Curse

Bryant Again · May 27, 2009, 01:21 AM // 01:21

That would probably be a good move at this point. It gets messy when you have to balance one skill for one aspect of gameplay and having it affect every other format, especially when the different game types become more and more varied.

Snow Bunny · May 27, 2009, 01:42 AM // 01:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by FeroxC

Imagine what it would be like if the entire PVE element of GW was disabled and then compare it to what would happen if PVP was disabled.

Which situation would leave the most players? If you think PVP only would have the most players remaining then IMO you're slightly deluded.

If you dropped PvP, you'd have WoW. If you dropped PvE, you'd have Fury.

UnChosen · May 27, 2009, 03:21 AM // 03:21

Easy...Split PvE/PvP skills from the get go. Just the last update had me wonder wtf they're doing again. PwK nerf for PvE? Castigation sig overpowered in PvE? Ele spells and Ranger attacks OP in PvE, when HM monsters have like 150 armor vs elemental and physical?

In the same time, stuff that can be justified for nerfing in PvE are completely untouched because they don't affect PvP. Not that I want them to because whenever Anet actually decide to have a PvE specific nerf it becomes Smiter's Booned even more so than PvP (Prot bond, Seed of Life and many many previous "farming skills" nerfs)

So perfect decent and balanced skill in PvE gets hit for no reason, and waste casual player's time to hunt/pay for another skill (Yes, not everyone are UAX), while we have a bunch of totallly useless skill can't be buffed because of PvP, and a few OP skills that is meant to compensate for all the useless and randomly hit skills....

draxynnic · May 27, 2009, 04:02 AM // 04:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by FeroxC

Probably a good idea. You cant just balance for PVP then expect it to work in PVE. A mob isn't just another team its a completely different set of opponents with higher stats, more dmg and much more primitive A.I hence the tactics to counter it are different.

Old mesmers might of been fairly balanced in PVP but in PVE they were not balanced as there role was nearly insignificant without AOE spells.

PVP balance does not map to PVE balance so GW2 should keep it separate.

If you agree with the above you might want to consider whether that means that PVP skill doesn't necessarily map to PVE.

This is pretty much the real issue here - in GW, the differences between the formats are such that what's balanced in one often isn't in the other. There are two possible ways to resolve this - balance them separately, or make the two formats close enough in behaviour that what works in one does in fact work in the other. (Working from Guild Wars 1, this would mean, among other things, keeping down the rate at which monsters die and removing some of their protections against shutdown so that shutdown-based classes like Mesmers remain useful.)

Note that I say balance them seperately, and not to avoid balancing PvE at all. When high-end PvE coalesces to a handful of builds, at that point it's become silly. While I'd admit there are some changes I'd selfishly prefer to happen after I'd achieved certain objectives than before, the free experimentation with new builds is one of the things that I like about Guild Wars, and it's somewhat lost when there are a handful of templates that will win everything. Just make sure that every profession has something they can meaningfully contribute to any given mission or area.

Besides, I do feel a certain thrill whenever I get to play my Mesmer as such and not as some Assassin Promising, cry-of-paining assassin summoning thing... (hello Hard Mode Thirsty River priest shutdown!)

Winterclaw · May 27, 2009, 04:44 AM // 04:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ensign

Fine-tuning the balance of a game is hard enough on technical merits; the public relations part of balancing is even harder, because as a rule your most dedicated and vocal players do not want balance.

PvP is a bit easier from a wide view, as PvP players, at least on the surface, don't want power outliers in their game. However the feedback loop is difficult because your most vocal and successful players typically want to steer the game to favor builds and strategies they find most enjoyable, which if taken to extremes will stagnate the game. There's always a lot of complaints out of the PvP community about balance, but it is very difficult to distinguish which complaints are serious balance issues, and which are complaints about the game being open to more strategies than they like.

PvE balance is very hard to sell, because your PvE playerbase as a whole despises balance, even though it's necessary for the health of the game. For your most dedicated PvE players, the game is typically an achievement engine, and that is most fun when you can find some strategy that is akin to cheating and milk that for rewards. Balancing those strategies is in direct competition to their goals. However it is necessary to keep the reward structure of the game intact.

Your more casual players generally do not understand the balance of the game nearly as well, and balance changes that hit their characters tend to upset them because it makes their character go backwards in a character building game, and they often are not using things in an abusive way / do not understand why something needed to be toned down.

PvE balance is the art of balancing the interests of your hardcore players against your casual players, while keeping a meaningful reward and goal structure in place. When the power curve gets steeper, your hardcore players have more to grind for but your casual players have less access - more problematic in what is fundamentally a social game. Keeping both of those groups happy while restricting the power structure enough that your reward structure is still good - that there are still things to achieve and goals to chase - is even harder. Both groups of players want to get achievements, and want to make progress faster, but if you let them go too fast the achievements get watered down. Most balance changes to Guild Wars PvE have been to gross attacks on the reward structure.

The biggest failing of Guild Wars PvE is how this particular balance has gotten worse over time. Between overpowered skills that are required for particular characters, overpowered PvE skills that require title grind, and pricey consumables that increase power significantly, one of the biggest selling points of the game at release - that you can log in and play and contribute with the character you have, due to the low level cap, flat equipment curve and skill restrictions - has gradually gone away. This is the sort of PvE balance I'm hoping returns for Guild Wars 2, as this being balanced was the one truly unique thing Guild Wars PvE has going for it.

Great post. The low level cap and the ability to jump in and contribute right away were some of the things that drew me to GW in the first place along with the no monthly fee thing (however that is a double edged sword). If Anet would come out and say there will only be 20 levels or less in GW2, I'd be a happy chocobo.

Here are some other things I think will hurt or help balance in GW2 depending on how they play out:

1. Number of levels. Let's say GW2 has 200 levels (a number I remember being thrown around). It's going to be a lot harder to balance 0-160 than 0-16. It could also result in heck levels, where you are gimped for several levels until you can hit the next break point for your skill. It's also going to make it more likely that some classes will be easier to play earlier on and some better later on because of how the break points and skill growth work out. For instance, when AoC came out rangers were OP for the first 40 levels and junk for the next 40. When you have to test 160 skill levels, it's going to also take longer to get the balance at the higher end as it'll take longer for everyone to get there and test out all the skill combos.

2. Number of skills. I think GW showed that Anet has the ability to manage only a few skills at a time. I can't remember seeing a balance that affected more than about 20-30 skills at once. However, not all balances tested their full capacity to balance and some skills either went unbalanced or took too long to correct when they were OP. Eventually Anet got to the point were they nerfed a skill so much it pretty much wasn't used in PvP again and they left it like that so they wouldn't have to keep dealing with it. As newer skills were introduced, it further complicated the mess.

3. Going back to what you said in your post, there is also the developer preference. If the developer likes a certain skill or tactic being used, even if it is a little unbalanced, they might leave it that way or unbalance it further for the sole reason they kind of like it. Take the power creep that came along, particularly with NF. It was bad for the game, and lessened the value of the older games, and ended with a lot of nerfing all around (tactics anyone) yet someone at Anet thought more powerful skills was a good idea.

4. Play the game more and see what other people are playing and aren't playing. Ensign made a good point about it being hard to see what is people whinging about making their playstyle more powerful and what is a general imbalance. In other words the balance devs need to become good at the game themselves. They need to see for themselves what is played a lot so they can see if those skills are good for the game or not good for the game as is. They also need to see what skills are too underpowered or aren't being used and why so they can make them a little more worth bringing. If those skills were overpowered and nerfed to the point no one uses them anymore, then they need a small tweak or change in the upward direction. If Anet takes my advice and keeps the skill list a lot smaller (say half or less), then NAF tactics (Nerf And Forget) won't be as viable because the players won't have as many skills to turn to.

Yawgmoth · May 27, 2009, 05:35 AM // 05:35

There's one BIG thing that PvE balancing and nerfing needs -- that is SPEED!

It's a FACT that if something in PvE is badly imbalanced it's visible and clear right away! In PvP actions don't need to be taken fast except extreme cases, because metagames evolve and players can adapt.
But mobs won't learn!
AI won't update builds and strategies and will just get abused over and over and over again.

So why not nerf the PvE imba right away? There's nothing to wait for! QUICKLY say "sorry, this was a mistake" and nerf before players get used to the imba!

Don't let the Ursan run untouched for a whole year when it's OBVIOUS it's stupidly overpowered. Nothing to wait for... oops, forgot that in this case it was about selling as many copies of GW:EN as possible

But things like Shadow Form were also obvious almost immediately, 1 week was enough to clearly see how absurdly imba it is. Update QUICK ffs, don't let players attach to it as something normal.

The sooner it goes the less QQ

pumpkin pie · May 27, 2009, 05:46 AM // 05:46

I really cannot belive players already wants to balance a game that is due in 2010/11, I am not trolling or tyring to discredit this thread or anything, I simply cannot understand the claim that pve players are whining when the pvp players wants to balance everything even when the game isn't even in the market yet. This thread just show you why you would think pve players are whining, we do not whine for the sake of whining its because you want to balance things even theres no need to, just think about it, you are attempting to balance something that hasn't even materialise.

UndeadRoadkill · May 27, 2009, 06:32 AM // 06:32

Why does everyone think PvE players all want to be imbalanced?

Brett Kuntz · May 27, 2009, 06:42 AM // 06:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by UndeadRoadkill

Why does everyone think PvE players all want to be imbalanced?

uhhh because thats when you get the most stuff in the least time??

The entire point of PvE is to find exploits and pattern abuse and gain as much gold/items as possible before other people figure it out, and when other people figure it out, you get the Devs to nerf it so you still come out on top.

duhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

zwei2stein · May 27, 2009, 06:49 AM // 06:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yawgmoth

The sooner it goes the less QQ

SF was intentionally made easy to maintain perma. If devs made it on purpose, can we really expect them to "take swift action" once people go "oh, i c wut u did thar" and start to abuse it?

---

I take it back, original idea would probably end up in skill split anyway and intentional imba stuff.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

I really cannot belive players already wants to balance a game that is due in 2010/11.

Because this idea would be worthless if it was brought up after release, now wouldn't it.

Cuilan · May 27, 2009, 08:24 AM // 08:24

I enjoy nerfing because it changes things around. I hope they continue this in Guild Wars 2. Keeps things fresh.

SpiritThief · May 27, 2009, 08:32 AM // 08:32

The answer is less skills, and not adding anything to it later that wasn't already "Pre-planed" from the very start.

JR · May 27, 2009, 09:00 AM // 09:00

All you need to do to balance GW2 is have a PvE level cap higher than the plateau for PvP levels (something already confirmed.)

You can then balance skills for PvP at that level, with attribute point caps, and have them do whatever the shit you want at the higher PvE levels.

Simple.

Konig Des Todes · May 27, 2009, 10:38 AM // 10:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by zwei2stein

Simple: Release "serious" PvP part of game year (or more) in advance before releasing PvE part.

Won't work, PvP needs constant balancing unfortunately. It's best to either integrate them to the point of people being able to dual in the persistent areas, or just completely split them.

Quote:

Reason: PvEr issue with nerfs is that:
a) They get attached to unbalanced crap that makes game easy and protect it as 'ballance'
b) They get attached to unbalanced crap that gets em virtual pixel goods and protect is as 'fun'
c) They get attached to unbalanced crap they did not know is unbalanced crap and protect it as 'being punished for being original'

And those people should be shot. That'll fix the problem, and Anet won't lose since they got the people's money already.

To be on a serious note, there is NO way to prevent QQ'ing. There is NO way to fully balance PvP. There is NO way to fully balance PvE. Best thing that can be done is not have any blantantly overpowere, or underpowered, things from the get-go and from release on monitor the gameplay, prefered builds, etc. with a team instead of a single damn person. Because, clearly, Izzy is losing any touch he had.

Edit: Another thing, remove PvX wiki so that people would actually think instead of using the exact same build. Maybe then the nerfs and balances would be better placed.

pumpkin pie · May 27, 2009, 12:28 PM // 12:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by zwei2stein

Because this idea would be worthless if it was brought up after release, now wouldn't it.

I am not saying your idea is worthless or trying to critising them. I know you have the best interest for this game we obviously love, otherwise we wouldn't bother talking about it.

to answer your question:
Its no, because how do you balance something that you don't know would be inbalance? Have yout thought about players who play both PvP and PvE? What about players who wants to casually play PvP?

As I am made to understand that Guild Wars 2 is one game, not 2 games. How do you seperate a game that tells you that everyone can jump in to play PvP, world PvP anytime they want? What about the sidekick (someone of low level able to join in PvP) system? Those will all be destroy if we try to seperate the game into 2 parts.

What we know now is Guild Wars PvP and we are trying to balance Guild Wars 2 with that knowledge, which simply is not feasible.

Anon-e-mouse · May 27, 2009, 12:52 PM // 12:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

Example?

(asking for examples of PvP'rs getting PvE skills changed

From the recent skill 'balance'.

Mirror of Ice, Steam, Castigation Signet, Peace and Harmony, Word of Healing, Foul Feast, Lingering Curse, Hunter's Shot, Melandru's Shot,
Keen Arrow, Protective Was Kaolai.

All DIRECTLY nerfed in PvE purely based on thier (ab)use in PvP. The skills were not overpowered in any way shape or form, but just got adjusted in PvE thanks to the PvP'rs, for the most part making PvE even easier still (as monsters use the same skills remember).

And that was only the most recent change, heck almost every balance since the beginning of the game has been due to PvP, and DIRECTLY affects PvE.

Default Name · May 27, 2009, 04:30 PM // 16:30

Just have separate copies like now and be done with it.

Everyone wins this way.

Bryant Again · May 27, 2009, 08:14 PM // 20:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anon-e-mouse

All DIRECTLY nerfed in PvE purely based on thier (ab)use in PvP.

Now that's very different. That's PvP getting "balance" changes while at the same time affecting PvE. The example I was looking for that Bhaav stated in his post was PvPers having direct influence on PvE, either exclusive or not, balance.

faraaz · May 27, 2009, 09:26 PM // 21:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bryant Again

That's PvP getting "balance" changes while at the same time affecting PvE.

Nerfing a skill in PvE because of its implications in PvP (which are often very different from the same in PvE) is pretty much what you were looking for verbatim.

kedde · May 27, 2009, 09:33 PM // 21:33

Skills not being overpowered in pve as well is simply due to bad design and limitations in AI.
If AI and pve were both designed optimally, no nerfs would be "unfair" to either part.

Also, that bhaav guy totally cracked me up.
Most hilarious thing I've seen in a while.