Player Character Balance

[Uska]

Other than both of the caster destinies, and the bard destiny, and shadowdancer. My arti has gone through all of the destinies getting fate points and the shiradi is only okay, it only has real strong bonuses for the crossbow. Arti's are a LOT more than a crossbow, people really need to wrap their tiny brains around that fact.

A lot of people have posted about monk and monk builds, here's the thing, monks aren't allowed to multiclass, that's why they keep breaking DDO. Monks are supposed to be able to stand side by side with a character in expensive awesome gear and hold a candle to that person in the nude. As a penalty for this they are supposed to shirk material possessions (like epic gear) and they are heavily penalized, losing all of their monk abilities if they multi out of monk even once, a few exceptions include monk specific prestige classes and classes designed with hybridization in mind, but nothing from the core books.

So while you're leveling yes, monks have a lot of well balanced power that makes them play very smoothly once you get the hang of them, a lot of the time they are even quite OP. However, once we get into the epic levels those sharp contrasts begin to really fade away, monks remain viable, and when well built they're down-right pretty powerful, but they never have and I fear never will hold a candle to ranged characters, certainly not after recent updates.

I can't address ever issue of balance in the game, I can't speak from every viewpoint. I can say though, as a melee who loves epics, it is RIDICULOUS to try to be useful in an EE party on a monk, our epic DR from class levels, USELESS, PRR, well it's pretty tough to push it past like 70 on a monk, so again, useless, AC, tough to get above 140 on a monk, heck, mine's at 110 and that was tough, once again, USELESS. Then to top it all off there's no epic HP booster monks can pick up, no way to get an extra 20% health like a fighter or paladin, so they're a heavy melee without any heavy, it works okay as long as defensive stats are beneficial, but when enemies seem to have a guaranteed hit rate (seriously my pali has a 160 AC buffed up and he is NEVER missed in EE) and they're dealing 1/4 of your HP per hit (most of the mobs that get on me in EE on a monk are swinging for like 250+) well it's just a recipe for disaster, and it's no fun to run up smack things twice and flee in terror to behind a wall of self healing 900 HP casters, and bows that inflict every status effect in the game and explode for a kadrillion damage every 2 minutes.

If you want game balance you have to start thinking of the fact that melee is something people enjoy. There may be fewer melees these days than ever but that's exactly what is going to happen when you make a build like the Fury Shot so tremendously overpowered.

So this will anger people, make FotW only effect melee, that was the original idea, it seems plain to see that the idea was for barbs to have another type of stackable rage, however we have resulted in a setup that's simply an easy button, and there should never be an easy button. But then again let's be honest, FotW was a bad idea in the first place, it was obviously going to make a HUGE shift to the game balance and it was broken at the moment of it's inception. I say ditch it all-together and replace it with something similar so those builds can still function, but far more restricted so that the easy button build no longer exists (other than every W/F arcane but that's a dead issue at this point.)

In summary I think melee has been overlooked in recent updates, leading to a serious disadvantage in upper tiered content, disadvantages are fine, some classes should have an easier time with some quests, sometimes it's better to be ranged, these are facts. However everyone who builds carefully and plans well, has a bit of luck and good decision making on their gear, they should be able to stand up in EE, if really truly well built they should be able to thrive with a friend or two. I don't think EE should be a solo run, but I also don't think it should be impossible to duo if you have for example, a paladin and a monk, or a melee ranger (I know unheard of these days) and a bard. DDO was designed with the original pnp goal of being all inclusive, making it possible for any type of player and any type of playstyle to at the very least approach a difficult quest, fair that some playstyles take longer to make progress, and some simply aren't as tough as others, but the simple fact remains that many aren't viable options at all after level 10-12, the game makes a sharp and sudden incline and build styles that aren't heavily defensive start finding themselves in trickier and trickier positions. Yes archers and mages should have to duck and dodge enemies, it's always been the policy that ranged characters kite things around annoyingly, lol. However a class intended to be a heavy melee, like a barb, monk, fighter, or paladin, should not be completely destroyed at that impasse and should if built well be just as viable in end game epics as it is in mid game raids. That however is not the case.

In summary, the biggest balance breaker to me is that the ranged DPS has skyrocketed over the last two years, and it was already nothing to scoff at, with defenses and difficulties also changing so dramatically melee builds are nearly useless in end game, that's a problem. I like ranged and I like casters, but I also like melee, and my favorite job is tanking, which is very disheartening when that's an impossibility because of crazy inflated mobs.

Please pardon my spelling and grammar, I've just woken up.

Actually in pnp monks are allowed to multiclass but once they take any class other than monk after their first monk level they may no,longer gain. Monk levels if they did that here it might reduce some people splashing monk but not many.

[mikarddo]

It is flawed, but it is also the best measure we have (it is the only one). I use kill count the same way as you describe: if I'm 4X the rest of the party combined, I know that I'm doing well, but I also need to be careful if I run out of spell points because the backup DPS is much lower. When someone is about the same kill count as me, I'm challenged to bring my A game. When someone is 2X my kill count, I'm watching to see what they do, how they are built and trying to learn what I can.

Completely agree. Removing the kill counter even flawed as it is would be a mistake imho. If it could be changed or augmented to show total damage as well that would be ok but its not something I consider terribly important either.

The kill count in itself isnt bad - its what you do with it. If someone uses it badly or lets it bother them that others use it badly thats not the fault of the kill counter.

Sorry for the derail which isnt a complete derail anyway as kill counts are a way to make it known when balance might be broken.

Anyway, back to the regular show. I am very curious how the Devs will pick up after posting such a thread just before the weekend and its plainly Monday now (evening here, but prime time work hours for the Devs).

[Cardtrick]

Anyway, back to the regular show. I am very curious how the Devs will pick up after posting such a thread just before the weekend and its plainly Monday now (evening here, but prime time work hours for the Devs).

Ha, if I was Vargouille at this point I would close my eyes, mouse over the close button on the thread, click it, shudder, turn away, and never think about posting another forum thread again.

There's probably a good reason I'm not a game developer.

[Kaytis]

I have always had the assumption that nerfing blitz/furyshot/whatever would go hand in hand with nerfing mob hp and damage in EE. (EH seems about right.) If they actually nerfed the OP abilities but didn't adjust EE, that would be a tragic mistake.

And yet, sadly, we all know that this is exactly what will happen. They will not just nerf all the things, they won't do anything about EE content. Instead of just some builds being viable, maybe only one will be, or not even that.

If they want to encourage build diversity, they might want to consider just reducing the incoming damage from EE mobs. If it is not possible to handle a few seconds of contact with one, then the only builds people will take in to EE are the ones that don't come into contact with the mobs. If it is possible to survive contact, maybe more builds would be viable and people could play the classes they like instead of the ones they are being pigeon-holed into.

[macros123]

Focus on the fundamental flaws in your design of content.

Making changes to the ED's, Enhancements, and classes is only adjusting the symptoms and does nothing to address the root cause of the issues. There are changes needed, to be sure, but it will gain you little in the end if you don't look at the PROBLEMS. Monster HP, their saves, their "to-hit", their damage, and to a lesser extent traps are pushing people into certain builds. Let's look at this objectively. The fact is a blitzing barbarian with an eSOS WILL do more DPS than an AA in Shiradi, but when the barb is dead because he has no defenses, the AA will live on killing mobs, and is thus way more effective.

You will only force people to make new race/class/ED combinations that will be considered the new "best" if you don't put some effort into addressing the root problems.

[Timap]

As Barb was young, he had fun. Me did hit all the bad guys on the head, yes yes. Also found a nice shiny big axe that play nice with muscles.
But Barb here not like ranged characters, as they make me run a lot. Feet already hurt. Also not like bad guy that makes ouch to me.
Me tried throwing big axe, but missed and was not returning. Now sit with this Pally guy in the corner and play dice while others have fun.

This is funny, and accurately summarizes the problem. Ranged is not only OP, it interferes with melee play and is actively anti-social. People who enjoy the social aspects of the game (healer-tank husband/wife pairs typically, and some monkchers/shiradis are actually also rather nice people) are not able to play socially at EE levels. If there is 1 ranged toon in the party, a melee toon stands a slim chance of killing a few mobs not being kited by him. If the number of ranged toons is greater than half the party, then melees can reliably sit back, relax, and watch the show, because there is no way they can catch up with all the running mobs. So once the number of ranged toons reaches a critical level, there is no point in adding non-ranged toons. EH does not demand group play, but in the one difficulty level where group play actually makes quests go faster, you need only ranged toons. Some of the really sociable elite players have respecced into evasion/dodge monk builds which can tank at EE and thus help other melee/healing toons, but most people will just try and find other ranged toons to group with at EE.

The Devs probably believe that this end-game social situation will lead to increasing player bleed from the game, and want to rebalance to prevent this. I will add here that the problem is problem more serious than they think, because once the number of ranged toons cross a critical threshold, I predict massive exodus of players who have no interest in playing ranged toons. And there are many people who just want to be a dwarf and swing an axe, and have no interest in arrows. But Devs have gotten A LOT MORE COMMUNICATIVE recently, and this is an encouraging sign.

There are 3 ways to balance

1) Buff many classes. Varg has already ruled this approach out, on the basis of excessive resource usage. This is a very good idea. Aside from resource consumption, making multiple changes at once vastly increases the number of possible bugs and exploits, will likely introduce more FoTM builds, and invalidates all the information about game balance the players have accrued thus far.

2) Nerf/buff selected abilities. Least resource usage, and least chance of introducing bugs. I add 2 suggestions 1) Always introduce some buffs along with some nerfs. If you just nerf, quests become harder to complete, low morale will set in, and people will accuse you of breaking their already-paid-for monk class etc. Give players some reason to cheer amid the inevitable grumbling. 2) Publicize nerfs/buffs on the forums way in advance. Some people will threaten to leave as you break their toons, some will be serious while others will be faking, but you will have actual data in the form of log in stats and the kinds of toons being played more often pre- and post-publication of said nerfs/buffs. Potential problems will be spotted, and if the player hemorrhage proves to be higher than anticipated, you can always rescind the changes.

3) Nerf/buff monsters. Likely very labor intensive. But potentially will upset the player base the least, since from a psychological perspective, many players will not notice these changes. An approach worth considering. And since you guys just collected feedback on monster behavior/stats anyway, might be the way to go.

[blackdoguk]

If anything Blitz needs a serious buff in stability. It's been brought up by other posters but why on earth would you consider decreasing the power of the destiny that makes melee characters compete in EE? Where are the posts on the forums that have people up in arms about Blitz?

Having run the Fire Peaks raid a good few times now it's obvious that the design merits constant movement. Stationary meleeing of mobs is a death sentence. Even if you clear the yellow blast radius, have sheath, the prism cloak and firestorm greaves equipped chances are the splash damage will kill you. (Why you would bother to put down a blast marker that doesn't cover the entire damage area baffles me but that's for another thread.)

The mechanics of that raid and massive trash spawns means that at all times something is being kited. Frantically chasing after mobs on one or two stacks of blitz is really not fun especially on a TWF, in fact it's hazardous to my health. I'd be happy for a slight reduction in damage in exchange for a little more stability.

[Hathorian]

Remember that there are certain skills that require you to get kills to charge them up (the Druid's Fatal Harrier, for example), so removing the kill count isn't going to stop people coming in and last-hitting by a long shot. Nor will it stop people who want to be a hero from trying to be a hero. The kill count's a flawed but informative way of showing how well you're performing.

If you want to add something for bragging rights, I think adding in a "total damage dealt" counter would offer a better representation of effectiveness in battle.

Anyway, this is also a bit off the original topic.

That would be fun to also include a total damage dealt counter. I'd like that though I think there are many who wouldn't.

[Ancient]

Kill count seems to be a competition for some people. That's just silly in a PvE game.

Teamwork and tactics should be more important than kill count, and yet I constantly hear people brag about how many kills they've gotten. It doesn't prove anything but that you're (in most cases) not a team player.

Kinda of a catch 22. I don't talk about kill count (mine or others) in party chat, so you never know I'm using it how I'm using it unless you are one of the handful of people I send a tell afterwards telling them that they rocked that quest.

Knowing kill count doesn't suddenly render you incapable of teamwork.

[danotmano1998]

Hi.

The problem is not in nerfing/balancing characters.
The problem lies in nerfing/balancing quests and mobs.

When the only viable option in the top level content is just not to ever get hit, period, you tend to foster imbalance.
Take a look at some of your CR's, monster hit points, and saves.

You guys make bosses that have hundreds of thousands of hit points and can do more damage on a single hit than most builds can even achieve hit point wise and are seriously considering nerfing player abilities?


NOBODY that plays this game wants a round of improperly worked balance passes simply because it's quicker or easier.
Had these things been balanced more properly from the beginning, none of this would even exist as a "problem".

The reason the game is in the state it is now is simply because of the history of half-fixes that DDO is known for.
Adding another balance pass that is another half fix is asking for disaster in a long sad history of disasters.


Please stop making me redo my characters over and over and over and over again and instead focus on the content side of things. Make properly scaled monsters with appropriate challenge ratings, balanced saves, and reasonable hit points to start with. Then do a balance pass or two on some of the old stuff and stay with it until it's done. THEN we can talk about character balance.

[Cordovan]

Whew! Just wanted to thank everyone who has participated so far. This thread and topic has been extremely interesting and valuable, and we're really pleased with the results so far. Thank you for staying (largely) on-topic and for keeping things civil and productive.

I did want to answer the criticism about the survey not including multi-classing: Yes, that is correct. The survey focuses on things that fit best into a numbered survey format. Which is why this topic isn't a survey, nor a thread, but is rather both. Discussing the complexities that multi-classing brings to the mix is best done outside of a survey format, such as this thread. Thanks!

[Delacroix21]

Whew! Just wanted to thank everyone who has participated so far. This thread and topic has been extremely interesting and valuable, and we're really pleased with the results so far. Thank you for staying (largely) on-topic and for keeping things civil and productive.

I did want to answer the criticism about the survey not including multi-classing: Yes, that is correct. The survey focuses on things that fit best into a numbered survey format. Which is why this topic isn't a survey, nor a thread, but is rather both. Discussing the complexities that multi-classing brings to the mix is best done outside of a survey format, such as this thread. Thanks!

Any words on consideration to nerfing EE monsters a bit?

[Ancient]

Not really it just means you hit the monster last I have seen hundreds of cases where myself or others have beaten monsters to a sliver of their lives and someone come in a finish them off and then brag how high their count was and don't say that's tactics as we have sometimes found ways to leave those same characters on their own in a mass of mobs and soon they are a soulstone. Changing or eliminating the kill count counter would at least stop that baloney.

If you think eliminating kill count would suddenly bring about world peace (or party unity)... then you are out of touch with reality. The issue of jerks bragging will continue with or without kill count and is a completely different issue.

Yes kill count is flawed, but as I said earlier... it is the best we have. It also is somewhat accurate. When I'm more than double the kill count of the rest of the party COMBINED... it wasn't just a lucky hit. When that same build, different party has another player who is double my kill count... that was not a lucky hit either. I've even had the strange situation where I was more than 2X the kill count of four of the other party members combined... but this druid staff build was 2X my kill count. Made me rethink what I thought I knew about staff builds.

The fact that many players in the game are quiet about kill counts and at most just send someone a tell "great job" when they were overwhelmingly ahead means that the most visible use of kill count are the jerks you describe. The same jerks would still find a way to be jerkish... and the polite players wouldn't have anything nearly as good to replace it.

[zwiebelring]

Whew! Just wanted to thank everyone who has participated so far. This thread and topic has been extremely interesting and valuable, and we're really pleased with the results so far. Thank you for staying (largely) on-topic and for keeping things civil and productive.

I did want to answer the criticism about the survey not including multi-classing: Yes, that is correct. The survey focuses on things that fit best into a numbered survey format. Which is why this topic isn't a survey, nor a thread, but is rather both. Discussing the complexities that multi-classing brings to the mix is best done outside of a survey format, such as this thread. Thanks!

Just to put some more emphasis on sirgogs' statement and Ellis':
Nerfing character abilities without scaling down mob stats will be a nerf like many fear but somehow expect. Tuning down certain abilities is not a cry for them to be OP rather a cry for them NOT to be the only viable/fun option, since many feel, melee characters or oldschool characters (pure lvl. 20 class x e.g.) are not contributing within the context of self sufficiency and what is needed in epic elite.

[Daze]

27 pages yet?

nope

[Drwaz99]

I did want to answer the criticism about the survey not including multi-classing: Yes, that is correct. The survey focuses on things that fit best into a numbered survey format. Which is why this topic isn't a survey, nor a thread, but is rather both. Discussing the complexities that multi-classing brings to the mix is best done outside of a survey format, such as this thread. Thanks!

The problem with that is when it is presented to the decision makers, the survey will be more visible since it's easier to convert into graphic aids. That will put a much larger emphasis on a aspect (relative power of a single class) that is relatively minor when it comes to character balance in the over all scheme of things. It's a proven fact that people tend weigh things they can see (graphs, charts, etc) much more heavily than other types of reports. It's much harder to translate written feedback to graphic aid since it's much more varied and diverse.

Decision makers (those above the Dev pay grade) need to read the thread and take notes. Not have others take notes for them or rely on reports from people such as yourself (I'm not saying you would distort things, just things get lost in translation). If they did that, they wouldn't need a survey, especially a survey that has a huge potential of going in the absolute wrong direction.

[Feralthyrtiaq]

I don't think we need balance across characters. DDO is based on Dungeons & Dragons (AD&D 3.5), and we never really had balance in the tabletop game, but it all kind of works out.

A level one fighter is generally more powerful than a level one wizard. But a level 18 wizard is much more powerful than a level 18 fighter, usually. In any case, it's all situational.

To me, balance comes from grouping and the party makeup.

Balance in PNP/Tabletop came not from rules or builds it came in the form of the Dungeon Master who could bend/re-interpret rules and fudge die rolls behind the DM screen.

A good DM can make the weakest gimpiest character feel like a hero and the Elf Archer (you know the class from the early Dragon mag) feel foolish for ONLY having a bow...

There is no DM in DDO...

However, if there was what would it look like?

Maybe a subroutine that randomly assigns a value to each party member based on class levels then calculates and assigns +/- modifier spread to Mob Saving Throws/To Hit/Damage/Spell DCs/Spot/Listen on a narrow scale like +1 to -3 for weaker (low calculated mod) party composition on Normal Difficulties and maybe +5 to -2 for stronger (high calculated mod) party composition in Elite Difficulties.

[Fhauvial]

Balance in PNP/Tabletop came not from rules or builds it came in the form of the Dungeon Master who could bend/re-interpret rules and fudge die rolls behind the DM screen.

A good DM can make the weakest gimpiest character feel like a hero and the Elf Archer (you know the class from the early Dragon mag) feel foolish for ONLY having a bow...

There is no DM in DDO...

However, if there was what would it look like?

Maybe a subroutine that randomly assigns a value to each party member based on class levels then calculates and assigns +/- modifier spread to Mob Saving Throws/To Hit/Damage/Spell DCs/Spot/Listen on a narrow scale like +1 to -3 for weaker (low calculated mod) party composition on Normal Difficulties and maybe +5 to -2 for stronger (high calculated mod) party composition in Elite Difficulties.

Except we do have DMs in DDO. They're the developers that create the content. The role is largely the same, and so are the responsibilities. Only the context has changed.

(Not that I don't get your point)

[Daze]

DDO is not PnP .... much to the dislike of many. Barring the existence of a live full time DM for each instance on every server they need to code that leveling of the field..... hence this thread.

As for adapting random penalties ... no thanks. I like the idea that the hero of my story is not going to swing a greataxe and hit myself in the foot.

[Vargouille]

FYI: We're still following along. I'm not personally quite caught up on the 10+ pages produced in the past few hours, but I have seven pages of notes on what I've ready through so far, which has been very helpful in showing some areas players are concerned about, and probably producing some items to focus on when looking for additional feedback (including some things only a few or even one person brought up but remain good topics of discussion). This is intentionally a broad look and overview right now, and especially is not supposed to be us (the developers) telling you the problems we're looking at. We haven't even fully defined "What counts as a problem" and we're absolutely trying to get you guys to help us answer that question, rather than focusing the discussion on narrower issues before finding out what you even think are issues.

Thanks for the detailed feedback.