I dont mind if they are unbalanced, as long as they have a specific role to play in the game/group/raid. (and they are going to be needed)
But not unbalanced enough that you could not do a bit of solo questing / harvesting with a particular class, like a burglar could not kill the mob standing next to the flower he was going to pick, or it would take him 10 times as long as say a Minstrel.
I think some should shine in certain cirumstances while be rubbish in others.
Cavat - As long as no PvP..
I guess this depends if there will be PvP or not. I personally think it doesnt need to be 100% balanced but I feel all classes should be able to preform ALL the roles just some to a lesser extent then others. Ex. A Crusader can play as a DPS or Crowd Control but while they can perform that role adaquently they wouldnt preform the DPS role as well as say an Assassin or Crowd Control as well as a Ranger (assuming they are designed as a kiting/trap class).
The reason for this is so people do not have to have a certain class in order to do certain content. Sure, they might not be as efficient as some guilds with a large range of classes avaiable to them but to shut down a group of people from raiding or doing other content because they are a group of friends who all picked their favorite classes but this particular raid or dungeon has a HARD requirement for a Ranger CC class and no one rolled that class.
Tuhart said:I dont mind if they are unbalanced, as long as they have a specific role to play in the game/group/raid. (and they are going to be needed)
But not unbalanced enough that you could not do a bit of solo questing / harvesting with a particular class, like a burglar could not kill the mob standing next to the flower he was going to pick, or it would take him 10 times as long as say a Minstrel.
I think some should shine in certain cirumstances while be rubbish in others.
Cavat - As long as no PvP..
Yeah, that is fair enough :)
PvP has no impact on PvE, separate servers, different rulesets, classes will be balanced accordingly without affecting each other, so it is not even an issue.
Aggelos said:I guess this depends if there will be PvP or not. I personally think it doesnt need to be 100% balanced but I feel all classes should be able to preform ALL the roles just some to a lesser extent then others. Ex. A Crusader can play as a DPS or Crowd Control but while they can perform that role adaquently they wouldnt preform the DPS role as well as say an Assassin or Crowd Control as well as a Ranger (assuming they are designed as a kiting/trap class).
The reason for this is so people do not have to have a certain class in order to do certain content. Sure, they might not be as efficient as some guilds with a large range of classes avaiable to them but to shut down a group of people from raiding or doing other content because they are a group of friends who all picked their favorite classes but this particular raid or dungeon has a HARD requirement for a Ranger CC class and no one rolled that class.
It actually makes no difference, class balance affects both sides equally overall, as in if we have 4 dps classes and they all have the same abilities, same dps output, same passives, same buffs and just call them 4 different names, it will affect both sides but as I have replied previously:
"PvP has no impact on PvE, separate servers, different rulesets, classes will be balanced accordingly without affecting each other, so it is not even an issue." :)
I totally agree on not being all able to do the same job equally, I think there needs to be some give and take going on, you pick a Rogue for slightly better overall dps but then lose out on evasion and FD that a Monk would have etc. (very short and basic example but you get what I mean) :)
Kilsin said:How important do you think it is that classes are balanced? Should some classes be better than others in different areas or should all classes be equal in your opinion? :)
IMO classes must be balanced as good as possible within their respective roles. As in, all tanks should tank comparably well. All "dps" classes should be able to deliver a similar damage output. "Healers" should be able to keep a group alive etc.
That goal can obviously only be reached when the world (that is, the NPCs) is somewhat balanced. If NPCs use a lot of AE or damage shields, melee dps will be inherently disadvantaged. If NPCs are often spell resistant, caster dps will fall behind. Class balance cannot be viewed independently from the game world. On the flipside this means that we as players should not give too much attention to "puppet" parses (dps tests against straw puppets in a city, or similar) as they only show the "optimal" situation.
I don't really care about balance, since I started mmo with Lineage 2, I noticed that I always picked one of the less played classes without knowing it. For me it's more about uniqueness, specialization and context. Let's take the exemples of healer, there's the group healer who will be better at managing AoE, the target healer who will heal for a massive amount but on one target and so will shine against a strong mob targeting the tank, the dot healers, etc.
As long as the class can do what it's supposed to do, for me it's balanced. Well of course if the solo target heal will heal one player at 500hp every 4 seconds and the group one can heal 400hp on all group members every 5s, there won't be a lot of love for the solo heal :p
An other exemple is the class I play on FFXIV, summoner, he has pets and dots, he's suited for solo random encounters or most of bosses, since he can cast his dots and then focus on dodging the AoE. But when you need some burst, he will be awful, on some bosses if all dps are summoners you can leave, it will simply not work. Well with the expansion they tried to give him some burst, so now with a little management of your cooldowns you can help on burt phase too, but you're still far behind a Black Mage. And I'm ok with that, I was even ok when I didn't have burst, I have situationnal pets and dots, and that's good, that's why when you play with a group find you're forced to have at least two dps. Classes are differents so it has meaning to have a diversified group where classes can synergize and compensate the weaknesses of others.
Balanced is a tricky word.
I assume that Pantheon is using the holy trinity of tank, healer, and dps as its class core. My personal preference is that all classes within an archetype should be on par with each other, i.e. all tanks should be able to effectively soak damage. The difference should come in terms of game play where a warrior is physically more tough a crusader may use buffs or minor healing to mitigate the damage. Minor differences like warriors soak physical best and crusaders handle arcane better are fine with me and provide an opportunity for strategy. What I don't like to see in a game is two classes listed as tank, but at end game you discover only one is a viable option. That is a lot of player time gone to waste.
The same would go for healer and dps. Each class should have a unique skill set that they bring to the table which allows them to perform their primary role effectively. A rogue may have the highest burst damage while a monk has better survivability. Minor variations in dps are fine as long as they are offset by a class' specialty like buffs/debuffs. However, if there is too much disparity within an archetype you effectively remove the viability of that lesser class.
As far as secondary roles are concerned I do not think a lot of thought needs to be put into balancing. A druid doesn't need to have the same dps capability of a wizard nor should a crusader heal as effectively as a cleric. Providing primary/secondary archetype tags for classes at character creation would help a lot in terms of players deciding which roles they will be able to fufill.
Again, the focus of the game is to encourage grouping and social interactions. As a healer in EQ I never had a problem giving a shout out and finding a group to fight with for a session. If you balance every class so it can effecitvely solo then you will loose the need to form those community bonds and the game becomes a single player rpg.
IMO classes must be balanced as good as possible within their respective roles. As in, all tanks should tank comparably well. All "dps" classes should be able to deliver a similar damage output. "Healers" should be able to keep a group alive etc.
That goal can obviously only be reached when the world (that is, the NPCs) is somewhat balanced. If NPCs use a lot of AE or damage shields, melee dps will be inherently disadvantaged. If NPCs are often spell resistant, caster dps will fall behind. Class balance cannot be viewed independently from the game world. On the flipside this means that we as players should not give too much attention to "puppet" parses (dps tests against straw puppets in a city, or similar) as they only show the "optimal" situation.
I disagree with this statement...
I don't think all tanks should tank equally well, I think warriors should be best at tanking mobs with high melee damage(quads,flurries) and have the best single target taunt, Crusaders should be the best at tanking caster mobs with some cures/higher resists/stuns/interupts, and Dire Lords should be the best at holding agro on lots of mobs at once.
This creates defined rolls for each tank. On raids the warrior is MT and the DL is on adds, while the Crusader is offtanking the rampage damage while waiting to grab agro when he sees the mob casting a big spell.
You can break up the rolls with the others also...
Clerics - Best healers in the game, most mana efficient and only class with exp returning ressurections.
Druid - Best spot heals and a damage preventing thornshield that also returns some damage to the mob on each hit.
Shaman - Best HoT and slows to prevent damage.
etc...
Thanks for reading,
Kiz~
Sarim said:Kilsin said:How important do you think it is that classes are balanced? Should some classes be better than others in different areas or should all classes be equal in your opinion? :)IMO classes must be balanced as good as possible within their respective roles. As in, all tanks should tank comparably well. All "dps" classes should be able to deliver a similar damage output. "Healers" should be able to keep a group alive etc.
That goal can obviously only be reached when the world (that is, the NPCs) is somewhat balanced. If NPCs use a lot of AE or damage shields, melee dps will be inherently disadvantaged. If NPCs are often spell resistant, caster dps will fall behind. Class balance cannot be viewed independently from the game world. On the flipside this means that we as players should not give too much attention to "puppet" parses (dps tests against straw puppets in a city, or similar) as they only show the "optimal" situation.
Yeah, nice examples Sarim :)
Belmont1 said:I don't really care about balance, since I started mmo with Lineage 2, I noticed that I always picked one of the less played classes without knowing it. For me it's more about uniqueness, specialization and context. Let's take the exemples of healer, there's the group healer who will be better at managing AoE, the target healer who will heal for a massive amount but on one target and so will shine against a strong mob targeting the tank, the dot healers, etc.
As long as the class can do what it's supposed to do, for me it's balanced. Well of course if the solo target heal will heal one player at 500hp every 4 seconds and the group one can heal 400hp on all group members every 5s, there won't be a lot of love for the solo heal :p
An other exemple is the class I play on FFXIV, summoner, he has pets and dots, he's suited for solo random encounters or most of bosses, since he can cast his dots and then focus on dodging the AoE. But when you need some burst, he will be awful, on some bosses if all dps are summoners you can leave, it will simply not work. Well with the expansion they tried to give him some burst, so now with a little management of your cooldowns you can help on burt phase too, but you're still far behind a Black Mage. And I'm ok with that, I was even ok when I didn't have burst, I have situationnal pets and dots, and that's good, that's why when you play with a group find you're forced to have at least two dps. Classes are differents so it has meaning to have a diversified group where classes can synergize and compensate the weaknesses of others.
Yes, your example of FFXIV is pretty much like EQ/VG and how Pantheon will be designed ;)
Azotate said:Balanced is a tricky word.
I assume that Pantheon is using the holy trinity of tank, healer, and dps as its class core. My personal preference is that all classes within an archetype should be on par with each other, i.e. all tanks should be able to effectively soak damage. The difference should come in terms of game play where a warrior is physically more tough a crusader may use buffs or minor healing to mitigate the damage. Minor differences like warriors soak physical best and crusaders handle arcane better are fine with me and provide an opportunity for strategy. What I don't like to see in a game is two classes listed as tank, but at end game you discover only one is a viable option. That is a lot of player time gone to waste.
The same would go for healer and dps. Each class should have a unique skill set that they bring to the table which allows them to perform their primary role effectively. A rogue may have the highest burst damage while a monk has better survivability. Minor variations in dps are fine as long as they are offset by a class' specialty like buffs/debuffs. However, if there is too much disparity within an archetype you effectively remove the viability of that lesser class.
As far as secondary roles are concerned I do not think a lot of thought needs to be put into balancing. A druid doesn't need to have the same dps capability of a wizard nor should a crusader heal as effectively as a cleric. Providing primary/secondary archetype tags for classes at character creation would help a lot in terms of players deciding which roles they will be able to fufill.
Again, the focus of the game is to encourage grouping and social interactions. As a healer in EQ I never had a problem giving a shout out and finding a group to fight with for a session. If you balance every class so it can effecitvely solo then you will loose the need to form those community bonds and the game becomes a single player rpg.
Yes, we are going with the "Quaternity" system incorporating Tank, Heals, Dps, CC/Buffing as described in our FAQ and I agree, we don;t want everything balanced to solo, we want people to interact with other players, other classes, need help and ask for it :)
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/game/faqs/#q10
Angrykiz said:
IMO classes must be balanced as good as possible within their respective roles. As in, all tanks should tank comparably well. All "dps" classes should be able to deliver a similar damage output. "Healers" should be able to keep a group alive etc.
That goal can obviously only be reached when the world (that is, the NPCs) is somewhat balanced. If NPCs use a lot of AE or damage shields, melee dps will be inherently disadvantaged. If NPCs are often spell resistant, caster dps will fall behind. Class balance cannot be viewed independently from the game world. On the flipside this means that we as players should not give too much attention to "puppet" parses (dps tests against straw puppets in a city, or similar) as they only show the "optimal" situation.
I disagree with this statement...
I don't think all tanks should tank equally well, I think warriors should be best at tanking mobs with high melee damage(quads,flurries) and have the best single target taunt, Crusaders should be the best at tanking caster mobs with some cures/higher resists/stuns/interupts, and Dire Lords should be the best at holding agro on lots of mobs at once.
This creates defined rolls for each tank. On raids the warrior is MT and the DL is on adds, while the Crusader is offtanking the rampage damage while waiting to grab agro when he sees the mob casting a big spell.
You can break up the rolls with the others also...
Clerics - Best healers in the game, most mana efficient and only class with exp returning ressurections.
Druid - Best spot heals and a damage preventing thornshield that also returns some damage to the mob on each hit.
Shaman - Best HoT and slows to prevent damage.
etc...
Thanks for reading,
Kiz~
I don't believe they should be completely equal either but they should be able to do their jobs without too much variance, for example, if a Warrior can tank a certain type of mob but a Dread Lord can;t, we start to cause unbalancing issues between class interdependence and that is bad for the game overall, but I do agree with you and think while both tanks should be able to do their jobs and tank most mobs, they should have pros and cons to each class to make them both interesting and better suited to different situations, so the tank/off-tank/multi-tank continually changes without one true top dog tank but that balance is difficult to achieve, so we will have to be careful ;)
I like to think of this as Class Specialty, not Class balancing. Balancing usually applies when trying to be "fair" in PvP where any class can beat any other class based on skills used.
So for PvE, which is the biggest focus for Pantheon, as stated in many spots above, each class should have it's own "specialty" that will allow them to shine throughout the game.
Examples in the simplest sense, very similar to EQ:
Cleric - Best single and group heals in game, best HP buffs
Crusader - Best off tank magic resist, decent back up heals, special buff
Warrior - Best overall tank, best melee mitigation in game, aggro control
Dire Lord - Best off tank multiple mobs, best melee AoE damage in game
Ranger - Best ranged DPS and tracking in game, good secondary utility skills
Rogue - Best melee DPS in game, secondary poison DOT and effect skills, best lock pick
Monk - Best avoidance in game, best feign death class, multiple self utilities
Summoner - Best pet class / DPS in game, great summoning utilities (that are needed / desired in game)
Enchanter - Best mezzing control, best mana regen utilities in game
Wizard - Best magic DPS in game, best AoE damage DPS in game, best ports
Bard - Quickest land travel, Second best messing, buff enhancement class, best overall utility in game
Druid - Only class to dire charm animals, best DS in game, bunch of utility
Shaman - Best slow in the game, best secondary HP buff (stackable), great utility class
As you can see, most any group can get something done, however, certain group make up would make specific situations much easier. So the PvE "balancing" would be, how any group make up should be able to pull off most situations, just some would be much tougher than others. It would be bad if certain classes in a group continually "hurt" the group's situation to achieve their goals. Don't want to always see them yelling "LFG" in specific zones... That is so sad :(
When it comes to class balance, I would like to see all classes be able to fill 2 roles if they choose to equip the right gear & abilities. In this way, you can avoid over supply of a certain role if the player is willing to adapt.
Once a class as been identified as able to do a role, I think the roles should be fairly balanced as to not favor one class over another in the overall scheme of things. I would like to see, as other mentionned, some classes shine at playing vs certain situations (caster/high armor/high dmg/aoe/etc). I would take this further and I would like to see a small edge go to certain classes against certain enemies. Think Cleric & Crusader getting a small dmg increase (10%?) to undeads. Monk & Enchanter vs humanoids, Druid & Rangers vs wild beasts, etc. But if we go that route, then the frequency of these situations needs to be fairly balanced as well.
An example I see often and strongly disagree with, is that warriors should always MT and dire lords and crusaders should be relegated to off tank duties. All tanks should be fairly equals, with dire lords making some encounters easier while warriors and crusaders make other type of encounters easier on their group. But you shouldn't be forced to bring all 3 tanks to get throught a dungeon. Another one is the dmg of monks vs rogues. I think both of their dps should be similar but the classes shine by the utility they also bring. Pickpocket, pick lock, stealth vs evasion, FD. Rogues could also bring more stuns/interrupts while a monk might bring ATK debuffs.
Another fear I have (thanks to EQ) is the abilities of hybrids. I hope hybrids will have their own, stackable if applicable, powers to bring to a party instead of weaker/lower lvl versions of the "parent" class. i.e What a crusader brings to a group should not be disminished if there is a cleric as well since the cleric will overwrite all the crusader's buffs.
In my mind, a group composed of any tank/healer/dps/cc&utility should be able to get thru any content, although some classes might make it easier to beat specific content.
Mekada said:An example I see often and strongly disagree with, is that warriors should always MT and dire lords and crusaders should be relegated to off tank duties. All tanks should be fairly equals, with dire lords making some encounters easier while warriors and crusaders make other type of encounters easier on their group. But you shouldn't be forced to bring all 3 tanks to get throught a dungeon. Another one is the dmg of monks vs rogues. I think both of their dps should be similar but the classes shine by the utility they also bring. Pickpocket, pick lock, stealth vs evasion, FD. Rogues could also bring more stuns/interrupts while a monk might bring ATK debuffs.
Another fear I have (thanks to EQ) is the abilities of hybrids. I hope hybrids will have their own, stackable if applicable, powers to bring to a party instead of weaker/lower lvl versions of the "parent" class. i.e What a crusader brings to a group should not be disminished if there is a cleric as well since the cleric will overwrite all the crusader's buffs.
In my mind, a group composed of any tank/healer/dps/cc&utility should be able to get thru any content, although some classes might make it easier to beat specific contentch:C/p>
I hope you don't just "do" a dungeon... I hope you say well we got a Crusader tank so lets go for the wing with the Froglock Wiz cause he can interupt its spells.
Kiz~
Classes should be balanced around what they add to a group. To avoid having groups only wanting x class with z class to have the most optimal group.
All should fill its main role in a group and then add a little class/race flavor.
For me - balance the classes against their specific role, not across roles.
Classes that tank should all be able to tank; Classes that heal should all be able to heal; Classes that only DPS should all be the best DPS in the game; etc...
Beyond that, if you try to make all classes across all roles somehow equal, you water the game down. You have the same risk making sure all tanks can tank, etc.. as well - so that needs to be guarded against. All should not basically be "Same stuff, different spell effects"
I'd like to see some compelling choices.
For example, maybe one tank is an avoidance tank (thus taking more spikey damage) but holds agro tighter than I hold onto a really good steak sandwich (and that's prettty blasted tight), while maybe another tank is mitigation oriented and suffers more steady damage and is thus easier to heal - but holds agro like I hold onto a balogna sandwich. (still a decent grip, but not nearly as zealous about it as the steak sandwich).
/Agree Wandidar
I like Pyye's example as well, but it created the never ending Warrior vs Hybrid tank whining in EQ. I'd rather have a "Tank" as a Base class, and then the utility that the tank provides differ among classes. Warrior with shouts that increase damage/defense, Dire Lord with lifetaps that heal the group/siphon strength/intelligence, etc., Crusader with buffs/blessings/heals, etc.