COOL Idea #9 = Mathematical Balancing of Skills!

DenMoria

I still say: take away all skills, take away all spells, take away all sets, points, attributes, CP and racial passives.

That way we can all just run around in our small-clothes beating each other with sticks.

generalmyrick

DenMoria wrote: »

I still say: take away all skills, take away all spells, take away all sets, points, attributes, CP and racial passives.

That way we can all just run around in our small-clothes beating each other with sticks.

buffs and nerfs! nobody is seeing this, they only see nerfs.

work with me people, please?

ResTandRespeC

I do not like it.

nemvar wrote: »

I presume your system would somehow differentiate between the stamina and magicka versions of the classes. Even then nerfing things just because they are often used is a stupid idea.

EDIT:
Short list of class skills that will be nerfed:
Every Major Ward/Major Resolve skill except maybe Immovable (notice how this doesn't account for the NB passive)
Cloak
Streak
Igneous Shield
PotL
Surprise Attack
Hardened Ward
Curse

Lets add...
Endless hail
Ele drain
Elemental blockade
Destro ult
Resto ult
Light armor shield
Caltops
Rearming trap
Poison inject
Rending slashes
Etc etc...

DuskMarine

I think _________ would be better. (Fill in the blank.)

this would make everything so useless in the end so itd be better to actually test stuff see whats beyond the power it should be and fix it accordingly

Aesthier

I do not like it.

generalmyrick wrote: »

work with me people, please?

We are working with you.

You made a poll.

We voted.

IT WORKS!

Dredlord

Other.

generalmyrick wrote: »

So, here’s an idea I think would be great!
I start with the premises;
• Most people use the skills that are most effective.
• Balance is the goal.
Every 3 months, patch/dlc/chapter updates, all skills are basically looked at and the following rule is applied.
Let’s say the skill radiant oppression is used by 60% of all templars. This would result in a damage nerf of 10%.
Basically, for every % point over 50 that it is used by classes who can use it a nerf is applied.
In the long term it would lead to a lot more build diversity I think because ignored skills would automatically receive buffs and abused would receive the appropriate nerfs.

Whatcha think?

[removed bashing comment]

Yolokin_Swagonborn

Here's a good rule.

STOP
NERFING
THINGS


why nerf based on popularity? isn't that kinda what ZOS is already doing?

I think we should apply the following mathematical 100% science based formula. Everytime someone asks for a nerf on the forums, it summons a daedroth that backhands them.

starkerealm

I do not like it.

generalmyrick wrote: »

common sense can be used to diff between skills like rapids and x skill.

Common sense has many uses. This thread is not an example. Frequency of use does not equal power, particularly when utility functionality is at issue. Particularly when discussing things that control fundamental class features.

Now, can overuse be an indicator that something should be looked at? Sure. It already is. But, saying, "no, people like this skill, therefore we must nerf it," is a poor algorithm. It also fails to account for players who operate far below top tier, who pick a skill because it "looks cool," or because it's, "fun to use." So, clearly, common sense dictates that we should punish that, because no fun allowed!

How about, no?

usmguy1234

generalmyrick wrote: »

So, here’s an idea I think would be great!
I start with the premises;
• Most people use the skills that are most effective.
• Balance is the goal.
Every 3 months, patch/dlc/chapter updates, all skills are basically looked at and the following rule is applied.
Let’s say the skill radiant oppression is used by 60% of all templars. This would result in a damage nerf of 10%.
Basically, for every % point over 50 that it is used by classes who can use it a nerf is applied.
In the long term it would lead to a lot more build diversity I think because ignored skills would automatically receive buffs and abused would receive the appropriate nerfs.

Whatcha think?

I kinda like this... Could utilize the pareto principle and adjust 20% of the most used skills.

Judas Helviaryn

I do not like it.

Applying rigid rules to an organic framework isn't even the lazy way out. It's just lazy.

I have very few, if any, issues with PVP/PVE balance in this game, but maybe that's because of my attitude towards the, you know.. game.

ɡām/Submit
noun
1.
a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.

usmguy1234

Judas Helviaryn wrote: »

Applying rigid rules to an organic framework isn't even the lazy way out. It's just lazy.

I have very few, if any, issues with PVP/PVE balance in this game, but maybe that's because of my attitude towards the, you know.. game.

ɡām/Submit
noun
1.
a form of play or sport, especially a competitive one played according to rules and decided by skill, strength, or luck.

Lol math rules the universe...I guess it's lazy and not diverse either.

Zagnut123Zagnut123

I do not like it.

generalmyrick wrote: »

Zagnut123Zagnut123 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure ZOS has some internal undisclosed means to flash out skills that are to OP. that being said having mandatory blanket requirements to buff and debuff in certain percentages to me seems like a really lazy way to do business. The game would need to be far more cookie cutter for that to work out well imo.

true. sometimes lazy is more efficient!

I cant disagree with your logic there lol. I think I know what you want, which is classes or skills that go unused for years to not be a thing. I just dont know if a flat rule is necessarily the best way to approach this. But honestly I have no ideas to counter propose so your proposal is better then anything I have lol.

SlippyCheeze

Other.

Zagnut123Zagnut123 wrote: »

generalmyrick wrote: »

Zagnut123Zagnut123 wrote: »

I'm pretty sure ZOS has some internal undisclosed means to flash out skills that are to OP. that being said having mandatory blanket requirements to buff and debuff in certain percentages to me seems like a really lazy way to do business. The game would need to be far more cookie cutter for that to work out well imo.

true. sometimes lazy is more efficient!

I cant disagree with your logic there lol. I think I know what you want, which is classes or skills that go unused for years to not be a thing. I just dont know if a flat rule is necessarily the best way to approach this. But honestly I have no ideas to counter propose so your proposal is better then anything I have lol.

Mmmm, I agree with Zagnut, on the basis that this is true of every MMO -- the developers invest a lot of time and effort into balance, which is very hard.

The only improvement on the original I can imagine would be, instead, to use something sort of machine learning to try and deal with the enormous number of dimensions to the problem, but I don't know it would be easy to define the desired outcome?

AdicusDio

Bad idea. As a stam player, I can't even use magika-based attacks as the damage is greatly reduced vs. a stam morph or stam counterpart and their CP branches greatly penalize you with their limited pooling and disparate % increases (compare 100 into mighty vs. 100 into light/heavy attack; it's already at the ragged edge w/o the magika counterparts even considered so you'd see large drops here just to slot magika-based skills and have them even do anything). Within the stam-based attacks, only a handful are useful on either mobs or single target, or rarely the amount of stam used on an attack needs to be considered i.e. attack D requires 2k and does better/similar damage as attack E that needs 3k. Then you have to factor in that some attacks buff or add a buff, or introduce a passive or passive bonuses, that again, greatly help overall vs. a generic attack from another skill line.

TBH, the game itself pigeon holes you into using what works and ignoring the garbage, mainly from the passives that certain skills add along with the damage output (why use an attack that does 4k crit damage when another does 18k non crit?). Then it compounds the problem by not even adding more choices, so you always see the same attacks being used. I'd love to see a cross-bow skill line (they have 4 different staves for magic but only a bow for physical not counting the fighter's guild cross bow) and more attacks added to the bow skill line. Some are already in the game, as I've seen mob archers use an oil variant of EH that they always yell out (light it on fire) which would be neat to have a fire enchant light off from a fellow player; basically copy the seige weapons to a bow. They could also do a disease/poison morph of EH, or add another tier of morphs, etc. etc..

So, instead of nerfs (that realistically penalize you for leveling up because every time a nerf is added it essentially rolls you back as if you were a lower level often negating any cp increase they've added- very sneaky tbh) that punish you for using what's available, they could either separate the magika/stam cp lines completely (allowing same cp allocation for both options to give players a bigger tool chest) which would at least allow slotting different stuff w/o a severe penalty, and/or they could add more attacks to already established skill lines and/or expand the morph options/tiers adding more variety/versatility. Even the new Psijiic skill line, while having a couple interesting skills, penalizes you because of what you aren't slotting.

starkerealm

I do not like it.

I'm just going to put this one out there, doing the opposite is a good idea. That is to say, looking for skills that no one uses and improving those skills. But, ZOS already does that.

nemvar

I do not like it.

ResTandRespeC wrote: »

nemvar wrote: »

I presume your system would somehow differentiate between the stamina and magicka versions of the classes. Even then nerfing things just because they are often used is a stupid idea.

EDIT:
Short list of class skills that will be nerfed:
Every Major Ward/Major Resolve skill except maybe Immovable (notice how this doesn't account for the NB passive)
Cloak
Streak
Igneous Shield
PotL
Surprise Attack
Hardened Ward
Curse

Lets add...
Endless hail
Ele drain
Elemental blockade
Destro ult
Resto ult
Light armor shield
Caltops
Rearming trap
Poison inject
Rending slashes
Etc etc...

I was just talking about PVP but yeah those things are definitly 'overused' in PVE.

Juhasow

If balance would be that simple even Wrobel would've handle it.

LordSemaj

This sort of balance method would result in the least used skills in the game being the strongest. So everyone will be busy trying to create a unique skill combination composed of the lamest powers in the game. That werewolf lightning-based magicka tank will actually be strong because he's using skills no one cares for.

Drdeath20

I do not like it.

Because for starters whats gonna stop people from making a mockery out of it. Its very simple to make alts.

Secondly just about every original skill/morph in this game has been adjusted multiple times and their is still a sea of difference between the ones that are truely valuable and the ones that are less desirable. Nerfing the usefull morph to make the other morph more desirable just does not work. ZoS already tries this all the time and it does not work. Trying to get templars to use healing ritual instead of BoL. Sorcs with crystal blast over frags. Etc..etc...

generalmyrick

LordSemaj wrote: »

This sort of balance method would result in the least used skills in the game being the strongest. So everyone will be busy trying to create a unique skill combination composed of the lamest powers in the game. That werewolf lightning-based magicka tank will actually be strong because he's using skills no one cares for.

it wouldn't be one time occurrence so i dont think so.

1. lame powers are only lame because they are weak. over time they would grow strong and then when they are overused a touch, theyd come back down.
2. overused powers by everybody would, at first, receive severe reductions then slowly be buffed to equilibrium...

but i don't think anybody is reading anything i write :-)

somehow "balance" only means nerf to most folks. oh well.

Kingslayer513

I do not like it.

This would legitimately kill the game. Because everybody just LOVES to completely rebuild their characters from scratch every patch. Might as well just throw class spammables into the rubbish heap with this idea.

Apherius

I do not like it.

Let's nerf Twillight Matriarch because nobody use the twilligh tormentor.

a 865% nerf sound fine, then both choice will be interesting if you plan to annoy people near guild merchants cause it would be the only use for this pet.

generalmyrick

Apherius wrote: »

Let's nerf Twillight Matriarch because nobody use the twilligh tormentor.

a 865% nerf sound fine, then both choice will be interesting if you plan to annoy people near guild merchants cause it would be the only use for this pet.

Why would one skill be nerfed because a different isnt used?

Lets not do that! :-)

dodgehopper_ESO

I do not like it.

This suggestion neglects to recognize that certain skills are core to a class by the very nature of how the devs built the class.

generalmyrick

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

This suggestion neglects to recognize that certain skills are core to a class by the very nature of how the devs built the class.

If the skills are at the core by design...why are they an option and not fixed to the skill bar(s)?

Like wheels are at the core of car design because the car uses them to move.

dodgehopper_ESO

I do not like it.

generalmyrick wrote: »

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

This suggestion neglects to recognize that certain skills are core to a class by the very nature of how the devs built the class.

If the skills are at the core by design...why are they an option and not fixed to the skill bar(s)?

Like wheels are at the core of car design because the car uses them to move.

Ok lets clarify. Lets say you design a class which apparently the Devs want to mostly just be good at healing and nothing else. You then have some weird niche tank or dd builds for that class. Since 80% of players of that class play as a healer, there are core skills that they will use. Ergo, those skills must be nerfed. Ergo, the class becomes a piece of ***. Its not rocket science really.

I'm going to further elucidate this for you as well. Some classes by nature have a following behind them of players who want to play them generally as 'Tank' or 'DD' or 'Healer'. Because of this they're going to have players use certain skills more than others. This doesn't make those skills 'unbalanced' or 'wrong' or 'overpowered'. There is a qualitative problem to your system.

I'd like to add that I like the spirit of what you want to see happen: Tanking, DD (Stam or Mag), and Healing all be fairly well strong on any class. The Diversity of choice I like. I simply think how you want them to go about it is not quite right.

generalmyrick

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

generalmyrick wrote: »

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

This suggestion neglects to recognize that certain skills are core to a class by the very nature of how the devs built the class.

If the skills are at the core by design...why are they an option and not fixed to the skill bar(s)?

Like wheels are at the core of car design because the car uses them to move.

Ok lets clarify. Lets say you design a class which apparently the Devs want to mostly just be good at healing and nothing else. You then have some weird niche tank or dd builds for that class. Since 80% of players of that class play as a healer, there are core skills that they will use. Ergo, those skills must be nerfed. Ergo, the class becomes a piece of ***. Its not rocket science really.

Crystal clear.

Who ever created and changes the skills is always correct? I can see the logic there...ownership does give control.

This comment kind of closes the discussion and im ok with that.

webrgesner

I do not like it.

The way i look at it, is that every classes are unique. I see magblade being SUPER strong in pvp but they haave weaknesses and you can always outplay them. Some classes has harder times beating other classes but can kill a certain class easily. Like stamblades can have a hard time killing magsorcs but stamblades can kill a warden or stamdk easily. Stamplars can beat magsorcs as stamplars are magsorcs weakness. Theyre all unique in all diffrent ways even if some skills are mor stronger than the other but just because youre using a strong class doesnt mean youre going to be good at it. Its all on builds, setups, your burst, defense, offence, cp, and your playstyle. So no. If you make everything balance then itd be boring. Like equalizing their main attack dmg. Basically making surprise attack, jabs, whip, and frag hit the same amount of damage for "balance" is absurd

dodgehopper_ESO

I do not like it.

generalmyrick wrote: »

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

generalmyrick wrote: »

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

This suggestion neglects to recognize that certain skills are core to a class by the very nature of how the devs built the class.

If the skills are at the core by design...why are they an option and not fixed to the skill bar(s)?

Like wheels are at the core of car design because the car uses them to move.

Ok lets clarify. Lets say you design a class which apparently the Devs want to mostly just be good at healing and nothing else. You then have some weird niche tank or dd builds for that class. Since 80% of players of that class play as a healer, there are core skills that they will use. Ergo, those skills must be nerfed. Ergo, the class becomes a piece of ***. Its not rocket science really.

Crystal clear.

Who ever created and changes the skills is always correct? I can see the logic there...ownership does give control.

This comment kind of closes the discussion and im ok with that.

If they had done what I wanted there would be no classes at all, just skills. Weapon Lines. Warrior unique skills. Tank Skills. Alteration. Destruction. Restoration. Mysticism. Conjuration, etc. This would have been how a proper Elder Scrolls game would have been built I think. This game is an MMO. We're at the mercy of the developers here and that's all there is to it. I really hope you don't take what I'm saying as a knock just trying to convey my perspective. The way they designed classes itself has created a can of worms they haven't been able to deal with since Beta. (and I say all this while I still enjoy the game).

generalmyrick

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

generalmyrick wrote: »

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

generalmyrick wrote: »

dodgehopper_ESO wrote: »

This suggestion neglects to recognize that certain skills are core to a class by the very nature of how the devs built the class.

If the skills are at the core by design...why are they an option and not fixed to the skill bar(s)?

Like wheels are at the core of car design because the car uses them to move.

Ok lets clarify. Lets say you design a class which apparently the Devs want to mostly just be good at healing and nothing else. You then have some weird niche tank or dd builds for that class. Since 80% of players of that class play as a healer, there are core skills that they will use. Ergo, those skills must be nerfed. Ergo, the class becomes a piece of ***. Its not rocket science really.

Crystal clear.

Who ever created and changes the skills is always correct? I can see the logic there...ownership does give control.

This comment kind of closes the discussion and im ok with that.

If they had done what I wanted there would be no classes at all, just skills. Weapon Lines. Warrior unique skills. Tank Skills. Alteration. Destruction. Restoration. Mysticism. Conjuration, etc. This would have been how a proper Elder Scrolls game would have been built I think. This game is an MMO. We're at the mercy of the developers here and that's all there is to it. I really hope you don't take what I'm saying as a knock just trying to convey my perspective. The way they designed classes itself has created a can of worms they haven't been able to deal with since Beta. (and I say all this while I still enjoy the game).

Im not mad, you made valid points. :-)