Printable View
Tear has been that way for a long time, though, probably four years. I don't think you can use that as an indicator of the current trend in DDO design - unless you're saying that they're making changes now that are similar to changes they made several years ago, which really isn't an indicator of any sort of trend at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Satyriasys
Sure, there's a few abilities that are lower in the enhancement trees than I would have expected, but when I'm designing a character, I still often find that I have to make painful trade-offs. I'm okay with that. I'm okay with moving the low-hanging fruit a bit higher up, too; I can adjust.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigErkyKid
But...
... what I do not like is the idea of forced co-operation (co-operation by your definition, too; others have said they co-operate just fine at the moment).Quote:
Originally Posted by BigErkyKid
I have a very young child; my gaming time is erratic and can be interrupted for long periods at any given moment. If people were depending on me (as they would be in your ideal grouping situation, I think) then they would be left in the lurch if my son needs me. This would make them unhappy, and is the primary reason I solo.
Yes, and raids and 4-lever quests are a mild irritant to me, too. Raids (and this isn't limited to DDO) gate what are generally the best rewards in the game (and also in some cases, the main story of the game) behind cat-herding. I would much rather see very challenging quests as raids, with a variety of difficulty settings determined by group size, a la challenges, and Commendation style rewards. Get X Commendations for beating it on Y difficulty, and give the soloists a crack at the loot and story, albeit more slowly than your groupers.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigErkyKid
As for 4-lever/pad quests, I have soloed a few of them anyway with Hold trickery and the like, but if I can't work around it at all, it's an annoyance.[/quote]
The thing is, you and other people to whom these group dynamics appeal could make four interdependent characters right now - Cleric, Fighter, Magic-User and Thief - and play them in the synergistic way you describe. Your disappointments appear to be that a) not everyone wants to play like that, and b) you don't get special rewards for doing so.
When you've talked about incentivising co-operation, it has sounded a lot like you want to weaken builds that are good at soloing. You may not want to make soloing a very ugly option, but it sounds like your aim is to make it less attractive. I don't want to feel punished for soloing.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigErkyKid
A few months back, I did a couple of Shrouds in a group (at level 28, with other high-level characters :) ). I'm pretty sure we did 1, 3, and 4. And 2, if puzzles count.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigErkyKid
In return, let me bring your attention to the fun test. When was the last time or how frequently does it happen that:
1. You have fun playing DDO?
In my case (more or less) right now. At least, I'm logged in typing this, and I'm going to go do an Epic Sentinels of Stormreach quest before work. I'm tossing around ideas for a beholder-punishing (I'm not bitter) max-SR drow Paladin/Ranger, and a pure Dark Monk to stealth as many quests as I can, in the character planner. I enjoy the game and the variety of builds available to me as a soloist, and it would make me sad if soloing were made punitively difficult because other people like to group.
It seems to me from the other comments in this thread that some enjoy grouping, and some enjoy soloing, and DDO supports both, better than many games I've tried. So I support it, with money. I'm pretty sure I'm not damaging the game, as has been suggested elsewhere in the thread.
Thanks again for your and the team's efforts!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vargouille
Side note related to something you posted previously. If doing an analysis of melees and the effectiveness of their armor/PRR in higher level content, please don't forget how any changes would be applied to Warforged. Since their 'armor' is non-traditional, they've been overlooked in this area in the past. As things currently stand, a Warforged melee needs to take an extra feat to get armor ratings that are still substandard to fleshies wearing actual armor.
Looking forward to seeing you guys at PAX East this year.
You do not achieve class balance by forcing players to work together, or preventing players from soloing quests.
You achieve class balance by making sure that similarly geared characters of any class can group together and feel that they are contributing roughly equally to quest completion.
Although you also have to take into consideration other things a class might give someone other than DPS.
A Ranger gets evasion, ranged and TWF feats, some useful spells... including healing spells and access to spell feats to beef those healing spells up.
Should a Ranger do equal DPS to a Barbarian, who gets none of those extra things? Plus can do even less when raging!
IMO, the classes will never be equal, but each should have strengths and weaknesses.
Barbarians strengths are super DPS.. and other benefits while raged.
High HP. (which should mean something in EE, both against monsters and traps.)
They are supposed to have better saves against traps too.... if the game would allow them to get a high enough Ref save and high enough HP, they would not feel they need evasion for traps.
Rage is suppose to add to For (by Con) and Wil saves.
If those two saves were more useful in the game, Evasion would be less useful, and Barbs would have a significant advantage against certain types of spells. (again, assuming they have ways to get their saves up high enough)
Barbs have Damage Reduction.
Unfortunately, Turbine kept the PnP DR numbers for Brbs despite multiplying monster damage by many exponents.
Barb DR needs to be beefed up! A lot! Maybe by a factor or 10 or more by the time they are running EEs.
Barbs can wear Medium Armor (and use shields)
If Medium armor gave more PRR, Barbs could stand longer in fights. (like they are suppose to!!!!) (and if certain Armor like Mithral Full Plate gave the PRR of Heavy Armor, that would be good for Barbs too.)
(oh, and beefing up shields would help Brbs too... at least by giving them an option for more protection in certain dungeons or situations.)
Epic Destinies: These would be more fun IMO, if every destiny offered something for every class.
Barbs could really benefit from destinies and twists that helped them overcome their limitations.... like no self healing.
Although.... is my memory correct? Do Brbs get the Heal skill as a class skill?
Even if they do not, Brbs get more skill points than most classes.
Find a way for the Heal (and Repair) skill to be more useful to non-casters. Please.
I could go on and say something about every class... but I'm too lazy right now.
But lets take a moment to mention some disadvantages of the all-powerful Sor.
Low HP. Unfortunately, most players of Sorcs pile on the Con, so that this is less of an obstacle.
But if other stats were more meaningful, in theory that high investment in Con means a disadvantage elsewhere. (I think it already does, but most players of Sorcs are convinced that the other stats are useless to them, so maybe something needs to be changed here to make them feel the pain of such a high Con investment)
No Armor!
Yes, they have some magical armor options, but they should be taking a ton of more damage then the guy who has (magical) Plate Armor and a Tower Shield.
Again.... beefing up Armor PRR would help those classes that can wear armor, and bring them closer to balance to the caster gods.
They are suppose to have limited Spells per day (SP).
But... the devs took us down a path that I see no coming back from there.....
Lolths SP drain attack was a move in the right direction though.
Add monsters that are immune to magic. (you soloist Sorcs can pull out a weapon too ya know.)(Or bring a melee hire, like those Brbs have to bring a healer hire)
I'm out of time... but do you see one pattern here?
Armor!
Reducing damage!
it can be the difference of a Sor walking into a room, the door shuts and the Sor is now trapped in a room with no where to run, from an army of magic immune monsters.
And a Brb walking into the same room, and the army of magic immune monsters is now trapped in the room with no where to run from the Barbarian!
That is class balance! ;)
(BTW, I practically hate playing Barbs, and I am not a Sorc fan either. I am a Ranger fan. But I support people being able to have fun with any class they choose to play)
Some people did play, and do play, D&D as hack-and-slash, you know; hack-and-slash is hardly 'far from D&D'. D&D supported many playsty- oh look, an analogy. D&D supported many playstyles, just like DDO does.Quote:
Originally Posted by Satyriasys
As for Tear, I did solo that pre-change, with and without Open Lock. Locking the shrines doesn't punish soloists in particular (some will build for Open Lock, some to endure without resting), it punishes people/groups without access to Open Lock. It wasn't made more solo-friendly, it was made more friendly in general. I'd be surprised if a change like that was made without some careful data mining, though.
This is important!Quote:
Originally Posted by Vamm
(I am not a WF fan either but.....lol)
My impression is that currently, WF cannot get as good an AC as fleshies can. (or PRR etc.)
I think Adamantine (and Mithral) body feats need to be beefed up.
But I am not a WF expert.... just how I think/feel right now. Others may know better than I here.
Quote:
Sure, there's a few abilities that are lower in the enhancement trees than I would have expected, but when I'm designing a character, I still often find that I have to make painful trade-offs. I'm okay with that. I'm okay with moving the low-hanging fruit a bit higher up, too; I can adjust.
But...
First thanks for your answers. I do enjoy talking about it without having to keep the knife out. Now, regarding your joy of soloing. While I can understand, I am fairly sure this is a game build, in principle, mostly around grouping. If it was my decision, soloing would be possible but most likely require some hirelingas.
Now the debate I see is whether in balancing they encourage grouping understood as beyond the simple BYO-everything and every man on his own. Easy ones are:
1. Cleric slas for healing. Not current trade off between fun an heals. (similarly, slas and cheaper buffing spells, increased effectivity of bard songs...)
2. Nerf kiting. Either they do less damage or they avoid less. Both at the same time = soloing FoT.
3. Remove evasion from being a low hanging fruit.
4. Rethink the extend to which self heals are sufficient.
I originally disagreed with someone who said "prevent", not "challenge", and then you disagreed with me. Thus the confusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Qhualor
Disagree. Soloing is good for the game because people who don't want to group are included in Turbine's bottom line. Your vision of the game would drive away paying customers. That makes your vision bad for the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Satyriasys
I rather like the suggestion someone made to include a balance check whenever running backwards or strafing. Fail the check and fall on your a%$. This is an elegant solution that can also be overcome with build choices. Perfect solution, IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by BigErkyKid
I wish I could remember the name of who proposed the idea; it's a good enough idea to merit credit.
Thanks, that's illustrative and similar to my experience. I wish more people would report what is going on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pala-forged
They've traditionally had a bit less ac as a tradeoff for built in DR (at least if we're talking the heavy-equivalent feat, as well as the forged only feat and enhancements that add additional dr/adamantine). In that respect, they suffer alongside the barbs when it comes to damage inflation at high levels, and oversensitivity to dungeon scaling at lower ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Talon_Moonshadow
I would have to disagree with ya here. There is people playing this game that lives all over this globe. Different time zones, different work schedules. I have tried to set up dates and times with players across the pond and its very difficult because of the time difference. I'm USA they are Norway. That's a 6 hour difference. Ok add to it that most of us have wives, kids, pets and whatever and stuff comes up and I or some of us needs to go afk for extended periods of time. So to not hold up 5 other people I choose to solo 95% of the time, as do they. If I cannot solo it even with a hire (except raids) then its just not getting played. I know ALOT of folks who do this because of the same reasons. So to make this into a "group" game would be a bad idea. Yes it would be nice and the option is there IF people can actually sit down undisturbed and uninterrupted for long periods of time. But for the majority of us this is just not an option most of the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Satyriasys
Rangers do suffer a penalty to shots while running backwards. They miss a lot. And I mean ALOT while trying to fire and run. That is why they can get the feat "Shot on the Run" so they can perform this.Quote:
Originally Posted by EllisDee37
Just editing this to elaborate a little more on this feat. In order for a AA Ranger to get the feat shot on the run (Link here: http://ddowiki.com/page/Shot_on_the_Run ) They first have to take Point blank shot (which is a pre req if your going archer) so No big deal there. But then they have to take the dodge feat and give up the critical ranged feat, ok THEN they have to take the Mobility feat and give up the Improved Critical Ranged feat. Then Finally at level 15 they can obtain Shot on the Run. This actually hurts the ranger in the low to mid levels but they can gain at least critical ranged back at around 18 but then Improved critical ranged gets left off. Lets face it the capstone for a pure build AA Ranger just sucks period. As do all the capstones for all the pure builds except the casters. That's why so many people multiclass now days. What most Archer WONT tell you is that they MISS a lot while running and trying to fire their bows. Why? well it makes them look bad. But the shots they do hit with while running and kiting is usually from the manyshots, That's why they draw the aggro. If it was a single shot while running then the monsters would not even give the Archer a thought.
So no more about the nerfing or changing of the way archers kite. Now I cannot speak for the Monkchers they seem to do more damage than a pure build archer does with manyshots so kiting for them may be different.
This ^ is a very accurate point (also made by others in this thread), and very much applies to me. When I was first playing I grouped all the time, ran several guild raids a week, led raids, helped newer players out with training runs etc etc. Life got a lot busier, I took a break from the game, and when I came back I rarely was able to commit in advance to running scheduled raids, let alone play from unbroken stretches of time. My current playstyle (hopping in quest, kill 2 mobs, go AFK for 20 minutes, repeat) is not party-friendly, so I mostly solo. If that wasn't viable, I wouldn't be able to play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam1313
I don't see how making it more challenging for those who run through a dungeon alone to finish a quest improves life and/or the playing experience for anyone else. It seems to just narrow the base of people playing (and paying).
This reads like guild and not pug. When people can't get a guild group together there is an lfm option. Tgeres lots of like minded players with time issues that could use the lfm to find groups.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam1313
It seems to me that the element in this that is bad for the game is the laggy, frustrating experience you get when in a group. If some people solo to avoid that experience, it is a consequence of the frustration but is not itself the element that hurts the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Satyriasys
And that's a development/technical issue, rather than one of balancing the game so that all players can contribute and enjoy their play.
Don't nerf my 100K damage a second build because then I can't beat EE raids dozens of times. If I don't have 100K damage a second then I will be forced to use strategy and cooperation and it would be boring and we might fail a quest and that sucks a lot. I hate not having an easy win button. All players should build monchers like me and they should do it and they should like it and they should shut up about my OP build.Quote:
Originally Posted by RapkintheRanger
Well, makes sense to me... You heard him developers, no nerfs!
That might very well be what balance is. I'd be happy if that was the kind of thing 'balancing' the game achieved. However, it seems to me that there are a lot of people who think balancing the game means something like "add a heal button to barbarians so I can solo quests as easily as this other guy with a monkcher." Since this kind of attitude seem prevalent enough, I figured I'd write a post expressing my disagreement with it, because the folks at Turbine are paying attention to this thread. So, it should be noted that I'm not arguing with anyone, and I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything. I am just stating my preference so the folks at Turbine will know that there are some people who think adding a heal button to barbarians is a bad way of balancing things. I hope there are a lot of people speaking up if they feel this way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Faltout
It used to be that way. Used to be that if you wanted to move and fight you needed spring attack or shot on the run. But nowdays AC is increasingly meaningless for both the characters and the monsters along with much more options for getting to hit bonuses. That said. Kiting wouldn't be an issue if the tanks could hold out against the big bosses. They often can't. And once the tanks are beaten down or ignored all players have left is the kite. ( Unless they can somehow beat down the target's hundred thousand hp quickly before it walks up to them ) People are playing the game as it is presented to them. If kiting is the only path to victory that is what they end up doing.Quote:
2. Nerf kiting. Either they do less damage or they avoid less. Both at the same time = soloing FoT.
Way too late. It was too late when the first wizard character decided to take two levels of rogue so he could evade spells and do traps. Now there are so many splash build characters that the purists may be outnumbered. Too many players to offend with "Elder Scrolls Online" just around the corner.Quote:
3. Remove evasion from being a low hanging fruit.
Many people who solo a lot are doing it out of consideration for everyone else. They have young children, girlfriends or wives, are on call, or have limited time and simply don't want to be the unreliable party member who spends half the quest "AFK".Quote:
This reads like guild and not pug. When people can't get a guild group together there is an lfm option. Tgeres lots of like minded players with time issues that could use the lfm to find groups.
Hey Bud! This is an important question. I hope I can give you a satisfying answer.Quote:
Originally Posted by SirValentine
Here are two important attitudes that inform play styles. According to the first attitude you begin with an archetype/idea of what your character is. You take that archetype (weaknesses, strengths, and all) and try to figure out how that character can achieve goals given its native abilities. This, for me, is the most exciting way to play, and it seems to me that pure class characters with roughly built in strengths and weaknesses afford a kind of baseline for this kind of play that should be preserved. According to the other attitude, you begin with the obstacles you know about in the environment and build a character specifically designed to overcome those obstacles. The idea is not that you see how you can handle the environment given your weaknesses. You figure out how to eliminate weaknesses, not live with them. Multiclassing in dnd has always been a way of doing this and basically I'm cool with it. It should be easy to see why it is generally appropriate for multiclass characters to be more powerful than pure class toons, namely, multiclass characters are typically designed based on prior knowledge specifically to fit the environment whereas pure class characters are designed around ideals whose overall environmental fit is not at all the first consideration.