anti-uniqueness (Twitter response)
This is where I cheat and explain my 1 word answer. Although I already cheated with a hyphenated response.
I'm torn between enjoying being in a Gameworld that promotes others to RP, while also loving the insane dedication of a min/max'er that is going for a world first kill.
I understand the vital importance of class bapance. If pally tanks are way OP (as they should be!!!) then every end game raiding guild will stack them and the other classes get left in the dust.
However there is something about having all things being equal that eliminates the uniqueness of selecting your class to begin with. Who cares if I roll a pally or a warrior if it's all the same anyways. At that point it only comes down to different spell/ability animations.
(So that's my 1 word answer)
Overrated.
Expanding: Don't get me wrong. I don't think you can let one class get so out of whack it's way, way, way too OP. But at the same time, you have to be mindful that the balancing act just doesn't turn everything into a generic vanilla flavor of everything else. I think this is one of many reasons so many MMOs nowadays just feel like giant online solo games. Many balance classes in such a way that they are often good at everything. There have been points in some MMOs where melee classes ended up just feeling like casters with a different color mana bar. That's why I like the 4 pillars of grouping. Each class has a unique role and it doesn't have to be balanced against every other. Nor should it be. In EQ I got my arse kicked by a druid as a warrior. But that druid couldn't tank for squat.
Kilsin said:In One Word - Tell us what you think about class balance? #MMORPG #CommunityMatters
rediculess
In a game like pantheon where there is so much class diversity and different utility in the different classes, balance is unrealistic since, how much dps does it cost for a dps class that it can offtank, off heal, buff, snare or what ever other functions?
Impossible
In a few more words: There are too many different things to balance. Raid DPS, group DPS, soloability, utility, fun. Some need to be balanced on their own, some need to be balanced both on their own and together. It would save a lot of time and anguish if VR were to admit that it cannot be done then focus on making each class exactly what it should be, to hell with balance (except raid DPS + utility needs to be somewhat balanced). If balance isn't a major focus of development you can save huge swaths of time to spend on more productive things and we won't end up with Flavor-of-the-Month classes.
Kilsin said:In One Word - Tell us what you think about class balance? #MMORPG #CommunityMatters
Unobtainable.
First, Pantheon is not designed (or hasn't been described since day one) as a class based game but rather an archetype based game. You cannot balance one archetype against another, but within a given archetype you can, to some limited degree, balance the classes against each other. I say 'limited degree' because as much as VR has said time and time again that classes within their archetype will each do perform their primary function equally well but by different means. A noble idea, but when a given class is deemed by the players to be good enough in a majority of situations, then you do not need the other classes in that archetype.
VR has pointed out that the DireLord will be the 'magic tanking' class, dealing with magic damage better than the other tanks. But if we, the players, find that the warrior can still do a good enough job then the DireLord is superfluous, uneeded. If you take a raid situation against new content you've never encountered, you are better off putting your warrior up front first, every time, than you are putting either the Paladin or DireLord up there first. If you beat the content, even if it was designed with a DireLord or Paladin in mind, you have no reason to change your strategy....you won afterall. Clearly the Warrior was good enough.
Ambiguous.
Class balance meaning all classes can do the same things in similar ways is awful.
Class balance meaning all classes aimed at a particular role such as healing a group can do it well enough to be valued in a group is critical.
Class balance meaning that to the extent there is some solo play in Pantheon all classes can solo, even if some better than others, is also critical.
A class that cannot handle its role in a group will get few takers - why bother creating it? A class that can do *nothing* other than group will be rejected by many - groups aren't always available and the player will not always have the uninterrupted time to group when he or she logs in.
Mathematical
- context: it's all math, so, it's possible to have design goals that state which role or class should offer the best and worst in a given game loop category.
So, for damage, it could currently be a design goal that one or two classes in a particular role should be the best in damaging particular targets. Conversely, it could currently be a design goal that one or two classes in a particular role should be the worst in damaging particular targets.
The real problem isn't who is the best or worst, that's a symptom of a larger problem: providing value to all roles in the role-playing game.
As in, is it fun to play your role in a group, during all game loops? So far, the best/worst design goals for any game loop (adventuring, or otherwise) hasn't been publicly disclosed by role, so as potential paying customers, we have no confirmed reference, today.
Ideally, sometime prior to launch, such information would be provided via the in-game client, during character creation, so paying customers will be able to make an informed decision. I have zero expectation this will be the case, but it would be a nice differentiator in the genre.
If the desired primary emergent behavior of the target demographic is to group up and adventure together, then class balance should be designed around that goal. It will be extremely easy to determine if this is the case, long before beta or launch, based on ability, skill, spell, and class descriptions & details. What will be really interesting is to see if VR implements according to those descriptions, or goes off into the weeds like most MMO's have. If 90% of the game is intended to be played in combat? Some conclusions can and will be critically and logically drawn about class balance, long before the game launches. Why?
Because if that's true, then the perceived fun or value of a character will primarily be how they contribute to TTK reduction. Anything outside of that will be relegated to bot function, alt function, gimmick, or similar. An example? If a class is balanced around a non-combat role, and that non-combat role is optional, temporary, inconsistent, flavor, or provides no extraordinary tangible value to the group? Then it's value is diminished. Put simply, if your class, by design, doesn't contribute to the goals of the group during the activity that consumes the most time of the group, then your class will be objectively "worse" than one that does.
Cacophonous
I prefer a symphony of varying instruments working together to produce something memorable and fun. Having everything tuned to the same register leaves our adventures flat or worse - highlights discrepancies among players and play styles.
