Curse

Genova · Jun 04, 2007, 07:51 AM // 07:51

Since the time is at brainstorming about the game's balance, I wonder why nobody brings the question of the game's balance between means of defense and means of offense. Maybe the questions or topics just got deleted

. I don't want to share my ideas yet because I know that a lot of people and especially the vets / mods will disagree, but I want to get your point of view on that matter. It is also important to take into account several situations like 8v8 obviously, but also 4v4, 3v3, 12v12, etc... don't forget that degen account for damage. Thanks in advance.

Patrograd · Jun 04, 2007, 09:55 AM // 09:55

As you are unwilling to share your ideas it is a little difficult to comment on them or discuss the point you are raising, or would have raised, had you actually shared your ideas.....

poobert · Jun 04, 2007, 12:02 PM // 12:02

I dont understand the question. But I will answer anyway :P

means of offence > means of defence

Nothing more to it. If it wasnt, matches would never end. The amount of difference just determines battle length. The lengths are fine at the moment, (at least they seem to be for me) so I assume they have a good balance.

Div · Jun 04, 2007, 01:09 PM // 13:09

In general, there is more offense than defense, as there's no point in a pure defense build. Vague question with no explanation either...

sir lockt · Jun 04, 2007, 01:44 PM // 13:44

And even if it would be defense>>>offensive then there are some tricks to avoid such a situation by splitting up or create a more favorable situation (like spiking, where all damage is concentrated) for you so it will be eventually offensive>>>defense

So again: what is your question again so we can disagree?

FoxBat · Jun 04, 2007, 03:14 PM // 15:14

It depends partly on the victory conditions.

In GvG, high defense can be difficult to keep up against VoD, and you can't actually win unless you kill the opponent's guild lord. If there's enough VoD pressure that both monks will inevitably collapse under loss of energy, the one with better offense will win.

In Arenas, you can grief with high defense/running but you won't actually win unless you like waiting 30 minutes for people to leave. Not an efficient way to farm faction or glad points.

In AB, at least some people on your team need to be able to kill NPCs to capture points. Not that most teams are terribly coordinated.

In old-school HA, pure defense was one viable way to hold halls for a while if you got lucky enough to get in there. With the three-way relic run though there's no way any team of any kind or skill can really stay in there for long, and lack of offense will make kill count much more difficult to pass.

In HvH... well everyone does play mostly defense, because you win by defending shrines, though the ability to get one or two kills per game at the center shrine can swing things.

So, yeah. You generally won't actually win with high defense at the expense of offense and disruption, and this is leaving aside the whole spike/disruption-can-beat-defense arguments. Except HvH, which is partly why it sucks.

Makkert · Jun 05, 2007, 04:34 AM // 04:34

Altough taking 4v4, 12v12 into account is of course important, one has to realised that this is designed for 8v8 play.

So 8v8 balance should be first priority when balancing.

~ Makk

Genova · Jun 05, 2007, 05:32 AM // 05:32

Well, let the discussion begin with a real question : "What do you think of spells that negate damage altogether ? Does this mean that there are too powerful skills, and that consequently there is a need for powerful defensive skills ?"

Div · Jun 05, 2007, 06:58 AM // 06:58

If you're referring to Life Sheath, it sucks. Negating damage is part of the game, as otherwise it takes very little skill to just make red bars go up.

Genova · Jun 05, 2007, 09:02 AM // 09:02

Protective spirit, shield of absorption, protective bond too... so arguing that Life sheath sucks make no point. If I follow your reasoning, most protection prayers spell suck.

This brings me to my second question : "Aside from pure mechanics, what difference do you feel between guardian and reversal of fortune for example ? Do you feel that one is right and makes sense, and the other is really artificial ?"

poobert · Jun 05, 2007, 10:46 AM // 10:46

They both "feel" right. If you are talking about realism, dont play a game with magicks. If you are talking about balance, then they are both very usefull skills.

I think he said life sheath sucks because there are other things which are of more use to the team. (RoF for example). People's points are from actual game experience. It sounds like you are just analyzing without experience.

Also could you elaborate on what this discussion is actually about. Perhaps give us you views, which have been eluding us up till now.

Also, no matter how many skills there are that totaly negate damage, it is far far easier to just out damage them totaly. Think about meditation of the reaper. It is not really that difficult to knock back all that damage even without the celestial skills.

Dzan · Jun 05, 2007, 10:47 AM // 10:47

Plus just stop. Your confusion is painful.

Div · Jun 05, 2007, 11:43 AM // 11:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genova

Protective spirit, shield of absorption, protective bond too... so arguing that Life sheath sucks make no point. If I follow your reasoning, most protection prayers spell suck.

This brings me to my second question : "Aside from pure mechanics, what difference do you feel between guardian and reversal of fortune for example ? Do you feel that one is right and makes sense, and the other is really artificial ?"

I don't see how you followed my reasoning. Life sheath sucks because it's a 1 second cast with very minimal damage reduction as an elite. Secondly, I can't believe you bring up protective bond...

I am in no way saying prot sucks, in fact I see prot as the most important thing in the game.

Difference between guardian and RoF? Go ask these questions in the "noob's Q&A section". Asking these questions here is just like asking people to call you a noob...

Your questions lead nowhere and neither is this thread. Ask a mod to close it before it gets closed by itself...

Genova · Jun 05, 2007, 06:26 PM // 18:26

Well, it is really hard to discuss things here. Well, sorry for misunderstanding your point about life sheath and my question about RoF and guardian isn't explicit enough I agree, nobody sees where I want to go with that one. The point isn't really about realism. RoF is useful in a lot more situations than guardian, and artificialy converts damage into heal. I don't question the use of the skill, because it still costs energy and you don't want to spam it recklessly. However this damage convertion bugs me. When you have put the energy (or adrenaline) and time to make use of a skill just to see that it has a negative effect (result in a heal), you don't ask yourself why it should be like that ?

Spirit bond is interesting too, this spell alone can keep a target alive against the concentrated efforts of a whole team. Restore condition (or mending touch) used at the right time result in a strong heal even if little to no damage has been dealt. I haven't seen a lot of games where you have to think so much about the numbers, that it feels mathematical and artificifial. Somewhere in my mind, there is still a need to believe that I am in the action, but numbers do the exact opposite. For example, you could use a spell that shares the incoming damage between like 4 members to prevent a spike. It may have been tested by the devs, and they thought it wouldn't work, who knows ?

In the end, I have merely tried to get your impressions on this subject, but like always there is something very difficult to overcome on these boards : most don't want to think about the fundations of the game and assume that they are good, (if it ain't broken, why fix it ?). However, I'd like to understand the "why", and that's the reason of this topic. For example, I believe that there will not be a need for such "artificial" protection spells if there weren't means to deal this high amount of damage, and even so, it is still possible to share / mitigate the damage instead of negating it altogether or convert it into heal.

Even if these skills are used perfectly, it is still possible to overcome the defense with enough offense. But how many times do we see a team without healing or protection at all ? It is like if it isn't a viable choice. I have seen this once, and I wonder why there isn't more of this kind of team, relying on movement and coordinated attacks to win. Maybe there is only me who think like that ?

Obviously like mentioned previously, all this is tied to the objective and victory conditions. We could discuss this later if you want, because this is mostly what separate HA from GvG. Although they do not play the same at all, there is still a balance to find between offense and defense through various objectives. I would like to see more diversity in playstyle, but it is like in the current situation, some builds are so good that there is no point in trying to be different. Being able to play without defense at all should be viable to some degree, and a defensive team should also be a viable choice, but all this is tied to the objectives.

lacasner · Jun 05, 2007, 06:51 PM // 18:51

Quote:

So 8v8 balance should be first priority when balancing.

I believe rather differently, that Anet should appeal to the masses, not just what the few "1337" players play. Maybe GvG should be priority, but certainly not by very far at all.

TheOneMephisto · Jun 05, 2007, 07:00 PM // 19:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genova

In the end, I have merely tried to get your impressions on this subject, but like always there is something very difficult to overcome on these boards : most don't want to think about the fundations of the game and assume that they are good, (if it ain't broken, why fix it ?). However, I'd like to understand the "why", and that's the reason of this topic. For example, I believe that there will not be a need for such "artificial" protection spells if there weren't means to deal this high amount of damage, and even so, it is still possible to share / mitigate the damage instead of negating it altogether or convert it into heal.

Even if these skills are used perfectly, it is still possible to overcome the defense with enough offense. But how many times do we see a team without healing or protection at all ? It is like if it isn't a viable choice. I have seen this once, and I wonder why there isn't more of this kind of team, relying on movement and coordinated attacks to win. Maybe there is only me who think like that ?

First, things are hard to discuss here because you're being vary vague, not really giving us what you want to discuss, and basically, it's your fault.

The reason that you don't see a team without healing or protection at all is that it would simply lead to a bad game. In a team like that, you would literally have to kill the entire enemy team, including breaking down their defense, before their offense rips through your unprotted characters. If that was possible, it would lead to the most retarded game ever. Basically, your telling me about a gametype that would be akin to 8 SP assassins vs 8 SP assassins running around trying to kill each other.

And also, how almost all gametypes are built makes this impossible. No matter how much you want to win by tactics, there are still control points in most gametypes that you need to take control of. If you want to be able to take control of them, you need to be able to hold your own against any team attempting to assault them.

Also, basically the reason that protection skills are needed is that they promote skill. Straight healing spells tend to promote red bars go up gameplay, where all you have to know is how not to overheal. However, using protection skills is much more difficult, requiring you to be proactive, to be able to find where the damage is going to go. This is much more difficult, and rewards skilled players much more. There's a reason why the healing line is extremely weak.

Genova · Jun 05, 2007, 08:36 PM // 20:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOneMephisto

First, things are hard to discuss here because you're being vary vague, not really giving us what you want to discuss, and basically, it's your fault.

Sorry for that one, but it if I go straight to the point saying something like "Spiking is retarded, discuss", the discussion goes nowhere too. I have to break through the general opinion and preconceived ideas, to get some answers. I thought that being vague and asking questions could allow me to do it more easily, because people now have to think more before answering. I know what is the global consensus and since I need to make people think "out of the box", I had no other choice.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOneMephisto

The reason that you don't see a team without healing or protection at all is that it would simply lead to a bad game. In a team like that, you would literally have to kill the entire enemy team, including breaking down their defense, before their offense rips through your unprotted characters. If that was possible, it would lead to the most retarded game ever. Basically, your telling me about a gametype that would be akin to 8 SP assassins vs 8 SP assassins running around trying to kill each other.

I understand your point but still, it is more the ability to solo-spike that is broken than anything else, and I am not asking for a game like that. Don't you think that you should be able to defend yourself without "god-like" backup ? You can prevent the attacks before they land like a blinder does, you can break a chain with an interrupt, you can divert spammed skills, etc... but you need time to do this. This is like what happens in splits where there is no monk and everyone has some selfheal, the game is much more about timing and require more skill because nobody will back up your mistakes. I guess that this has a lot to do with the number of avaible skill slots though.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOneMephisto

And also, how almost all gametypes are built makes this impossible. No matter how much you want to win by tactics, there are still control points in most gametypes that you need to take control of. If you want to be able to take control of them, you need to be able to hold your own against any team attempting to assault them.

I have seen this team winning against a top 20 team, with only one monk runner. They taked out most archers and get killed, rezzed, regrouped, and pushed to the bodyguard. From that point, the opponent couldn't even split or get out for their base, and lost at VoD. For sure it was in GvG, but it might be possible in other formats. As long as you can avoid damage, disrupt the defenses, and get some kills, you can hold your own against "balanced" teams and have an interesting game. I think that it is more the diversity of the skills and damage sources that prevents a team from bringing enough shutdown to adotp this style of play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheOneMephisto

Also, basically the reason that protection skills are needed is that they promote skill. Straight healing spells tend to promote red bars go up gameplay, where all you have to know is how not to overheal. However, using protection skills is much more difficult, requiring you to be proactive, to be able to find where the damage is going to go. This is much more difficult, and rewards skilled players much more. There's a reason why the healing line is extremely weak.

I agree but I see a difference between "uber" skills ending up as heal, and others. My example of guardian and RoF is exactly that, while both require skill to use, one is much more artificial in my eyes. I understand the need for versatile, powerful and versatile skills because you have only 8 skills, but that is a little too far maybe. Does all LoD monks feel that their bar don't require skill to use ? I always thought that the long casting times makes this a little more difficult than it seems at first. There are these times while under pressure, where you have to heal everyone and should not heal someone who isn't going to die soon. Other times you have to choose who you are going to let die, or cancel a cast to infuse. This is a great responsability, and I think it requires some skill to master.

TheOneMephisto · Jun 05, 2007, 09:17 PM // 21:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genova

Sorry for that one, but it if I go straight to the point saying something like "Spiking is retarded, discuss", the discussion goes nowhere too. I have to break through the general opinion and preconceived ideas, to get some answers. I thought that being vague and asking questions could allow me to do it more easily, because people now have to think more before answering. I know what is the global consensus and since I need to make people think "out of the box", I had no other choice.

If you bring up valid points that others have opinions on, people will discuss them. Saying that spiking is retarded will yield no discussion because it's been discussed to hell, gives no reasons or reasoning, and makes you look like a retard.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genova

I understand your point but still, it is more the ability to solo-spike that is broken than anything else, and I am not asking for a game like that. Don't you think that you should be able to defend yourself without "god-like" backup ? You can prevent the attacks before they land like a blinder does, you can break a chain with an interrupt, you can divert spammed skills, etc... but you need time to do this. This is like what happens in splits where there is no monk and everyone has some selfheal, the game is much more about timing and require more skill because nobody will back up your mistakes. I guess that this has a lot to do with the number of avaible skill slots though.

2 monks is hardly "god-like" backup. Also, there is a very different set of skills to be used in splits and regular fights. In splits, emphasis isn't necessarily on all types of skill. Splits emphasize twitch gameplay, interrupting vital skills, dodging, and a lot of the micro parts of the game. In regular battles, it becomes a much more long-term skillset, how do you begin to use the tools that you have brought to deconstruct the opponent defense enough that you can outpressure them and begin to get kills.

It's almost akin to tactics vs strategy or micro vs macro. Splits may emphasize individual skill more than 8v8s, but in an 8v8 it's much more about long-term strategy, decontructing defenses while not overextending your resources, and what goals you are going to work towards.

And a couple of your points are moot also. Many splits recently have used a monk or rit backup for healing, often the runner. Also, a large part of splits can be luck. The prime example is a BA vs BA, where whoever can dshot mending touch through natural stride first basically wins.

If you want a game where people can deal with 8v8-style pressure with purely self-heals/defense, you're going to have a very offense-light game. There's a reason why splits without monks/rits are over very quickly. Especially with the current quality-level of the self-heals in the game.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genova

I have seen this team winning against a top 20 team, with only one monk runner. They taked out most archers and get killed, rezzed, regrouped, and pushed to the bodyguard. From that point, the opponent couldn't even split or get out for their base, and lost at VoD. For sure it was in GvG, but it might be possible in other formats. As long as you can avoid damage, disrupt the defenses, and get some kills, you can hold your own against "balanced" teams and have an interesting game. I think that it is more the diversity of the skills and damage sources that prevents a team from bringing enough shutdown to adotp this style of play.

I think that you're talking about teleway, and I think that you don't know that teleway is a joke build. Any style of build that you're talking about is more abuse of broken shadow-step mechanics (currently recall, formerly shadow of haste) in order to be able to teleport out of any danger on demand. Also, teleway only has a chance when facing a fairly inflexible splitwise build on a split-friendly map. Any time that they are forced to fight a fairly even 8v8, they're going to be destroyed simply due to the fact that they can't deconstruct the enemy defenses as fast as they are killed without any defenses backing them up.

You're forgetting the fact that "disrupting the defenses" can often take a long time. If you watch top teams, they often fight for extremely long times while their team slowly works on taking down aegis, diverting blindspammers, putting pressure on the monks, and finally making the final push combined with short-term shutdown that breaks the team. And you'd have to avoid an immense amount of damage to be able to keep up with pressure on any scale from a full team, I doubt that you'd even be able to stay alive long with a perma-dark escape and self heals if put under focus fire from 8 people.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Genova

I agree but I see a difference between "uber" skills ending up as heal, and others. My example of guardian and RoF is exactly that, while both require skill to use, one is much more artificial in my eyes. I understand the need for versatile, powerful and versatile skills because you have only 8 skills, but that is a little too far maybe. Does all LoD monks feel that their bar don't require skill to use ? I always thought that the long casting times makes this a little more difficult than it seems at first. There are these times while under pressure, where you have to heal everyone and should not heal someone who isn't going to die soon. Other times you have to choose who you are going to let die, or cancel a cast to infuse. This is a great responsability, and I think it requires some skill to master.

I'm not understanding your view of "artificial" at all. First of all, both of the skills that you are talking about aren't "uber" in any way. Guardian is what I would consider to be a decent cheap pre-prot, but nothing amazing in any way. RoF actually isn't that amazing of a skill, but is a monk staple due to the fact that it is fast recharging, fast casting, can be used in every situation to some effect, and is pretty good at what it does (prot/heal). Most of the monks that I've heard talk about it describe it more as a skill that they use to either buy time as they think of a better skill to use or as a filler if the better skill is recharging.

Also, the reason I don't think LoD bars are as bad as other heal bars is because the majority of them run prot also. Most LoD's run at least RoF and one prot, and usually 2 prots (SoA/SH and prot spirit/spirit bond). TBH, a lot of LoD bars are built off of the standard GoH/prot/elite/condition removal/hex removal/emanagement or self-defense format, except with LoD and 1-2 more heal spells replacing GoH.