Class Discussion

[Moglit Crimshine]

Are MMO games capable of maintaining [class] balance if players are able to pick and choose their own skills?

In other words... you are not a "warrior" with a defined set of skills. You are a player creating what you want in a warrior; you collect skills and abilities available to all players.

I've had a rough time accepting the cookie cutter systems in MMO games after using class systems in single player games like FF Tactics and Morrowind.

Maintaining a certain level of balance is usually a problem even with a cookie cutter system. Too much freedom, like allowing massive spell damage with heavy armor would be unbalanced, but controlling skill/ability power with attribute or stat points could be a simple solution. Synergies could also play a vital role in power balance.

[Faille]

The way I plan to try and tackle this is to make sure each skill is as balanced on its own as possible, and to also to try and dynamically change how powerful, or cost effective, a skill is. By this I mean, if half the server is using Taunt, then its going to be a lot less powerful then is only 10% of the server was using it.

[Zinke]

I apologize in advance if these things have been brought up before. I was reading this forum when it started, then sort of stopped as I figured you would only need programming type assistance for awhile(now I see you guys already have a working engine going) which I don't have.

The one thing that most every MMO I've ever played (going back to Gemstone3 and up to WoW) has gotten wrong is their handling of healers. If you avoid a classic 'whack a mole' healer, you are a long ways towards a great MMO.
I've played a healer in 90% of the games (empath in GS3, Cleric in EQ, Priest in WoW etc..) I've played. NOT because I enjoyed whack a mole, I believe very few people truly do, but because it's always the most integral part of a group. I like being the most in control of whether my group survives or not. You'll notice that games where healers aren't that important, any pure healing class is rarely played.

The closest I think a MMO has gotten to (my idea) of the perfect healer was the direction WoW could have taken Shadow priests. I've heard City of Heroes had a similar idea, but I never played it, unfortunately.

If you are going to have a true cleric/priest class, make them able to heal their group while participating in the fight itself. I.e. they can put a buff on one person, who is the main recipient of any health they drain while doing damage. Think of vampiric touch, but it solely goes to one person, like the main tank. They can less efficient damage spells that would heal more, or vice versa. Also, some spells that would heal the whole group, but at a more inefficient ratio. etc etc.. You can easily balance it all out.

Other classes can have debuffs and reactive defensive abilities, that are based around reacting to the monster instead of a player's health bar. Exe: they can counter monsters' spells, put up temporary invulnerable 'wall' shields to prevent big physical attacks, launch attacks that stun the mob etc.. I could go on for days.

[xilsharn]

Originally Posted by Moglit Crimshine

Are MMO games capable of maintaining [class] balance if players are able to pick and choose their own skills?

In other words... you are not a "warrior" with a defined set of skills. You are a player creating what you want in a warrior; you collect skills and abilities available to all players.

I've had a rough time accepting the cookie cutter systems in MMO games after using class systems in single player games like FF Tactics and Morrowind.

Maintaining a certain level of balance is usually a problem even with a cookie cutter system. Too much freedom, like allowing massive spell damage with heavy armor would be unbalanced, but controlling skill/ability power with attribute or stat points could be a simple solution. Synergies could also play a vital role in power balance.

I'm sure it's possible to work out an algorithm for balance using skill points. This is a math exercise, and I'm horrible at math, so I'm sure this is laughable. Plus I'm sure my math is pretty dubious.

Let's say you've got a warrior who's got 10 starting skill points. Being a min-maxing sort of guy who wants to play a tank warrior going against the big baddies, who drops 7 points into Heavy Armor, 2 points into Shields, and 1 point in One-Handed Axes.

Then you've got a Wizard who's got 10 starting skill points. He puts 8 points into Arcane Damage and 2 points into Concentration, for a boost to mana pool. (Go with me on these skills here, they're just for sake of argument)

Rogues, Rangers, etc., all the typical subtypes (again for the sake of argument) all get the same starting skill points. At each level you get four more skill points.

So at level 20 you've got yourself 90 skill points total. As you level up each skill, its price in skill points increases. So while Heavy Armor may cost 1 point per level up to level, say, 10, after that it increases to 2 points, then one additional point each 10 levels of that particular skill. So by the time you've got 30 points in Heavy Armor you've had to spend 60 skill points. Same deal with Arcane Damage.

But now if you've got a warrior who wants to throw a few points at level 10 into Arcane Damage, you've got some formula that says warrior.ArcaneDamageCost=([base.ArcaneDamageCost]+([base.ArcaneDamageCost]*.75)) rounded up to the nearest whole number. So one level of arcane damage would cost a warrior 2 skill points. 10 levels of Arcane Damage would cost 20. God this is getting complicated, lol.

Anyway, in my math/class balance hallucination I'm barfing onto the page here, it would be possible to have points left over if you're cross-speccing into different archetype trees at your current level. Like if a warrior has a lot of Heavy Armor skills, a high amount of One-Handed Axe skill, and a few Arcane Damage skill points at level 30, he might have three or four skill points left over. So instead of 90 points spent, he's got 86. This warrior would have a very difficult time against a Wizard (or an NPC whose design has spent certain skill points in certain areas) who has allocated carefully all of his skill points to spend them all by level 30. But at level 31 he might have enough skill points to buy another rank of One-Handed Axe and even out his points at 94 at level 31, bringing him into balance.

So basically with a skill point system you ought to have some sort of algorithmic balance inherent the nature of the thing, is my point. My math is probably all jiggered, I know. But letting a player choose whatever skills he wants should be a solvable thing using a skillpoint system that has a formula built in that says if a player of a given level has some number of skill points that is less than maximum, that player will be less powerful than another player of same level who has spent max skillpoints. But basically the trade off is that the warrior in this scenario is willing to trade off a level or two of being relatively underpowered to gain some personal preference of skill mixture.

A guy who has decided to min-max a tanking warrior was probably the worst possible example in this situation. It might have been better to make it some sort of psionicist-rogue who wants to cast illusions, or something, but it's too late now and I don't feel like going back and changing all of it.

What do you guys think? Is this viable? There should be some sort of mathematical solution to solving balance in a video game. That would also serve the double purpose of ending balance cry-titting if the algorithm is sound, and also giving players the freedom of building a character how they want.

The most obvious thing here is that players will still be tempted to create a powerful archetype instead of experimenting with different subtypes to create some sort of viable cross-platform badass.

[xilsharn]

With, say, 8 skill points in Arcane Damage you can train a particular spell that might be advantageous to both the exemplar Warrior and Wizard, say a single-target DD stun/high-threat nuke. Useful for keeping aggro and useful for Wizards for kiting multiple targets, or something.

[Nehrak]

Not to sound like I'm trying to plagiarize here, or encourage such, but why not go for a system similar to d20 and what the .hack games use?

By that, I'm suggesting you could have "core" classes that get some exclusives, but everyone shares a common pool. For (strictly) example, to take ye olde proverbial Wizard and Warrior:


General Skills/Upgrades
- Weapons: some easier for "Warriors" to buy and train in
- Armor: easier for "Warriors" to buy and train in
- HP boosts: easier for "Warriors"
- MP boosts: easier for "Wizards" to get
- Stat boosts: depends
etc.

Magic Abilities
- Weapon Based (for example, adding elemental damage to a weapon)
- "Force" Based (classic fireball, heals, whatever; "force" means whatever lore the writers come up with for how magic works)
- (Wiz only): Strengthen Armor (+AC buff) -- Requires ____ combat skills
- (War only): Shear Wards (a poor man's version of dispel magic that procs on combat damage and doesn't always guarantee success) -- Requires ____ magic skills

You get the basic idea. Anyway, you could in theory just make a big load of passive upgrades and skills that cost some number of skill points or exp (whichever) and then assign either modifiers or factors or hardcoded values that vary based on who is trying to train in those abilities. Kind of like cross-class skills vs. class skills, while at the same time allowing some uniqueness in a class by giving them abilities that only that archetype could have. You could also have a hardcap on what route a player goes, or prohibit to one direction. For instance, your Warrior could pursue a magic study and become a kind of Mageknight yet forfeit higher training in arms for the use of exclusive magic-based boosts to his abilities (for instance, self-only elemental damage and defense), whereas a Wizard pursuing arms would have more defense available as well as various combat tricks (Wizard-only skills) but not get the most powerful spells.

That's my take on it, anyway.


So my answer to the OP is "Hell yes... if done carefully."

[Big W Powah!]

As far as the healer dicussion goes. Thats great for one style. the Lifetap Healer.

but thats not all there is to it. what about a cleric who builds holy power by doing forces with the foes of their gods, and uses those holy points for very powerful nukes, heals, debuffs, or short term buffs? The cleric's main lines would consist of melee damage, damage shields, and long term buffs (which cost from the same pool a warrior's abilities do), and they MUST do battle to heal effectively.


What about the shaman who must actively commune with the spirits, summoning pets and assigning them people to guard/heal? Or placing powerful wards on a player, allowing that player to activate the heal/ds/what have you effect at any given time?

What about the Priest who stands in the middle of combat shouting powerful holy chants that are AE heals, or powerful dots, which require player interaction, similar to eq1 style bard songs? (some method without the carpel tunnel-inducing twisting)

Theres a million ways to get rid of whack a mole to some extent (distraction)--but its always going to be there.

[Nehrak]

It is; the thing is finding ways to either disguise it, or mitigate the amount of it. At first I thought WoW was going that way, especially with Priests having serious support spells such as Sleep, Mind Rot, and Shadow Word: Fumble (all removed from the class in alpha/beta)... but well, we saw the result.

At any rate, sure you'll always have whack a mole, but one of the main issues is that NPCs always require you to have it to some extent. If they do too little damage, they're either an endurance fight (larger HP to compensate) or trivial in any context. Now, that's not to say there couldn't be, say, skills to counter skills or mitigate effects of abilities NPCs have, but that's one for the designers, really. We all know what's involved in the process of combat, but it's one thing to bitch and another thing to put your money where your mouth is as far as dealing with design issues. I think Furor could tell us about that firsthand, and by that I mean talking about how to fix/do it and actually fixing/doing it are two very distinct and separate things.

[xilsharn]

Originally Posted by Big W Powah!

As far as the healer dicussion goes. Thats great for one style. the Lifetap Healer.

but thats not all there is to it. what about a cleric who builds holy power by doing forces with the foes of their gods, and uses those holy points for very powerful nukes, heals, debuffs, or short term buffs? The cleric's main lines would consist of melee damage, damage shields, and long term buffs (which cost from the same pool a warrior's abilities do), and they MUST do battle to heal effectively.

You stole my idea!

[Lejina Bloodbath]

Originally Posted by xilsharn

A guy who has decided to min-max a tanking warrior was probably the worst possible example in this situation. It might have been better to make it some sort of psionicist-rogue who wants to cast illusions, or something, but it's too late now and I don't feel like going back and changing all of it.

Heck why a min-max tanking warrior using spells couldnt be viable?
Ditch the whole weapon training, spend 70% of your points in armor (tie Taunt to armor) and the remaining 30% in Fire, and voila, a tank who's doing his damage by hurling fireballs.

[Rezz]

I gotta get more familiar with the development tools (just going through the motions now) but is it possible to give synergy bonuses based upon what types of skills you have, such as if "Armor" is above a certain% you get tank abilities, and if Fire is above a certain percentage you get Fire abilities, but if both are above a combined percentage, you get Firey Tank abilties?

[Nehrak]

From what I've been reading, it seems like there's only basic types supported for what a skill or a spell can do, rather than allow for customized abilities. I haven't pursued it too heavily, though, so I don't know if the engine allows for you to make specialized functions for the purposes of leet-hax skills that key off player data.

[Zinke]

Originally Posted by Big W Powah!

As far as the healer dicussion goes. Thats great for one style. the Lifetap Healer.

but thats not all there is to it. REST CUT FOR LENGTH

Yea, your other ideas is basically what I was touching on in the last paragraph. Make healing a byproduct of participating in the fight itself, i.e. damaging the mobs. It doesn't have to all be direct life drain spells, I just went into detail on that specific idea.

A 'tank' class that can heal themselves/others by doing certain combat moves. Think of the WoW warrior revenge ability, but instead of doing damage to the mob, it heals the person with lowest health in group for X amount. Or, another similar reactive ability that intercepts the next attack the mob does to an alternate person. A really good tank could actually pick up slack for shitty healers if played properly, and vice versa.

A druid type class who has a special melee attack that can place a debuff on the mob to reverse the damage of the next spell cast by the mob, long cooldown. With proper timing, a bolt volley type effect would then heal the group for that amount instead.

Give a paladin/defender class a similar idea to rage, the more they see comrades injured or the more they are attacked (whatever works for the style of the class better), the higher a faith/deity meter builds up. When it's full, they can unleash an instant heal spell to heal one member to full, or the whole group X amount.

Make the healing spells more passive overall or reactive to the mob itself. The whole problem with whack a mole, and you CAN eliminate it without trivializing content, is that a dedicated healer has to watch bars instead of the game. If you can get your healing cues from mob actions or abilities, that's fine. If you have a group heal, and you have to hit that spell in reaction to seeing the mob do an AE damage effect, it's a way more enjoyable experience then watching a health bar.

Melee abilities that place debuffs on the mob, similar to the paladin judgement of light, that then allow others hitting the mob to heal, or for the mob's attacks to heal the target for X amount (like shaman's earthen shield but on the mob instead).

There's tons of creative ideas that many MMO fans have come up with, I think developers have just gotten themselves into a creative rut, and don't spend as much energy thinking of new ways to be a healer.

[Rodyland]

Just MHO: I believe it is impossible to truly 'balance'* a skill based system.

I believe you may be able to 'balance' your 'most likely' skill combinations, but there is always going to be some tard 'warrior' who spends a bucket of skill points on some 'mage' skill and then bitches that he's out-performed by someone who's skilled up 100% 'warrior' skills or 100% 'mage' skills.

I believe this is because MMO encounter difficulty is inherently non-linear. We all know that two level 10s are no match for a PVE mob that a single level 20 would stomp all over, right? Well, what if you get a level 20 that has skilled up the equivalent of two level 10s of orthogonal skillings? You get a level 20 that is only as effective as two level 10s, and who bitches that he's been nerfed, that's what.

I could go on, but I think you're all smart enough to understand what I'm trying to say.

* I don't know what you understand 'balance' to mean, but I know some people seem to think it means 'class A DPS == class B DPS'. Some people may think it means 'every class is useful, and every class has a role to play in an effective group'. I like the second definition personally, but for this discussion I'm leaning more heavily on the first. I'm sure there are more definitions you all could all come up with.

[Nehrak]

Class 'balance' has two different meanings, is the main thing: PVE and PVP are apples and oranges when it comes to the 'b' word. (And yes, I think it's important to include some form of "sanctioned" PVP in an MMO.)