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.

[AbyssalMage]

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?

There are multiple problems with your analysis.

First, there are over 10,000+ builds thanks to Race, Enhancements, and Classes. If "10 builds over perform" that should be expected because there is an inverse of '10 builds that sub perform.' Which would leave over '9k builds in the middle.' Every time there is a "rebalance" as you put it, 'the next set of 10 builds' will simple replace the previous 10 that were just nerfed. As a player who has been around through 3x regimes now (has it really been that many?), and some players who have been around for more, we can all attest that they never "reign" in the player base in finding the next 'Flavor of the month."

The choice should be obvious.

Second, as I just showed above the "Choice" is not "Obvious" because there is no discernible problem. If it is a 'coding' error like "The Batman Build" from an era before my playtime then it is less of a nerf and an actual fix.

Weakening (i.e. nerfing) a class because it performs well is poor game design. Actually, "Weakening" a class so that you can sell a different class is greed. The player base finds the next build to play. Those players who enjoyed their previous build are left upset and angry. And the cycle of the developers "reigning" in the next crop of builds begins anew. It is a 'cat and mouse game' which leads to the attrition of players.

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.

Nerfs are never the correct answer. And after 10+ years I find it funny that any player would talk about "balance" because the game (i.e. DDO) has never seen balance while I have played. I have seen multiple builds (i.e. hundreds, if not thousands /shrug) be nerfed in the name of "balance" though. I've seen "new" game elements brought in to help "balance" the game that backfired spectacularly in the developers faces.

The opposite is actually true. They need to identify the weakest races, enhancements, and classes and buff them. Not overnight, but slowly over multiple patches, and allow players to discover what synergies well with each other.

[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]

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

[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.

[LavidDynch]

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

Dmg is circular. I got 2 very similar maxed decked out toons. one got 14 the other 21. guess which one is doing more imbue dmg? (and it´s close!)

With that said, I have no idea how extreme imbue builds are performing, my guess would be: not that great to the alternative.

[ivorycoaster]

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?

my EK has 30 dice, and it is not overpowered. that's hovering over 1k elec spellpower. you could remove immunity from the game completely and it'd still not be overpowered. it's very good, but its a racial completionist with a VERY carefully crafted gear set. it still won't compete with a good sorc, alch or druid in kill count.

an inquis can get 35 dice with ease, and that toon with shiradi mantle will be WAY overtuned. and the imbue dice don't have to deal with immunity. they also scale on the same thing as their attack damage and sneak dice. quite a different story..

[Bjond]

inquis can get 35 dice with ease, and that toon with shiradi mantle will be WAY overtuned

That INQ still can't compete with top thrower & bow builds at cap, but OMG is it strong sub-cap.

The problem with DDO isn't so much power creep as balance. I suspect SSG divided the archetypes up .. melee dev, ranged dev, caster dev because otherwise the current situation doesn't make much sense. What we've got is the melee dev is either fantastic or horrible and the ranged+caster devs are either horrible or fantastic. They really need to get on the same page, especially for risk versus effect and most particularly in higher reaper.

[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

[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