What does balance mean to you?

Beardimus

Balance is when the best players on the server run multiple setups. When trials are all Nightnlades and PvP death recaps are all 2H and leathal arrow and everyones on a blade - it's not balance.

IcyDeadPeople

Beardimus wrote: »

Unless you are a DW Magika DD then screw you.

what's the benefit of DW magicka now that staff provides 2nd set slot? Wouldn't DW just be used for cosmetic purpose? Spell damage has been the same as staff for quite some time now.

MinarasLaure

To me it means that I can cover all roles with every class with different mechanics but same results

JobooAGS

ThinkerOfThings wrote: »

srfrogg23 wrote: »

To most people it either means “I’m not top dps” or “that build killed me in PvP”.

I noticed this as well!

b.bredfeldtub17_ESO wrote: »

It means that any build with proper stat optimization to accompany it is capable of competing with any other build of same optimization when played at the same skill level.

Essentially, choices don't affect performance, they just alter how you play the game.

This makes me wonder if people often don't take their own skill level into account.

JobooAGS wrote: »

For pve dps, ranged stam, melee stam, ranged magicka, melee magicka are all viable and are wanted at the top levels

While that seems like a good response, I see the term instead used in opposition to any change to the game. So much so that in the context of these forums it seems to have lost any semblance of its original meaning.

The thing is at the current meta, only melee stam and ranged magicka are wanted at the endgame, pvewise

Ilithyania

what if I told you Balance dosent exist

Ragnarock41

bananas.

Ley

Character 1 *copy*
*paste*
*paste*
*paste*
*paste*
*paste*
...

FakeFox

I don't see how the points you list are necessarily subjective. Of course expressing a opinion always bares a certain subjectivity , but balance/imbalance in performance is a measurable fact.

Pastas

Buff me, nerf everyone else

Kel

It's weird.

You'll see players screaming "Balance your game Zos!!"

You'll also see players screaming "Stop homogenizing your game Zos!!"

Sometimes from the same person...

I mean, it's easy...keep every class the same while being completely different. Please do not take individual player skill into account whatsoever. And forget the fact no MMO out there has ever achieved balance without keeping homogenization at bay. Hasn't ever been done.
/sarcasm over

In all seriousness, they keep working on it and trying, of course they do! And while some games do it better than others, none has gotten it right, nor will they. Balance without making everything the same is like a seesaw, not a scale. That's why we see constant changes with classes/skills.
Playing a MMO, you have to understand to keep class individuality means there will be unbalance. This is the nature of the genre.

dennissomb16_ESO

Balance is when the class you choose to main is fun to play. For min/maxers there will never be balance and for the majority of people who simply play MMOs for fun there is always balance.

Enslaved

"What does the balance mean to you?"

Nerf sorc.

b.bredfeldtub17_ESO

Judas Helviaryn wrote: »

Balance as most players know it is a lack of flavor. A bland, boring, homogenized world where everyone might as well be reduced to one hit point. A game where every single variable is removed, you are never surprised, and competition is dead.

Imbalance is the true balance.

Just because homogenization is the path most developers take because they can't be bothered to spend their precious time constantly numbers tuning doesn't mean it's the only way balance could happen.

The problem isn't that things get nerfed or buffed, it's that they don't happen rapidly enough. We should be seeing WEEKLY tweaks to whatever the top and bottom performers are until they're all relatively similar. And don't do snap reactions either. Small, incremental changes until it's perfect.

Again, this would require at least one dev to dedicate his entire life to just doing this, and game companies seem to not really give a crap about what is the single most important aspect to me, so I never expect it to happen and instead they'll resort to lazy implementations like homogenization, but don't make the mistake of thinking that is actually the only way.

Violynne

VaranisArano wrote: »

Rock, Paper, Scissors.

Exactly. Yet with every single update, we get:

"I'm Rock. I should be able to take out Paper and Scissors."

"I'm Paper. I should be able to take out Rock and Scissors."

"I'm Scissors. I should be able to take out Rock and Paper.

Every. Single. Update.

I don't think people understand what "balance" really means. Every class has its pros. Every class has its cons.

In a one-to--one match, if you're a Rock going against Paper, you should lose.

Sabbathius

To me, balance means classes can perform equally well, albeit in different ways, in all facets of gameplay.

For PvE, there's very simple metrics. Go take a look at the vMA leaderboards for the week. Sorcs and NBs will have full leaderboards. DKs and Templars usually don't go past 50 each. Wardens have even less than that. See the problem? Clearly some classes just don't perform as well, given the same amount of skill and effort on part of player. If someone presses 2 buttons and facerolls their way through vMA on MagSorc, then the class needs to be redesigned to be more challenging. Not necessarily weaker, but more challenging. And so on.

Slightly harder to prove, but if you look at ease of tasks like tanking endgame content (vet DLC dungeons and trials), the main tank is almost always a DK. And there's very good reasons for that. Meanwhile, a Sorc is almost never a main tank, and again there's reasons for that. Needs to be addressed and balanced. And so on, and so forth.

In PvP, for example DK can perform well in a duel, but doesn't do well in open world Cyrodiil. And so on, and so on.

In my view, the game is very, very, very poorly balanced. Not completely broken, but there's a tangible, palpable difference in class strengths in various aspects of the game.

Now, I can totally accept that the game's class system can be hard to balance. Which is fine, but if you can't balance it, abandon the class system! Remove classes, move abilities into a single pool, and let us choose what we want. Many MMOs have done this (EVE Online, etc) with excellent results. This also matches the lore of Elder Scrolls, where we've been able to create a custom class for quite a while, and recent game(s?) had no classes at all. But of course ZOS won't, because they don't want to lose the ability to sell us new classes. Even though it would be just as easy to sell us skill lines (see Psijic skill line). Just do it!


EDIT: I also deeply, strongly disagree that rock-paper-scissors qualifies as balance. It's the complete opposite of balance. With RPS, if you are R and run into P, you just lose. Which isn't entertaining or fun for either participant. The idea that RPS somehow works in group setting is also ridiculous, since every XvX can subdivide into 1v1 + 1v1 + 1v1 = XvX. And if 1v1 isn't balanced, XvX is by definition not balanced. A true balance is when every class is a threat and an even 50:50 win/lose for every other class, all else being equal, in every scenario. You may get to be a threat by different means - pressure vs burst (ESO fails at this, burst is by far the most effective means, and almost always required to get the kill), direct damage vs DoTs, instant heals vs HoTs, etc.

b.bredfeldtub17_ESO

Violynne wrote: »

In a one-to--one match, if you're a Rock going against Paper, you should lose.

That is in no way balance, because that means certain aspects are designed to hard counter other aspects. Should not exist. The hard counter to anything should be player skill and that should also be the sole variable for determining a victor (whether victory is being the top DMG on a fight or winning a duel).

MinarasLaure wrote: »

To me it means that I can cover all roles with every class with different mechanics but same results

This guy has it right.

Saumur11689

VaranisArano wrote: »

Rock, Paper, Scissors.

this

Violynne

b.bredfeldtub17_ESO wrote: »

That is in no way balance, because that means certain aspects are designed to hard counter other aspects. Should not exist.

Which is why people don't understand balance.

MinarasLaure wrote: »

To me it means that I can cover all roles with every class with different mechanics but same results

This guy has it right.

No, what this guy is saying is "I want all the pros, none of the cons, because having my cake and eating it too makes for true balance".

That's insane, and would be an incredibly boring game given no one person can defeat another "all things being equal".

Rock, Paper, Scissors is balance, all things being equal.

Kuramas9tails

I don't believe in balance in ESO.

Saumur11689

If you don't use the rock paper scissor system there will always been a superior choice, aka no balance.

This is why everyone is using the same sets, they are superior in every aspect and content of the game.

ThinkerOfThings

It seems that a lot of people have different theories on what balance in this game means.

Murador178

Game will be balanced the second I am able to win every fight by pressing one button - while my opponents cant even strike back. - 90% of balance forums thread

rfennell_ESO

ThinkerOfThings wrote: »

My question is, what does balance mean to you and what would be you ideal balance if you could make changes to ESO?

Balance is:
There exists a counter to an action that's reasonable.

Fleshreaper

Something like this.
Going clockwise.
Dragon Knights are strong against Sorcerer and some what strong against Nightblades.
Nightblades are strong against Templar and some what strong against Sorcerers.
Sorcerers are strong against Wardens and some what strong against Templars.
Templars are strong against Dragon Knights and some what strong against Wardens.
Wardens are strong against Nightblades and some what strong against Dragon Knights.

minorhero

Balance is where every class has a viable and needed role in leveling, pvp, and end game content.

My example of imbalance goes way back to my first MMO which is EverQuest (the original). Back then the best classes to level were druids and shamens because they could cast a buff that allowed them to run fast. Then they could kite mobs that were 30 levels higher then them. Grinding was the only way to advance in that game so this mattered a lot. In pvp the most viable class was a wizard because they did the most damage that didn't rely on equipment. Since if you died folks could loot your stuff the naked wizard became pretty powerful.

DaveMoeDee

Balance means chaos because some people are never pleased.

generalmyrick

it should mean that if a character with a 2h lands a successful wrecking blow/dizzy swing on me i should have more than a 25% chance to win...it shouldn't mean "seemingly" minutes on the ground getting the *** pounded out of me.

SirAndy

ThinkerOfThings wrote: »

What does balance mean to you?

The longer my wooden stick is the less force i need to match your shorter wooden stick ...

PlagueSD

VaranisArano wrote: »

Rock, Paper, Scissors.

Rock is OP!! paper is fine
- scissors

That's basically what I see on the forums when anyone complains about balance.

To me, balance is basically saying I can do the same DPS on any character with comparable gear. The problem with this is the min-maxers - See above quote. They do not want balance. They want to be able to faceroll anyone in 1v1, Xv1, or 1vX.

Sergykid

when anything has a counterplay. Just like a rock-paper-scissors, but everyone has a rock, a paper, and a scissor. Here comes the skill: when an enemy uses rock, you use paper; when an enemy uses scissors, you use rock, etc.

but in this game, some builds have all, some builds have one. And some builds have two papers and a rock, while others have a rock and two scissors, etc.