Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
True Class Balance
Eronakis
Member UncommonPosts: 2,249
I have read numerous threads about class balance and how people question the balancing issues on certain games. There are many different aspects of what you need to balance with classes, but I will take it with the very basic form which should be used in a pve or pvp game.
Here are some examples of what class balance is NOT.
A: If the DPS can do high damage, then the healer and tank need to be on par damage
B: All classes need to be equal and thus this takes away from diversity among classes.
What is the correct way to balance classes? Let’s start with the basics, the archetypes. There are 3 basics archetypes of classes, tanks, dps and healers. I am going to give a damage balancing example simply that is what the majority of people complain about.
First, you look at the core of that class in their general mechanic. Let’s take tanks as our first example. A tank is supposed to be a defensive class that can mitigate damage very well. At most the tanks should have a moderate damage output because they do indeed use weapons.
As for the DPS, of course their damage output needs to excel in immense damage. However, since the DPS can do tons of damage their survival needs to be low, aka the glass canon. I am also going to cover, the difference between melee dps and caster dps. Caster dps needs to have heavy damage spells but have the lowest form of survival because they are ranged. As for melee dps, their survival should increase by 20% but decrease in their damage by 20%.
Why? Simply because melee dps does not have a cast time and their duration between different swings are nominal as opposed to the caster. As for healers, they of course need to excel in their healing abilities and do minimal damage at best. As for the damage between each archetype, the interval needs to have a huge range to distinguish between the archetypes in damage output.
When you say class balance, what does it balance? When you balance something you weigh each aspect. The main part of this issue is that in most mmos, there are not penalties to counter the powerful abilities that each class may have in their arsenal. By balancing classes, not all classes are the same, you have to weigh it out and BALANCE it with penalties!
Example, let’s use a typical Warrior’s damage. A warrior is a usually a tank class who can mitigate well and can do decent damage. Lately you have seen where tanking classes can do on par damage with pure dps classes with no penalty. Let’s say this Warrior class has a berserker mechanic. When the Warrior activates his berserking mechanic, he will ultimately succeed beyond the class’s moderate damage dps output by maybe 20% at the most.
Since this tanking class now has a modifier to increase its damage output there has to be some kind of penalty to balance it. Simply the warrior’s mitigation decreases substantially and they are more prone to critical hits more often. Here are some numbers, for instance, in berserking they can do 20% more damage but receive 40% more damage back onto the Warrior.
I will post this for now, to see if people can grasp the basic concept of balancing. I hope people agree, and I have a feeling I know what niche of mmo gamers will agree with me more and ones who will not. Other than that, post, if you agree or disagree; and why. If you disagree retort with sound answers of why your way of balancing is better than this simple concept.
Comments
When I saw the thread title, it struck me as a sentence fragment to which I would add "doesn't exist."
OP
dps/hps =hps/dps ,100 =100
so if x char is say 70%dps/30 % hps then the foe as to be say 30% dps and 70% hps
juste an exemple with infinite graduation etc but the idea is to have a fair ratio
True Class Balance = FPS shooters. MMO's will never achieve perfect "Class Balance" because Classes aren't designed to be balanced, they are designed to be a different and offer a different gameplay style.
That's the basics, but it has to be tweaked a lot beyond that. A few quick ways it breaks down:
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You think FPSes with Classes don't have the same balance problems as MMORPGs with Classes?
Classes are asymmetrical. This doesn't mean they're not designed to be balanced, it means they're designed to offer different playstyles.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
To OP: First thing that caught my eye was that you included the tank archetype in PvP where it has no place in its basic state. In short, nobody attacks a strong target (as opposed to a "soft" target) that does not pose a threat. People don't have aggro. If you do realize this, you should have had emphasized it more in your post.
I don't prefer to talk about of balance in class-based MMOs with simple terms when it can be quite complicated and multilayered. In my opinion the more complexity the game has and the more balance it maintains while increasing in complexity, the better the game usually is.
When we look deeper there's, toolbox characters/abilities, pressure or spike dmg, shape and type of the damage, direct single effect, maintained effet or fire-and-forget effect, buffs and debuffs, range, speed, charge and recharge, tradeoffs, blocks and interrupts, party dynamics...
For me, simplifying class balance is hard because I want to see something complex. I respect the effort.
It might be more fruitful however to explain how class balance is so important to some people and how to best spot balance issues in a game. It might spread some more understanding among the community.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Class balance target: All things equal two people can reltivly easily take out any single target, even one their classes would have a "weakness" to.
This is just my target AIM, I have no idea what "real" developers are using if anything.
I find it amazing that by 2020 first world countries will be competing to get immigrants.
You think FPSes with Classes don't have the same balance problems as MMORPGs with Classes?
Classes are asymmetrical. This doesn't mean they're not designed to be balanced, it means they're designed to offer different playstyles.
He didn't say FPS w/ Classes. Who plays FPS that has classes anyways...
You think FPSes with Classes don't have the same balance problems as MMORPGs with Classes?
Classes are asymmetrical. This doesn't mean they're not designed to be balanced, it means they're designed to offer different playstyles.
In addition, I would say its near impossible to even compare different playstyles hence it's impossible to acquire "true balance". There's too much complexity especially when every action/reaction is determined in real time. I think this might be part of the reason why I haven't seen a "true hybrid" class treated like a "true hybrid" class because MMO's at least as of lately try to make a hybrid's individual role such as healing as good as the class that originally had intentions of being a "pure healer" etc. People whine and complain and eventually the company can't do anything but give their customers what they want because that's just a good way to keeping good business. I personally wouldn't even want perfect balance (but wouldn't sau theres anything wrong with companies fixing obvious overbalances) because that just keeps the challenges for me within a game, personally and keeps the game in flux in a way, even if its unintentional.
The only way you could have "true perfect ballance" would be if every "class" had the same skills, the same HP, the same dmg output, etc. but of course that would ruin the whole point of any given MMO that supports multiple classes. Personally, that wouldn't be a game I'd like to play.
The funny thing is; you could make a game where every class was, from a game mechanic perspective, absolutely identical with the only difference between them being entirely cosmetic; i.e. the mage throws a 100 DPS fireball and the rogue throws a 100 DPS shuriken star.
And I would be more than willing to bet a serious amount of cash-money that the forums would still be full of people complaining that <insert class here> is ridiculously overpowered on the basis that they keep getting killed by them in PvP.
Obviously that's a class balance issue rather than the player being the personfication of PvP failure.
Point of this post: we, the players, wouldn't recognize a balanced class-based PvP game so one can't help but wonder why the developers bother. I have more respect for the ones that just come clean and say "we're balancing on group combat not 1v1" 'cos at least then they have a reasonable chance of getting half-decent combat mechanics into the game.
Playing: EVE, Final Fantasy 13, Uncharted 2, Need for Speed: Shift
I enjoyed MMOs more when it was literally quite possible to screw yourself up permanently during character creation. I don't remember many people speaking of "balance" back during Asheron's Call, even though certain setups were miles beyond other setups in terms of effectiveness. I can't remember caster setups ever not being stronger than melee and ranger setups, but it didn't stop people from creating melee or ranger characters. Incentives were just different then, I suppose. There weren't many skill or level restrictions on items, few were "soulbound" (so you could equip incredible gear on your level one toon) and every setup was at least strong enough to allow the player to level, supposing they grind the appropriate badguys.
I don't mean to sound like a curmudgeon, but I get a little bit depressed when people make recommendations for future games with the assumption that they must follow the "tank/healer/dps with a level cap" model. Just because it worked for WoW and certain other games doesn't mean that every single game needs to follow in its footsteps. "Alternative" functionality worked before WoW, and it will work after WoW.
-----------
I'm reluctant, but I'll try to add to the conversation here. Assuming each player is of a specific class and with a specific set of abilities common to every other player of that class (hurray for customization, right?), you can't simply balance them based on damage in vs damage out. For PvP, the only way you can truly balance classes is to observe their performance over a long period of time, and make adjustments so that their win/loss ratio is roughly 1:1.
In PvE, it means nothing how much mitigation a mage has because the mage isn't getting hit. Similarly, it means nothing how much damage a tank does in PvE if the tank can only do that much damage while it's getting hit. This is assuming we define class balance in PvE as follows: For any class x, if y is of the same archetype as x, then the performance of the raid will neither decrease nor increase by taking y instead of x (assuming equivalent gear). We need to also assume that if x and y are of different archetypes, x will never be able to fill y's shoes, and vice versa.
There are extremely unbalanced games. Where one class dominates pvp wise because of various factors. Being the only class with a dot, or multiple dots, combined with awesome melee base dps and damage boosting skills.
But, illval is right though, alot of times its just the perception of unbalance that people complain about. And alotta times it comes from a class being relatively simple to play, comes across a class thats a little (or alot) more challenging to play. The simple class wins more often because its easier to play. Some never get how to play a class and complain that its unbalanced. When really its not, whats unbalanced is the ease of play among classes. Though this isnt relevant in all mmorpgs.
I think WoW got closest with its talent trees. A warrior can spec for pve or pvp. Making them viable in both in theory. Though wow has spent time balancing each tree of each class multiple times. But when i played i found that the trees overall we're the difference in being effective in either. And i think an approach like this, that either a class has a different skill set for pvp than pve , or a way to specialize for one or the other, is a good way to try and balance. While maintaining each of the classes own unique abilities. Its hard to do that in f2p games though, since skill resets and stat resets are cash shop items, and alot of times not cheap enough to switch back in forth a whole lot.
But I dont think a mmorpg will ever have a community that all agree classes are balanced. We all can agree that there's people who just suck at playing. They never get the hang of it. And they'll never admit that its because of their own short comings, and instead complain that something else is the problem.
The AC example might've merely been an example of early MMORPG players still learning the importance of optimizing.
Also, the value players place on playing efficiently is directly related to how many Rewarded Challenges a game offers. My own experience with the game is limited (1-2 months) but I mostly only remember random monsters to kill which dropped random loot -- and this is a lot different from doing a quest or dungeon of Difficulty X and getting Reward X (proportional to the difficulty.)
As for your comments on the PVP balancing of asymmetrical classes, that's absolutely right (and not dissimilar from the jobs I've had professionally balancing RTS games.)
Regarding the PVE balance, you're also right..mostly.
You still measure the "mitigation" of the mage, it's just that things like "I attack from range" and "I can frost nova" and "Hitting me slows you down" factor in to your overall damage taken.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
great post. what i would add tho is... do really MMOs have to achieve that balance? dnd exists since dinosaurs, no classes are balanced there and nobody gives a shit, because every class has different playstyle and thats whats important.
Yes, you do not have "sniper" or "scout" in most of FPS games, but the corresponding thing is choosing your weapon, like getting M4 or AK in counter strike, are those two balanced? Maybe, but they work differently and you can fix the difference with player skill, that's why people keep saying "True Class Balance = First Person Shooter shooters" because every "class" can win an another (Skill > Class).
But back ot the OP:
It's a hard topic since only one MMO (guild wars) have tried created competitive PvP (class balance) and they succeeded.
M4 and AK certainly play differently, and that's the same type of asymmetrical playstyle choice as class is in MMORPGs. It's just a lot more constrained (only CTs can buy the M4) and not nearly as asymmetrical (M4 and AK aren't really that different.)
I'd agree that having skill trump game balance helps things but calling it "true balance" is inaccurate. The imbalances are still there, they're just less of the reason of why you win/lose. You've hit upon the root of why balance is complained about more in MMORPGs: the balance matters more when more of winning/losing is about how powerful your class/spec/gear is than how skillfully you play.
"What is truly revealing is his implication that believing something to be true is the same as it being true. [continue]" -John Oliver
You think FPSes with Classes don't have the same balance problems as MMORPGs with Classes?
Classes are asymmetrical. This doesn't mean they're not designed to be balanced, it means they're designed to offer different playstyles.
He didn't say FPS w/ Classes. Who plays FPS that has classes anyways...
Erm, most of the really successful ones e.g. COD4, Battlefield series etc - all these have equivalents of classes.
OT: Does class balance really matter that much (expecially in PVE)? With so many people crawling over every aspect of each class surely such balance is nigh on impossible to attain (any examples of any MMO that has)? The most important thing IMO is to have a rolling class review/update program to both add interest and to prevent any class imbalance being permanent. The down side of this is you tend to get FOTMs but this is no realy bad thing really as it encourages people to explore the classes more widely. What hsould change I think is that most games take aaaages to revise and update each class. I would rather something a bit faster (e.g. 1 update per class per year) and maybe not so perfect. I hate to say it but I think the template SWG pre CU set in terms of class updates was nearing the mark (although due to so many classes they never got round to fixing some borked ones - lesson there is perhaps fewer classes).
MMORPGs take cue from D&D pen and paper game based on GROUP gameplay
And "balance" you look for here is 1 on 1 balance... when in fact you should look at group vs group balance.
Todays MMOs are more and more aiming at SOLO experience.
And perhaps balance in such case will be much easier
I really really dont get the point with classes! There is nothing "natural" about it. And the other thing i dont get about them, its that is all about combat and damage. Why not ask about crafting class balance? Or pet balance between classes?
I think the fighter should be the one wich can fight, the crafter should be the one that craft and so on. If you want to fight, be a fighter then. I hate the idea that you choose a hiunter if you want to fight. A hunter is called a hunter because they dont fight! They hunt animals for food and skin.
This make no sense to me what so ever : (
what really matters is the ROLE BALANCING. What is your role in the game. What are you supposed to do? Honestly i have much problems with healers that can do crazy damage. If you took that class, then stick to the fact that you are made to heal. your attack skills are simply for the "just in case one enemy gets passed the armada" (in which case he should be 1/2 dead suffering from every possible DoT effect)
then you get the complaints "But i can't solo with a healer"
then you get my answer, "if you intended to play solo in an MMORPG, why did you take the healer class to begin with, take something that AT THE LEAST has a ROLE that would seem to indicate a FIGHTER and possibly a fighter who might, in all likelyhood go out by himself. warrior? champion? Paladin? Ranger?Assassin?
balancing is not about everyone on the same level and power. It should be an aspect of the game that makes you follow your role.
now if a warrior is able to kill 3-4 assassins (same level) we now have unbalancing.
if each one would play their roles, all the games would become more interesting
and the excuse for soloers "i want to go in without having to wait 4 hours to find a group to play" would not be valid, because every class would be needed since a warrior would need a team of healers, and healers would need their fighters, Mages would need the warriors every one would need every one else.
There is no crafting PvP or it isn't half as fun as combat PvP. Imbalanced PvP isn't fun. There is craft grinding but that is not the same as PvE grind where you might do faster with another class.
It's all about choices. If you have two characters for PvE and the other does it better/faster. Which one you choose? How can you justify having 2 classes in your game when 90% will choose the one thats better of the two. Sure, there will be those who want to be "unique" and choose the more rarer class or some that don't realize the other class is infact better. Those people are a glitch in the numbers. Nothing more. All the effort that went making that another class goes to drain and it frustrates the players when instead of 2 classes, you get only 1.
I skate to where the puck is going to be, not where it has been -Wayne Gretzky
Well, the AC example is fairly interesting, IMHO, because although you could optimize so that you'll play as well or better than anyone else of a specific level and of the same gear, in AC that difference can always, in reality, be made up for by having better gear and by being of a higher level. The reason is that in AC there was essentially no level cap, and reaching the gear cap is nigh impossible, since gear quality is entirely determined by the level of the badguy you kill, which dictates the maximum "item budget" of the items that drop, and then that item budget is distributed at random. An item of the highest current item level with the optimal stat distribution is unbelievably rare. Since the vast majority of items in AC never bind to your character, the possibilities are nearly endless for how any given character is constructed. The question of balance rarely came up because it would be an almost entirely intractable problem.
Furthermore, a setup that's weaker at one level is often far stronger at others. The best example I can think of is the so-called "Og mage" setup, where the player would specialize in Life Magic and Creature Magic (both schools being used for buffs, debuffs, and healing) at the cost of any sort of real offense. Later, when they finally have enough skill points to pick up War Magic they become powerhouses. So when it's assumed that different configurations are stronger at some levels than others, and when it's also assumed that there's no level cap, it becomes very difficult to even define "balance."
WoW, on the other hand, has certain limitations that force the game to require balance. Having scripted encounters that require a specific number of players is one. Another is that every player is of the same level. Lastly, everyone is essentially in equivalent gear if we assume they're working on the same level of content. This makes imbalances infinitely easier to spot. Everyone wants to be the strongest dude around. Now it just depends on Blizzard to make that happen, where in AC it required player ingenuity and perseverence.
P.S. AC had more things wrong with it than I can count, but I did appreciate Turbine's encouragement of emergent gameplay in its design philosophy. Many games lack that now.
Great reply. I totally agree with you 100% and this is what my post is to conduct, the balance between roles via archetypes. But you said it here best. Read this reply here, because this GUY KNOWS WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT.
Actually, if you read what class balance is not, you wouldn't of post this. Please re-read the section in the OP where it states, "THIS IS WHAT CLASS BALANCE IS NOT"