Curse

Sab · Apr 20, 2008, 02:53 PM // 14:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zamochit

No I believe that he means when balancing certain skills such as splinter weapon, you could utilise the fact that pve is ordinarily against non human foes. effectivly 'Nerfing' damage, recharge etc for pvp to maintain balance there, but keeping the skill the same in most cases in pve. For example.

[skill]splinter weapon[/skill]Weapon Spell. For 20 seconds, target ally has a Splinter Weapon. Target ally's next 1...4 attacks deal 5...41 damage to up to 3 adjacent foes.

Could become

[skill]splinter weapon[/skill]Weapon Spell. For 20 seconds, target ally has a Splinter Weapon. Target ally's next 1...4 attacks deal 5...41 damage to up to 3 adjacent human foes or ALL adjacent non-human foes.

Skills could have damage buffs against certain enemy types, that sort of thing (in the same way that Holy damage deals double damage to undead.) Im not saying its necessary but its something they could take into consideration for GW2

Pre-nerf Splinter was an I Win button vs huge balled-up mobs. Now it's been toned down so Splinter doesn't completely overshadow every other reason to bring a Rit. I know you used it just as an example, but I still don't see why retaining overpowered skills or buffing skills unnecessarily is a good idea.

Magikarp · Apr 20, 2008, 02:53 PM // 14:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crom The Pale

PvE is about stability.
PvP is about diversity.

In one you learn from mistakes so you can build the perfect counter, and know that it will work anytime you come accross a foe using that same strategy. In the other you have no knowladge of whats coming so you need to build something that will work vs everything and hope you do not run into something completely unexpected that is the perfect counter to your build.

Balancing one will always imbalance the other as long as you only look at the skills. They have improved PvE through AI changes however there are a number of other ways they could improve the game without damaging PvP at all.

Having such things as Exhaustion work slightly different in PvE and PvP for example. PvP = 10energy loss, PvE = 5energy loss.

Minion caps could be set differently in PvP/PvE and in PvE hard mode as well.

Adjusting some skills so that they have a broder effect when used vs a non human fow, like [club of a thousand bears]. Imagine adding to Hexes, If target is non-human then 1-3 nearby foes are also effected.

They could also adjust what is concidered In The Area and Nearby and Ear Shot to create a better balance between how they work in the limited arena space vs the wide open places of PvE.

These are just ideas off the top of my head, but you can see there is a great deal of flexability they can utilize to balance the game outside of pure skill changes.

and in pve the sky is red, and in pvp the ground will be solid pewter. in pve the air will be jello, whereas in pvp th.....

yeah... thanks... novel idea, no thank you dude

Zamochit · Apr 20, 2008, 03:18 PM // 15:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sab

Pre-nerf Splinter was an I Win button vs huge balled-up mobs. Now it's been toned down so Splinter doesn't completely overshadow every other reason to bring a Rit. I know you used it just as an example, but I still don't see why retaining overpowered skills or buffing skills unnecessarily is a good idea.

You are right, perhapts I did make a mistake utilising splinter as the example, as it is so extreme, all I mean is that when 'balancing' skills for pvp which are not problematic in their current form in pve, they could almost split the skill by creating two slightly different effects. One against human foes (predominantly pvp) and one against non-human foes (pve) these effects would not be significantly different but rather minor damage or duration boosts for pve in relation to pvp.

I dont like the idea of making any of the actual game mechanics different between pvp and pve (exhaustion etc) but I do think that subtle skill damage and duration differences between pve and pvp are plausable.

Avarre · Apr 20, 2008, 03:21 PM // 15:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zamochit

You are right, perhapts I did make a mistake utilising splinter as the example, as it is so extreme, all I mean is that when 'balancing' skills for pvp which are not problematic in their current form in pve, they could almost split the skill by creating two alternate effects. One against human foes (predominantly pvp) and one against non-human foes (pve).

The implication of this, however, is that because the non-human effect has to be limited to pve, then it is obviously not going to be on the same level of balance as the general skills that don't have restrictions.

Which leads directly back here;

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sab

So, basically, PvE is currently too hard so you want your skills to be more powerful. Are you seriously suggesting that would be an improvement to PvE?

Zamochit · Apr 20, 2008, 03:41 PM // 15:41

I just dislike the current system with PVE only skills and would prefer if they did not find their way into Guildwars2. I feel that this 'crutch' has gone a long way towards the shift in PvE away from Skill>Time towards Time>Skill.

Grinding reputation points to access vastly overpowered skills, Three of which are on the majority of pve players bars has been bad for the game imho.

It is these skills which have created the biggest gulf between pve and pvp since guildwars conception. Any move away from this system for the next 'chapter' would be good.

Fril Estelin · Apr 20, 2008, 03:44 PM // 15:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fril Estelin

In GW2, I'd like to see the dichotomy PvE/PvP disappear completely. Skills are just skills, and you can fight humans or AI with them (people may be smart, but AIs are fast, synchronised and very reactive to the set of programmed actions). Then balance would be brought into the equation by automated means on Anet's side, where they examine when players/teams win too easily on this or that part of the game, with statistics on the skills used (both by players and monsters, thus enabling an almost-automatic response. But imbalance should also be introduced to enable people to look for new ways to play and have a non-bland gameplay experience (being pwned is not a nice moment but you do get strong feelings and emotions, you remember what it feels like), maybe with more randomisation over the skills (this way, the skill balance can be a bit less visible). I'd even like to see gears/armors brought into the equation, but I think that NF inscriptions, HM and things like the BMP are already doing a good job. (then comes the question of how you balance the economy and it becomes a nightmare!)

IMHO, with GW2's linked instances, skills will become a little less of a problem, with the strategy (as in Factions) and storyline (as in favor) mixing seemlessly into everyone's experience. So it won't only be about your skillbar only, because the situation you're facing will be changing in an almost random fashion. May be we'll get evolving monsters and NPCs too: earning XP and getting new skills?

I'd like to add an idea (because that's what this thread was all about): same skills for PvP and PvE styles of play in GW2 (but nothing like these denominations, I like zwei2stein's idea of no profession, just a skillbar), but balanced in a double-movement, first the PvP-balance and then PvE monster skills (possibly different from players so as to ease this double-balancing?) are nerfed/buffed so that the PvE player is not impact "too much" (possibly not at all for some parts of the game, but as highlighted before, breaking PvE once in a while brings refreshment and fun, and pushes player to adapt/evolve).

I hope there's still room for ideas, if not I just lost my time.

Clarissa F · Apr 20, 2008, 04:05 PM // 16:05

I thought they made it official. There will be a pvp part with arenas, a pve area, and a PVP world area. The five races will each have their own bonuses, nothing to make them imbalanced, just advantageous for certain situations. pure pvp/pve skill sets separate from each other will be the rule, as there will be separate pvp/pve servers.

Read up on the GW2 conversations from Jeff Strain et al.

JR · Apr 20, 2008, 04:12 PM // 16:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clarissa F

I thought they made it official. There will be a pvp part with arenas, a pve area, and a PVP world area. The five races will each have their own bonuses, nothing to make them imbalanced, just advantageous for certain situations. pure pvp/pve skill sets separate from each other will be the rule, as there will be separate pvp/pve servers.

Read up on the GW2 conversations from Jeff Strain et al.

Got any links/quotes? Would be very interested to read that.

I did try and research what had been released so far before I made the thread, but there's a good chance I missed some stuff.

Crom The Pale · Apr 20, 2008, 04:18 PM // 16:18

Its not about making the game easier and its not like they havent already made some changes that only effect one.

Take pets for example, when they die in PvP your skill bar doesnt reset like it does in PvE.

If they keep changing the skills to balance with only PvP inmind then you wind up with them creating a PvE game that requires mobs to be smaller and run PvP style builds to give them balance as well.

If I wanted to fight a PvP battle vs AI I would play a different game. What I want is PvE, with large mobs of foes and super bosses. Not an easy walk in the park steamroll. Not ultra hard mode with one hit kill monster only skills.

PvE certainly needs to be challenging, but a challenge that can be overcome through learning what the foe does and preparing accordingly.

Keep in mind the game, PvE at least, should have 3 levels of challenge.

1) normal mode
2) hard mode
3) Elite dungeons

The highest AI and best skill bars/mob build should be reserved for the Elite Dungeons giving the End Game content some real challenge.
Normal mode SHOULD be easy and have over powered skills that let you steam roll foes with ease.
Hard Mode should be a level playing field between builds/parties and good AI.

Celestial_Kitsune · Apr 20, 2008, 04:27 PM // 16:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by JR

Got any links/quotes? Would be very interested to read that.

I did try and research what had been released so far before I made the thread, but there's a good chance I missed some stuff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Erik Flannum

We want races to really have a pretty big impact on the way characters play. For example, the Norns, who are the big, burly, half-giant Viking guys from up in the North, all have the ability to shape-shift into a were-bear form; giving them more health and making them stronger, that sort of thing.

Source

If I recall correctly, PvP and PvE will have separate skills, but I'll have to find the interviews to back it up.

Magikarp · Apr 20, 2008, 04:35 PM // 16:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Celestial_Kitsune

Source

If I recall correctly, PvP and PvE will have separate skills, but I'll have to find the interviews to back it up.

meh.... (not towards you... towards that source post..)

Celestial_Kitsune · Apr 20, 2008, 04:41 PM // 16:41

I think they are not going to create two functions for each skill in GW1 or GW2 given their vision:

Quote:

When you land in a new world, O'Brien explained, you don't want to have to read a bunch of skill descriptions, you want to run around and jump and swing, so that's what you'll be able to do in Guild Wars 2. It's meant to be a learn-by-doing sort of situation--rather than have overly complex skills that take an excessive amount of brain matter to understand, players will learn less complicated skills that they will be encouraged to test out in any situation they can think of. What happens if you use this skill while jumping, or that one while surrounded by monsters? Who knows? Give it a whirl and find out! Strain referred to it as "emergent complexity," and if it works the way they say it will, I shall personally send them each a fruit basket. Having a wide variety of skills in a game is great, but the amount of reading and memorizing you usually have to do to have even the most functional ability in an MMO is enough to drop me into a deep state of catatonia.

Source

Dr Strangelove · Apr 20, 2008, 04:45 PM // 16:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crom The Pale

PvE is about stability.
PvP is about diversity.

Flawed from the very beginning. An ideal skill balance in PvP minimizes the importance of build wars and maximizes the importance of player skills. This is why everyone gets nostalgic for the time near the end of Prophecies when everyone was running the same build. Guild Wars was an excellent way to show player skill, even if it wasn't diverse. By contrast, the beginning of Nightfall is generally perceived as the worst time for game balance, since junk like hexes, searing flames, paragons, and SP sins changed the game into a very diverse button-mashing fest.

An ideal balance in PvE gives people lots of new, diverse toys. This is why everyone is shiny happy and wonderful when a new chapter comes out, but complains when needed game balances pare down the number of viable builds, or when players find idealized builds and then refuse to change them. Stability isn't remotely important to PvE, since grave imbalances like ursan don't directly piss anyone off.

TL;DR version:

PvP = Balanced, competitive play
PvE = Shiny fun toys

Sab · Apr 20, 2008, 04:47 PM // 16:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crom The Pale

Its not about making the game easier and its not like they havent already made some changes that only effect one.

Take pets for example, when they die in PvP your skill bar doesnt reset like it does in PvE.

While you may not be intending on making the game easier, that's exactly what will happen if you buff skills for PvE.

The rest of your post takes issue mainly with mob design. Enemies can be made harder or easier or more interesting without having to change the skills themselves - mob composition and skill bars can both be adapted as needed. If certain mobs need an additional layer of difficulty, monster-only skills can fill this gap.

As for normal mode being easy, it already is. Even more so if you use PvE skills.

Dr Strangelove · Apr 20, 2008, 04:55 PM // 16:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Knightfall

This is the part I get tired of reading out of pvpers. If someone beats them all of a sudden it's not the players that beat them, but, only the skills they used on their bars.

It's both. In an ideal world, the ingame skills give you the medium by which to express your awesomeness.

For example, Mokone and Sab have kicked my ass in every streak I've had in TA this weekend. I hate them for it very much, but there's a good reason behind it. First, they picked builds that gave them the ability to respond to a wide variety of threats, especially those commonly found in TA. Second, they're better at the game than my friends and I.

Given that both of those items still work, I'd say the balance for TA is in a decent place, with the exception of shovespike.

Fug the Unwashed · Apr 20, 2008, 05:27 PM // 17:27

Why not drop the borders between PVE and PVE completely? All skills thrown into the mix with an adjustment to rank within the arenas so that say an R4 and R10 have the same bonus. Personally, I'd love to throw Pain Inverter at an E/Mo using Obsidian Flame.

Seriously, though...the division between PvE and PvP should have been (IMHO) snipped in the bud during development. The mere fact that the devs have given us PvE AND PvP-only characters creates the divide from day one. If the characters ALL had to begin the same way and acquire gear, skills and titles the same way, we wouldn't be in this pickle in the first place. I'm not in favor of either means of play more than the other, but I am for equity. To those ends, I would like to see ALL characters have to develope from lvl 0 to max by progressing through trials in the GW world. Arenas along the way until you are a full fledged max lvl...then you have earned the right to enter the elite arenas...if we all start the same, we are united by a common thread. Otherwise, we bitch about what the other side is doing until our fingers bleed with the OMFG!! keybanging through the forums. Too late to balance it now, so why try? If we all agree it's broken, then throw everything into the arenas and see what develops...

Red Sand · Apr 20, 2008, 08:03 PM // 20:03

I think introducing races with advantages and disadvantages leads to people only playing the "right" race for the "right" profession.

When you pick a profession or class (warrior) and you pick a race (wood elf) people look at you and want to know what you were thinking: Didn't you know that dwarves make the best warrior because they have the STR bonus? You are obviously are not smart enough to be in my group, let alone my guild.

It's called Min-Maxing, where the bonuses given by racial advantage tend to outweigh the desire to play a certain race outside of a certain profession.

Right now, with everyone human, you choose your professions based on what you want to do, not the bonuses that you can get. If we were to add other races, if one were to give inate abilities to other races, I would prefer that they be abilities that enhance *gasp* roleplay rather than gameplay.

around · Apr 20, 2008, 08:58 PM // 20:58

Oh wow.

It's not often I say this, but manitoba you are beyond belief.

To add my views on the topic:

I think that, while it's desireable and nice to have a variety of options to pick from, buffing random skills such that they are useable/overpowered is not the way to go about it.

It's a bit like MtG. There's always a certain number of cards which are worth looking at and are 4-of in most decks of that colour, just like there are skills you would be a fool not to take (RoF and Frenzy). Then there are the cards that give your deck it's defining characteristics, like Dragonstorm or what have you, just as there are skills which you take depending on how you like to play (i.e. I like to play W/A with DDagger and dash, intead of shock).

Then there are the thousands of cards which have no use whatsoever.

While it would be nice to have every single card on a par, this won't happen. The game would get far too complex, and you'd get unforseen synergies that break the game (Steady Stance immediately springing to mind). Just look at Vintage or Extended, where the card pool is much greater and as a result decks are generally more powerful.

The main difference is, MtG is played 2-of-3, and you can change cards depending on what your opponent plays. However, GW is a one shot event-if you meet a spike guild you can't sideboard in CoF after 1 match to shut them down.

Hence, it's much better to just keep a core of usable skills instead of having a massive library.

I realize this has little or nothing to do with the topic, but that's just my 2 pence.

Magikarp · Apr 20, 2008, 09:38 PM // 21:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by spawnofebil

Oh wow.

It's not often I say this, but manitoba you are beyond belief.

To add my views on the topic:

I think that, while it's desireable and nice to have a variety of options to pick from, buffing random skills such that they are useable/overpowered is not the way to go about it.

It's a bit like MtG. There's always a certain number of cards which are worth looking at and are 4-of in most decks of that colour, just like there are skills you would be a fool not to take (RoF and Frenzy). Then there are the cards that give your deck it's defining characteristics, like Dragonstorm or what have you, just as there are skills which you take depending on how you like to play (i.e. I like to play W/A with DDagger and dash, intead of shock).

Then there are the thousands of cards which have no use whatsoever.

While it would be nice to have every single card on a par, this won't happen. The game would get far too complex, and you'd get unforseen synergies that break the game (Steady Stance immediately springing to mind). Just look at Vintage or Extended, where the card pool is much greater and as a result decks are generally more powerful.

The main difference is, MtG is played 2-of-3, and you can change cards depending on what your opponent plays. However, GW is a one shot event-if you meet a spike guild you can't sideboard in CoF after 1 match to shut them down.

Hence, it's much better to just keep a core of usable skills instead of having a massive library.

I realize this has little or nothing to do with the topic, but that's just my 2 pence.

whats funny is that this is on topic.

while i understand your analogy, the real fact of the matter is that MtG also has well over 6000+ MtG cards give or take, and about 400-500 are total, unusable trash. thats a far cry different from our 600+ skills, and only having about 100-120 good ones to choose from.

thats also between 10 professions, and thats only if you have all 4 games.

this is causing that stale, monotonous gameplay.. in both pve AND pvp.

Dr Strangelove · Apr 20, 2008, 10:25 PM // 22:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magikarp

while i understand your analogy, the real fact of the matter is that MtG also has well over 6000+ MtG cards give or take, and about 400-500 are total, unusable trash. thats a far cry different from our 600+ skills, and only having about 100-120 good ones to choose from.

thats also between 10 professions, and thats only if you have all 4 games.

this is causing that stale, monotonous gameplay.. in both pve AND pvp.

Despite its shortcomings compared to pen & paper and cards, Guild Wars really does have one of the most diverse skill systems in a video game. 600 skills, with 8 professions, all allowed a secondary profession makes for a mind-blowingly complex skill system.

You're correct that there are a lot of skills that aren't viable for general use. This is the single biggest conflict between PvE and PvP. PvP doesn't need a huge variety of skills, for the reasons spawnofebil mentioned above. PvE requires tons of fun stuff to play with, since new skills are essentially new content. It's unfixable with the current system, but I know GW2 will have a different system, so we'll see there.