what is ballance?

New_barb · 09-05-2010, 10:12 PM

is ballance a fight between classes which are fully buffed?
and end up in a 50/50% win chance?

is ballance a fight between classes not buffed
and end up in a 50/50% win chance?

is ballance a fight in which some classes have to cast 8 buffs to be fully buffed VS another class that has to buff 3 things (and then is already fully buffed) is that ballance?

i think fights should end up in 50/50% if a unbuffed clas fights against another unbuffed clas...

i think fights shouldn't end up in 50/50% if clas 1. casts 2 buffs and clas 2. casts 5 buffs then the clas that casts 5 bufs should definitely have to win but they wont in this game..

i think every class should have the same amount of buffs lets have a barb first to think about they got like 7 buffs.. i think the archer / mage buffs should be splitted up into 7 buffs (but the effect will remain the same)

i think i get many posts of you cant compare a egg with a apple etc. etc. but if a warlock only has 2 buffs to be fully buffed..? i think it is ballanced if a barb only had 2 buffs too!!! and if a archer only has 2 (don't get me wrong if they have more) then warriors should only have 2 buffs aswell!!!! isn't that called ballance? and the same Casting Time FOR EATCH CLASS to be fully buffed!!

i wan't to know what NGD thinks of is ballance so please.. and guys please vote for what you think is ballance and lets compare our votes to NGD's

Seher · 09-05-2010, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir-barb

i think fights should end up in 50/50% if a unbuffed clas fights against another unbuffed clas...

No, warriors should be more effective without buffs than archers, and archers more than mages. The same applies to your other examples.

Archers should have to use more spells/buffs than warriors, and mages more than archers, etc.

edit: There's still a sticky in Balance: http://regnumonlinegame.com/forum/sh...ad.php?t=44667

AntibioTsu · 09-05-2010, 10:44 PM

I think NGD knows the answer... just wait for them

fritsz · 09-05-2010, 10:56 PM

I agree with tsuku but i wanne give my opnion to

I think balance is that (for example) lock can win from hunter and knight with like 60% for the lock and 40% for these classes and that they have to fear marks and barb and that every class have this.
I think warjurer is nerfed so badly that you wont see any of them, they nerfed to hard in my opnion. its the same as knight, i like supporting but i like to attack to so i wanne have options, now i dont have them.

AntibioTsu · 09-05-2010, 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fritsossss

I agree with tsuku but i wanne give my opnion to

I was being ironic

/me feels misunderstood...

Cuchulainn · 09-05-2010, 11:35 PM

I voted for the last option and also for "none of these options...". If anyone don't know it yet, the upcoming balance update will not be the only one in this year according to chilkos post here.

I think RvR class balance is more important than PvP class balance in Regnum. And its hardly possible to have complete balance at RvR+PvP with so much class differences.
But I agree with the buffs. Warriors have a bit to many of them. It's not much fun to cast every few seconds a buff, but you don't have to use everything. Just drop the worst buffs you have.

Topogigio_BR · 09-06-2010, 01:26 AM

Balance for me is that support classes should have many protection and tricks and low attacks, meaning they should win by time.
In other way offensive classes should have high attacks and low defenses, meaning they need to win quick or they will lose for support class.

metsie · 09-06-2010, 01:33 AM

IMO balance is many things.

1. Better/more skilled player wins worse/less skilled player usually, not because he/enemy gets lucky with resists/evades

2. some classes will be stronger than others, so in pvp there is no "true" balance between all classes

3. in rvsr group with all classes combined should have good chance to win against equal sized group that does not have all classes included

system should be "best/strongest survives", not everybody can win with luck and random events. If bad player wins too easily then he/she wont ever need to really try and learn to play better.

4. some are just better than others, so if somebody has 100% chance to win because of his playing SKILLS thats part of "balance" too

so to me balance = system that allows stronger one to survive+be good and allows weaker ones to learn to be stronger.

ncvr · 09-06-2010, 10:17 AM

None of these. Most of the people on this forum rooting for "balance" are completely off.

A game like this cannot have perfect PvP or RvR balance. In a "perfectly" balanced game, you would have a 50-50 shot at surviving any encounter.

It would be boring as hell and not near what most people think they would get.

All classes would need to be so homogenized to the point that they are interchangeable, and that completely ruins the point of having classes. All unique, valuable class skills would have to be shared upon all classes. Any given fight would look like a duel between 2 full support conjus.

You want this kind of balance? Play an FPS. Of course, one of the biggest goals for any FPS player is to get better weapons to have an advantage.

There is one rule, though. No class should be designed so that it completely negates how terrible the player is. I'm looking at you, hunters.

Truewar · 09-06-2010, 12:00 PM

Best Ballance was in Delta force.

noarmor + 1 hit = death
armor + 2 hits = death

If seriosely... All we said in this topic is just words and different views.
I think NGD is on the right way. Time will show when ballance update will come on live servers.

But I think players will never stop complain and cry about how they are weak and how others are strong. Sometimes it so absurdly just like:

Quote:

I am pissed off. Some barb killed my barb in 5 seconds. His powers are owerpowered. Nerf them! And Increase my powers!

P.S. And also nerf all other classes too or I WILL LEAVE REGNUM FOREVA

View Poll Results: what is ballance (first read the story) and is this ballance update done?
a equal ammount of buffs, casting time, effectness to al classes...	8	28.57%
what the ballance update brings us is ballance	5	17.86%
2 buffs for one clas 8 buffs for the other	3	10.71%
a unbuffed fight between 2 diffrent classes should end up in a 50/50% win percentage	8	28.57%
a fight that ends up 50/50% win chance no matters that person A. casts 4 buffs more then person B.	5	17.86%
none of these options, please post your ballance opinion	13	46.43%
Yes	4	14.29%
No, there still needs some nerfs/rethinking about buffs/ballance	12	42.86%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 28. You may not vote on this poll

09-05-2010, 10:12 PM	#1
New_barb Initiate Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 119	what is ballance? is ballance a fight between classes which are fully buffed? and end up in a 50/50% win chance? is ballance a fight between classes not buffed and end up in a 50/50% win chance? is ballance a fight in which some classes have to cast 8 buffs to be fully buffed VS another class that has to buff 3 things (and then is already fully buffed) is that ballance? i think fights should end up in 50/50% if a unbuffed clas fights against another unbuffed clas... i think fights shouldn't end up in 50/50% if clas 1. casts 2 buffs and clas 2. casts 5 buffs then the clas that casts 5 bufs should definitely have to win but they wont in this game.. i think every class should have the same amount of buffs lets have a barb first to think about they got like 7 buffs.. i think the archer / mage buffs should be splitted up into 7 buffs (but the effect will remain the same) i think i get many posts of you cant compare a egg with a apple etc. etc. but if a warlock only has 2 buffs to be fully buffed..? i think it is ballanced if a barb only had 2 buffs too!!! and if a archer only has 2 (don't get me wrong if they have more) then warriors should only have 2 buffs aswell!!!! isn't that called ballance? and the same Casting Time FOR EATCH CLASS to be fully buffed!! i wan't to know what NGD thinks of is ballance so please.. and guys please vote for what you think is ballance and lets compare our votes to NGD's

09-05-2010, 10:44 PM	#3
AntibioTsu Initiate Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Portugal Posts: 245	I think NGD knows the answer... just wait for them __________________ Amoxi - Vanco - Azithro - Genta - Cipro - Doxy [RA] A proud member of INQUISITION

09-05-2010, 11:35 PM	#6
Cuchulainn Master Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 303	I voted for the last option and also for "none of these options...". If anyone don't know it yet, the upcoming balance update will not be the only one in this year according to chilkos post here. I think RvR class balance is more important than PvP class balance in Regnum. And its hardly possible to have complete balance at RvR+PvP with so much class differences. But I agree with the buffs. Warriors have a bit to many of them. It's not much fun to cast every few seconds a buff, but you don't have to use everything. Just drop the worst buffs you have. Last edited by Cuchulainn; 09-05-2010 at 11:59 PM.

09-05-2010, 10:56 PM	#4
fritsz Apprentice Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 54	I agree with tsuku but i wanne give my opnion to I think balance is that (for example) lock can win from hunter and knight with like 60% for the lock and 40% for these classes and that they have to fear marks and barb and that every class have this. I think warjurer is nerfed so badly that you wont see any of them, they nerfed to hard in my opnion. its the same as knight, i like supporting but i like to attack to so i wanne have options, now i dont have them.

09-06-2010, 01:26 AM	#7
Topogigio_BR Baron Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Brazil Posts: 622	Balance for me is that support classes should have many protection and tricks and low attacks, meaning they should win by time. In other way offensive classes should have high attacks and low defenses, meaning they need to win quick or they will lose for support class.

09-06-2010, 01:33 AM	#8
metsie Apprentice Join Date: Oct 2009 Posts: 59	IMO balance is many things. 1. Better/more skilled player wins worse/less skilled player usually, not because he/enemy gets lucky with resists/evades 2. some classes will be stronger than others, so in pvp there is no "true" balance between all classes 3. in rvsr group with all classes combined should have good chance to win against equal sized group that does not have all classes included system should be "best/strongest survives", not everybody can win with luck and random events. If bad player wins too easily then he/she wont ever need to really try and learn to play better. 4. some are just better than others, so if somebody has 100% chance to win because of his playing SKILLS thats part of "balance" too so to me balance = system that allows stronger one to survive+be good and allows weaker ones to learn to be stronger.

09-06-2010, 10:17 AM	#9
ncvr Marquis Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Australia Posts: 2,439	None of these. Most of the people on this forum rooting for "balance" are completely off. A game like this cannot have perfect PvP or RvR balance. In a "perfectly" balanced game, you would have a 50-50 shot at surviving any encounter. It would be boring as hell and not near what most people think they would get. All classes would need to be so homogenized to the point that they are interchangeable, and that completely ruins the point of having classes. All unique, valuable class skills would have to be shared upon all classes. Any given fight would look like a duel between 2 full support conjus. You want this kind of balance? Play an FPS. Of course, one of the biggest goals for any FPS player is to get better weapons to have an advantage. There is one rule, though. No class should be designed so that it completely negates how terrible the player is. I'm looking at you, hunters.