Some statistics on class balance - Page 2

Foolou · 09-14-2009, 04:15 PM

This is the result of a comparision of the data from sept 8th and sept 14th, boiled down to a relative rp weight of the classes in %:

Barbarian: 98
Knight: 66
Hunter: 122
Marksman: 114
Conjurer: 101
Warlock: 96

The intention is to again show that there is a fundamental difference between knights and barbarians in pvp.
The upcoming changes to the combat system will probably lead to a situation where barbarians are the only ones at the end of the food chain.
I hope there will be further modifications to balance out barbarians and knights.

ArchmagusArcana · 09-16-2009, 02:59 AM

Its not a balance issue, its an issue of knights dont do damage, which they shouldnt as they have all this armor and a broken block to tank damage. The problem lies in the fact that they are hard to kill and dont do damage, low priority target, therefore they dont get as much rp. Its got nothing to do with balance, its just poor mechanics.

Also, for your percentages to have any bearing, it should be a total of 100% only, those numbers have no meaning.

Edit: This is not a PvP game, its RvR, and if you look, warriors are at the very bottom of the 'food chain' as it is, the whole class needs an overhaul, which it is getting in the next update (at least as far as sorting out some poor mechanics).

Foolou · 09-16-2009, 12:59 PM

You're right that rp-measures are probably not good to tell something about performance of a class in an rvr game, because it almost never is a pure one vs one situation. Of course taking the rp average of one class and comparing it to another is neglecting most of the effects.

But it could be used as a correction factor for comparing your rp to someone elses, for example if you're a knight and you're comparing yourself to a hunter, you can almost double your rp to be 'comparable'.

Quote:

Also, for your percentages to have any bearing, it should be a total of 100% only, those numbers have no meaning.

Well as I said I calculated a relative rp weight of the classes (not the total), and I'm using the % in the way it is defined : 1% = 1/100 (one per cent). So instead of writing a number like 0.96 it's 96%, nothing wrong about that. Of course you could divide all the values by 6, the relation would still be the same.
I did it this way to have the majority of the classes at a factor of almost 1 (barbs, conjurers and warlocks) and to see the deviation from that.

09-16-2009, 02:59 AM	#12
ArchmagusArcana Master Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 357	Its not a balance issue, its an issue of knights dont do damage, which they shouldnt as they have all this armor and a broken block to tank damage. The problem lies in the fact that they are hard to kill and dont do damage, low priority target, therefore they dont get as much rp. Its got nothing to do with balance, its just poor mechanics. Also, for your percentages to have any bearing, it should be a total of 100% only, those numbers have no meaning. Edit: This is not a PvP game, its RvR, and if you look, warriors are at the very bottom of the 'food chain' as it is, the whole class needs an overhaul, which it is getting in the next update (at least as far as sorting out some poor mechanics). __________________ Alsirian Legion Horus: Wulfgar Heartsfang 50 barb: Arcan Heartsfang 50 Lock RA: Drakonklenok 50 Knight

09-14-2009, 04:15 PM	#11
Foolou Pledge Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 5	This is the result of a comparision of the data from sept 8th and sept 14th, boiled down to a relative rp weight of the classes in %: Barbarian: 98 Knight: 66 Hunter: 122 Marksman: 114 Conjurer: 101 Warlock: 96 The intention is to again show that there is a fundamental difference between knights and barbarians in pvp. The upcoming changes to the combat system will probably lead to a situation where barbarians are the only ones at the end of the food chain. I hope there will be further modifications to balance out barbarians and knights.