Oh trust me I by no means expected to have a perfect game I'm just like I said wasting my opinion because I want the best game. But yes we don't know how everything's going to match up but sometimes like you said you can see something go down it's just really correct. And hell we know that the devil's coming to the forums but I don't think that read everything. And at least being able to debate well something that we might feel is overpowered or underpowered gives us something to talk about on the game until it comes out lol
Hell we all know that everybody who's playing is going to be somewhat competitive We all want the best class and we all want to play the best class lol
You know realistically There are several changes within pretty much all the classes that can happen that was played in the last play session. The dire lord's ability to self heal which has been posed as the way that they will mitigate not having plate armor seem to be hardly there. Low DPS from the wizard some of that was the play style but some of it also seems to be just needed across the board increase. The shaman debuff and DPS possibly could work but I will say that the healing of powers and stacking healing with the shaman was pretty sweet. And then of course the rogue being OP at least there is easy ways to change this they could make smoke trick require a regnant maybe increase the recast time. Knock it down to where the mob only ignores the rogue. But we'll go straight to the other group members. Could also bring back the anti stealth due to light but maybe reduce the range of a torch light. I do believe the devs will be adjusting all the classes as we play through pre-alpha and alpha but I also think that since this is crowdfunded in a community we should voice our opinions but don't expect them to be To do what we are asking because they do have something in mind but we might be able to bring something like that they didn't see.
Triple post consolidated into a single post to follow the official guidelines.
Please only post once in reply and edit your post if needed, so not post back to back posts, it is considered double posting and against the guidelines plus considered poor forum etiquette.
Class balance boils down to a fairly simple equation:
Ap + As + O + D = Class desirability
Where:
Ap = Primary ability strength (tank, healer, cc, etc)
As = Secondary ability strength (same as above)
O = Offensive ability strength
D = Defensive ability strength
and where each of the above is rated in terms of its desirability in a typical group. One tank is an almost absolute requirement for a group as is one healer. A secondary tank or healer is generally not wanted. Every class can be rated in terms of how strong its offense is as well as its defense, e.g. cloth armor and lack of defensive spells is basically a 0 but a tank with plate armor and lots of save-my-ass abilities is very high. Once you set appropriate values for each of those and add them all up you can begin the balancing process.
Balance should be calculated for max level, max everything with the best possible spec. They should also, with less weight given to the outcomes, be calculated at 2 or 3 intervals along the leveling curve.
Many games, for the sake of "fun", ignore balance and do things like give tanks strong offensive capability so it doesn't take them 3 weeks to kill a mob. The trouble with that is it creates a class that is always wanted (because it's a tank) and can still fill a dps role while being a very low burden on the healer. When dps players outnumber tanks 10 to 1, giving up a dps slot to a tank reduces dps classes to second-rate citizens. Now everyone wants to roll a tank, especially one that has any kind of healing ability even if minor.
Either have a role-based system with unique, strongly defined roles and abilities with minimal overlap (EQ1) or abandon the whole thing and go with a classless system that lets players pick and choose the abilities they want in any combination. Trying to make everyone happy with some strange middle ground will only alienate the players Pantheon is aimed at, to wit: WoW's class system that eventually gave everyone everyone else's abilities, making all the classes essentially the same.
Edit to provide a clear example:
Rogues and rangers wear the same armor. Where rangers are typically pet classes rogues are not. Both typically have similar defensive capabilities, beit CC, stuns or what have you. But because rangers do their damage from a distance they are automatically less of a resource drain on healers (nevermind the ranger stereotypes...) which raises their defensive potential by a lot. There is no way a ranger should ever out-dps a rogue who has to get up close and personal with the mob yet most games try to match their dps potential. Many even assume that a pet isn't always available so that shouldn't be part of the balance calculation resulting in rangers with pets significantly out-dpsing rogues despite being at range and taking far less damage. Why, then, would anyone choose rogue over ranger, either to play or to invite to your group?
It's a similar problem for rangers versus wizards. Wizards are usually a one-trick-pony, pure dps, that can maybe teleport in some limited capacity. They also wear toilet paper for armor and have extremely limited defensive abilities. Paper cannons and mana sponges for healers. Wizards should out-dps rangers by a pretty strong margin yet rarely do. Worse, casters have next to zero mobility, having to stand still to cast, but rangers can shoot (and melee can stab) while running. Casters also have a limited damage resource, mana, and rangers can shoot non-stop all day long. Casters have long gotten the crappy end of the stick in class balance.
Akilae said:Class balance boils down to a fairly simple equation:
Ap + As + O + D = Class desirabilityWhere:
Ap = Primary ability strength (tank, healer, cc, etc)
As = Secondary ability strength (same as above)
O = Offensive ability strength
D = Defensive ability strength
and where each of the above is rated in terms of its desirability in a typical group. One tank is an almost absolute requirement for a group as is one healer. A secondary tank or healer is generally not wanted. Every class can be rated in terms of how strong its offense is as well as its defense, e.g. cloth armor and lack of defensive spells is basically a 0 but a tank with plate armor and lots of save-my-ass abilities is very high. Once you set appropriate values for each of those and add them all up you can begin the balancing process.
Balance should be calculated for max level, max everything with the best possible spec. They should also, with less weight given to the outcomes, be calculated at 2 or 3 intervals along the leveling curve.
Many games, for the sake of "fun", ignore balance and do things like give tanks strong offensive capability so it doesn't take them 3 weeks to kill a mob. The trouble with that is it creates a class that is always wanted (because it's a tank) and can still fill a dps role while being a very low burden on the healer. When dps players outnumber tanks 10 to 1, giving up a dps slot to a tank reduces dps classes to second-rate citizens. Now everyone wants to roll a tank, especially one that has any kind of healing ability even if minor.
Either have a role-based system with unique, strongly defined roles and abilities with minimal overlap (EQ1) or abandon the whole thing and go with a classless system that lets players pick and choose the abilities they want in any combination. Trying to make everyone happy with some strange middle ground will only alienate the players Pantheon is aimed at, to wit: WoW's class system that eventually gave everyone everyone else's abilities, making all the classes essentially the same.
Edit to provide a clear example:
Rogues and rangers wear the same armor. Where rangers are typically pet classes rogues are not. Both typically have similar defensive capabilities, beit CC, stuns or what have you. But because rangers do their damage from a distance they are automatically less of a resource drain on healers (nevermind the ranger stereotypes...) which raises their defensive potential by a lot. There is no way a ranger should ever out-dps a rogue who has to get up close and personal with the mob yet most games try to match their dps potential. Many even assume that a pet isn't always available so that shouldn't be part of the balance calculation resulting in rangers with pets significantly out-dpsing rogues despite being at range and taking far less damage. Why, then, would anyone choose rogue over ranger, either to play or to invite to your group?
It's a similar problem for rangers versus wizards. Wizards are usually a one-trick-pony, pure dps, that can maybe teleport in some limited capacity. They also wear toilet paper for armor and have extremely limited defensive abilities. Paper cannons and mana sponges for healers. Wizards should out-dps rangers by a pretty strong margin yet rarely do. Worse, casters have next to zero mobility, having to stand still to cast, but rangers can shoot (and melee can stab) while running. Casters also have a limited damage resource, mana, and rangers can shoot non-stop all day long. Casters have long gotten the crappy end of the stick in class balance.
This is entirely empiric and not really offering any side solutions. If other melees can't match the DPS of rogues then rogues will be stacked like they were in EQ and no one will want any of others.
If ranger pays a heavy toll for not beeing a rogue, and pay a second one for not beeing a wizard, then why even making ranger a class ? They all should deal DPS in a 5 to 10% margin from lowest to highest, but their tools and additionnal benefits should be what differenciate them from others. You're advocating for casters by reducing the fact they have a general easier life with teleports, gates, invisibilities or such, however you class mobility, survival and ressource as an edge other classes might have over them.
It's not just a matter of aligning numbers and making them betters for the classes you prefer, the game has to be played by many, and every class should fit a role or necessity that makes them desirable, which should start by making them attractive for their main role at the very same scale.
Raidil said:Hell we all know that everybody who's playing is going to be somewhat competitive
We all want the best class and we all want to play the best class lol
You are wrong.
Some players are competitive. Some like me are not. As has been said countless times, Pantheon focuses strongly on cooperative play and teamwork. I want to make friends and have FUN with them. I don't care about playing the "best" class. I don't care how I 'rank' compared to other players. I don't care how much XP my group/guild is making compared to any other. As long as my friends and I have fun when we play, I don't care if it takes YEARS for us to reach level cap.
This whole thread is an example of over-thinking things until a confused frustration causes a feedback loop of poopy brain ache.
Nothing is set in stone.
The game already contains enough variation to warrant many group builds.
Plus the point of the game is to have fun with friends.
Want 5 bards in the group and call yourself the traveling toto's? Do it.
Want to take all tanks and just march until you create the biggest train anyone has ever seen? Do it.
Seek the fun, let the worry die.
Class balance is easy it's X + Y + Z = Fun and balanced game
Raidil said: So currently in Pantheon we're supposed to have a four distinct class makeups. We have the tank We have the DPS and we have the healer and then as with EQ we were supposed to have crowd control class. But from what I've seen from last streams this last class grouping we no longer need. So a a group will no longer need a secondary tank or one the secondary thing because they're not going to need to be off taking anything. Your Your DPS classes have this locked down Your monk is able to off tank and add mass DPS. Then you got the rogue who can crown control multiple mobs massively. So why bring an extra tank everyone's looking for a room there's no no reason for this. Then when you consider would be the crowd control classes bard enchanter possibly the necromancer what's the point of bringing up a crowd control is already being handled Well. So what do they really bring The DPS is not going to be as high as the has the DPS classes who seem to be able to crowd control just as well as what they probably will or as well as what you would need an enchanter to. So why do we need these classes anymore then goodbye having secondary tanks in groups when there's when there's no enchanter available. Say goodbye to having a secondary tank in group anyways with that role being field by the DPS classes.
In pre alfa things are done testest and tweaked. Things are also tested and tweaked in Alfa and Beta. Some of the pre-alfa tests are being broadcast to
the public. This is to help promote the game to help more people get involved and get interested in it. Many changes will be made between now and the
release of the game. Think of it like Chuck Yeager breaking the speed of sound for the first time in a plane and then knowing what changes have to be
made while breaking the sound bearer. Then he has to figure out how to land the plane without crashing. In-game testing they don't have to figure out how
to land the plane just make tests and adjustments according to how the tests went.
StoneFish said:This whole thread is an example of over-thinking things until a confused frustration causes a feedback loop of poopy brain ache.
Nothing is set in stone.
The game already contains enough variation to warrant many group builds.
Plus the point of the game is to have fun with friends.
Want 5 bards in the group and call yourself the traveling toto's? Do it.
Want to take all tanks and just march until you create the biggest train anyone has ever seen? Do it.
Seek the fun, let the worry die.
That is so Awesome... I got a good laugh out of that. Thanks so much. Especially the part where you take all tanks and march until you create the biggest train ever!!!
Jothany said:Raidil said:Hell we all know that everybody who's playing is going to be somewhat competitive
We all want the best class and we all want to play the best class lol
You are wrong.
Some players are competitive. Some like me are not. As has been said countless times, Pantheon focuses strongly on cooperative play and teamwork. I want to make friends and have FUN with them. I don't care about playing the "best" class. I don't care how I 'rank' compared to other players. I don't care how much XP my group/guild is making compared to any other. As long as my friends and I have fun when we play, I don't care if it takes YEARS for us to reach level cap.
Veru much, yes.
StoneFish said:This whole thread is an example of over-thinking things until a confused frustration causes a feedback loop of poopy brain ache.
Nothing is set in stone.
The game already contains enough variation to warrant many group builds.
Plus the point of the game is to have fun with friends.
Want 5 bards in the group and call yourself the traveling toto's? Do it.
Want to take all tanks and just march until you create the biggest train anyone has ever seen? Do it.
Seek the fun, let the worry die.
And yes!
Some players enjoy the minmaxing and the competitive comparisons and that's fine.
Let's enjoy discussing it, too. We're all interested.
Let's just not take it too seriously A) This early and B) Because it's a game with friends.
Discussing concerns and the possibilities is great.
Assuming the worst and making pessimistic presumptions based on very early game play of an incomplete game is a bit pointless.
Yes we have been told utility, including crowd control, will be very important to Pantheon.
But we were not told that the last stream represents what will be in the final game regarding utility and crowd control, in fact we know, since there are at least two classes with crowd control not even seen yet, that it definitely isn't representative and we know, since we are only at pre-alpha and not about to launch, that things are going to change a lot in the coming months and years.
Yes, it's pre-Alpha, because of that and the many other reasons mentioned, don't worry hehe. There's no need.
Worry /ˈwʌri/
Verb
Feel or cause to feel anxious or troubled about actual or potential problems.
"he worried about his soldier sons in the war"
Don't worry, because what you are suggesting is not an actual problem and we don't even have any reason to believe it is a potential problem.