Curse

Christ67 · Jun 10, 2005, 08:30 PM // 20:30

I keep reading about "game balance" let's put this into practical application.

We get a group of random people together and decide to make them equal or balanced.
Of the 6 people one is blind in his right eye, hence we poke out the right eye of the other 5. Now we have balance.
Opps, just noticed one has a prosthetic left foot 5 chops later we have balance again.
Whoops, 2 are women and 4 men. Radical surgery needed Whew, finally we have balance.
Oh crap one has an IQ of 90 well lobotomys will bring balance. Ok so now we have 6 equal "balanced" people great. See that wasn't so hard. Wait one has a......

Anyone see the problem created when you "Balance" the game.

KuTeBaka · Jun 10, 2005, 08:32 PM // 20:32

that would be nerfing, you can also do the oposite.

Deagol · Jun 10, 2005, 08:40 PM // 20:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Christ67

Anyone see the problem created when you "Balance" the game.

12 years kids attracted to seing big numbers on the screen would start making up ridiculous analogies?

Sting · Jun 10, 2005, 08:41 PM // 20:41

"Game Balance" is giving everyone the same opertunity for a chance of succes. If you give someone a task to do say dig a ditch give one person a backhoe (monk) and another a small shovel (Ranger) and make them compete to see who can dig the longest ditch in a day, is this balanced? No, by game balance means give each person a tool of equel effectiveness then you will see who is actually the best worker/player. So think of the game as a tool not the people using it.

Christ67 · Jun 10, 2005, 08:41 PM // 20:41

Exactly we tend to see a nerfed fix rather than a repaired game

Keesa · Jun 10, 2005, 09:20 PM // 21:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sting

"Game Balance" is giving everyone the same opertunity for a chance of succes. If you give someone a task to do say dig a ditch give one person a backhoe (monk) and another a small shovel (Ranger) and make them compete to see who can dig the longest ditch in a day, is this balanced? No, by game balance means give each person a tool of equel effectiveness then you will see who is actually the best worker/player. So think of the game as a tool not the people using it.

Some of the people playing games are tools...

Sorry, couldn't resist.

BrandonIT · Jun 10, 2005, 10:26 PM // 22:26

I think of game balance as more of a rock-paper-scissors model, which I think Guild Wars does very well.

Your elementalist beats the warrior, but my ranger is extra protected against elementalist, but my ranger is weak against the warrior. See?

It should always be that your super-weapon can be countered by someone else's super-weapon.

That's balance.

The reason Guild Wars works so well, is because I can only bring 8 of my super-weapons to the field, and you can only bring 8 of your super-weapon-destroyers to the field.

Now who brought the right ones? And who knows how to employ them effectively?

In the most abstract sense, that is what Guild Wars was built on. And that's what I enjoy most about it.

eA-Zaku · Jun 11, 2005, 12:06 AM // 00:06

Quote:

"Game Balance" is giving everyone the same opertunity for a chance of succes. If you give someone a task to do say dig a ditch give one person a backhoe (monk) and another a small shovel (Ranger) and make them compete to see who can dig the longest ditch in a day, is this balanced? No, by game balance means give each person a tool of equel effectiveness then you will see who is actually the best worker/player. So think of the game as a tool not the people using it.

Wow Sting, get over it. Rangers are coming to be appreciated, especially here on the forums, and monks are NOT, as has been repeated and backed up plenty of times, overpowered. They are there to do their job and they do it well. Rangers have a job, too. It's just lots of people think it's just shooting arrows and maybe having their cat do an attack or two. Sure, there may be no love for the rangers, but don't hate on the monks. We keep your ranger ass alive

Ardus Shadowmane · Jun 11, 2005, 12:14 AM // 00:14

I'm a ranger, and I don't consider myself a small shovel at all. I'm more of a trowel. Oh...wait...crap *runs and hides behind a tree*

Seriously though, I love playing a Ranger and can hold my own. Comparing me to a small gardening tool is just...well...something...heh.

eA-Zaku · Jun 11, 2005, 12:30 AM // 00:30

More like dig a ditch, hand the monk a shovel polishing kit, and hand the ranger a backhoe with foreign instructions/operating manual.

Serafita Kayin · Jun 11, 2005, 12:44 AM // 00:44

When I feel underpowered, I'll let you know.

As it stands, I may not do the most damage, but what damage I do COUNTS. And monks hate me. I like that.

Ardus Shadowmane · Jun 11, 2005, 02:49 AM // 02:49

eA-Zaku--Hehe, apt description! Me likey! *promptly steals and copyrights under his own name so as to claim credit for that witticism* HA!

ComMan · Jun 11, 2005, 03:09 AM // 03:09

I still want to know what super-rangers do. My goal is generally, "if I put enough status ailments on that guy, maybe he'll stop chasing me..."

Balance in a game like GW is definetly not about being equal. As much as I despise my terrible Ranger damage, I understand that if I had damage equal to a warrior, and I could use skills like Pin Down over a range, I would have more of unfair advantage than he has now.

I kind of dislike the Paper Rock Scissors setup, mainly because the community is unbalanced. Mesmers can shut down monks. OK, but how many monks are out there and how many Mesmers? As it is, I wouldn't mind seeing underplayed classes get a little pick me up.

You CAN win with a build of varying specialties that work together, but in generally the Air Ele/Warrior/Monk setup will still crush you. I don't think that's as balanced as it's intended to be, but it's closer than a lot of games.

Sting · Jun 11, 2005, 03:55 AM // 03:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by eA-Zaku

Wow Sting, get over it. Rangers are coming to be appreciated, especially here on the forums, and monks are NOT, as has been repeated and backed up plenty of times, overpowered. They are there to do their job and they do it well. Rangers have a job, too. It's just lots of people think it's just shooting arrows and maybe having their cat do an attack or two. Sure, there may be no love for the rangers, but don't hate on the monks. We keep your ranger ass alive

Didnt mean to imply Monks are overpowered (my touchy

). Please insert whatever "TOP" class type for monk. And for you uber rangers (insert what you consider bottom class type

).

The OP was stating that by "Balancing a game" would make less capable people equel or excell to better players. All I was saying is making all the classes equel (give both people a backhoe) the better people would still win but they would have had an even shot. And more people would choose diferent classes instead of the ones that are considered a top class so they can get in groups.

As for the Rangers who only shoot arrows comment. Arnt Rangers supposed to be archers (I mean I know DMG from bows suck unless your the uber rangers who talk about 2 shooting people on here all the time LOL)??? only skills we have are bow skills and creature taming skills, so we shouldnt shoot arrows or have pets (wich I dont use pets) so then what just run around and put traps? Best Interupts are my mesmer skills becasue they are faster counting arrow flight time and have the benefit of extra dmg or energy steals. Maybe Elementalists shouldnt use spells??