The whole DaoC 2.0 hope

[pez]

The culture server is just an interesting way to create safe zones. They could have achieved almost the same thing by having a below level 30 /pvp on or off flag.

You guys are really making this server out to be way more than it is.

 

[Vasconcelos]

Yes, archtypes missing, no need for them. As long as it's balanced out with the differences at hand. Someone heals more, make the others do more damage. Etc.

Its more complicated than that. Theres a realm now with NO tanks and all classes being papermade, and theres another realm with 0 ZIP NADA ranged dmg

Thats, as much as you would like to achieve balance throu difference, is simply rendering the whole idea of culture pvp useless (unless you can grp with other cultures, but then, what would be the point of the whole rules?)

I agree, and prefer, to have different classes on each realm, but sadly, with the tools avaible in the game atm, is not posible and would mean creating another game basically (not even a expansion adding 3 classes). The only way out of this mess, is making all classes avaible for all races.

 

[pez]

I really must have been the only one who read the press release...

 

[old.Tohtori]

Didn't know that you have to be a game designer to have an opinion and can't have one when you aren't one.

I'll say it again: balance = equality.

Only thing worth quoting on the point at hand, the rest was something else.

That is just wrong because you can have balance with differences too.

It's proven simply in how a healer can defeat a tank in these games.

And as a different kind of example, round-counter-tactics have been the key elements to many games also. This tank can cloak, the others can detect cloak, we have balance.

I don't know exactly where you went aray, but it's simply a FACT that you don't have to have equal classes to create balance. It's just the simple solution.

Its more complicated than that. Theres a realm now with NO tanks and all classes being papermade, and theres another realm with 0 ZIP NADA ranged dmg

Thats, as much as you would like to achieve balance throu difference, is simply rendering the whole idea of culture pvp useless (unless you can grp with other cultures, but then, what would be the point of the whole rules?)

I agree, and prefer, to have different classes on each realm, but sadly, with the tools avaible in the game atm, is not posible and would mean creating another game basically (not even a expansion adding 3 classes). The only way out of this mess, is making all classes avaible for all races.

Nothing complicated. No healers, no tanks, no rangers...fine. Then change the classes to accomodate this difference.

The easy way out is to give all classes to all realms, not the only way out.

For example:
This race has no ranged weapons. Let's make 'em more resiliant to ranged weapons.

And no the examples ain't perfect solutions, but they give the idea that it's not the only wya to go.

 

[Manisch Depressiv]

That is just wrong because you can have balance with differences too.

It's proven simply in how a healer can defeat a tank in these games.

*slaps forehead*

Yup, let's take one case out of the equation and call it balanced. For your information class based systems are almost NEVER balanced unless it is the same class(es) playing against each other. Even chess isn't balanced as white has a higher chance to win and you need more matches to decide who is the better player.

Something is balanced when there is an equal chance for a specific outcome. At complete balance no class will win or lose (double pan balance with both pans at same level).

Show me how 4 Tanks and 2 Healers get beaten by 6 Healers without giving some of the 6 Healers abilities of the 4 Tanks and therefor removing the differences and I will bow before you.

The most balanced thing you will get will be the same amount of same classes at each side or even better (as the classes can be specced differently) exactly the same abilities distributed equally among all the classes on each side.

You're free to call 4 Guild Wars (melee) Warriors fighting 4 (bond/protection) Monks balanced - since no side has enough damage to strike a kill and you're free to call it "balanced through differences" but at the end of the day you would have looked again at one specific case as Necormancers or Mesmers would destroy the Monks easily, just proving that the game is not balanced in all cases.

Before you come up with "I am a game designer" again, please say

- if you actually play Age of Conan,
- what games you have designed so far that made it live, as I have the feeling that there are games that have been designed well and badly.

Maybe, you should think about the word balance a bit further, if you look at the natural sciences you will realize that balance is a non changing condition, so terms from the gaming theory craft like winning and losing do not apply really. Balance in video gaming is achieved when each side has the same chance of achieving the wanted result and now what sides would have the same chance?

1. Two sides with same classes or at least abilities.
2. Two sides with different classes and abilities but designed so wonderfully that under ideal circumstances they will play differently but result the same effects as two sides with same classes or at least abilities.

If you believe in point 2, then you believe in wonders and you fail to think in an abstract way.

 

[old.Tohtori]

I don't need to play AoC to know about balance. And only reason why i bring up the game designer thing, is that you understand that i've actually had to work in this field and know a thing or two.

You're talking about some "natural balance" or the terminoligal balance meaning, which has nothing to do with "game balance" where player skill ALWAYS comes to play, ofcourse.

But just like in chess, you have to play it out many times to see.

The basics of a class can be changed and tweaked so that they are at a equal starting point.

Case in point, healer and tank, both can win, depending on the player skills.

About your "example" of:

1. Two sides with same classes or at least abilities.
2. Two sides with different classes and abilities but designed so wonderfully that under ideal circumstances they will play differently but result the same effects as two sides with same classes or at least abilities.

If you believe in point 2, then you believe in wonders and you fail to think in an abstract way.

I think you'll find that you're just a boxed thinker and think "everyone gets everything" ONLY will bring balance when that's not the case.

We designed, as an example, in Pathway to Glory: Ikusa Islands a way to balance out the fact that the allied forces start every time. This was done via weapon, location, etc balancing. It became equal with different base setting.

I think of option 2 because it's possible to do with more work. As in, 4 rangers vs 4 mages, played differently but both can win. Or 4 tanks vs 4 healers. All about knowing the class and playing it, not about "they are different!"

Abstract thinking and in-box thinking is EXACTLY what is limiting game designers.

And further more, about your "game balance is when both sides can achieve wanted results" is right as one single part of it, but you get it wrong. Two healers can complete a quest, 2 rangers can do too, 2 warriors, all groups can also kill eachother when met. Or as a fine example, EVE online, where you can achieve the same result with two smaller ships and two bigger ships.

Achieving result isn't about giving the same tools.

 

[dee777]

But just like in chess, you have to play it out many times to see.

Interesting that you use the perfect balanced (except for the little advantage of who begins first) game as an example. Why not use Magic the Gathering for instance? ;P

We designed, as an example, in Pathway to Glory: Ikusa Islands a way to balance out the fact that the allied forces start every time. This was done via weapon, location, etc balancing. It became equal with different base setting.

I ve never heard of the game and have never visited any of the community forums, but I ll bet you a fair amount of beer that there was whining about balance.

I believe than when you talk about giving different options to different people and balance them via their differences, you only name issue different. If I have tanks or healers with the ability to tank doesnt change anything. Its a tank after all.

Check out the PvE raiding server-firsts before WoW Burning Crusade and after and count the number of Alliance and Horde entries. Proves my point.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Interesting that you use the perfect balanced (except for the little advantage of who begins first) game as an example. Why not use Magic the Gathering for instance? ;P

I ve never heard of the game and have never visited any of the community forums, but I ll bet you a fair amount of beer that there was whining about balance.

I believe than when you talk about giving different options to different people and balance them via their differences, you only name issue different. If I have tanks or healers with the ability to tank doesnt change anything. Its a tank after all.

Check out the PvE raiding server-firsts before WoW Burning Crusade and after and count the number of Alliance and Horde entries. Proves my point.

I didn't bring chess into it. Get the facts straight.

I'll take that beer now thank you. The "fix" worked perfectly.

Wasn't talking about giving healers tanking ability, others were. About giving all all abilities to create balance. I was talking about using different skills and balance them out for the same result. As in, warrior wins all the time. Boost healing power. Now warrior only wins 50% of the time. Tadaa!

WoW doesn't have balance via difference, it has equality in all aspects and it makes it rather boring.

 

[dee777]

I was talking about using different skills and balance them out for the same result. As in, warrior wins all the time. Boost healing power. Now warrior only wins 50% of the time. Tadaa!

I better stay outta the "discussion", but maybe you would be willing to tell me how you would factor in secondary and tertiary (if not more) effects? In your little example above you boost healers to hamper warriors. What is with mages. What is with hybrids of tank and mages. Hybrids of mages and healers. Hybrids of...

You cant really balance that out IMO. Prove me wrong...

 

[old.Tohtori]

I better stay outta the "discussion", but maybe you would be willing to tell me how you would factor in secondary and tertiary (if not more) effects? In your little example above you boost healers to hamper warriors. What is with mages. What is with hybrids of tank and mages. Hybrids of mages and healers. Hybrids of...

You cant really balance that out IMO. Prove me wrong...

With time, and actually getting paid to do funcoms work, i could.

Noones saying i don't have my own MMO in the works ofcourse, but i'm just saying, completely different classes/sides/skills is balancable. Rather easy too. Just that the easy solution people use to save time is "give all all", boring.

 

[dee777]

So you restrict yourself to make a claim without proving it, since you dont get paid for it? Did I get that right?

 

[Vasconcelos]

Honestly toht, what is more feasible, faster, easier, not the job of a different game and not a source of creating another imbalances issue between:

- changing existing classes (i rly cant see how to give tanks to Stygians besides making mages able to use heavy armors....)

or

- making accesible to all races the Guardian, the Demonologist and the Priest of Mitra classes, as just an example of the 3 archtypes (tank, healer and ranged).


I, at least, am very sure what option i would pick if I were a dev

 

[Vasconcelos]

Honestly toht, what is more feasible, faster, easier, not the job of a different game and not a source of creating another imbalances issue between:

- changing existing classes (i rly cant see how to give tanks to Stygians besides making assasins able to use heavy armors....)

or

- making accesible to all races the Guardian, the Demonologist and the Priest of Mitra classes, as just an example of the 3 archtypes (tank, healer and ranged).


I, at least, am very sure what option i would pick if I were a dev

 

[old.Tohtori]

So you restrict yourself to make a claim without proving it, since you dont get paid for it? Did I get that right?

I'm saying i don't want to prove my point FURTHER, because it takes time, and time is something that is well spent on other things.

All i'm claiming is that it's doable, like said in the warrior/healer example.

Honestly toht,

Honestly, it all comes down to the guys in charge.

I know MOST game developers would love to make it so that the differences count , and that the game is balanced with different races still staying different, but as said, time and money dictate that usually, they take the easy way and give "all all".

 

[Vasconcelos]

Honestly, it all comes down to the guys in charge.

I know MOST game developers would love to make it so that the differences count , and that the game is balanced with different races still staying different, but as said, time and money dictate that usually, they take the easy way and give "all all".

Its not a matter of money, its just that with the current portfolio of classes avaible for each realm, its simply not posible to reach balance on the archtype issue by tweaking all the classes without creating further and deeper imbalances.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Its not a matter of money, its just that with the current portfolio of classes avaible for each realm, its simply not posible to reach balance on the archtype issue by tweaking all the classes without creating further and deeper imbalances.

Ofcourse it is as time is money.

If they need a fix for imbalance tomorrow, they do the "all for all" and that's it. no going back. Ever.
If they tweak classes, they get more time to sort the imbalance out.

Saying that it's not possible, is just restricted thinking.

 

[Manisch Depressiv]

Not only is he a game designer with a MMOG in the making he also knows what most developers would like to do, but sadly time and money does prevent them from doing so.

Maybe no one wants to spend an entire life on creating balance in chaotic system.

 

[Vasconcelos]

Ofcourse it is as time is money.

If they need a fix for imbalance tomorrow, they do the "all for all" and that's it. no going back. Ever.
If they tweak classes, they get more time to sort the imbalance out.

Saying that it's not possible, is just restricted thinking.

Cant agree. If they start tweaking, they throw in even more imbalances, as we are not talking about about fluff, but about a "Realm" having leather as hardest armor, the class with more hps being a priest and the only one able to weild a shield a mage/priest hybrid.
I rly cant see how are you supposed to fix that by tweaking sorry. Same goes for another realm in which the longest range dmg avaible is the one from cross-bows...

 

[dee777]

Saying that it's not possible, is just restricted thinking.

I think that is nitpicking. When people say "its not possible" I suppose they actually mean "its not possible without skyrocketing costs (no matter if its time or money or both)".

 

[old.Tohtori]

Not only is he a game designer with a MMOG in the making he also knows what most developers would like to do, but sadly time and money does prevent them from doing so.

Maybe no one wants to spend an entire life on creating balance in chaotic system.

I said i've got my own MMO on the works, as in, personal design, working out things, hoping i'll get it done one day. MMO design is one of the biggest things in designer careers. So what?

Also, i do know, 'cause i know a lot of them. It's a basic thing, if you don't control the money and time yourself(like some companies can), you're bound by cash and time to cut corners and not do things as "you'd like".

It's not an entire life and not a chaotic system. You claim it's not doable, i know it is, from experiene and as it is my job to know so.

Cant agree. If they start tweaking, they throw in even more imbalances, as we are not talking about about fluff, but about a "Realm" having leather as hardest armor, the class with more hps being a priest and the only one able to weild a shield a mage/priest hybrid.
I rly cant see how are you supposed to fix that by tweaking sorry. Same goes for another realm in which the longest range dmg avaible is the one from cross-bows...

Tweaqking is perhaps the wrong word, as it would mean "careful changes so players don't get anrgy". I'm talking about changing things as needed, planning it, and testing it, and making it work. The only thing i'm arguing is that it CAN BE DONE. And it's not even that hard.

I think that is nitpicking. When people say "its not possible" I suppose they actually mean "its not possible without skyrocketing costs (no matter if its time or money or both)".

Exactly what i'm saying, have been saying, and am getting argued over. Balance with differences is possible, has been done, have done personally and is in no way impossible.

It's not skyrocketing though, it's just "bit more", but bit can be the deciding factor to the bigshots.

 

[Vasconcelos]

Tweaqking is perhaps the wrong word, as it would mean "careful changes so players don't get anrgy". I'm talking about changing things as needed, planning it, and testing it, and making it work. The only thing i'm arguing is that it CAN BE DONE. And it's not even that hard.

Well, im still trying to figure out how to change as needed a mage or an assasin into a tank without throwing imbalances, because thats the real scenario in AoC right now.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Well, im still trying to figure out how to change as needed a mage or an assasin into a tank without throwing imbalances, because thats the real scenario in AoC right now.

Exactly!

It's not about changing something into a tank.

Look, i'll use the same example as before:

A tank(warrior) fights a healer.

Statistically(default) the tank wins a 100% of the time.

Let's not make the healer tank better(which would change the class), or make the warrior weaker(which would anger players), but let's make it so that the healer heals much more. Self heals, some such. Without changing the class, we now have a more surviving healer.

Get it?

Don't change the class, change what they do to the better. Or add some things that keep the class as it is, don't take away, but give that needed edge.

 

[dee777]

The only thing i'm arguing is that it CAN BE DONE. And it's not even that hard.

Then why do you think no commonly known MMO so far has suceeded in doing it your way? Not even Blizzards designers were able to, even tho cost supposedly is not a deciding factor for them.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Then why do you think no commonly known MMO so far has suceeded in doing it your way? Not even Blizzards designers were able to, even tho cost supposedly is not a deciding factor for them.

Now you're asking a question that, honoestly, has been on my mind too.

Maybe it's an "easier" issue, maybe it's a cost issue, maybe it's a talent issue(doubtful), but something is prohibiting the use of different classes as i'm suggesting. While, all points point to the fact that it can be done.

 

[dee777]

Let's not make the healer tank better(which would change the class), or make the warrior weaker(which would anger players), but let's make it so that the healer heals much more. Self heals, some such. Without changing the class, we now have a more surviving healer.

From my point of view you just upgraded the healers ability to get hammered. People usually call that "improved tankability".

 

[old.Tohtori]

From my point of view you just upgraded the healers ability to get hammered. People usually call that "improved tankability".

Hammered?

Anyway, like i said, it's just throwing the general concept in there. Not a definitive working thing.

You know what i mean, stop being pedantic.

 

[dee777]

Hammered?

Maybe the language barrier hit me in the face here. With hammered I meant getting hit a lot.

Anyway, like i said, it's just throwing the general concept in there. Not a definitive working thing.

You know what i mean, stop being pedantic.

I am not being pedantic, I show you what appears to be a flaw in your logic. You said you dont want to upgrade the tank on a class but improve its survivability. Thats not a concept, thats a paradoxon at best...

 

[old.Tohtori]

Maybe the language barrier hit me in the face here. With hammered I meant getting hit a lot.

I am not being pedantic, I show you what appears to be a flaw in your logic. You said you dont want to upgrade the tank on a class but improve its survivability. Thats not a concept, thats a paradoxon at best...

Yeah, the hammered just means "really drunk" too so got a bit confusing

I know what you mean, and yes, that "fix" would be like that.

But what i didn't mean is to improve tankability, or survivability, but to change the talents they have, or add some, so that they are more competative and equal, without changing the whole class definition.

 

[dee777]

But what i didn't mean is to improve tankability, or survivability, but to change the talents they have, or add some, so that they are more competative and equal, without changing the whole class definition.

Exactly thats the point where our oppinions divide. I think you can put any class in any MMO into one of the functions tank, DPS (range/pointblank), utility (heal/CC/buff/debuff...) or hybrids of those functions. Stealth is a different and difficult little beast, BTW.

Whatever you do to change whichever class will change its function as well. So whatever you do to balance the classes, you will equalize them in some way, tho maybe its not apparant at first. At least thats how I see it.

 

[old.Tohtori]

Exactly thats the point where our oppinions divide. I think you can put any class in any MMO into one of the functions tank, DPS (range/pointblank), utility (heal/CC/buff/debuff...) or hybrids of those functions. Stealth is a different and difficult little beast, BTW.

Whatever you do to change whichever class will change its function as well. So whatever you do to balance the classes, you will equalize them in some way, tho maybe its not apparant at first. At least thats how I see it.

If you change it like that, aye, but you can also change them within their given base talents.


Although, this might be problematic if the basis of it all is classic MMO classes.

The easier way to do this, would be to stricten up the classes. As in, tanks don't get healthboosts but rely more on healers etc.

Anyway, either change is better then givig everyone everything, as it generally destroys the unique feel.