What's So Good About Balanced PvP

Galwylin · April 2017

In terms of classes. I've never saw the wisdom that one different thing should work the same as a different different thing. Nightblades for instance. Should they be as good as dragonknights in terms of health, stamina, magicka, tanking, healing, damage, etc.? And if they aren't, should the game change? Same for Templars. Should they have all that evenly including being as good as nightblades at surprise openings? And if one doesn't, is that fair to that class? If players haven't all started playing the same class then either all classes function the same in PvP or players like the differences even if that difference means they aren't the best all the way around. So, what's so good about the continual need to balance PvP each month? Eventually the promise land where different things are the same will be reached?

Bouldercleave · April 2017

You are going to get a lot of "opinions" on this. Here's mine:

I believe there should be balance in terms of counterplay - think of a game of rock, paper, scissors. Every class should have a way to counter against each other.

Balance should NOT mean equal in all aspects. Plate tanks should have good defense against stealth and melee attacks, but be weaker against fire and shock attacks. Mages should be able to defend strongly against magic, but be prone to heavy attacks.

You get the point.

It would be ungodly boring if every class was perfectly equal in all aspects.

I know a lot of people think I'm a fanboi, but I think ZOS is doing a horrible job at watering down the classes to "balance" out the small minority that PvP while the rest of the game suffers for it. That being said, I'm also not prone to panic or rage quits before something goes live.

The patch goes live - I play and see what's up - I make my decision to stay or move on. Like a big boy.

Galwylin · April 2017

I was thinking in terms of boxing. We have the different divisions because its not fair to say everyone is the same because everyone isn't. I think WoW uses rock, paper, scissors and they've been balancing for 10+ years. All the while their actual gameplay has remained a bit dull and simple minded. I'd much rather we just all convert to a PvP class that just gets new bars or something. There's no realism in the current method anyway. I hate seeing rock, paper and scissors be used when there are four (so to be five) classes to fall into those roles. There needs to be something other than rock to beat scissors and always lose to paper.

dimensional · April 2017

What's so good about balanced anything?

Bouldercleave · April 2017

WoW uses that method and is the most successful game in the Genre and has run longer than most with very high numbers.

There is a reason for that.

I agree that PvP and PvE must:

1. be balanced completely seperately or
2. The PvE environment must be modified to accommodate a balanced PvP game set up (impossible) or
3. PvP must be eliminated from the game (completely stupid option)

Number 1 is really the only logical direction. PvP and PvE simply cannot be balanced as one when the environments are so impossibly different.

dimensional · April 2017

1 is a terrible direction and I would hate it. PvE and PvP can absolutely be balanced together and I like it the way they are doing it already.

RT_Frank · April 2017

dimensional wrote: »

1 is a terrible direction and I would hate it. PvE and PvP can absolutely be balanced together and I like it the way they are doing it already.

Sure it's "possible" but that's like saying that it's possible for aliens to exist. It's not efficient banking on a procedure, that everybody knows doesn't work, until the slim chance that ZOS acquires some common sense to properly balance PvE and PvP. The 1st method makes wayyy more sense because it's a different procedure that separates PvE and PvP rather than combing them, which is what most PvEers and PvPers want. Having skills, passives, and sets function differently in each scenario would allow any PvP balancing to not affect PvE, which would fix the biggest reason why the last few changes and morrowind have pissed/are pissing a lot of people off.

davey1107 · April 2017

What's good about balanced pvp? How the hell should we know? No one here has ever seen such a thing, lol.

The classes should have core strengths and weaknesses, and I think when people say "balance" they mean that players can scrap in 1v1 without one being superior, while the core differences are maintained. DKs should be tanky and hard to kill, with the offset that their dps is low. Sorcs should have good AOE dps, offset they should have resource management issues for that power. Nightblades have massive single target from stealth, offset they're squishy. Templars get massive heals and buffs, offset to some dps and some resource management.

Like other say, this means that good balance means they're viable, but not equal in all things. A NB shouldn't be able to tank in pvp.

But right now, the CP system and various other game elements have allowed some classes to supremely buff their strengths and overcome weaknesses better than others. DKs can be geared to hit way too hard considering they can have massive armor and health, and ward/heal to full health in seconds. But magsorcs are ridiculously OP, not inherently but with the right setup. They can get tons of magic back, then spam a ridiculous number of wards and heals. They're often running tanker in pvp than DKs. Plus they've been handed ridiculous off the charts power. Overload and the destro ulti allow them to potentially throw out 200,000 damage from one ultimate. IMO, magsorcs should be as squishy as nightblades considering the armor, dps and range abilities.

kevlarto_ESO · April 2017

Even if everyone had the same stats and class, there would still be some people that just play better than others, better internet, quicker reflexes, better situational awareness, better computer, all come into to play, the idea of balance play is giving everyone a chance regardless of your level of skill, like the boxing analogy you don't see a heavy weight beating on a feather weight, for pvp to be healthy in a game both sides of the keyboard need to be having fun, once a game gets overran by elite players cheaters, broken game mechanics and the fun stops for one side then pvp starts to decline, so keeping balance as much as possible is important to long term pvp play.

Blackfyre20 · April 2017

I think it makes for more fun and interesting gameplay, plus makes balancing easier, when classes are different and have different strengths and weaknesses. Everyone wants their class to be able to do everything, which is why there are so many balance issues. DKs are a hard counter to sorcs with wings? So what. Templars are a hard counter to DKs with purge and BS? So what. Picking your class should have meaningful choices and consequences, including being very strong against a certain class and very weak against another.

In my perfect world (with soft caps), DKs get their wings back to hard counter sorcs. Templars are hard counters to DKs with purifying ritual and get their blazing shield back (as in, it is useful without stacking health and therefore hitting like a wet noodle). Give DKs and templars their houses, granting major evasion to ash cloud and maybe change the sacred ground passive to increase shield strength or something when standing in rune or ritual (to synergize with blazing shield). Sorcs are in a good place, I suppose with defensive rune, they could be considered a counter to nightblades (who get their stealth crit bonus back). With the return of soft caps, they get their shield duration back and streak cost should not increase exponentially. And NBs become hard counters to templars with their disease damage and major defile on ult (which becomes unpurgable). NBs would also just get some needed buffs to certain abilities.

Regen becomes important with soft caps and classes get their powerful and unique abilities returned to them.

Nyghthowler · April 2017

dimensional wrote: »

1 is a terrible direction and I would hate it. PvE and PvP can absolutely be balanced together and I like it the way they are doing it already.

Good for you; glad you're happy with it.
I don't PvP, nor do I give a damn about PvP and am tired of having PvE turned up side down continuously as they try to balance every aspect of the game around PvP.
The game already has skills that react differently depending on which setting they are used in, so it is doable to balance the two separately. It would just require extra effort on their part.

jaye63 · April 2017

Assuming there is balance in any pvp is thinking wrong to begin with. You have so many factors outside of the game effect it that unless you limit bandwith to the lowest ISP speed, PC capability and factor in net limiters, etc...you've already stepped outside of balance. And if you DO set it up for actual balance, no one wants to play it.

Balance in PvP will never happen as long as we have different machines and ISPs and routes thru different hubs.

technohic · April 2017

They do feel like they are homogenizing some things. I'm kind of on board with just eliminating classes. Maybe just limit how many different skill lines you can chose

AhPook_Is_Here · April 2017

Galwylin wrote: »

In terms of classes. I've never saw the wisdom that one different thing should work the same as a different different thing. Nightblades for instance. Should they be as good as dragonknights in terms of health, stamina, magicka, tanking, healing, damage, etc.? And if they aren't, should the game change? Same for Templars. Should they have all that evenly including being as good as nightblades at surprise openings? And if one doesn't, is that fair to that class? If players haven't all started playing the same class then either all classes function the same in PvP or players like the differences even if that difference means they aren't the best all the way around. So, what's so good about the continual need to balance PvP each month? Eventually the promise land where different things are the same will be reached?

I think the answer is yes. The real question should be, should tanks out-soak dps, should dps out-dps tanks, should healers out-heal dps. When any class can play any role the classes should be pretty close and the roles should define strengths and weaknesses.

Gilvoth · April 2017

because we nightblades die constantly.
the sorcerers very rarely die.
healers and tanks soak up all the damage put out, then heal themselves and then kill everyone around them = really unfair.

balance means everyone can play fairly.
in eso, we do Not have balance.

KochDerDamonen · April 2017

Not what balanced means.

Balanced means if you put equally skilled players against eachother, the winrate should be close to 50/50 regardless of what character/class they play

Sneaky-Snurr · April 2017

What's so good is the Morrowind patch notes.

Blackfyre20 · April 2017

KochDerDamonen wrote: »

Not what balanced means.

Balanced means if you put equally skilled players against eachother, the winrate should be close to 50/50 regardless of what character/class they play

Trying to balance the game this way is why classes are getting homogenized. There's nothing wrong with classes being strong or weak against certain other classes, as long as strengths and weaknesses are similar in magnitude across classes.

Galwylin · April 2017

Why do game companies bother with introducing classes if they want them to all function in all roles. What world exists where the noted healers in a world can also dps and tank as well as the knights? A class is meant to show that character is very good at a specific set of skills. Knights can absorb damage. Perhaps even return it in kind. But not heal as well as a character that devotes their life to healing arts. At best, all classes should do well at two roles with one being their specialty.

That's what I think would be balanced. Allow classes to be distinct with one major role they fulfill and one they might could step in if needed. But not three because them we'll have to lose the distinction since its not fair for one class to be as good as another in all three roles while they struggle. And so far, I'm not seeing all classes being good in all roles. I've no idea of the mindset needed to balance the classes when you don't make them better at all available roles currently. Making a dragonknight's tanking harder doesn't make the Templar a better tank. It just makes the crowd bigger of crappy tanks.

So, I don't get the constant strive to balance classes when ZOS simply won't balance them in their current state instead of tearing another class down. What I'd like to see is for the ZOS devs to play each class in its thought of role as a group. Your dragonknight tank, Templar healer, sorcerer dps and nightblade dps. Then all of them play a night blade in those roles. If its as easy then on to the next class. If its more difficult or easier, take note. Then fix them for those roles. Then the next. And if you have kept the class distinction as well as made them function well in all roles, I think you may have found the sweet spot of balance. But it feels an awful lot they are like the players, have their favorite class and know it well but the others not as much. I do wonder what class they do play if they play at all anymore.

ScytheNL · April 2017

If class X can oneshot class Y, while class Y can NOT oneshot class X... That's not balanced. Nobody is saying all the things have to be the same all the time, but the CHANCES OF WINNING should be the same with two different classes of the same level.

RadRzRg · April 2017

ScytheNL wrote: »

If class X can oneshot class Y, while class Y can NOT oneshot class X... That's not balanced. Nobody is saying all the things have to be the same all the time, but the CHANCES OF WINNING should be the same with two different classes of the same level.

You are a very honest Nightblade

FlyLionel · April 2017

Galwylin wrote: »

In terms of classes. I've never saw the wisdom that one different thing should work the same as a different different thing. Nightblades for instance. Should they be as good as dragonknights in terms of health, stamina, magicka, tanking, healing, damage, etc.? And if they aren't, should the game change? Same for Templars. Should they have all that evenly including being as good as nightblades at surprise openings? And if one doesn't, is that fair to that class? If players haven't all started playing the same class then either all classes function the same in PvP or players like the differences even if that difference means they aren't the best all the way around. So, what's so good about the continual need to balance PvP each month? Eventually the promise land where different things are the same will be reached?

Sorcerers have shields that they can apply whenever they feel like it, it is very powerful in PVP/PVE. The only real counter to this is shield breaker which no one runs anymore(I'm talking about a direct counter). Nightblades have cloak which is a PVP skill only, other NB's have mark target/pots that allow you to see/AOE that can remove them from stealth etc. If you can manage to overcome those, cloak is still buggy and doesn't work at all sometimes. I'm all for spice of a class and everything but things need to work, magic sorcerer is the prime example, their class is figured out and is good where it is. Time to buff the remaining classes that need it so we can get this Morrowind train going. Instead of figuring out all class balance we get a rehaul on the system like if all of the classes were perfectly fine. We were close to the promised land, all thieves guild was missing was stam ultimates.

t3hdubzy · April 2017

I think the rock paper scissors analogy was taken incorrectly. The classes are not the rock paper scissors. What this means is that every move you make has a counter. If i attack, and you block, you countered my scissors with your rock. If you block, and i fear you, i just countered your rock with paper.

The problem though is that the game allows you to be a rock, paper and scissors all at the same time. Tanks can permablock eith immovability up 100% of the time, while block casting heals. When you couple this together in a group of players who have achieved this, and skills like guard exist, you create fights that are unwinnable for most folks.

I dont have any data but theres probably something like 20 percent of folks who have builds like this, which gives the perception of a huge disadvantage for others who are playing one role only. In turn more people are turning to these builds in order to get even. I have friends in game who change charachters when we encounter these builds to give payback.

This is why i am in favor of major change to the game, but i feel like there are some major holes in the plan.

stevepdodson_ESO888 · April 2017

Bouldercleave wrote: »

You are going to get a lot of "opinions" on this. Here's mine:

I believe there should be balance in terms of counterplay - think of a game of rock, paper, scissors. Every class should have a way to counter against each other.

Balance should NOT mean equal in all aspects. Plate tanks should have good defense against stealth and melee attacks, but be weaker against fire and shock attacks. Mages should be able to defend strongly against magic, but be prone to heavy attacks.

You get the point.

It would be ungodly boring if every class was perfectly equal in all aspects.

I know a lot of people think I'm a fanboi, but I think ZOS is doing a horrible job at watering down the classes to "balance" out the small minority that PvP while the rest of the game suffers for it. That being said, I'm also not prone to panic or rage quits before something goes live.

The patch goes live - I play and see what's up - I make my decision to stay or move on. Like a big boy.

welcome to the new world of grey

but i do agree with you in terms of play and counter-play that makes for a fair and balanced game where people can learn their classes strengths and weaknesses and how to attack other classes with the most effective skills

NewBlacksmurf · April 2017

If it was actually balanced it would be pointless as that removes distinct roles and support/main builds in PvE so it either works for PvE or changes make PvP work but never both in this design.

However

The PvP should be a seperate game and character with different skills, etc.
take for example the game Elite Dangerous which has a CQC (sp) PvP mode where the ships and gameplay are completely seperate.

That model would work very well for this game. Often communities where unique gameplay is seperated truly, results in much better interactions and experiences.

It also allows the developers to address things separately rather that collectively which in this games case, results in waves of ppl leaving or joining

Kay1 · April 2017

dimensional wrote: »

1 is a terrible direction and I would hate it. PvE and PvP can absolutely be balanced together and I like it the way they are doing it already.

But I'm still confused in these forums, he's he trolling right?

I just don't get when people are serious or not

Galwylin · April 2017

ScytheNL wrote: »

If class X can oneshot class Y, while class Y can NOT oneshot class X... That's not balanced. Nobody is saying all the things have to be the same all the time, but the CHANCES OF WINNING should be the same with two different classes of the same level.

That's fine. So, a nightblade can usually win a straight fight 50% of the time? That's what I'm doubtful on. If you're not addressing the shortcomings now, how does taking anything at all feel justified. I don't PvP. I got enough of that in WoW. I think WoW does it better and ESO will never approach them in that regard because they refuse one simple truth. PvP is not PvE. Even the letters are different! That's a clue that hey, this thing isn't the same as that thing.

It seems to be their prevailing view on all aspects of the game. All classes should be like each other and all playstyles should be played like each other. Its dull and its boring. Its would be like WoW deciding its playerbase is so good at PvP now that they should buff the PvE bosses up tremendously to even things out. How would that make sense? Well, in some aspects that's what ESO keeps doing. Balancing the classes due to PvP (for some reason) while actually damaging PvE. AGAIN.

If the problem they are having is their players are beating their PvE content to easily then say so instead of calling it class balance. So far, I'll just play my sorcerer more and more because apparently being better than the other classes is the balance.

Tommy_The_Gun · April 2017

Easiest way ? Just disable all class skill & passives, and racial passives in PvP. Allow only to use weapon, armour and alliance war skills....
I can see better results by doing this rather than seeing ZOS actually "balancing" classes.... xD
( ^ This is a joke ^ )

IcyDeadPeople · April 2017

Galwylin wrote: »

In terms of classes. I've never saw the wisdom that one different thing should work the same as a different different thing. Nightblades for instance. Should they be as good as dragonknights in terms of health, stamina, magicka, tanking, healing, damage, etc.? And if they aren't, should the game change? Same for Templars. Should they have all that evenly including being as good as nightblades at surprise openings? And if one doesn't, is that fair to that class? If players haven't all started playing the same class then either all classes function the same in PvP or players like the differences even if that difference means they aren't the best all the way around. So, what's so good about the continual need to balance PvP each month? Eventually the promise land where different things are the same will be reached?

Balance doesn't mean identical abilities. It means having a shot at making a viable character and having some possible ways to counter the abilities of the other classes.

The class balance will never be perfect, but it is currently pretty good, tremendously improved since launch. We have already reached the "promised land" where you can finally make a viable pvp character from any of the four classes, stamina or magicka, and your choice of light, medium or heavy armor. This was certainly not the case during the first year or so after launch.

Taking into account planned upcoming changes for Morrowind update, I'd say NB needs a bit of a buff along with passives for light and medium armor. Also I suspect a nerf is in the cards for Sorc and Warden.

ScytheNL wrote: »

If class X can oneshot class Y, while class Y can NOT oneshot class X... That's not balanced. Nobody is saying all the things have to be the same all the time, but the CHANCES OF WINNING should be the same with two different classes of the same level.

Any class can one shot. It's a little easier to sneak around and gank if you have cloak, but this is definitely not limited to NB. And if you are worried about getting ganked yourself, just sacrifice an ability slot for radiant magelight (or sacrifice the magicka from inner light for radiant). That alone cuts sneak attack damage in half and removes the stun.
.

ljb2k5_ESO · April 2017

The problem is the same in all MMO's with PVP but also classes that are specialists at certain roles. Balance as it is most easily and often interpreted, is sameness. Specialist classes are specifically different from one another, in function and role. So you see where the clash occurs and why homogenization of classes and their abilities happens in the pursuit of balance. Also there is a problem with PVP and a class/role system; In PVE all roles have a purpose, in PVP only DPS is important because you cannot force actual players to fight the tank, and the healer cannot heal opponents to death. So you arrive at a situation where trying to balance for PVP is inherently going to mess up balancing for PVE, and vice versa. The best option is to make the classes as good at their specialization as possible and convey to players that the game and classes are designed to operate fulfilling various roles in a group, not necessarily to solo. Once a developer starts trying to make every class equally good at all parts of the game, then classes begin to homogenize and become boring.

Hazethemadman · April 2017

Here is my opinion on balancing:
*The asterisks represent 2 different classes

Illustration 1
<__*________=________*__>

Illustration 2
<________*__=__*________>

Both illustrations repesent a balanced game, but illustration 1 is obviously better given that it is diversely balanced instead of the equally balanced illustration 2.

In short, Haze says that classes should have more extreme opposing strengths and weaknesses rather than equal abilites across the board.