Warlock NERF Again

[Forzah]

They should just un-nerf those other things now, so those other things wont "have their fun ruined" by warlocks. That is the claim most often posted, so if the devs do anything to act on that feedback in the "spirit of game balance" it would be to un-nerf those other things. It is already very clear those providing said feedback couldn't care less about content balance. Myself and others have brought content balance up in each of these nerf threads for years now, and it mostly gets glossed over or shouted down by folks who still think nerfing is better, after having played through years of evidence which shows nerfing hasn't solved the "balance issue" and a strong case has been made by that same in game evidence that nerfing has actually made the issue worse. Thus closing the power gap is the right thing to do. Since the loudest players have reached a consensus that warlock is top of the meta, un-nerfing everything else would be prudent so those things can be closer to the top, and then they can stop having their fun ruined.

Giving everyone more power is against the spirit of D&D. Players are supposed to depend on each other and cooperate with each other in D&D. With more power they have less reason to do so. Therefore, nerfing overpowered builds is the better option in my opinion. I'd rather move in a direction that makes the game closer to D&D than to stray away from it.

[BigErkyKid]

Giving everyone more power is against the spirit of D&D. Players are supposed to depend on each other and cooperate with each other in D&D. With more power they have less reason to do so. Therefore, nerfing overpowered builds is the better option in my opinion.

The crazy part is that we do have the appropriate level of power already in the game. Playing (epic) quests at level with a fleshy pure kensei, with a q-staff build, or playing the tougher quests with a barbarian; those feel right to me. The barbarian suffers from lack of evasion and lack of enough healing to just outdo the damage in tough encounters. The kensei doesn't heal well enough, and the same goes for the q-staff build. A fleshy monk also feels just right, if perhaps a tad too powerful.

Playing those classes in LE raids, or even some of the LE quests, feels fine to me. The other problem is that there isn't enough to play at cap, since lower level quests are often trivialized by then, but that's a different business.

You are absolutely right that the amount of power we have is what destroys the game. The weaker we are wrt to content, the more we need other players and cooperation. It should be completely obvious. And OP builds are precisely what breaks the game. From the stupid p2w blade forged reconstruct (which undoes class balance providing full heals to every freaking class), to the super efficient warlock (a frankenstein of the best features of many classes), or the uber shiradis, that have returned with a vengeance (or trees, or wolfsploits). All those builds, arguably some more than others, break the game in some way.

Even rangers are excessively powerful, and the same goes for insta kills that have become too powerful in raids (only moderated by investment, at least that's something).

So yeah, but good luck, because the devs have proved time and again that they have absolutely no clue. From Sev saying that paladin heals are not a significant benefit for paladin over acrobat, to Steelstar saying that Henshin mystics are fine. From the release of MF, to the complete disgrace of nerfing it to the trash can AND pretending it is not a nerf. From the release of TOEE gear that needed a completely obnoxious 20 MP set to be even considered, to the absolutely absurd grind that is slavers. The game is managed by people who don't understand how it works.

[Forzah]

So yeah, but good luck, because the devs have proved time and again that they have absolutely no clue. From Sev saying that paladin heals are not a significant benefit for paladin over acrobat, to Steelstar saying that Henshin mystics are fine. From the release of MF, to the complete disgrace of nerfing it to the trash can AND pretending it is not a nerf. From the release of TOEE gear that needed a completely obnoxious 20 MP set to be even considered, to the absolutely absurd grind that is slavers. The game is managed by people who don't understand how it works.

What I find problematic is that there seems to be no clear planning in the game design. They initiated a balance pass two years ago but almost without exceptions they make the next class stronger than the previous one. Why did they not beforehand order classes in terms of how much power and survivability they should have compared to existing content and then satisfy that ordering when doing the implementations? Why take several years for something that they did earlier in a single update when introducing the trees? Why introduce various different mechanics and classes in the meanwhile that change the power in non-trivial ways?

In my opinion, more careful planning and better communication about the design goals would have saved time, money, and complaints.

[BigErkyKid]

What I find problematic is that there seems to be no clear planning in the game design. They initiated a balance pass two years ago but almost without exceptions they make the next class stronger than the previous one. Why did they not beforehand order classes in terms of how much power and survivability they should have and then satisfy that ordering when doing the implementations? Why take several years for something that they could do earlier in one update when introducing the trees? Why introduce various different mechanics in the meanwhile that change the power in non-trivial ways? In my opinion, more careful planning and would have saved much time, money, and complaints.

It is the worst of combination possible. A cash grabby attitude (hey we sell more **** when we release OP classes) combined with a lack of understanding of the game. If you bother to read the posts when they bother to discuss a bit their design plans you can easily realize that there is a naive attitude (we want wonderful things to happen) combined with a complete disregard for the reality of the game. It might have to do with the moving around devs across projects so much. They just do t understand very basic things, and I think they are often too time pressed too. So it is astonishing the many times we have caught them actually not bothering to test in an actual server what they implement. For instance, we have sev confessing that they actually didn't test holy sword stacking, and that it wa NOT meant to stack the way it did. Tools years to fix.?Other times they just have no clue about damage benchmarks. Like with He shin.

They should have mourn lands back, but in a more professional way. They should hire player consultants. They might know how to code stuff, but they certainly don't have the sufficient game knowledge to make the appropriate decisions. They cannot even implement their own vision because of that.

[Duetotheseverity]

lol planning lol

[slarden]

It is the worst of combination possible. A cash grabby attitude (hey we sell more **** when we release OP classes) combined with a lack of understanding of the game. If you bother to read the posts when they bother to discuss a bit their design plans you can easily realize that there is a naive attitude (we want wonderful things to happen) combined with a complete disregard for the reality of the game. It might have to do with the moving around devs across projects so much. They just do t understand very basic things, and I think they are often too time pressed too. So it is astonishing the many times we have caught them actually not bothering to test in an actual server what they implement. For instance, we have sev confessing that they actually didn't test holy sword stacking, and that it wa NOT meant to stack the way it did. Tools years to fix.?Other times they just have no clue about damage benchmarks. Like with He shin.

They should have mourn lands back, but in a more professional way. They should hire player consultants. They might know how to code stuff, but they certainly don't have the sufficient game knowledge to make the appropriate decisions. They cannot even implement their own vision because of that.

What makes the situation more complicated are comments like these

My current ranger is much more powerful than a simple CON based warlock at its peak, but it is not as efficient in farming content. With ToEE starting the trend, and then slavers, a lot of powerful gear is in quests. This means that having a fast speed + AOE damage toon is invaluable.

Finally, there is also the issue of balance between "legit builds" and "exploiters". The new uber shiradi spammers, tree builds, and to a lesser extent shuriken and wolfexploit builds, are miles ahead of any traditional build. To the point that if you want to play the game competitively, there seems to be no reason not to gravitate towards them. I see this as a problem.

When the people demanding nerfs are acknowledging warlock is not the most powerful build it sounds like you are asking the devs to nerf something because it's more efficient at farming quests vs. another more powerful build. I don't think the devs should balance this way - for one thing there will always be a build that is more efficient at farming so all you are doing is playing whack-a-mole by trying to nerf the most efficient farming class that isn't the most powerful.

I think it's up to players to have a few characters that are good at different things rather than expecting the devs to make all builds equally good at everything. That makes for a boring game.

I agree the devs should put more emphasis on fixing bugs rather than more inconsequential nerfs that force people to switch builds but do nothing to fix balance on a larger scale.

The reason I think bugs should be the priority is that all players don't have an equal opportunity to build an optimized character if huge amounts of power come from bugs that only part of the player base know about. Having characters that are more powerful due to game bugs (double hellballs for the mana cost of 1 hellball, etc.) distorts feedback on game difficulty.

[Ellihor]

Nope. Because I have the ability to see past one update, while those demanding nerfs of this new thing clearly demonstrated they are unwilling to.

Also: The claim that paladins, bards or barbarians are broken and OP in the current era is vastly incorrect. Not only that, but demanding nerfs of those in the name of game balance while not being willing to discuss the real OP builds of that era is sheer hypocrisy. All demanding nerfs of t2 builds while not being willing to discuss the power of t1 builds did was increase the gap between t1 and t2.

Chai, do you even read what you are quoting? By saying what you said in this second paragraph, you are actually agreeing with me, so that "nope" in the first should be a yes. This is why these threads don't evolve. Read again:

Had they not been nerfed, they would all be beyond broken, like the top of current meta. [...] I think it's fair to ask first to nerf the beyond broken at least to the level of the only broken, before nerfing the latter. Don't you agree?

[Nestroy]

(...)I agree the devs should put more emphasis on fixing bugs rather than more inconsequential nerfs that force people to switch builds but do nothing to fix balance on a larger scale.

The reason I think bugs should be the priority is that all players don't have an equal opportunity to build an optimized character if huge amounts of power come from bugs that only part of the player base know about. Having characters that are more powerful due to game bugs (double hellballs for the mana cost of 1 hellball, etc.) distorts feedback on game difficulty.

I am totally on your side regarding bug fixes.These should have top priority above any events, new content or anything else shiny the devs are developing. But...

1.) The devs at least in the past tried to fix these exploiter bugs but afaik they failed. Maybe the bugs cannot be fixed, at least not without doing more damage to the game.

2.) Xploiter-builds like trees and wolves are widely spread and known. No need to go the other forum, even here on the main forum / builds section we find some of them. Anybody wantin´ one can freely look them uo.

Therefore, to my mind the devs gave up on the xploiter builds a while ago and they are semi-legal now. That many players do not want to build on exploits is an entirely different matter.

[nokowi]

What I find problematic is that there seems to be no clear planning in the game design. They initiated a balance pass two years ago but almost without exceptions they make the next class stronger than the previous one. Why did they not beforehand order classes in terms of how much power and survivability they should have compared to existing content and then satisfy that ordering when doing the implementations?

Their attempt at balance can be defined as trying to give everyone equal DPS, with some attempt to add defensive choices (sometimes not at the expense of DPS).

Equal DPS is really impossible to do across the builds that players choose when there is such easy access to nonlinear multiclass and twisted epic destiny abilities.

What you see is their best attempt.

Why take several years for something that they did earlier in a single update when introducing the trees?

Because players quit when they experience too much change and their existing build no longer works.

Why introduce various different mechanics and classes in the meanwhile that change the power in non-trivial ways?

There is a large cost in programming and debugging to such changes. They generally only changed things that were "broken" in such a way that no balance could ever be achieved. Its certainly fair to critique the results of the changes.

In my opinion, more careful planning and better communication about the design goals would have saved time, money, and complaints.

I agree with this one. I don't believe its fair to criticize their motivation without knowing their internal constraints, but it is pretty easy to armchair quarterback and see that a well designed and well communicated plan would have been helpful to players.

[Whitering]

I think they used to give us +20s when they significantly changed something, but they no longer do that, can't remember the last time I got a free heart, but many of my characters still have at least one +20 and I know I never bought any. Maybe that was before TRs, I can't remember.

Now it's just a bit of a slog, a few days of running through quests to reboot and start fresh. I do question the increasing levels, I hope it doesn't go up again, but Epic levels go pretty quick once you get your formula down.

[changelingamuck]

I think they used to give us +20s when they significantly changed something, but they no longer do that, can't remember the last time I got a free heart, but many of my characters still have at least one +20 and I know I never bought any. Maybe that was before TRs, I can't remember.

They only did that once, when the huge overall enhancement revamp was done (introducing the enhancement tree structure).

[Chai]

Chai, do you even read what you are quoting? By saying what you said in this second paragraph, you are actually agreeing with me, so that "nope" in the first should be a yes. This is why these threads don't evolve. Read again:

If this was the case, you wouldn't be still advocating for nerfs, because if you agree with what Ive stated (and 10 years of evidence have shown) nerfs have accomplished, then advocating more nerfs = advocating a larger gap between t1 and t2, which brings the game further away from game balance (refuting the justification for nerfs).

AKA - continuing to advocate for nerfs claiming they will bring us closer to balance, while fully understanding and agreeing with the fact that they do not, is a direct contradiction in logic. What causes these discussions to stagnate rather than evolve, is these direct logical contradictions, and the unwillingness to change ones position after 10 years of evidence has refuted any premise that it will work.

[NaturalHazard]

Their attempt at balance can be defined as trying to give everyone equal DPS, with some attempt to add defensive choices (sometimes not at the expense of DPS).

Equal DPS is really impossible to do across the builds that players choose when there is such easy access to nonlinear multiclass and twisted epic destiny abilities.

What you see is their best attempt.




Because players quit when they experience too much change and their existing build no longer works.



There is a large cost in programming and debugging to such changes. They generally only changed things that were "broken" in such a way that no balance could ever be achieved. Its certainly fair to critique the results of the changes.



I agree with this one. I don't believe its fair to criticize their motivation without knowing their internal constraints, but it is pretty easy to armchair quarterback and see that a well designed and well communicated plan would have been helpful to players.

the problem is there is different kinds of dps, AOE, big AOE small AOE, single target, ranged, melee. Then you have to factor in instant kills.

[nokowi]

the problem is there is different kinds of dps, AOE, big AOE small AOE, single target, ranged, melee.

I agree with you completely.

My observation/opinion is they went for equal DPS without considering such things.

[NaturalHazard]

If this was the case, you wouldn't be still advocating for nerfs, because if you agree with what Ive stated (and 10 years of evidence have shown) nerfs have accomplished, then advocating more nerfs = advocating a larger gap between t1 and t2, which brings the game further away from game balance (refuting the justification for nerfs).

AKA - continuing to advocate for nerfs claiming they will bring us closer to balance, while fully understanding and agreeing with the fact that they do not, is a direct contradiction in logic. What causes these discussions to stagnate rather than evolve, is these direct logical contradictions, and the unwillingness to change ones position after 10 years of evidence has refuted any premise that it will work.

Nerfs are fun though dictating to other people as to how they should play is fun. It gives that feeling of satisfaction haha screwed that guy over now his toon sucks...........but really.

[Forzah]

If this was the case, you wouldn't be still advocating for nerfs, because if you agree with what Ive stated (and 10 years of evidence have shown) nerfs have accomplished, then advocating more nerfs = advocating a larger gap between t1 and t2, which brings the game further away from game balance (refuting the justification for nerfs).

AKA - continuing to advocate for nerfs claiming they will bring us closer to balance, while fully understanding and agreeing with the fact that they do not, is a direct contradiction in logic. What causes these discussions to stagnate rather than evolve, is these direct logical contradictions, and the unwillingness to change ones position after 10 years of evidence has refuted any premise that it will work.

10 years of evidence? Until MOTU I'd say the game was fairly balanced. The period from the release of MOTU until now is only 4.5 years. (I'd even argue that before epic ward was removed balance in epic quests was near perfect)

Then for those remaining 4.5 years we have the following facts:
1) The nerfs carried out were small tweaks that on the grand scale of things changed nothing to the way classes were ordered in power.
2) While carrying out these small tweaks, they simultaneously introduced classes with much more power than before.

The 1st fact shows that developers are not willing to make hard choices. That 2nd fact shows that developers when they have the choice to make nerfs work, they chose not to. How can you conclude in that environment that nerfs don't work and that we have 10 years of evidence for it?

If the developers want to achieve balance, they can do so by carrying out the balance pass and some nerfs carefully. By not introducing too much power with new classes and let all classes be reasonably powerful with respect to the difficulty of content.

The only thing I can conclude is that they don't really care about balance beyond calming down people asking for balance. These half-measures are not meaningful if they don't have a targeted plan for balance.

I know nerf requests are probably in vain when something more powerful will be introduced next, however, I will keep asking the developers to change their strategy so the game can become more comprehensive and better. This is also why I'm arguing for a targeted balance update where everything is balanced at once.

[2pc2]

Elite as default difficulty started 5 full years previous to warlock release.

That's just not true. 5 years ago we had Motu, when Motu came out elite was not the default difficulty for everyone. It started with the new classes revamp and got out of control with warlocks release.

[2pc2]

The most OP builds I've seen are shiradi spammers, by far. Doesn't matter if their survivability compared to warlock is lower if they are killing 200k hp bosses in 6-10 seconds.

Ruin and G ruin + too much spell damage multiplier, too much spell critical chances, no DC needed, no to hit, no mob spell fortification = 150k damage in 2 clicks 100% of the time any time you want. Any well build warlock can do the same and those are 2 builds ( warlock and shiradi spammer) who are top trash killers with very good defenses, give them top red named dps as they have now and well... we see the result : a build that has everything and is miles away from others. Give furyshotters the same trash killing tools and defenses while keeping it's red named dps and you would see 1/3 of every server being a furyshoter, like we see with warlocks now.

[Forzah]

That's just not true. 5 years ago we had Motu, when Motu came out elite was not the default difficulty for everyone. It started with the new classes revamp and got out of control with warlocks release.

It started with the introduction of bravery bonus in September 2011; see http://ddowiki.com/page/Bravery_Bonus. MOTU was released in 2012. By then elite was the default difficulty.

[Robbenklopper]

That's just not true. 5 years ago we had Motu, when Motu came out elite was not the default difficulty for everyone. It started with the new classes revamp and got out of control with warlocks release.

Subjective. I joined a years before MotU and as a noob, There were less lfm on hard and me partially challenged even with normal. The average pug was Elite. The class revamp was certainly the biggest boost due to transparency.from that point on, i saw not hing else thanks elite.