Devs - this is why paladins don't need the best DPS

[Bluegirl_Two]

As long as several classes were actually needed often enough, I'd be mostly happy. But since DDO moved away from that classes need to be sufficiently self contained and similar in the overall balance of defense + heals / offense. This is what the game has come down to, let's not pretend otherwise.

Even if we agree that the game is moving towards symmetry I'm not sure how that argues for imbalance because symmetry is a type of balance. Since the community as a whole seems intent on building solo capable characters and appears to have an inexhaustible set of reasons for why the game must accommodate soloists I don't see what the problem is.

What I find intriguing is that the same Wiki article that discussed game balance also mentioned difficulty level. Thrudh mentions building to solo epic hard while grouping for epic elite. If that in fact describes the game then, once more, I would argue that the game is balanced. And, I would contend that it succeeds in creating the right environment for cooperative success provided that the general point of view remains that nearly any combination of characters can complete EE.

Now, it has been a very long time since I've seen anyone arguing that a group cannot succeed if X class is present. And, with respect to the Shapley value, it is pretty irrelevant if there are no combinations that cannot succeed.

So, Thrudh's criteria of build to solo EH and group EE seems to suggest that balance does exist.

[Bluegirl_Two]

Before we start this, what is the definition of a flavor build? And if you're going to argue in the direction of 'non-optimal', what are reasonable upper and lower bounds for that?

I don't think there are upper and lower bounds. I think it is entirely irrelevant if a build is or is not optimal. I think the only criteria on which a build should be judged is the amount of enjoyment that it provides to the player running the character.

The forums are full of people arguing that the game is just too easy. If that is true then it is entirely irrelevant what the build is like since any even remotely competent player (or group of players) should be able to succeed. Just this last week alone there were posts talking about deliberately CON dumped and purposely CON gimped builds played all the way up through epic content. The implication is that build has almost nothing to do with success.

And, following through on the balance discussion, the various difficulty levels exist expressly to encourage players to find success based on the character they enjoy playing.

From personal experience I will strongly argue that EH is attainable by any player with any build. I will also strongly argue that EE is not, that EE -- particularly at the highest levels -- is extremely challenging to most builds. OTOH, I would argue that it should be that way -- if it were not then what would be the purpose of having EE?

So, to me a flavor build is any personal build that is made purely because that is what the player wants to do and that is built without any regard to anyone's opinion of its value. That might include some really great builds but it might also include some really horrible ones. IMO it does not matter. All that really matters is if the person running the character is having fun playing it.

[FlaviusMaximus]

I did a search of the internet looking for "game-balance 101" and found this interesting article on Wikipedia. Nothing in the article mentions offense/defense/self-healing.

There is a profound lack of logic in the internet searching and the argument that followed.

While I agree in principal that Paladins should not have such strong offense, defense, and self healing, and was personally not in favor of the strength of the DPS changes they received, other classes are being revised so rapidly and in such a strong manor that I am finding it difficult to single out any one class as being broken. Barbarians are crazy with the dps and self healing, and from what I can tell on lamannia, various kinds of ranged combat are soon going to be dishing out some serious dps as well - with the defensive benefit of not being in melee combat at all.

In other words, yeah, everything the OP said is accurate, but with every new update Paladins stand out less and less.

[Thrudh]

That was called the last encounter.

LOL.. So why not have the wizard use ALL his spells at every encounter, and then rest after each one?

You needed better DMs... I play tested for every edition since AD&D, and I was always invited back multiple times, so obviously the quality of my feedback is the highest level possible.

[FlaviusMaximus]

LOL.. So why not have the wizard use ALL his spells at every encounter, and then rest after each one?

Safely resting for a few hours after each encounter shouldn't always be possible in a realistic campaign setting.

[blerkington]

You needed better DMs... I play tested for every edition since AD&D, and I was always invited back multiple times, so obviously the quality of my feedback is the highest level possible.

Hi,

Or they wanted anyone they could get, and took pretty much everyone

Or they wanted a variety of different opinions/playstyles/age ranges for different types of feedback

There are plenty of other explanations possible than you just being the best **** playtester there ever was.

It's really best not to come out with comments like the one above. The next thing you know you're quoting yourself in your own signature, and that's not a good look at all.

Thanks.

[Soleran100]

Check out the thread where the guy throws down 1200 point CSWs with a 3000 CSW crit...

https://www.ddo.com/forums/showthread.php/457808-3k-csw

Heal scrolls (with failed concentration checks) don't really match do they?

Nice job dude, your argument about healing is fail.

The fact that this come from an exploit is sill, let me understand this, nerf dps because of healing.........

[Chai]

LOL.. So why not have the wizard use ALL his spells at every encounter, and then rest after each one?

You needed better DMs... I play tested for every edition since AD&D, and I was always invited back multiple times, so obviously the quality of my feedback is the highest level possible.

Oberoni, and yet more non sequiturs. Disagreement with you =/= anyone who disagrees having a bad DM.

We played by the standard rules, one of which is the party should reasonably be able to rest after 4 or 5 encounters. A DM trying to go against the grain in order to make the party go on with depleted resources on purpose is not a better DM. Other than being completely arbitrary and saying "you cant do that because Im the DM and I said so" the DM cannot (and should not) reasonably restrict the party's actions due to a number of spells and other abilities which the party can use to rest when they need to. A good DM is the one who encourages the party to decide, rather than makes decisions for the party. They are there to help tell the story, not write it in stone before the campaign even begins.

[Chai]

How do you define power and balance when several archetypes are needed for success?

This is not a trivial question and has been studied in game theory, for instance.

See this for one such concept HERE.

Forced cooperation =/= several archetypes needed for success. In a D&D campaign the players can all roll fighters if they want, and still be forced to cooperate in order to succeed. The idea that different archetypes are needed for success is an MMO thing, not a D&D thing.

As long as several classes were actually needed often enough, I'd be mostly happy. But since DDO moved away from that classes need to be sufficiently self contained and similar in the overall balance of defense + heals / offense. This is what the game has come down to, let's not pretend otherwise.

The community lobbied for years for this game to move away from reliance on other classes, and got what it wished for. Im not pretending otherwise. Im saying the game balance decision making where builds were nerfed often, failed to retain players, and now Turbine is leaning more in the direction, by degree, in making decisions based on providing a good play experience, which retains players more.

[Bluegirl_Two]

I play tested for every edition since AD&D, and I was always invited back multiple times, so obviously the quality of my feedback is the highest level possible.

Such a large ego. I see where your problems stem from. Along the way you were permitted to believe that because you participated that your thoughts were especially valuable. Now you write dismissively of others as if your ideas are the only ones with merit.

But you begin with false assumptions which results in bad analysis and yields wrong conclusions. Rather than exercising humility, respecting contrary points of view, and re-examining your premises in light of feedback you erroneously think that once you've posted something that the matter has become settled fact.

Your overly simplistic defense/offense/self-healing presumption demonstrates this.

Consider the pale master.

Defensively is there anything better? Stat requirements are minimal -- INT, CON remainder DEX. Dodge value can be among the highest attainable. Concealment and incorporeal numbers also at or near the highest attainable. Within the framework of damage avoidance among the highest possible values. Spending AP on eldritch knight and selecting elf permits use of heavy armor, trading dodge for AC and PRR/MRR. Again, creating a whole defensive package that is close to the top. Arbitrarily let's set the value at 7.

But, defensively the pale master is not done. The operate at range so are seldom required to be in danger. They also have access to crowd control spells to simply stop mobs in their place. Those factors ratchet up the defensive value of the pale master. Let's be hyper conservative and only raise the value to an 8.

Offensively is there any better DPS than instantaneous kills? A Finger of Death or Wail of the Banshee -- what is the offensive value of certain and complete annihilation? And if those fail there are SLAs and Ice Storm and Wall of Fire and a whole assortment of force and sonic spells -- spells that most mobs have no defenses against. Neither are spell points a hindrance. Stacks of mnemonic potions, concordant opposition items, various procs regenerating spell points, summoned rest shrines -- a well played pale master need never worry about running out of spell points. Let's be honest, the prolonged popularity of pale master shows that this rating is at least an 8 as well.

Self-healing, that was the whole reason the pale master became popular to start with. Except for 1 quest in the Vale of Twilight a pale master could just assume undead form and be continually healed through death auras and necrotic blasts. And, it has been made even easier with the availability of harm potions and scrolls. This was the original 10.

Yet here we are in a thread about paladins.

Classes that out DPS paladins -- bards, rogues, barbarians. Classes that out defense paladins -- bards, rogues, pale masters, sorcerers. Classes that out self-heal paladins -- clerics, favored souls, wizards. Based on forum feedback I might add barbarians to the self-heal list but I don't have any personal experience with them so will refrain.

But, when you start out with such a large ego and sense of self-importance it stops you from being able to objectively evaluate things. Your criteria is broken because it does not include all of the ways damage is mitigated, all of the ways DPS is meted out, all of the ways in which characters self heal. And, as a result is wrongly skews the results towards a prejudged, predetermined outcome -- one that you want to exist even though there is no evidence that it does. (See again the comments previously made about what players are doing in the game versus what the forum talking heads assert.)

Each of us likes to think we are the sole fount of all wisdom and knowledge. But the truth is that we are usually our own worst enemy and biggest hindrance to unbiased and fair analysis. Even more so when we allow our egos to intrude so blatantly into the conversation as you have done.

[BigErkyKid]

The community lobbied for years for this game to move away from reliance on other classes, and got what it wished for. Im not pretending otherwise. Im saying the game balance decision making where builds were nerfed often, failed to retain players, and now Turbine is leaning more in the direction, by degree, in making decisions based on providing a good play experience, which retains players more.

Our positions are clear.

I don't like zerg rolf stomping classes, but that's what previous updates have created. If this is the game we are playing, all classes needed to be upgraded to that standard. The player base demands balance (don't trust me, turbine run a survey on it so I don't care if a few forumites say otherwise), the devs promised it.

You say that you don't want all classes to be like that, that you are fine with some being uber and some being flavor.


I am on the side of the majority and on the side turbine said they would take. So our side should get what we were promised.

[BigErkyKid]

Yet here we are in a thread about paladins.
Classes that out DPS paladins -- bards, rogues, barbarians. Classes that out defense paladins -- bards, rogues, pale masters, sorcerers. Classes that out self-heal paladins -- clerics, favored souls, wizards. Based on forum feedback I might add barbarians to the self-heal list but I don't have any personal experience with them so will refrain.

You are wrong. But I wanted to highlight this part for anyone reading that wall of text. This is a bad assessment.

[Chai]

Offensively is there any better DPS than instantaneous kills? A Finger of Death or Wail of the Banshee -- what is the offensive value of certain and complete annihilation?

I posted something about this in another thread. Since people are holding up examples of extreme burst DPS and extreme burst overkill healing to demand nerfs, an instakill would be an even more extreme DPS example.

The non sequitur extreme DPS example would be: Instakill a 10k HP mob, took 1/3rd of a second to cast the spell. OMG this PM character is 30k DPS!!! Nerf PMs!!! Its just as bad as: This guy landed a 1200 point CSW and a 2k CSW crit, we have the screenshot folks, paladin needs to be nerfed!!!

[Bluegirl_Two]

A good DM is the one who encourages the party to decide, rather than makes decisions for the party. They are there to help tell the story, not write it in stone before the campaign even begins.

Discussion of what is or is not a good DM seems a huge derailment and pretty much irrelevant to the discussion. IMO a good DM is one that the group approves of regardless of how they run the game. Some groups will want and enjoy the challenge of being pushed to the limits of their resources while others will enjoy a more regularly paced game where they are seldom pushed. It is all about the personality of the group and is no reflection on whether the DM is good or not.

But, what any of us thinks about a DM seems nothing more than a distracting tangent to the discussion. At issue is whether there is any merit to the idea that paladins a) have the best DPS and b) do not need the best DPS because c) they have such over powered healing that they cannot be killed.

I will argue strongly that a and c are false and so b is moot. I would argue that even with Holy Sword and Zeal that paladins come behind barbarians, bards and rogues for DPS. I would also argue that the self-healing of paladins is matched by bards and bettered by clerics, favored souls and pale master wizards. But, more than that, I would argue that paladins are not unkillable which is why we don't see everyone soloing epic elite with them.

And, while people will pull out maths to show that paladins are uber I will point to the game itself and how all of the theory crafting fails to produce actual characters in the game attaining the mythic results.

The discussion reminds me of so many others in the past where some class was best at everything -- until it came down to actually designing and playing the character. That is when it became obvious that to be the highest DPS it had to surrender the highest survivability and in order to gain the highest survivability it had to give up the highest DPS -- and that when actually built with everything incorporated the build was just another build, neither better nor worse than any other well designed build.

And that, people, is the point of game balance. Fortunately the players themselves seem to recognize this because every character class is in play on every server -- which is really what game balance should be producing.

[Bluegirl_Two]

You are wrong.

No, I am not wrong. Unfortunately your assessment is based on maths and models whereas mine is based on what is happening in game. Even granting that every character I play is a complete gimp (which would not actually be true but is a preemptive comment due to the inevitable assessment) my L20 bard easily out DPSs my L23 paladin, easily out heals him, easily out defenses him. I have to jump all the way up to a L28 paladin before the paladin wins. And, prior to ETR the bard was the character of choice over the L28 paladin for any EE content because he is so much more capable.

It isn't theory-crafting, it is actual experience in the game. That, coupled with observing what other players are doing, demonstrates that I am correct.

[Bluegirl_Two]

I posted something about this in another thread. Since people are holding up examples of extreme burst DPS and extreme burst overkill healing to demand nerfs, an instakill would be an even more extreme DPS example.

The non sequitur extreme DPS example would be: Instakill a 10k HP mob, took 1/3rd of a second to cast the spell. OMG this PM character is 30k DPS!!! Nerf PMs!!! Its just as bad as: This guy landed a 1200 point CSW and a 2k CSW crit, we have the screenshot folks, paladin needs to be nerfed!!!

Considering how often you and I are on opposite sides of an argument I'm extremely nervous about this. However, I will point out that when minds are already made up facts are entirely irrelevant.

[legendkilleroll]

Our positions are clear.

I don't like zerg rolf stomping classes, but that's what previous updates have created. If this is the game we are playing, all classes needed to be upgraded to that standard. The player base demands balance (don't trust me, turbine run a survey on it so I don't care if a few forumites say otherwise), the devs promised it.


I am on the side of the majority and on the side turbine said they would take. So our side should get what we were promised.

Another person using the "promise" tag. lol

Zerg rofl stomping as you say was happening before bards, paladins and barbarians

[Bluegirl_Two]

I don't like zerg rolf stomping classes, but that's what previous updates have created. If this is the game we are playing, all classes needed to be upgraded to that standard.

Why? Why can't some be zerg stomping classes and others not? Why do they all have to be one or the other? What you have is opinion not fact. More than that, it is just one of many balance approaches to a game.

A game might intentionally have one or two classes that are zerg stomping as a way to pull players in. It might then have one or two that can zerg stomp but only when played with experience or skill. That might serve to lure players into one or two that cannot zerg stomp at all but that serve to attract an entirely different type of player. And all of it, taken together, might be a healthy design strategy since the objective might well be to attract and hold as many players as possible.

So, if paladin is your zerg stomper then just don't play paladins. Your personal problem is solved.

The player base demands balance (don't trust me, turbine run a survey on it so I don't care if a few forumites say otherwise), the devs promised it.

This is actually a false statement. Those people who were aware of and responded to the survey expressed a point of view. That does not equate to a demand and it might not even represent the majority of the players. Given the fluidity of the player base it might not even represent the current population's opinions even if it was accurate when taken.

Polls are a tool but they are not absolute and they certainly should never be taken as mandates. What is more, this thread demonstrates that even if 100% of the players demand balance they do not know or understand what balance actually is. YOU don't understand what balance is.

You understand one type of balance. But there are many ways to balance a game and standardization is just one of many options. What this means is that Turbine is under no obligation to make every class equally zerg stomp capable.

You say that you don't want all classes to be like that, that you are fine with some being uber and some being flavor.

There is actually a game balance strategy that profits from some classes being uber and others being flavor. Since the purpose of balance is to create a game in which every type of player is challenged at a level appropriate to him/her many games intentionally balance by providing some uber and some flavor options.

Consider a CCG like Yugioh. There are some decks that are A level decks and others that are B level or even lower. There are a lot of players who enjoy the challenge of taking a B level deck to a tournament rather than just running wild over every competitor with an A level deck. The game balance is the synergy between deck and player.

DDO offers the same thing. There are players who can play flavor and just stomp the content. There are others who can run uber classes and still get their tail end handed to them by the game. The balance is in the synergy between build and player -- not in making every class zerg stomp capable.

I am on the side of the majority and on the side turbine said they would take. So our side should get what we were promised.

It is time that you learned that the majority does not always rule. Sometimes the majority loses due to complex rules (American national politics and Presidential elections). Sometimes the majority loses due to their position being wrong (slavery, segregation, women's rights, gay rights). Sometimes the majority loses due to not being the actual decision makers (DDO).

It is completely unimportant what the majority asked for in a poll. Turbine is going to do what benefits its bottom line irrespective of any other consideration. Our side should get what we were promised is just an unrealistic temper tantrum that completely ignores the realities of life.

[BigErkyKid]

Why? Why can't some be zerg stomping classes and others not? Why do they all have to be one or the other? What you have is opinion not fact. More than that, it is just one of many balance approaches to a game.

People expressed their opinion, the devs acknowledged it. We don't want flavor and power classes. It is obvious why: you can make a flavor build out of an uber class but the reverse is not true. You can say what you want, that the poll is there, the dev posts are there. Just because you throw around some doubts about the validity of polls and some big words about electoral rules (rolf) it does not change one bit.

For the rest, it does not matter very much you think (or any of us individually). You don't make any decision and you don't even represent the sentiment of the player base as the evidence at hand shows.

It is completely reasonable to ask for what we were told we would get. The rest is just trying to post for the sake of posting in this thread and some good old DDO PVP, which is only forum PVP as we all know.

[BigErkyKid]

Another person using the "promise" tag. lol

Zerg rofl stomping as you say was happening before bards, paladins and barbarians

I raise your LOL to ROLF. Now welcome to my ignore list.