to the amount of skill sets, but I (and the team which helps me balance playtesting) will make sure that it is as good as we can make it. Besides, one of the more fun things about MMORPG's is the ever-changing balance, making options open up for new forms of play. I will also be sure to playtest everything myself, especially if I read complaints on the forums.
So would a RPS system be good? Yes, if combined with additional variables, and there were more than just RPF. No, if all there is are 3-5 classes and few variables to add to combat.
Oh, if it's from a mobile, then nothing is wrong with it at all.
To the other guy,
Typos do happen, but in large text, in the first line of an OP? It's a bit different. I also wasn't mad or upset, so it's not a big deal. It's a mix of joking and "Oh my gosh, are you serious?" surprise. I'm more annoyed at myself for wasting so much time on the forums when I should be working.
My apologies though! Like I said, if it's from your mobile, that's entirely another story. You can't just edit it like a PC user can, and it is certainly not worth attempting. (Would takes hours, not minutes, at least for me anyway.)
That is an interesting idea. I would certainly give an MMO like that a go.
FEEL THE FULL
FREE-TO-FLAME
FANTASY.
Thank you. Hopefully I can keep the majority of design (haven't playtested it yet, and still iffy about how combat should work until I really get at prototyping the combat system).
Still, I believe that the design should work well, with Tanks being able to protect others, but those behind them can only use defensive abilities, as offensive ones require Line of Sight (which the tank blocks).
The Tank archetype is actually designed to protect objectives (cannot be taken with a tank protecting it) and rescue down players by dragging them to safety so they can recover. (There are 5 wound levels; Healthy, Hurt, Wounded, Severely Wounded, and Down which immobilizes you, giving you a full wound level of health before suffering death). The idea is that with death being a serious event, players should retreat when wounded, as the design is more to make an enemy retreat than to kill them outright.
I always thought the role of a tank should be to protect, but they never truly did until Warhammer and its 50% dmg absorb ability. Taunting is just silly, as that doesn't actually protect anyone from anything. In fact, my design doesn't have any taunts at all, as I find that type of "power" to be entirely unrealistic.
MTG players still hate matchups that are completely lopsided. MTG tournament use the sideboard to allow players to change their deck between games and thus give tehm a fighting chance against an otherwise unwinnable matchup.
Another important difference is that MTG players will usually have multiple decks on them that they switch out to have a more balalnced and interesting matchup. Players who only have one deck are not gonna be very successful.
In MMORPG terms the MTG analogy only works if the players could have access to fully developed characters of any class and be able to swtich which one they use before any fight.
Even more importantly there is a big distinction between MTG tournament play and MTG casual play. Casual play will have decks much more balanced since it is about having an interesting match rather than just winning or losing.
MTG has zero RPS. all colors have enough cards that decks can be built to fit your style, you can have a DPS blue a control black or a defensive red if you want.
Except teamwork can be enforced in other ways. Team Fortress 2 isn't even as strongly teamwork-focused as it might be, and yet teamwork is still strongly rewarded there without players being locked into class counters.
There's a big difference between class counters you have to roll an entirely new character to beat, and those where you can simply switch roles mid match to beat.
Some of MTG's worst meta strategy comes from deck type counters, tbh. It's at its best when decks are on even footing and mid-match decisionmaking decides matches.
The problem also has to do with match length. In very short games focused on pre-game strategy, it can be acceptable to have class counters because you can always switch for next game.
But very long predetermined-by-class-counter matches are incredibly one-sided and boring, because there's no opportunity for the underdog to correct their mistakes and generate a comeback (comebacks are exciting conflict.)
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
I strongly disagree.
This is not what balance is, this can be many things OTHER than balance:
Luck because: what if you're looking for a duel and you're a warrior who just happens to bump into a mage? You automatically win because you're a warrior. That's not very balanced.. Why do I HAVE to fight another warrior just for a fair duel? All duels should be fair disregarding class as a factor.
Chaos because: So you're a rogue. You're only going to find warriors to duel. Warriors will refuse and look for mages to duel. Mages will refuse and look for rogues to duel. See what's happening? With this system, no one will want to 1v1 because unless you're facing the same class, you already know the outcome and not everybody wants to party-duel.
unbalanced because: When X class is > Y class, that is the definition of unbalanced and that is the basis of your system. Sure, it can be interesting and maybe even a little fun, but most of the time, it's going to be a restriction to players because they cannot fight people of certain classes due to the fact that they know they'll lose.
It should be: Mage = Rogue = Warrior.
All classes have an equal chance of winning against eachother in a duel.
It sounds a hell of a lot easier said than done, but that's the optimal system in any MMORPG.
No restricions, just people that want to battle eachother.
Epic Music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAigCvelkhQ&list=PLo9FRw1AkDuQLEz7Gvvaz3ideB2NpFtT1
https://archive.org/details/softwarelibrary_msdos?&sort=-downloads&page=1
Kyleran: "Now there's the real trick, learning to accept and enjoy a game for what it offers rather than pass on what might be a great playing experience because it lacks a few features you prefer."
John Henry Newman: "A man would do nothing if he waited until he could do it so well that no one could find fault."
FreddyNoNose: "A good game needs no defense; a bad game has no defense." "Easily digested content is just as easily forgotten."
LacedOpium: "So the question that begs to be asked is, if you are not interested in the game mechanics that define the MMORPG genre, then why are you playing an MMORPG?"
Firstly, who says they will automaticlly win. The basics of any type of GAME is luck. A game without luck or chance isn't game. Even if an MMO magages to get all the class balanced, there is still luck involved. The damage done is due to luck. Are you asking for a game with fixed damage? How boring. Your connection speed and many other variables are involved so ultimately they is so such thing as a FAIR game as that would be called a movie.
Chaos? What chaos? How can you refuse a duel in a FFA PvP arena or zone? It's simply jump and go. A professional mage might want to how well he does fighting a "stronger opponent" or the mage might be a higher level or the warrior might have just had a long battle with another warrior and the mage could easily finish him off. Maybe party dueling isn't as bad as you might think with players having to duel a specific player it help from others. It uses the whole MMORPG to its full potential. If you're in a battle field and you had a choice to have a squad backing you up or to go alone. If you wouold rather go alone they perhaps you would not be playing an MMORPG.
They don't KNOW they'll lose; perhaps your taking the whole "Rock Paper Scissors" thing to literally. If a rouge creeps up on an unaware mage and quickly uses some stunning spell and actives all the buff at finish the mgae of then the rouge will win. In isolate context then it may be unbalanced but , 0+1-1= 0. The beutiful part is that altogether it makes a perfect network.
You may think that " Warrior > Mage " is unfair, but, then again, so is " Level 50 > Level 49 ".
" We should scrap the whole leveling up nonsense. It's so UNFAIR! " - this is how you sound.
Difference is what makes this world. Deal with it.
FEEL THE FULL
FREE-TO-FLAME
FANTASY.
You are simply blind to how easy it is to abuse this kind of system.
I see no point in prolonging this argument.
The amount of "Strongly Disagree" votes speaks for me.
Me is actually using this type of system for my LoL-inspired PVE only game.
Instead of looking into RPG games for ideas on how to handle all kinda playstyles, I just used typical RTS balance sheets.
So instead of Daggers hitting weaker than swords, it becomes daggers hits cloth very well, leather in an ok way, armor extremely weakly, almost no damage to heavy armor.
Ai use extreme amounts of specializations though so there will be one type will always without a doubt pwn you! But with 37 different classes and the way content is handled, It should nu be a pwoblemmm
Is a pve only game as well...So far I was able to make awesome test bunnies out of UT3 and makying the ai work as a team and make use of strategies to counter ppls n stuff so that part imo is going to be easy. The one I is stuck on is graphics *pouts* still trudgying on wif DX programming o.o
''/\/\'' Posted using Iphone bunni
( o.o)
(")(")
**This bunny was cloned from bunnies belonging to Gobla and is part of the Quizzical Fanclub and the The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club**
Rock-paper-scissors = no.2 cheapest excuse for imbalanced game.
Absolutely!! Thats why we need to use
Rock, paper, scissors, lizard, spock!!
scissors cuts paper, paper covers rock, rock crushes lizard, lizard poisons spock, spock smashes scissors, scissors decapacitates lizard, lizard eats paper, paper disproves spock,? spock vaporizes rock and as it allways has, rock crushes scissors
Cookie for who gets i! @_@
''/\/\'' Posted using Iphone bunni
( o.o)
(")(")
**This bunny was cloned from bunnies belonging to Gobla and is part of the Quizzical Fanclub and the The Marvelously Meowhead Fan Club**
It's easy!
Nothing wrong with RPS (or RPSLS). It is balanced if done properly -> In this case, everyone has two they can beat and two they cannot beat. In the long run, your chance of victory would be around 50%. Anything above or below that is player skill.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
1. Melee>Magic? It should rather be Magic>Meleer.
2. Magic>Rogue? Well ofc against a defensive spellcaster.
3. Rogue>Melee? Depends. Plate should be tricky to kill as a rogue.
Im not a fan of rock paper scissors. Why? Cause per box, theres unbalanced amount of classes.
In most PvP MMOs: Rogues takes 50% of the player base.
Meleers take 40%.
Casters takes 10%.
Why? Cause rogues sneaks, can escape and can pick targets easily.
Meleers in most games are strong while extremely basic in skill choices. Press 1 and 2 without thinking and win. This is why i want casters to fully own meleers. Especially warriors, i think they deserves it.
Caster is a total of 10%. Why? Cause both scissors and rocks owns them. They have to waste much offensive power to play defensive in many MMOs. Usually theres only one spec that can slow down and anti the meleers, the frost/water mage/shaman.
If a rogue catch you, youre dead cause of weak armor/defense. If a warrior catches you, the extreme damage output, slowing abilties etc will just tear you apart. YOU cant cast any spells vs them cause they got interrupts and slows. What a fail. And at last, after defending yourself for ten seconds, your mana is gone. Not to be compared to nowadays casters in WoW that never runs OOM in pvp for some unknown reason.
I so want: Burn down your mana, use a weak spell to gain mana. Thats the problem why theres no spec that doesnt have control ability enters the pvp. Weak armor, weak defense, mana that burns fast and never goes up again.
Atleast they could give casters some focus like mana bar and add some anti meleer ability like CC not breaking on spellcast but make the target immune to it for a while after it breaks to not make it spamable.
Whats the point playing a caster when both rocks and scissors can own you easily nowadays? I actually miss the days i used to play druid in WoW and chainroot-starfire warriors to death. The breakable root pretty much ruined it. I could suggest adding life to CC so warriors can break it but ofc, that would make casters crap again due to warriors extreme strenght breaking it after one second.
Again, i would like to see this in rock paper scissors:
Meleers with high defense>rogues.
Rogues> unpreparedcasters and meleers with low defense.
Mages>meleers with high armor and ofc the healers. Healers should be very afraid of casters once again. Very very afraid.
Again, this wouldnt be much problems in PvP if each box had the same numbers of players. The biggest mistake is giving meleers interrupts, sorry but that should be a work for mages and maybe rogues.
Yawn
What MMO is that?
From my experience, 49% are casters, 32% are Melees, and 28% are Rogues.
My list of what classes overpower the others wasn't taught thouroughly through; I just wanted to give this simples examples I could.
FEEL THE FULL
FREE-TO-FLAME
FANTASY.