A Conversation Concerning Player Power

[EdsanDarkbane]

I am against nerfs that simply reduce player damage
Or player defence.

Because traditionally it was not possible to nerf in Dungeons and Dragons, and because a large portion of Dungeons and Dragons audience is made up of theory crafters, and build makers.

I am against all nerfing. The following is a discussion of perception.


Sorcerers are ridiculous in DDO. Super powerful. More powerful than any batman build, rogarian, bardbarian, or battle cleric. And for a long time and some might argue that warlock is also overtuned.

The Sorcerer is more powerful than the batman build. That is a big deal! They nerfed the **** out of AC and changed to hit values and buffed monsters because of the batman build and builds like it. Think of the monkchers era a burst build with good sustained. Nerfed. Sorcerer is more powerful than the monkchers build.

So should we nerf sorcery? Should we change the game back? Back to a time when ESOS was king and blue bars meant death penalties to xp? I am generalizing for the sake of making the point.

We got rid of AC builds because melees where too powerful. We changed melee and ranged damage when players adjusted their melee build priorities and became "overpowered" again. Then. After finally relenting SSG began to make casters more powerful. BUT they forgot all the nerfs to melees.

Would it be fun to have those builds back? Of course! It makes me question the previous nerfs, and if they really hurt the game in the long run.

Would it be fun to add R20! You know what happens on R20? Only feat and enhancements matter gear doesn't apply. There's your challenge difficulty. Want more challenge? Death in R21 lowers your reaper exp and available points. You can't play in reaper until you redistribute them.

There are ways around nerfing, And increase challenge thing. And I would welcome any and all discussion on the topic.

[Stravix]

Hard disagree.

If there are 10,000 builds and 10 builds overperform to the point where the other 9,990 builds are basically pointless in comparison, would you honestly suggest to take the time to buff those 9,990 completely different builds to bring them on the level of those 10 and then completely rebalance all content to compensate for the severely increased power levels?, or simply rein in those 10 overperforming builds?

The choice should be obvious.

Are nerfs always the right answer, ofc not! But they have a very valid place in game balance and prevents a PvE arms race where both sides are simply buffed into oblivion to the point where we get 1000% more damage multipliers on sets like in D3.

[EdsanDarkbane]

Since the release of reaper your position (sans the lowered difficulty of reaper overall) is that more builds are viable?

[ekaterina]

I disagree entirely. Opinions can and will differ on whether any particular class or build is too strong or too weak. But as the game moves along it is certain that some classes and builds will become so weak that they will not be fun to play for most people, and will not be welcome in most groups. It is certain that other classes and builds will become so strong that there will be little challenge in playing them, and any group trying to maximize its power will not take any *other* class or build to fill the same role.

The developers should not be limited in how they fix any such unbalance issues. Hitting a certain level of power should not give any class or build a vested right to remain there - we have no need to give tenure to overpowered classes and builds.

[ahpook]

I am against nerfs that simply reduce player damage
Or player defence.
...

Your position presupposes that the devs never make mistakes. Since we know this to be false the devs need tools to fix mistakes resulting in overpowered characters.

I will say that DEV nerfs have not always been well thought out or applied evenhandedly but that should not mean that they never be undertaken. Sometimes a nerf is the easiest solution to a problem and the one thing the devs don't need is a more complicated solution.

The game changes. Adjust and move on.

[KoobTheProud]

All conversations about player power need to come from the baseline of SSG intentionally releases classes and trees that are completely OP compared to the current power structure. This is indisputable over the course of DDO's history at least since the Warlock class was released in 2015.

In that context it is possible that SSG sees a few continually powerful pure builds as a necessary framework in which to release their newest Kraken whatever that might be.

[Strider1963]

All conversations about player power need to come from the baseline of SSG intentionally releases classes and trees that are completely OP compared to the current power structure. This is indisputable over the course of DDO's history at least since the Warlock class was released in 2015.

In that context it is possible that SSG sees a few continually powerful pure builds as a necessary framework in which to release their newest Kraken whatever that might be.

I agree, for a long time now SSG has created op classes, trees etc to sell such to the players so they can make money. Then, after a year or less, they nerf them. I've always said that this is bait and switch and shouldn't be allowed but they still get away with it. Just waiting for the imbue dice system to be nerfed.. some get 22 dice, really?

[Oxarhamar]

Your position presupposes that the devs never make mistakes. Since we know this to be false the devs need tools to fix mistakes resulting in overpowered characters.

I will say that DEV nerfs have not always been well thought out or applied evenhandedly but that should not mean that they never be undertaken. Sometimes a nerf is the easiest solution to a problem and the one thing the devs don't need is a more complicated solution.

The game changes. Adjust and move on.

I agree with that

The nerfs do sometimes tend to be too broad and hits harder on classes that aren’t over performers

[Oxarhamar]

I agree, for a long time now SSG has created op classes, trees etc to sell such to the players so they can make money. Then, after a year or less, they nerf them. I've always said that this is bait and switch and shouldn't be allowed but they still get away with it. Just waiting for the imbue dice system to be nerfed.. some get 22 dice, really?

There are things I like about the imbue dice system and things I don’t

I do like that it’s an on hit rather than a spike damage proc chance

I don’t like that it scales with spellpower

I don’t like that Arti elemental spell now is an imbue it should change elements

Yep imbue distribution is going to be a problem I don’t even think 22 dice is high


it will likely be op for certain builds then the nerf with nerf imbue for everyone

[jskinner937]

I am against nerfs that simply reduce player damage
Or player defence.

Because traditionally it was not possible to nerf in Dungeons and Dragons, and because a large portion of Dungeons and Dragons audience is made up of theory crafters, and build makers.

I am against all nerfing. The following is a discussion of perception.


Sorcerers are ridiculous in DDO. Super powerful. More powerful than any batman build, rogarian, bardbarian, or battle cleric. And for a long time and some might argue that warlock is also overtuned.

The Sorcerer is more powerful than the batman build. That is a big deal! They nerfed the **** out of AC and changed to hit values and buffed monsters because of the batman build and builds like it. Think of the monkchers era a burst build with good sustained. Nerfed. Sorcerer is more powerful than the monkchers build.

So should we nerf sorcery? Should we change the game back? Back to a time when ESOS was king and blue bars meant death penalties to xp? I am generalizing for the sake of making the point.

We got rid of AC builds because melees where too powerful. We changed melee and ranged damage when players adjusted their melee build priorities and became "overpowered" again. Then. After finally relenting SSG began to make casters more powerful. BUT they forgot all the nerfs to melees.

Would it be fun to have those builds back? Of course! It makes me question the previous nerfs, and if they really hurt the game in the long run.

Would it be fun to add R20! You know what happens on R20? Only feat and enhancements matter gear doesn't apply. There's your challenge difficulty. Want more challenge? Death in R21 lowers your reaper exp and available points. You can't play in reaper until you redistribute them.

There are ways around nerfing, And increase challenge thing. And I would welcome any and all discussion on the topic.

True melee were more powerful than back in the day, but I have to disagree that blue bars never used to be powerful. Before epic hard, epic elite, etc., there was one epic difficulty and only a handful of packs even had epic difficulty. Back then, most of the harder content (sands or Devils Assault for example, you needed a CC/Necro caster. Heck that is all you needed and I used to solo most of epic content on my wizard. Not a single melee could achieve that, not even the almighty monk back in those days.

The only time i remember casters being lower in soloability than melees was maybe the GH Epic era. I think cap was 24 back then iirc. The devs basically redesigned the game around making necro and instakills less meaningless by buffing fort saves on most of the epic mobs in epic elite difficulty. But to be honest, thats when most of the casters realized CC/damage as a better investment overall in epics. I also remember the faster heroic elite shroud I ever did was an all blue bar shroud. Other than portals, everything just melted in an instant, including Harry.

Overall, I would say blue bars in general have always been tops on soloability in DDO for its 16 year age. Melees did have a time when their self healing became available and especially when meld was a twist thing, but that was only a few years compared to a much longer time blue bars ruled the roost in normal quests. Raids are another story, and rightfully they should be.

[Oxarhamar]

True melee were more powerful than back in the day, but I have to disagree that blue bars never used to be powerful. Before epic hard, epic elite, etc., there was one epic difficulty and only a handful of packs even had epic difficulty. Back then, most of the harder content (sands or Devils Assault for example, you needed a CC/Necro caster. Heck that is all you needed and I used to solo most of epic content on my wizard. Not a single melee could achieve that, not even the almighty monk back in those days.

The only time i remember casters being lower in soloability than melees was maybe the GH Epic era. I think cap was 24 back then iirc. The devs basically redesigned the game around making necro and instakills less meaningless by buffing fort saves on most of the epic mobs in epic elite difficulty. But to be honest, thats when most of the casters realized CC/damage as a better investment overall in epics. I also remember the faster heroic elite shroud I ever did was an all blue bar shroud. Other than portals, everything just melted in an instant, including Harry.

Overall, I would say blue bars in general have always been tops on soloability in DDO for its 16 year age. Melees did have a time when their self healing became available and especially when meld was a twist thing, but that was only a few years compared to a much longer time blue bars ruled the roost in normal quests. Raids are another story, and rightfully they should be.

Yes soloing on a Melee that could sustain blitz the entire quest was easy button especially when soloing made it easiest to maintain blitz no one steals the kill you need

[Marshal_Lannes]

By game metrics, sorcerer and alchemist are the two least played classes on hardcore. Now, you might say, but that's hardcore it's different. Sure, but hardcore is now 50% of the DDO calendar year. How a class performs on hardcore is far more relevant in terms of game time being played than how one functions on R10. Based on this data, I would argue that sorcerers and alchemists need to be buffed, they are obviously the least attractive classes for players in 50% of game time.

As far as builds being left behind. No one is being turned away from a group or raid because of their build in 2022. Virtually all groups are taking whoever can fill a party. There simply isn't the population for people to be that selective. Besides, almost all the players who had that mentality (link your boss beaters!) are long gone.

[Oxarhamar]

By game metrics, sorcerer and alchemist are the two least played classes on hardcore. Now, you might say, but that's hardcore it's different. Sure, but hardcore is now 50% of the DDO calendar year. How a class performs on hardcore is far more relevant in terms of game time being played than how one functions on R10. Based on this data, I would argue that sorcerers and alchemists need to be buffed, they are obviously the least attractive classes for players in 50% of game time.

As far as builds being left behind. No one is being turned away from a group or raid because of their build in 2022. Virtually all groups are taking whoever can fill a party. There simply isn't the population for people to be that selective. Besides, almost all the players who had that mentality (link your boss beaters!) are long gone.

Hardcore isn't an acccurate measure of the game survival is perfered

[Stravix]

Hardcore isn't an acccurate measure of the game survival is perfered

You are correct, but it does show that the power gained from reaper points and past lives has a disproportionate effect on the strength of builds.

Personally, that is something I would want SSG to look at, as some builds seriously favor completionists more than others, in a way that skews power distribution on live.

[EdsanDarkbane]

My main points are that:

1)Casters are overpowered, they are more overpowered than any previous player made build.

2) SSG changed the game to make players weaker because they discovered strong builds.

SSG made casters more overpowered than the builds they nerfed the game for previously.


One of the reasons the player based dwindled (at least from my group) was that they felt targeted by those nerfs.

And I can tell that the content that SSG has churned out in the intervening years has been way better than the earlier expansions.

It is my belief with the proper reintroduction of more styles of builds DDO will be more successful. I really believe this game has a much bigger market. I have spent time on all kinds of games there is a reason DDO keeps coming back up on my radar.

[Marshal_Lannes]

1)Casters are overpowered, they are more overpowered than any previous player made build.

This is your opinion. Repeating it doesn't make it true based on the data we have and what people play. Current casters are not overpowered - that is not an opinion based on the data we have. Sorcerer and Alchemist are the two least played classes on hardcore. There is empirical data that proves this. The most played casting class on hardcore, Favored Soul, just underwent multiple nerfs. It was glaringly obvious that the FVS was overperforming on hardcore. And while I think the nerfs to FVS have gone too far, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Devs might be balancing classes based on hardcore. I can't say that I blame them - it is the purest measurement of classes without past lives and reaper points muddying the waters and, as I've said, hardcore is now 50% of the game calendar. A sorcerer is actually a well-balanced class - you have excellent AOE DPS but poor survivability. Lots of past lives and reaper points can mitigate some of the weaknesses of the class, but the class itself, on an equal footing, is perfectly balanced with other classes, perhaps even a bit weaker (though they did get a slight HP buff recently) so we will see if that changes the play metrics in this upcoming hardcore season.

[Cavalier]

You are correct, but it does show that the power gained from reaper points and past lives has a disproportionate effect on the strength of builds.

Personally, that is something I would want SSG to look at, as some builds seriously favor completionists more than others, in a way that skews power distribution on live.

No, hardcore is not a metric that can be used in any meaningful way to determine class power. The entire premise of hardcore is survival since one death = game over.

People build different for hardcore for that very reason. In the normal game, death means nothing.

Thats why you cannot use hardcore for a metric.

[jskinner937]

No, hardcore is not a metric that can be used in any meaningful way to determine class power. The entire premise of hardcore is survival since one death = game over.

People build different for hardcore for that very reason. In the normal game, death means nothing.

Thats why you cannot use hardcore for a metric.

Agree. And the FVS and Bard nerfs as a result of analyzing HC server data is the very reason why it went too far. I prefer not balancing around on aspect of the game as it has unintended consequences for the rest of it. The reality is we have what we have as far as game balance. If a nerf is in order due to an overperforming ability in the game in general, it should be dealt with, but more gingerly than in the past. And if a certain aspect of the game, like hardcore or reaper is out of balance, whether it is for certain builds or not, I am in favor of only nerfing it for that aspect of the game to make sure overcorrections are not done. Because an overcorrection in most cases has far dire consequences on the player base, than not nerfing at all. This is the stuff that makes people quit instantly, not the other way around.

For example sonic blast should have stayed in the game but increase it aoe from 1,2,3,4 mobs depending on casting level. Holy Smite should have been unavailable in HCL, as it was not game breaking at all on live. Instead these nerfs drastically affected live for these builds, both at cap and end game, because they werent balanced for HCL.

And as far as casters go, I do believe HPs in reaper mode is a big reason for being overpowered. There is no reason a caster with massive AOE should be able to take multiple hits from any mob in r10, especially a doom. Maybe consider giving access to only one reaper tree is the best path? This way builds can make a choice of which tree they activate before stepping in a reaper quest. You can fill each up, but only can have one active at a time.

[Oxarhamar]

You are correct, but it does show that the power gained from reaper points and past lives has a disproportionate effect on the strength of builds.

Personally, that is something I would want SSG to look at, as some builds seriously favor completionists more than others, in a way that skews power distribution on live.

I think Sorc and Alc are squishy is more of the reason than that but that’s also true

[Oxarhamar]

This is your opinion. Repeating it doesn't make it true based on the data we have and what people play. Current casters are not overpowered - that is not an opinion based on the data we have. Sorcerer and Alchemist are the two least played classes on hardcore. There is empirical data that proves this. The most played casting class on hardcore, Favored Soul, just underwent multiple nerfs. It was glaringly obvious that the FVS was overperforming on hardcore. And while I think the nerfs to FVS have gone too far, it is becoming increasingly clear that the Devs might be balancing classes based on hardcore. I can't say that I blame them - it is the purest measurement of classes without past lives and reaper points muddying the waters and, as I've said, hardcore is now 50% of the game calendar. A sorcerer is actually a well-balanced class - you have excellent AOE DPS but poor survivability. Lots of past lives and reaper points can mitigate some of the weaknesses of the class, but the class itself, on an equal footing, is perfectly balanced with other classes, perhaps even a bit weaker (though they did get a slight HP buff recently) so we will see if that changes the play metrics in this upcoming hardcore season.

You are too focused on HCL look at casters on regular servers YW