Balancing Stragegy

[makarios68]

I was thinking about the general balancing strategy over the last few updates.

Nerfs to one class or another seem to be happening frequently, and they are invariably followed by jeers and complaints (not to mention people quitting) when their favourite class is given a major nerf.

What i wanted to say was: would it not be better, as a general rule, to increase the effectiveness of other classes against a skill that is deemed overpowered, rather than taking the easier route of nerfing that skill?

I say this because i have noticed a general trend over the last year or so, where pretty much all classes have recieved a serious nerfing, and as a result people feel they no longer enjoy playing that class.

So would it not be better to GIVE things (ie, make other classes more effective against a particular skill) rather than keep TAKING things away and annoying people by nerfing their class?

As a general rule, would making classes stronger (against a skill considered overpowered), rather than weaker (by nerfing that skill), not be a better way to solve balance issues?

[UmarilsStillHere]

Better yes, but far harder, EG (going back a bit here) How would you balance every class vs the old South Cross? Or Son of the Wind without throwing up a hundred other issues?

[Signatus]

Originally Posted by makarios68

I was thinking about the general balancing strategy over the last few updates.

Nerfs to one class or another seem to be happening frequently, and they are invariably followed by jeers and complaints (not to mention people quitting) when their favourite class is given a major nerf.

What i wanted to say was: would it not be better, as a general rule, to increase the effectiveness of other classes against a skill that is deemed overpowered, rather than taking the easier route of nerfing that skill?

I say this because i have noticed a general trend over the last year or so, where pretty much all classes have recieved a serious nerfing, and as a result people feel they no longer enjoy playing that class.

So would it not be better to GIVE things (ie, make other classes more effective against a particular skill) rather than keep TAKING things away and annoying people by nerfing their class?

As a general rule, would making classes stronger (against a skill considered overpowered), rather than weaker (by nerfing that skill), not be a better way to solve balance issues?

I agree with you, problem is that due to game mechanism some features can only be fixed if removed.

That by itself it's not a major issue imho as long as in those changes players can find ways of effectively playing their characters.

Since character screen misses lot of information, since some changes have multiple effects on gameplay, since players actually gain "habits" when managing their chars and given that the positive sides rarely add up for the negative effects it's no wonder players get downhearted.

Of course, then you have the forums and its lobby leagues, something that democracy generously allows but was intended to be rational by its founders... and rationality here is a scarce good.

As the previous changes show it was a good thing to make knights realistic on a pvp perspective (so many people asked about it) but with that change their role as front line (or in another expression RvR) was reduced to standing still inside a bubble while walking backwards to get a person more inside a 1000 mana worth aura (in order to be effective)... but as a spanish user said elsewhere RO is balanced now... all classes can complain!

I don't know who's the testing team nor what game they play but...

[chilko]

A basic rule of game design is that balance needs has to be negative

If we started adding power to every class the system would just collapse
there are certain variables in the game that can take combat equations to infinite values for example...

Also, we have a strong believe that Regnum's combat is too fast and require less strategy because of some overpowered spells.

If we don't go this route then a battle would end because who launched certain group of spells first instead of who has better tactics and coordination.

Regards,

- Chilko

[makarios68]

I can see that with game design it is easier and more practical to take away rather than to add.

But there seems to have been a very noticable trend toward nerfing, and it seems very.... reductionist.

I thought it was worth noting that the more you reduce something the closer it gets to becoming nothing.

[Bladnoch]

Originally Posted by chilko

A basic rule of game design is that balance needs has to be negative

If we started adding power to every class the system would just collapse
there are certain variables in the game that can take combat equations to infinite values for example...

Also, we have a strong believe that Regnum's combat is too fast and require less strategy because of some overpowered spells.

If we don't go this route then a battle would end because who launched certain group of spells first instead of who has better tactics and coordination.

Regards,

- Chilko

I second this, but thats only half the battle with balance. You need to make taking forts strategic too, as right now its more about the numbers and levels (to an extent) rather than tactics.
In history, battles consisted of ambushes, surrounding the enemy and ordering small groups to sneak around for an advantage. None of that is really possible as a group; hunters can sneak around which is great, but can do no more. As far as taking an enemy fort goes, it can pretty much depend on how many people you have, what classes are with you and what level they are, same goes for the enemy. There is no sense of troop movement strategy as its easy to just pan the camera and spot them whether your character is looking at them or not. Im not saying to immediately come up with a solution, but its something to bear in mind in the future.

[octopus]

Originally Posted by makarios68

But there seems to have been a very noticable trend toward nerfing, and it seems very.... reductionist.

I thought it was worth noting that the more you reduce something the closer it gets to becoming nothing.

All the classes have been nerfed to make us weaker compared to mobs. This means it takes longer to kill mobs, burning up XP booster scrolls faster and using more repair hammers, generating more money for NGD. Think of it as a form of inflation.

[octopus]

Originally Posted by chilko

If we don't go this route then a battle would end because who launched certain group of spells first instead of who has better tactics and coordination.

Regards,

- Chilko

If this is true, then why was Terror one of the few spells that was actually made stronger with an update a few months ago, increasing range from 30 to range of staff? To make matters worse, Winterstroke's range was nerfed, and that was about the only way to stop an impending Terror. Now battles are even more a case of "he who casts the first Terror wins."

Two equal forces meet, two warlocks run forward. Team A's warlock finishes Terror a millisecond before Team B's warlock, so Team B falls to the ground. Before they get up, they are hit with 3 more Terrors, a handful of lightning strikes, and the fight is over. Might as well just flip a coin and say "Sorry Team B, you lost, you're all dead."

[Angelwinged_Devil]

Originally Posted by chilko

A basic rule of game design is that balance needs has to be negative

If we started adding power to every class the system would just collapse
there are certain variables in the game that can take combat equations to infinite values for example...

Also, we have a strong believe that Regnum's combat is too fast and require less strategy because of some overpowered spells.

If we don't go this route then a battle would end because who launched certain group of spells first instead of who has better tactics and coordination.

Regards,

- Chilko

and end up with poking sticks?

the best way is to chose some sort of middle and adjust the strength of classes to this point, some go weaker others go stronger

If this is true, then why was Terror one of the few spells that was actually made stronger with an update a few months ago, increasing range from 30 to range of staff? To make matters worse, Winterstroke's range was nerfed, and that was about the only way to stop an impending Terror. Now battles are even more a case of "he who casts the first Terror wins."

I agree, and it seems people doesn't know how to stop the terrors, if a warlock goes to the front hardly no one casts meteor or burst of wind on em'.

Before the last update a knight with an aura could stop terror but that was just too easy, terror need to be range 30 again

[Pendalf]

Dear chilko!

Thank you very much for your attention to our needs.
I beg you a just one thing: make all chages to a balance which you want and freeze all skills forever. Think completely deep, count all trifles, pay your attention to major differencies between Horus and Ra, test your changes really pedantic and apply them FOREVER, swearing you will never change it again.

The fair game is the game with hard rules. Changing rules again and again turns game into soap opera.
Please remember, the person's opinion cannot be objective. Please don't pay your attention to some persons' (even mine) moaning. Build your own NGD judge team that will make decisions and bear responsibility.