Spoiler:
Back in August, during the outcry regarding the Marauder AOE nerf Kaelang posted something very insightful in a discord
"ok so here’s the thing, I was sent data that showed Destruction winning every city for months. I appreciate destruction are a more organised side HOWEVER you cannot ignore the fact there is a huge destruction imbalance in population, and also in win rate. Order morale has hit an all time low, it was evident with how big of an event the city win for them was yesterday. Destro seem to think that order bias and we hate Destro, the bottom line is Destro are always pushing, Destro are always winning, Destro are the stronger side right now, "
So, given that Destro morale has been, *decidedly* at an all-time low, not only because of continued lack of equity in the basic mechanics of the game, classes, and overall attitude toward the different factions but also because of the lack of attention by those who have the power of to do something and the continued gaslighting of Destro players who have, from this game's inception noted the fundamental problems with the game. Therefore, given this lack of morale, given the depths of despair to which most Destro players have sunk, I can only assume that now, finally, will be the time that the devs will swoop in and actually change something to provide the balance we have been yearning for. After all, in the darkest time for Order, in the few weeks this summer where the forces of Destruction managed to cobble together an offensive in the eternal war, the devs swooped in, like Sigmar with his hammer full of grace, to put us heathen Destro in our place and restore Order to their rightful place. I can only assume that now, when the walls of the Inevitable City echo with a silence that bespeaks the malaise that has clouded our ranks, the winds of change will blow and some semblance of a balanced war can continue.
Of course, I should acknowledge that I am making this argument in bad faith. Of course I understand that the morale of one faction should not be used as a justification for any sort of class-balancing act. To do so would be patently absurd. We all acknowledge that balance should be accomplished in terms of equity of opportunity and not equality of outcome. Now, to the actual concerns I bring to the table.
But right now, we have neither. And that is, has been, and will continue to be a problem for the continued survival of this server and this game.
Clearly, I think the past days, weeks, month have been evidence enough. Even the most out-of-tune, hidden-under-a-rock dwarf in Karaz-a-Karaz understands that there are fundamental problems that exist with the balancing of this game. It is what killed the game on live, and it is what will kill this server, too. That is not a prophecy; it is a prognosis. This game cannot survive as it is currently.
I am not posting this to the forums for the purpose of inciting a flame war, arguing the specifics of class-on-class balance (acknowledging that there are no mirrored classes), or for self-indulgence. I care about this issue; I care about this game; I care about Destruction, so I am using what skills I have to urge a change of direction.
I know that the responses this post will receive:
*Abilities are working as intended: To this, I say. I agree. Some of the abilities are working as intended, and that is the problem. The overall state of synergy, broad capabilities of organized order warbands, and fundamental imbalances in the abilities of order characters vis-a-vis the AOE meta have reduced the competitiveness of the game, resulting in fundamental inequities.
*Get good: (1) I have been playing this game, on multiple classes, multiple characters to 80+, since the first day of live. I know that this is only evidence of longevity, but give me the benefit of the doubt to assume that I know a little bit about how to play this game as do the people that I play with. (2) In all environments, in all contexts, if an organized destruction warband goes up against an order Warband of any quality, there is not an equitable chance of winning. *I am not arguing that we should win every fight, I am saying there should be an equitable chance. Which does not exist in the status quo.
*Forts/Keeps/oRvR don't matter: They do matter, because of the extent to which they now serve the purpose of gearing up characters to the highest level of competition. Order's continued and consistent domination of oRvR means a further exacerbation of continued game imbalances. Forts are especially important in this context because of the massive advantage Order has when it comes to ranged AOE pressure.
*Destro wins cities: Destro wins *some* cities. I agree that, largely, semi-organized destro pug warbands have a greater chance of winning stage 3 than do Order solo-queued. Granted, acknowledged; however:
(1) We must remember that the win ratio in cities reflects only one stage of the process. Stage 1 and 2 are *not* reflected in cities in any way, shape, form, or fashion. Given that destro pugs organize to 2/2/2 standards (in large part because of class balance), they have a greater chance of winning cities. And *yet* we have still seen cities where order queues with vastly unbalanced warbands, with far too much DPS, few tanks, fewer healers. *These compositions are still competitive in stages 1 and 2 which would not be possible on Destro side.* The ability of order to compete and win in Stages 1/2 of the city siege is not reflected in win ratios and yet this is the prime argument that order continues to use to justify further and further reduction in Destro's ability to compete in any manner. The point at which destro has to organize 2/2/2 to even have the possibility to defeat an order pug is the point at which there are severe problems with the game.
(2) Semi-organized to Organized Order WBs utilize the slayer-ball, BW-bomb to ridiculous, and largely undefendable extents.
(3) The evidence suggests that, after continued nerfs to destro classes the argument about winning cities no longer continues to hold any water. I would love to see the numbers on pugs vs pugs, pugs vs organized, organized vs organized. These numbers would paing a vastly different picture of city balance in this game.
(4) Destruction's previous successes in City sieges has often been attributed to organization. In response to this argument, many order players, rightfully so, have questioned this argument. Are organized players simply more inclined to play destro classes? Of course not, they say, so there must be a fundamental class imbalance that allows destruction to be more successful in city sieges. However, this argument is flawed. It is not that more organized players join Destruction; it is that in order to have even a modicum of a chance at succeeding in city sieges, Destruction has to organize, even loosely. If we do not, we don't have a chance in hell. So, we became more efficient and effective at organizing groups for city sieges. The current situation provides further evidence to this point. As destruction efforts have met with fewer and fewer successes, people are no longer putting in the effort to organize. WHy organize when you can lose a city without the indignity of having a 2/2/2 warband while you're at it? As failures have continued to compound, the organizational structure of destruction (for both cities and oRvR) has collapsed, leaving forces even further demoralized. (The present imbalance has also driven our most dedicated, organized leaders to abandon the game altogether or switch sides to enjoy success, which has created an altogether different kind of imbalance.
So, what is to be done? Wargrimnir and others like suggestions (so do I). So what are mine.
Multiple things need to change:
1. There must be real, in-depth discussions of balance in this game. Not class to class, not mirror to mirror. We need to discuss the variety of abilities that are/are not available to different classes on each side, examine where the unique abilities are, and tweak them so that, given the current meta they can be used to the deleterious effect they have on the game currently. Each individual knows their class and others well enough to acknowledge what these abilities we might question are. For example, is it right that of the ranged DPS on destruction side 2 (Sorc, Magus) classes have a pbAOE for 1800 and rSH have a ground target AOE. Given the meta in the game, the proliferation of the bomb Magus must have certainly inspired the pbAOE Magus M4, but given the small population of Magi who prefer to stay at ranged (note: Sarcasm intended for those who may not have noticed it) perhaps it might be logical for the ranged class to default to a ranged m4. To escape from the sarcasm for a moment, why do Squig Herders' (the vast majority of whom are melee) have a ranged, ground target m4 that is of little use to them? In contradistinction, both Engineers and Shadow Warriors have a ground target AOE. And while I certainly don't dismiss the entertainment value in imagining a new meta of pbAOE Engis, perhaps we can all see that these abilities do not line up and do not make sense given the positions these classes hold in the current organization of warbands. The continued lack of rSH buffs months after the commensurate buffs to the rSW is further evidence to this point. If the meta of this game had shifted even marginally since the days of live, I could understand that these problems might just be an artifact of times gone by. Alas, it is not. It is an artifact of continual imbalance in the game, of which there are many, many, many.
On this point, I also wish to acknowledge that there are clear instances where imbalance goes the other way. There are abilities on Destro side that order players do not have access to. However, in the context of the contemporary meta, I argue that these abilities have far less impact on equity in the game than do the imbalances that favor order.
2. We need a shifting meta. Class abilities can and should vary. I don't think anyone would mind certain abilities changing to provide a breath of fresh air to their favorite old toons. We need revolving changes that allow certain classes and fighting styles to take the lead for a moment, and then, they can change again. The stale meta is not only boring but also serves to highlight balance inequities and furthers the impact that class those imbalances have on the game in the long term. There should be changes to allow for all kinds of organized warbands to be competitive. This would emphasize skilled play over selecting the right composition.
3. AOE abilities, in general, for all classes, should see their damage reduced. The reliance on AOE as a solution to all combat problems is reductive. In the current meta there is very little place, if any, for single-target play. I think shifting this focus around is one way to bring new light to some of the excellent classes that see little attention due to normative warband practices and the overwhelming efficacy of AOE in most situations.
4. City siege matching should be rebalanced. Wherever possible, pugs should not go against organized warbands. It is not fair to either side. Acknowledging the population problem that makes this practically difficult, there are ways (AAO, buffs/debuffs) to balance instances so that underdogs have a fighting chance, win more when they have successes, and organized warbands can continue to fight rather than sitting at Emissary or Circle for what feels like decades.
5. Recent changes to fort defender proportion should be reverted. The evidence of practice has been overwhelming. The implementation of changes to stage 2 has been excellent and make forts more competitive and interesting. The change to proportions of defenders to attackers has more than destroyed any gains those changes have made. Forts are now competitive in stage 2. Forts are no longer anywhere near competitive in stage 3.
I know these ideas are just a start, but it is clear to me that something has to be done. It is clear for a lot of people on Destruction, and to be frank, I hope many on Order read these ideas and see a place where they can agree with me, too. The tired, old, overreliance on slayer-balls is injurious not only to my characters (shattered limbs hurt!) but also to the order players whose toons never have a chance to shine. I look forward to reading replies and hearing peoples' thoughts.
I do not want a meta where Destro warbands stomp all over Order pugs. I've done that in cities. Many times. It's boring. But it is just as boring as sitting in spawn for the fifth city in a row because we have no chance to compete with the current meta.
I have a deep and abiding love for this game. I always have; I likely always will. But it genuinely hurts to see my Destro friends leaving this game because they don't feel like they have even a fair shot anymore. And, bluntly, it's not like this server has population to spare. I hope this post can serve to start a genuine conversation about where this game really is and where we want to go. Because as much as I embrace the philosophy of destruction, it takes two sides to WAAAAGH!
--Codrington
"ok so here’s the thing, I was sent data that showed Destruction winning every city for months. I appreciate destruction are a more organised side HOWEVER you cannot ignore the fact there is a huge destruction imbalance in population, and also in win rate. Order morale has hit an all time low, it was evident with how big of an event the city win for them was yesterday. Destro seem to think that order bias and we hate Destro, the bottom line is Destro are always pushing, Destro are always winning, Destro are the stronger side right now, "
So, given that Destro morale has been, *decidedly* at an all-time low, not only because of continued lack of equity in the basic mechanics of the game, classes, and overall attitude toward the different factions but also because of the lack of attention by those who have the power of to do something and the continued gaslighting of Destro players who have, from this game's inception noted the fundamental problems with the game. Therefore, given this lack of morale, given the depths of despair to which most Destro players have sunk, I can only assume that now, finally, will be the time that the devs will swoop in and actually change something to provide the balance we have been yearning for. After all, in the darkest time for Order, in the few weeks this summer where the forces of Destruction managed to cobble together an offensive in the eternal war, the devs swooped in, like Sigmar with his hammer full of grace, to put us heathen Destro in our place and restore Order to their rightful place. I can only assume that now, when the walls of the Inevitable City echo with a silence that bespeaks the malaise that has clouded our ranks, the winds of change will blow and some semblance of a balanced war can continue.
Of course, I should acknowledge that I am making this argument in bad faith. Of course I understand that the morale of one faction should not be used as a justification for any sort of class-balancing act. To do so would be patently absurd. We all acknowledge that balance should be accomplished in terms of equity of opportunity and not equality of outcome. Now, to the actual concerns I bring to the table.
But right now, we have neither. And that is, has been, and will continue to be a problem for the continued survival of this server and this game.
Clearly, I think the past days, weeks, month have been evidence enough. Even the most out-of-tune, hidden-under-a-rock dwarf in Karaz-a-Karaz understands that there are fundamental problems that exist with the balancing of this game. It is what killed the game on live, and it is what will kill this server, too. That is not a prophecy; it is a prognosis. This game cannot survive as it is currently.
I am not posting this to the forums for the purpose of inciting a flame war, arguing the specifics of class-on-class balance (acknowledging that there are no mirrored classes), or for self-indulgence. I care about this issue; I care about this game; I care about Destruction, so I am using what skills I have to urge a change of direction.
I know that the responses this post will receive:
*Abilities are working as intended: To this, I say. I agree. Some of the abilities are working as intended, and that is the problem. The overall state of synergy, broad capabilities of organized order warbands, and fundamental imbalances in the abilities of order characters vis-a-vis the AOE meta have reduced the competitiveness of the game, resulting in fundamental inequities.
*Get good: (1) I have been playing this game, on multiple classes, multiple characters to 80+, since the first day of live. I know that this is only evidence of longevity, but give me the benefit of the doubt to assume that I know a little bit about how to play this game as do the people that I play with. (2) In all environments, in all contexts, if an organized destruction warband goes up against an order Warband of any quality, there is not an equitable chance of winning. *I am not arguing that we should win every fight, I am saying there should be an equitable chance. Which does not exist in the status quo.
*Forts/Keeps/oRvR don't matter: They do matter, because of the extent to which they now serve the purpose of gearing up characters to the highest level of competition. Order's continued and consistent domination of oRvR means a further exacerbation of continued game imbalances. Forts are especially important in this context because of the massive advantage Order has when it comes to ranged AOE pressure.
*Destro wins cities: Destro wins *some* cities. I agree that, largely, semi-organized destro pug warbands have a greater chance of winning stage 3 than do Order solo-queued. Granted, acknowledged; however:
(1) We must remember that the win ratio in cities reflects only one stage of the process. Stage 1 and 2 are *not* reflected in cities in any way, shape, form, or fashion. Given that destro pugs organize to 2/2/2 standards (in large part because of class balance), they have a greater chance of winning cities. And *yet* we have still seen cities where order queues with vastly unbalanced warbands, with far too much DPS, few tanks, fewer healers. *These compositions are still competitive in stages 1 and 2 which would not be possible on Destro side.* The ability of order to compete and win in Stages 1/2 of the city siege is not reflected in win ratios and yet this is the prime argument that order continues to use to justify further and further reduction in Destro's ability to compete in any manner. The point at which destro has to organize 2/2/2 to even have the possibility to defeat an order pug is the point at which there are severe problems with the game.
(2) Semi-organized to Organized Order WBs utilize the slayer-ball, BW-bomb to ridiculous, and largely undefendable extents.
(3) The evidence suggests that, after continued nerfs to destro classes the argument about winning cities no longer continues to hold any water. I would love to see the numbers on pugs vs pugs, pugs vs organized, organized vs organized. These numbers would paing a vastly different picture of city balance in this game.
(4) Destruction's previous successes in City sieges has often been attributed to organization. In response to this argument, many order players, rightfully so, have questioned this argument. Are organized players simply more inclined to play destro classes? Of course not, they say, so there must be a fundamental class imbalance that allows destruction to be more successful in city sieges. However, this argument is flawed. It is not that more organized players join Destruction; it is that in order to have even a modicum of a chance at succeeding in city sieges, Destruction has to organize, even loosely. If we do not, we don't have a chance in hell. So, we became more efficient and effective at organizing groups for city sieges. The current situation provides further evidence to this point. As destruction efforts have met with fewer and fewer successes, people are no longer putting in the effort to organize. WHy organize when you can lose a city without the indignity of having a 2/2/2 warband while you're at it? As failures have continued to compound, the organizational structure of destruction (for both cities and oRvR) has collapsed, leaving forces even further demoralized. (The present imbalance has also driven our most dedicated, organized leaders to abandon the game altogether or switch sides to enjoy success, which has created an altogether different kind of imbalance.
So, what is to be done? Wargrimnir and others like suggestions (so do I). So what are mine.
Multiple things need to change:
1. There must be real, in-depth discussions of balance in this game. Not class to class, not mirror to mirror. We need to discuss the variety of abilities that are/are not available to different classes on each side, examine where the unique abilities are, and tweak them so that, given the current meta they can be used to the deleterious effect they have on the game currently. Each individual knows their class and others well enough to acknowledge what these abilities we might question are. For example, is it right that of the ranged DPS on destruction side 2 (Sorc, Magus) classes have a pbAOE for 1800 and rSH have a ground target AOE. Given the meta in the game, the proliferation of the bomb Magus must have certainly inspired the pbAOE Magus M4, but given the small population of Magi who prefer to stay at ranged (note: Sarcasm intended for those who may not have noticed it) perhaps it might be logical for the ranged class to default to a ranged m4. To escape from the sarcasm for a moment, why do Squig Herders' (the vast majority of whom are melee) have a ranged, ground target m4 that is of little use to them? In contradistinction, both Engineers and Shadow Warriors have a ground target AOE. And while I certainly don't dismiss the entertainment value in imagining a new meta of pbAOE Engis, perhaps we can all see that these abilities do not line up and do not make sense given the positions these classes hold in the current organization of warbands. The continued lack of rSH buffs months after the commensurate buffs to the rSW is further evidence to this point. If the meta of this game had shifted even marginally since the days of live, I could understand that these problems might just be an artifact of times gone by. Alas, it is not. It is an artifact of continual imbalance in the game, of which there are many, many, many.
On this point, I also wish to acknowledge that there are clear instances where imbalance goes the other way. There are abilities on Destro side that order players do not have access to. However, in the context of the contemporary meta, I argue that these abilities have far less impact on equity in the game than do the imbalances that favor order.
2. We need a shifting meta. Class abilities can and should vary. I don't think anyone would mind certain abilities changing to provide a breath of fresh air to their favorite old toons. We need revolving changes that allow certain classes and fighting styles to take the lead for a moment, and then, they can change again. The stale meta is not only boring but also serves to highlight balance inequities and furthers the impact that class those imbalances have on the game in the long term. There should be changes to allow for all kinds of organized warbands to be competitive. This would emphasize skilled play over selecting the right composition.
3. AOE abilities, in general, for all classes, should see their damage reduced. The reliance on AOE as a solution to all combat problems is reductive. In the current meta there is very little place, if any, for single-target play. I think shifting this focus around is one way to bring new light to some of the excellent classes that see little attention due to normative warband practices and the overwhelming efficacy of AOE in most situations.
4. City siege matching should be rebalanced. Wherever possible, pugs should not go against organized warbands. It is not fair to either side. Acknowledging the population problem that makes this practically difficult, there are ways (AAO, buffs/debuffs) to balance instances so that underdogs have a fighting chance, win more when they have successes, and organized warbands can continue to fight rather than sitting at Emissary or Circle for what feels like decades.
5. Recent changes to fort defender proportion should be reverted. The evidence of practice has been overwhelming. The implementation of changes to stage 2 has been excellent and make forts more competitive and interesting. The change to proportions of defenders to attackers has more than destroyed any gains those changes have made. Forts are now competitive in stage 2. Forts are no longer anywhere near competitive in stage 3.
I know these ideas are just a start, but it is clear to me that something has to be done. It is clear for a lot of people on Destruction, and to be frank, I hope many on Order read these ideas and see a place where they can agree with me, too. The tired, old, overreliance on slayer-balls is injurious not only to my characters (shattered limbs hurt!) but also to the order players whose toons never have a chance to shine. I look forward to reading replies and hearing peoples' thoughts.
I do not want a meta where Destro warbands stomp all over Order pugs. I've done that in cities. Many times. It's boring. But it is just as boring as sitting in spawn for the fifth city in a row because we have no chance to compete with the current meta.
I have a deep and abiding love for this game. I always have; I likely always will. But it genuinely hurts to see my Destro friends leaving this game because they don't feel like they have even a fair shot anymore. And, bluntly, it's not like this server has population to spare. I hope this post can serve to start a genuine conversation about where this game really is and where we want to go. Because as much as I embrace the philosophy of destruction, it takes two sides to WAAAAGH!
--Codrington
