balance Update 2011 Stage 1 - Summary

[Seher]

It's just the first stage... And you have to focus on something.

[UmarilsStillHere]

In -my- dream land:

First stage: Bringing all CC spells into balance with current speed of the game (generally make them shorter) + other cc balance changes which have already been discussed at length, hope to see a second draft soon.

Second stage: SAVES.

Third stage: General class balance, definition and usefulness, Ie. Improve hunters debuffing/support roll, tailor marks to fit with its offence roll by reducing ranged tanking ability etc...

[bois]

Colour me crazy but I want to see something happen in early stages besides CC adjustments.

I want to see a sink for those extra 20 points that they give between from level 50 to 60. That unfinished idea broke so much of the balance as far as I am concerned. Much of the contention comes from the fact that players have access to too much skills (60) at high level without having to concede something else.
Consider dispell as an example. The spell is not that bad and is located in a tricky location for a lock. A lock would have to concede a lot of spells to be able to skill that properly. That in itself was a form of balance. Now it is a bit too easy to skill it hence the apparent imbalance . Nothing is really wrong with the spell, it is just too easy for a level 60 to get.

I am also quite concerned about the idea of the extra discipline points. Sure you use them up to level the warmaster tree but, I can't help wondering if a different system of developing "traits" would have worked as well. This would be a parallel system in which you can purchase 1 warmaster power at a time through exploits in war (WM coins). Using WM coins you then equip it in its specific Warmaster trait slot. You can purchase any one with a first free slot (gained at lvl 52 onwards ). After that you must unlock fresh slots. Each slot cost WM coins to unlock and become more expensive the more you unlock. You then purchase more warmaster traits which all cost the same. You max out at 3 WM slots. In other words you cannot equip all Warmaster spells.
You are able to equip/swap these in the field at your markets. This means more flexibility in war. You are not limited in the amount of WM traits you can acquire but you are limited by how much you can equip at one time.

Yes it is an odd and complicated system I am suggesting but, it avoids tinkering with the current level 50 system (which can then be balanced without flux and breakages). The bonus is that NGD can add as many 'traits' or warmaster skills as they want without risk of it getting out of hand on the battlefield. The control is via the Warmaster equip screen (3 traits max) which can be changed to suit the game. The bonus to the player is extended feature set, something to aim for, more diversity, limitations on skills, more balance and unlimited skill sets and diversity. Indeed , some warmaster coins can be gained by War, PvE, Quests etc.
They could have done this so differently for the win. More work yes, but it would have saved them in the long run. With such a system all they had to do was adjust the amount of traits you could equip at one time and be free to develop new Warmaster spells without worrying about the regular skillset system and progression. They would also be free to make more content for coins without worry that the expansion would die off quickly. Indeed, they could add,Basic WM traits, Realm specific WM special ability (1 slot), Class specific WM ability (1 slot), Race specific WM ability (1 slot). In such a case, an expansion to level 70 might never be necessary. Limitless opportunities at level 60 and an expansion that would never die.
Of course it is a crazy idea but, I have not been accused of being sane recently anyway.

Regards

[UmarilsStillHere]

Originally Posted by bois

...

Sounds like a good idea, as you show those extra points are an issue when the skill system and its balance was built around a lower set of points.

Having the current skill tree's till level 50 followed by these warmaster 'perks' sounds like a good solution.

[_Nel_]

Originally Posted by bois

I want to see a sink for those extra 20 points that they give between from level 50 to 60. That unfinished idea broke so much of the balance as far as I am concerned. Much of the contention comes from the fact that players have access to too much skills (60) at high level without having to concede something else.
...
I am also quite concerned about the idea of the extra discipline points.

Ones of numerous things that warmasters update broke.

Interesting suggestion you made there. Separating normal leveling from lvl 1 to 50 keeping spells balance as it was, and warmaster leveling from 50 to 60 with new skills accessible only with level + wm coins.

Moreover it won't cause any drama because players spent time and money to grind their characters until lvl 60.

Originally Posted by bois

They could have done this so differently for the win. More work yes, but it would have saved them in the long run.

It's better to take one step forward and two steps backwards. You still don't know the way of thinking of companies.

[53453467734534]

@Seher

I don't get this. Why should low casting times cause tree hugging? Of course, if the warlock manages to chain CCs before the marksman manages to, there is no need for tree hugging, but once the marksman managed to cast BoW the warlocks will hug trees, even if it took the marksman 3 seconds to cast BoW.

The difference is: Now the Warlock has to stay besides a tree.
If he can cast CCs faster than a Marksman tree hugging isn´t the only option from the beginning. This means, gameplay will be more offensive (not around trees, rocks). I haven´t said, i wouldn´t reduce CCs effect duration (including dizzies), but not to the extent, you have suggested. Marksmen/Archer = CCs have more range, Warlocks/Mages = CCs are faster to cast. It was in this way before last years patch, and it worked. A PvP (and similar situations) was winnable by both classes (also because of SotW).
Marksmen probably had even a slight advantage. Ok, Warlock was strong against Barbarians, but nerfing Warlocks created stronger Barbarians and Marksmen, with the result that last-mentioned classes are considered imbalanced (see Poll). Revive Warlocks!

Okay, it IS more difficult then to create the SAME momentum as with long CCs

That´s what i am saying.

Longer CCs just spread the outcome more, meaning sometimes smaller groups of players can actually win fights they could've never won with short CCs, yeah, but don't forget the enemies who will win just as often as yet anyway!

Exactly, longer CCs spread the possible outcome of a battle.

I quote myself:
This is the "Ebb and Flow"-principle with strong momentums for both sides. Better win 1 out of 5 battles outnumbered and lose 4 of them in a dramatic fashion, than losing all of them everytime, because you can´t create strong "tides" as you can now because of strong CCs.



It is of course possible, that your enemies win more convincingly, but the task in RO among other things is to recapture your forts. There has to be a possible outcome (for example 1 out of 6 rushes), where you can overwhelm the larger army. Otherwise the game is dead.

Exactly. And this initiative can make 1 barbarian kill 4 enemies while not being able to kill anyone in most other situations. A surprise bonus is nice, for sure, but we've got too much of it.

And this is good under above mentioned circumstances.

To balance asymmetric battles:
1.Spread the possible outcome of a battle
2.Reward initiative and surprise (something a smaller and better organised army can do better)

You are suggesting the opposite.
That´s why we don´t agree here.

True. But as I said, luck doesn't just help the underdog, sadly.

What´s better for your smaller army, which wins only 1 out of 6 times (current game mechanics and same skill level)?
1= worst possible outcome of the battle (you were owned)
....
5= tight defeat
6= only outcome the smaller army wins the battle.

A dice with these six faces 3,3,3,4,4,4 (short CCs)
or this dice: 1,2,3,4,5,6 (long CCs, more spread)

Well, that´s what i want to bring across...

[53453467734534]

I want to see a sink for those extra 20 points that they give between from level 50 to 60.

I agree...
This here is a similar idea. Please vote!
http://www.regnumonline.com.ar/forum...ad.php?t=79106

[bois]

Originally Posted by 53453467734534

I agree...
This here is a similar idea. Please vote!
http://www.regnumonline.com.ar/forum...ad.php?t=79106

No issue with your idea. It is a viable alternative. However, the idea I put across is different in that I am looking to do away with the addition of any power points or discipline points to the game at all. That system remains capped at level 50 and will be balanced there.
I am not quite sure if your system just looks to use level 50 point allocations or if it caters for the increase of power points and discipline points and devised a sink for them.

My system does not need a sink. The extra points don't exist anyway. from 50 onwards you have another system that is separate from the 1-50 skill system. This one is controlled by WM points and level. It is balanced to an extent by the skill slots available. In my example above I suggested a system of many warmaster spells but only 3 slots where you can equip spells. It could be 4 or 2 or 5 depending on the needs of the game.
In my system, WM coins will become useful from 52, making the system a progressive one.
At 60 you can still make the armour useful. Equip (must wear to remain active )at least 1 component to activate the Realm/Race/class special ability slot. Put a nice set of spells there. Of course these cost WM points as well and you must have purchased all lower slots. Expansion thus has a very long lifespan.

[Seher]

Originally Posted by 53453467734534

The difference is: Now the Warlock has to stay besides a tree. If he can cast CCs faster than a Marksman tree hugging isn´t the only option from the beginning.

Tree hugging is the only option as long as there's burst of wind. With burst of wind any marks can easily start a chain, no matter if it lasts 11, 8 or 5 seconds. This CAN end in an interesting duel, but just when warlock CCs are faster AND burst of wind + the next CC, that's still very easy to cast for the marksman obviously, don't last too long.

Originally Posted by 53453467734534

This is the "Ebb and Flow"-principle with strong momentums for both sides. Better win 1 out of 5 battles outnumbered and lose 4 of them in a dramatic fashion, than losing all of them everytime, because you can´t create strong "tides" as you can now because of strong CCs.

[...]

What´s better for your smaller army, which wins only 1 out of 6 times (current game mechanics and same skill level)?
1= worst possible outcome of the battle (you were owned)
....
5= tight defeat
6= only outcome the smaller army wins the battle.

A dice with these six faces 3,3,3,4,4,4 (short CCs)
or this dice: 1,2,3,4,5,6 (long CCs, more spread)

Well, that´s what i want to bring across...

For sure, and I agree there, really, but I just don't think CCs are the best way to bring this luck into fort wars, especially not single-target CCs. Single target CCs usually don't create important momentums in fort wars, can we agree on that? They're important to stop attacking enemies and to hinder enemy momentums, yeah, but that's where short CCs aren't useless at all. A warlock trying to sultar will be stopped by both a 20 seconds burst of wind and a 5 seconds one. Even a 2 seconds burst of wind might be enough to push warlocks, a very weak class in defense, back as they can't survive very long in the front line. But single target CCs for attacking? Maybe to take down knights to keep them from casting shield wall or something like that (I still don't see why you should do this with a knock down, a confuse like spell preventing area buffs would just do the same without being frustrating in any other situation), but in general they're useless. Any area is more helpful.

But what single target CCs definitely do is frustrating players. Especially when there are many other players around, it's a death sentence to be knocked down for 6 seconds. RvR + long CCs can't work, and they're not needed to spread the outcome of a battle. Areas are the way to go there.

And speaking of helping underdog armies... Nerf of marksman range would bring many tactics and chances for underdogs back, as you can't really do anything against a huge number of marksmen on steroids hitting you from range 50.

[HidraA]

NGD can do this?Narzoul idea is just brilliant

Originally Posted by Narzoul
As for the poll, yeah, it would be nice to have it in the game (in the recently added "news system", for example), so that it would reach more players. Maybe even a short survey (multiple polls, basically), about the most debated issues. Could be some sort of continuation of the "Ask NGD" initative, if at the end of the survey time NGD would comment something on the results, be it whether that they're going to do something about it, or a reason why they won't despite the poll results.

In game poll by NGD will be awesome.
Players that never log in forum can vote....there are lots of players that never post in forum.So as this you can have they opinion too...