Recent Topics

Ads

Percieved Bias and Game Balancing

Let's talk about... everything else

Moderators: Developer, Management, Web Developer

Anaerion22
Posts: 16

Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing

Post#91 » Fri Aug 07, 2020 5:01 pm

Definitely more White Lions these days than Shadow Warriors lol

Ads
User avatar
Aethilmar
Posts: 236

Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing

Post#92 » Fri Aug 07, 2020 10:43 pm

Everyone seems stuck on "balancing" classes that are inherently unequal (by design). You can also just make the content (and even more to the point, the way you obtain rewards) be relevant to the classes. For example, consider what might happen if just ONE of the three phases of city favored splitting up into 4 groups instead of favoring WB melee deathball.

Ashoris
Posts: 142

Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing

Post#93 » Fri Aug 07, 2020 10:59 pm

no one mentioned ease of use here ... (and it is important, because most of us are not very good at this game for different reasons :) )

If you have classes that are pretty effective with 123 123 123 instead of 124 578 329 347 they will be played more ..
If you have classes that are less squishy ( and therefore give you more time to react before dieing) they will be played more.
Warhammer Return of Reckoning
Verey / Ashoris / Devoras

WaR -dead-
Erengrad - Order - Frostbringer - Devoras

Fenris78
Posts: 158

Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing

Post#94 » Sat Aug 08, 2020 1:23 pm

Ashoris wrote:
Fri Aug 07, 2020 10:59 pm
no one mentioned ease of use here ... (and it is important, because most of us are not very good at this game for different reasons :) )

If you have classes that are pretty effective with 123 123 123 instead of 124 578 329 347 they will be played more ..
If you have classes that are less squishy ( and therefore give you more time to react before dieing) they will be played more.
Exactly.

This, and the side effects fo skills/tactics placement and downsides for some. IE. Chosen/KotBS : Having a -20% healing on self IS NOT the same as +15% damage taken... One being able to get avoidances buffs without a shield, the other not (guess the viable 2H build between the two). Orders of magnitudes between "mirrors", small differences that make all powerful or useless...
Same for skills use (need X conditions or none), toolkit distribution between classes (Mara and mSH got pretty much everything CC in the game, AND AoE on them, wich is not the case for their "mirrors" WL and SW wich need prerequisites and/or are ST only)...
Or the famous example of WE/WH, the former being able to use their add damages (Kiss, witchbrew) with all their attacks and naturally building requirements (ergonomic), while WH not being able to fully build their class ressources to be effective with add damages (not ergonomic)...

Such little discrepancies have a BIG importance for balancing mirrors classes.

Yes we can always whine about "X class is inferior to... for Y reasons", but we have to grasp the big picture, wich is composed by all those "little ergonomy details", making a class powerful or not versus its counterpart.

User avatar
farng84
Posts: 64

Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing

Post#95 » Sun Aug 09, 2020 7:00 pm

Ashoris wrote:
Fri Aug 07, 2020 10:59 pm

This, and the side effects fo skills/tactics placement and downsides for some. IE. Chosen/KotBS : Having a -20% healing on self IS NOT the same as +15% damage taken... One being able to get avoidances buffs without a shield, the other not (guess the viable 2H build between the two). Orders of magnitudes between "mirrors", small differences that make all powerful or useless...
Same for skills use (need X conditions or none), toolkit distribution between classes (Mara and mSH got pretty much everything CC in the game, AND AoE on them, wich is not the case for their "mirrors" WL and SW wich need prerequisites and/or are ST only)...
Or the famous example of WE/WH, the former being able to use their add damages (Kiss, witchbrew) with all their attacks and naturally building requirements (ergonomic), while WH not being able to fully build their class ressources to be effective with add damages (not ergonomic)...

Such little discrepancies have a BIG importance for balancing mirrors classes.

Yes we can always whine about "X class is inferior to... for Y reasons", but we have to grasp the big picture, wich is composed by all those "little ergonomy details", making a class powerful or not versus its counterpart.
I agree on a base level but I think you should make you argument two way to be more fair. I mean like you said mara had stronger AOE capability compared to its mirror WL that is not fair and should be normalised, BUT at the same time WL has an extreme single target burst capability, that should be also mirrored towards Mara.
mSH offers indeed a much better melee option compared to SW, that should be normalised, BUT the strength of ranged SW should also be mirrored in ranged SH, otherwise there is no fairness.
Same goes for tactics strength which are stronger for chosen, BUT KoTBS points which are undoubtedly stronger than his counterpart should be equalised too.
I often read talks about nerfing choppas; let's talk about normalising them with slayers instead... Maybe giving both side an equivalent M1 for starter. BTW, how many choppas do you need to chop a slayer? plz post your answer and win nothing (prices were chopped while in berserk).

My point being, we know the list of issues on both sides if we just want to look at them with an impartial eye.
Since we do, we should ask for balanced actions instead of one sided ones. And this should come from both factions. Otherwise we risk to sound like that little cousin (we all have one, I know it) which wants to play soul calibur with you and request to be allowed 500% HP and to use the soul calibur...
Also, consider that the mirrors are not built to be perfect reflections (usual example being BW is designed to be slightly stronger in AOE while Sorc is stronger on single target)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Jabba, Sinnarah and 38 guests