Forums » Pantheon Classes

Creating Balance Through Imbalance

    • 79 posts
    November 21, 2017 2:26 PM PST

    One frightening trend I have seen is where you have many classes that are mirrors of others, or perform the same as others but in different ways.  Balance is achieved through equality, which makes the game boring and reduces replayability.  To solve this, I think it is important that each class fit into specific roles where they excel, sometimes significantly, over the other classes.  To best depict this, I have made a chart of potential roles for each class.  Listed are several different abilities throughout the game, from DPS to utility capabilities.  Next to that are ratings from zero to five, with five being the highest.  Only one class can receive a five in any ability.  Take a look:


    This post was edited by Hadekin at November 21, 2017 2:36 PM PST
    • 326 posts
    November 21, 2017 3:02 PM PST

    Very nice. I like that approach.
    I could use that for testing, =).
    Some appointed abilities and numbers are in for a furious debate, lol. It would depend on what will be used by the devs though.

    • 79 posts
    November 21, 2017 7:14 PM PST

    I received a couple of messages asking me what some of these terms mean:

    * DOT - Damage over time;

    * HOT - Heal over time

    * MT - Multi Target

    * ST - Single Target

    * Lull - Reduce agro range of monster

    * Reverse Heal - When hitting monster, players heal

    * Thorns - Target takes damage when player is hit

    * Damage Shield - A shield that prevents a certain amount of damage.

    Zero through five may represent getting more powerful abilities earlier, buffs that affect multiple targets, or more powerful abilities. 

    To make things even more interesting, some classes could have significant limitations.  For example, a rogue is not able to both high ST and MT DPS at once.  They have to equip a certain weapon.  A monk has to have less than 25 stones of equipment to maximize its potential.  A wizard has to be at 75% mana or higher to do the most damage.  A Dire Lord has to have the target feared to do its best damage.  A paladin has to have a creature blinded.  In other words, classes need to have certain conditions met to maximize their class abilities.

    • 1886 posts
    November 21, 2017 9:42 PM PST

    metteec said:

    I received a couple of messages asking me what some of these terms mean:

    * MT - Multi Target

    * Thorns - Target takes damage when player is hit

    * Damage Shield - A shield that prevents a certain amount of damage.

    If you were a long time EQ player, these three had different definitions.

    *MT = Main Tank

    *Thorns = Druid damage shield

    *Damage Shield (DS) = A buff where any melee attack by enemy would damage enemy.  Cast by Mage (fire based) or Druid (Thorns).  Excellent for 'free' aggro building.

    • 678 posts
    November 22, 2017 4:34 AM PST

    Vandraad said:

    metteec said:

    I received a couple of messages asking me what some of these terms mean:

    * MT - Multi Target

    * Thorns - Target takes damage when player is hit

    * Damage Shield - A shield that prevents a certain amount of damage.

    If you were a long time EQ player, these three had different definitions.

    *MT = Main Tank

    *Thorns = Druid damage shield

    *Damage Shield (DS) = A buff where any melee attack by enemy would damage enemy.  Cast by Mage (fire based) or Druid (Thorns).  Excellent for 'free' aggro building.



    Yeah, that had me confused xD
    Really nice post metteec.


    -sorte.

    • 264 posts
    November 22, 2017 1:32 PM PST

    We can argue the content and values but I like that approach :)

    I would push it even more and give a coeficient to certain abilities that are more critical that others (perhaps a class would have only 55 points instead of 60 if those points are often max to 5 or 4 or combined too well) and have a special rule so that a class has to have at least 3 attributes to 5. My concern would be that if the points are too diluted, the class might depend of the game design too much and perhaps become useless. By having at least 3 attribues to 5, it feel it should help.

    • 1886 posts
    November 22, 2017 5:44 PM PST

    metteec said:

    One frightening trend I have seen is where you have many classes that are mirrors of others, or perform the same as others but in different ways.  Balance is achieved through equality, which makes the game boring and reduces replayability.  To solve this, I think it is important that each class fit into specific roles where they excel, sometimes significantly, over the other classes.  To best depict this, I have made a chart of potential roles for each class.  Listed are several different abilities throughout the game, from DPS to utility capabilities.  Next to that are ratings from zero to five, with five being the highest.  Only one class can receive a five in any ability.  Take a look:

    While I can appreciate the purpose of your post, you are looking at this from a CLASS standpoint while Pantheon is taking an ARCHETYPE approach.  The difference is important.  Each class within each archetype will perform the primary function of the archetype equally.  All 3 priests (Druid, Cleric, Shaman) will heal (and rez) with the same power.  The 3 tank classes (Warrior, Paladin, Dire Lord) will all tank equally well, and so on.

    Classes within an archetype won't really be competing with each other.  What we don't know beyond that they will perform their primary function equally is exactly how each class operates.

    • 264 posts
    November 22, 2017 6:27 PM PST

    Vandraad said:

    While I can appreciate the purpose of your post, you are looking at this from a CLASS standpoint while Pantheon is taking an ARCHETYPE approach.  The difference is important.  Each class within each archetype will perform the primary function of the archetype equally.  All 3 priests (Druid, Cleric, Shaman) will heal (and rez) with the same power.  The 3 tank classes (Warrior, Paladin, Dire Lord) will all tank equally well, and so on.

    Classes within an archetype won't really be competing with each other.  What we don't know beyond that they will perform their primary function equally is exactly how each class operates.

     

    I understand and agree with you that having the matrix based on archetype would make sense. However, I disagree when you say "equally". It should be close but it will not be equal. Some type of encounters will be a better fit for a certain class of tank or healer.

    I think this is where the challenge is. VR is trying to bring back class interdependence. Why would they design 12 classes for 3 'primary' roles if they are equal?

    Players cried for years for balance and sadly we know what happened to the MMO industry. I feel it is OK that classes won't be equal, I don't expect them to be and I don't want them to be, as long as they all shine in a specific way and are all fun to play. 

    • 1886 posts
    November 22, 2017 7:16 PM PST

    Ithaca said:

    Vandraad said:

    While I can appreciate the purpose of your post, you are looking at this from a CLASS standpoint while Pantheon is taking an ARCHETYPE approach.  The difference is important.  Each class within each archetype will perform the primary function of the archetype equally.  All 3 priests (Druid, Cleric, Shaman) will heal (and rez) with the same power.  The 3 tank classes (Warrior, Paladin, Dire Lord) will all tank equally well, and so on.

    Classes within an archetype won't really be competing with each other.  What we don't know beyond that they will perform their primary function equally is exactly how each class operates.

     

    I understand and agree with you that having the matrix based on archetype would make sense. However, I disagree when you say "equally". It should be close but it will not be equal. Some type of encounters will be a better fit for a certain class of tank or healer.

    I think this is where the challenge is. VR is trying to bring back class interdependence. Why would they design 12 classes for 3 'primary' roles if they are equal?

    Players cried for years for balance and sadly we know what happened to the MMO industry. I feel it is OK that classes won't be equal, I don't expect them to be and I don't want them to be, as long as they all shine in a specific way and are all fun to play. 


    VR has stated time and time again that there will not be situations for which a certain class of tank or healer is better than another.  They specifically want the classes within an Archetype to perform the prime function of the archetype equally.  The methods by which they will perform that function will be different, as Brad has stated in several threads on the topic.

    The priest classes will not have the same healing spells yet will still heal equally powerfully.  The shaman's heal would be smaller than that of the cleric, but because the Shaman can slow a mob, debuff its strength,etc and buff the players, it reduces the incoming DPS enough that its smaller heal will keep a tank alive.  The cleric, unable to debuff a mob like the shaman, uses the bigger heal.  What we are unsure of is how the druid fits into all this.

    This was how it worked in EQ1, but there mob damage output was balanced against the cleric heal lines and the emergent gameplay of complete heal rotations, etc.  In groups though I, as a Shaman, had no problems keeping a group alive in any group content appropriate for our level.  What made it really easy was having a melee heavy group with an SK tank so my buffs would have their greatest effect.

     

    • 103 posts
    November 22, 2017 9:45 PM PST

    Vandraad said:

    VR has stated time and time again that there will not be situations for which a certain class of tank or healer is better than another.  They specifically want the classes within an Archetype to perform the prime function of the archetype equally.  The methods by which they will perform that function will be different, as Brad has stated in several threads on the topic.

    The priest classes will not have the same healing spells yet will still heal equally powerfully.  The shaman's heal would be smaller than that of the cleric, but because the Shaman can slow a mob, debuff its strength,etc and buff the players, it reduces the incoming DPS enough that its smaller heal will keep a tank alive.  The cleric, unable to debuff a mob like the shaman, uses the bigger heal.  What we are unsure of is how the druid fits into all this.

    This was how it worked in EQ1, but there mob damage output was balanced against the cleric heal lines and the emergent gameplay of complete heal rotations, etc.  In groups though I, as a Shaman, had no problems keeping a group alive in any group content appropriate for our level.  What made it really easy was having a melee heavy group with an SK tank so my buffs would have their greatest effect.

     

    I think "generally equal, but situationally better or worse" would sum it up nicely. It's important to make classes within the same archtype different, but not so different to where it deviates to far from their general purpose, or no longer viewed as a viable option. When it comes to the healer archtype, I think the two focal points of discussion is the ability to ressurect, and the ability to keep a group alive on their own merit. It's okay to make one class better at ressurecting, but if you make it either exclusive to that one class, or the difference in quality so great the community no longer view the other options viable, you have a problem on your hand. In this scenario two classes would be unable to compete for their designated role within a group, and for the most part be relegated to compete for a spot in a different role, or the flex position in a group.

    • 1886 posts
    November 23, 2017 10:09 AM PST

    In regard to resurrection specifically, Brad has stated time and time again all 3 priest classes will have the same resurrection.  He does not want groups waiting around for a cleric because only a cleric can resurrect. If there is any difference in resurrections, either in level earned, amount of xp returned, etc, everyone will quickly insist on having that class with the best one in their group thus completely defeating the purpose of the archetype approach.

    • 264 posts
    November 24, 2017 6:36 PM PST

    Menubrea said:

    I think "generally equal, but situationally better or worse" would sum it up nicely. 

    I agree with you!

     

    Vandraad said:

    In regard to resurrection specifically, Brad has stated time and time again all 3 priest classes will have the same resurrection.  He does not want groups waiting around for a cleric because only a cleric can resurrect. If there is any difference in resurrections, either in level earned, amount of xp returned, etc, everyone will quickly insist on having that class with the best one in their group thus completely defeating the purpose of the archetype approach.

    I agree with you Vandraad. Perhaps classes will be 'equal' in the sense of access to critical/very important abilties that define a role (ie: access to resurrection spell). However, we know that most classes abilities will be different from a class to another (even if most of them will either heal, or damage a target). I do not think having access to a ressurection spell at lvl 10 or level 20 make a huge different in the scale of a MMO. I believe all healers will have access to resurrection, one will remove most of the penalty perhaps, another will grant full mana, others will not. I see little differences that hopefully make sense with the lore of the classes and the game in general.