Camelot Unchained

[Threash]

- I hate stealth in PvP games as well.  Initiative is impossible to balance correctly.

It's not impossible, just very difficult. PlanetSide had stealth balanced about as good as you can hope for.

So did Shadowbane.  Having a dedicated anti-stealth class that was well done and very fun to play is by far the best solution i've seen anyone come up with.

[Nebu]

So did Shadowbane.  Having a dedicated anti-stealth class that was well done and very fun to play is by far the best solution i've seen anyone come up with.

I'll all for that... or, you know, no fucking stealth at all.

[Threash]

So did Shadowbane.  Having a dedicated anti-stealth class that was well done and very fun to play is by far the best solution i've seen anyone come up with.

I'll all for that... or, you know, no fucking stealth at all.

Why not get rid of healers? they cause as many balance problems as stealthers.  Or range classes, balancing the benefits of range and the ability to stay at range is just as hard as balancing initiative.  It is a playstyle people enjoy and it has a place in a fantasy setting, balancing is hard is no reason to get rid of it.

[Nebu]

I can see ranged classes and healers and react to their actions.  Stealthers... they're invisible until they choose to be visible.  Not the same problem at all. A good stealther will have initiative 100% of the time.  That's never going to create a fair encounter and precisely why people like playing them.  They will always have the initiative advantage and good players know how to maximize the benefit of that.   Stealth exists because it makes paying customers happy, not because it makes pvp better.

... and I'm back to a discussion from 2004.

[Threash]

Yes stealthers have the initiative advantage, healers have the advantage of being able to heal themselves, range classes have the advantage of range... etc etc etc. 

[Numtini]

With stealth, you either kill the victim in one shot (overpowered) or you don't (gimped). I've yet to see anything in the middle really.

[Falconeer]

Invisibility is an idiot mehanic that has no place in PvP games at least until the day designers will give the classes that can't disappear interesting tools to counter that. Age of Conan dealt with stealth in a cool way since all classes could go invisible (even though for different amounts of time) and all classes could dispell invisibility every 15 seconds or so. That should become the norm.
Unfortunately, there's too many out there who enjoy PvP only as long as it is unfairly rigged in their favour, so too many crappy designers design around that. Still, there are a few PvP games where there's no stealth/invisibility mechanic, and they seem to work very well, and no one complains about healing or ranged.

[Nevermore]

With stealth, you either kill the victim in one shot (overpowered) or you don't (gimped). I've yet to see anything in the middle really.

Minstrels in DAoC couldn't one-shot anything yet weren't gimped.  Same with tank specced Shadows in TOR.  In games where stealth is frustrating, they tend to give the stealth class huge upfront damage and/or enough CC to completely lock down the target.  That's really frustrating when you're the target, but for me at least the frustration is due to the huge initial damage and/or not being able to respond due to the CC.  The stealth itself is just a vehicle for those other problems.

[trias_e]

Yeah, the problem with stealth is combining it with huge burst damage or huge CC.  Stealth can be a good mechanic that adds to the complexity of the game, but stealth should be a tradeoff, implying less direct combat capability.  Without stealth we lose stealth and anti-stealth subgames, decision making when scouting enemy positions, offensive feints (assuming that stealthers have scouted them), scouting enemy positions in general, and a higher level of uncertainty in general.  These are good things that help gameplay stay interesting and keep the game more than just numbers.  Stealth in DAOC was bad (except for minstrel as was pointed out).  It's just not the way stealth should be.  I believe stealth in EVE, for example, is done much better (although I'm not an EVE player so I can't say for certain).

[Nebu]

Stealth for scouting = good.  Stealth for killing or gap closing = bad. 

Stealth + damage + CC = VERY FUCKING BAD.

[Hoax]

Stealth for scouting = good.  Stealth for killing or gap closing = bad.  

Stealth + damage + CC = VERY FUCKING BAD.

Which brings us back to the fact that in this very thread you have suggested you are excited about the third game made by the man who has introduced for sure the #1 worst CC at launch of an AAA western title (DAOC) and I think WAR is up there as well though I had the smarts to not pay any money for that pile of shit. Also I always felt that DAOC's stealth classes were much more abusive than anything I'd seen in EQ1, AC1 or AO which might have come a bit later. What was that one stealth archer that could practically one hit cloth users from stealth at certain BG brackets? That was good times.

Mark Jacobs doesn't know shit. RvR in DAOC wasn't that special and it pisses me right the fuck off when people act like DAOC had some magical formula. DAOC's RvR has the same drawbacks as Planetside and the same strengths. DAOC did a much better job than Planetside 1 & 2 of not having you fight for the same shit every single day and it did a much better job than games like WAR (another jacob game) and WoW and Aion that only had two factions which means any balance problem in class/race power or population is a huge deal.

DAOC was a pretty shitty game. Horrible class balance. Horrible pve. Horrible CC systems. Horrible stealth systems. Buffbots. Healbots.

[Nebu]

I will buy it.  I will play it.  I will bitch about it.  

I know myself all too well.

Not once did I say or even express that I was excited.  It's a new option.  That is precisely how I am treating it. Well... if it ever exists.

[Goreschach]

I still can't understand why these numbnuts haven't figured out how to balance realms yet. It's so, so simple. Just have two regular and one mercenary faction.

Realm A and Realm B stab each other in the face. When a merc faction group enters a combat area, have the server ally them with whatever side needs more people. As long as one realm doesn't outnumber both the second realm plus all mercs combined you'll always be able to roughly balance things out.

[Phred]

I still can't understand why these numbnuts haven't figured out how to balance realms yet. It's so, so simple. Just have two regular and one mercenary faction.

Realm A and Realm B stab each other in the face. When a merc faction group enters a combat area, have the server ally them with whatever side needs more people. As long as one realm doesn't outnumber both the second realm plus all mercs combined you'll always be able to roughly balance things out.

And what do you do when everyone decides being a merc is the coolest and rolls there?

[Ingmar]

I still can't understand why these numbnuts haven't figured out how to balance realms yet. It's so, so simple. Just have two regular and one mercenary faction.

Realm A and Realm B stab each other in the face. When a merc faction group enters a combat area, have the server ally them with whatever side needs more people. As long as one realm doesn't outnumber both the second realm plus all mercs combined you'll always be able to roughly balance things out.

And what do you do when everyone decides being a merc is the coolest and rolls there?

Yeah this solves nothing. You still need the exact circumstance of "side A + mercs = side B", that's no more likely than "Side A = Side B", unless you can add mercs to both sides at the same time - in which case you come back to the "I can't play with my friends" problem.

[Typhon]

What about three sides ABC, low-pop sides are opened up to players from other servers (same side, so only A players can reinforce A-challenged servers) being able to port in (during times of action) as "reinforcements".

Would need some incentive to encourage folks to help out (but maybe this is as simple as giving the reinforcements intel on which servers were in need a reinforcing).  Probably need some de-incentive to discourage folks from never playing on their own server.

[Goreschach]

I still can't understand why these numbnuts haven't figured out how to balance realms yet. It's so, so simple. Just have two regular and one mercenary faction.

Realm A and Realm B stab each other in the face. When a merc faction group enters a combat area, have the server ally them with whatever side needs more people. As long as one realm doesn't outnumber both the second realm plus all mercs combined you'll always be able to roughly balance things out.

And what do you do when everyone decides being a merc is the coolest and rolls there?

Yeah this solves nothing. You still need the exact circumstance of "side A + mercs = side B", that's no more likely than "Side A = Side B", unless you can add mercs to both sides at the same time - in which case you come back to the "I can't play with my friends" problem.

Are you people completely illiterate? Being able to split mercs to both sides is the entire point. And it solves the problem of splitting people apart because those people who don't want to do that can just stick to realm a or b.

[kildorn]

I still can't understand why these numbnuts haven't figured out how to balance realms yet. It's so, so simple. Just have two regular and one mercenary faction.

Realm A and Realm B stab each other in the face. When a merc faction group enters a combat area, have the server ally them with whatever side needs more people. As long as one realm doesn't outnumber both the second realm plus all mercs combined you'll always be able to roughly balance things out.

And what do you do when everyone decides being a merc is the coolest and rolls there?

Yeah this solves nothing. You still need the exact circumstance of "side A + mercs = side B", that's no more likely than "Side A = Side B", unless you can add mercs to both sides at the same time - in which case you come back to the "I can't play with my friends" problem.

Are you people completely illiterate? Being able to split mercs to both sides is the entire point. And it solves the problem of splitting people apart because those people who don't want to do that can just stick to realm a or b.

I want to do that (be a merc), so does my friend I made while mercing, Ingmar.

Why can't we play together?

(the point they are making is that the only way to balance realms is to put hard caps in place, which also piss people off. Hell, look at PS2: they put massive XP bonuses for being outnumbered. Still doesn't matter and the players themselves choose to make massively unbalanced continents)

[Goreschach]

I still can't understand why these numbnuts haven't figured out how to balance realms yet. It's so, so simple. Just have two regular and one mercenary faction.

Realm A and Realm B stab each other in the face. When a merc faction group enters a combat area, have the server ally them with whatever side needs more people. As long as one realm doesn't outnumber both the second realm plus all mercs combined you'll always be able to roughly balance things out.

And what do you do when everyone decides being a merc is the coolest and rolls there?

Yeah this solves nothing. You still need the exact circumstance of "side A + mercs = side B", that's no more likely than "Side A = Side B", unless you can add mercs to both sides at the same time - in which case you come back to the "I can't play with my friends" problem.

Are you people completely illiterate? Being able to split mercs to both sides is the entire point. And it solves the problem of splitting people apart because those people who don't want to do that can just stick to realm a or b.

I want to do that (be a merc), so does my friend I made while mercing, Ingmar.

Why can't we play together?

(the point they are making is that the only way to balance realms is to put hard caps in place, which also piss people off. Hell, look at PS2: they put massive XP bonuses for being outnumbered. Still doesn't matter and the players themselves choose to make massively unbalanced continents)

So join a combat area with him while you're grouped.



Fucking illiterates.

[Falconeer]

Goreschach's idea has legs. I am sure players would find a way to exploit it and software house XYZ would take years to fix the loophole, but the idea is good.

[Nebu]

I can't envision the idea of a merc in DAoC (or a DAoC-like world with 3 very different factions), especially as it works within the 8-man group mechanic.  An Alb 8 man functions differently than a Mid 8 man and a mid 8 man functions differently than a Hib 8 man.  How do you create classes that fit seemlessly into all 3 realm's groups without making them overpowered to the point that everyone prefers to be a merc?  You've got racial resists to consider, racial benefits, RR5 abilities, etc.  The only thing that I could see working in all 3 realms would be an MA or assist dps, but even that would have limited utility in things like extension or keep take groups.

I am literate by the way.  

[kildorn]

I still can't understand why these numbnuts haven't figured out how to balance realms yet. It's so, so simple. Just have two regular and one mercenary faction.

Realm A and Realm B stab each other in the face. When a merc faction group enters a combat area, have the server ally them with whatever side needs more people. As long as one realm doesn't outnumber both the second realm plus all mercs combined you'll always be able to roughly balance things out.

And what do you do when everyone decides being a merc is the coolest and rolls there?

Yeah this solves nothing. You still need the exact circumstance of "side A + mercs = side B", that's no more likely than "Side A = Side B", unless you can add mercs to both sides at the same time - in which case you come back to the "I can't play with my friends" problem.

Are you people completely illiterate? Being able to split mercs to both sides is the entire point. And it solves the problem of splitting people apart because those people who don't want to do that can just stick to realm a or b.

I want to do that (be a merc), so does my friend I made while mercing, Ingmar.

Why can't we play together?

(the point they are making is that the only way to balance realms is to put hard caps in place, which also piss people off. Hell, look at PS2: they put massive XP bonuses for being outnumbered. Still doesn't matter and the players themselves choose to make massively unbalanced continents)

So join a combat area with him while you're grouped.



Fucking illiterates.

So now we either sit in a queue for an opening (waiting), or we unbalance the sides by joining in grouped increments.

This is what people are talking about, illiterate. You have to force people to either queue, or wind up with unbalanced forces.

This is one of the problems GW2 has: they balance the teams by capping player participation. This annoys the shit out of people who go "I would like to RVR. Oh look, a fucking queue."

Balancing teams in an MMO is fucking difficult unless you treat combat as a non open world experience. And people are buying in to RVR for the open world experience. This is the problem people are trying to express to you.

[Goreschach]

Where did I ever mention queues? As I said in the first post, this would only roughly balance the player numbers. If one side has maybe a half dozen more people than the other, then that's still a far better setup than the typical open world rvr 'matchup' of fifty people getting ganked by a hundred.

Illiterate.

[Rasix]

[Goreschach]

Hush, you. This is the internet.

[kildorn]

Where did I ever mention queues? As I said in the first post, this would only roughly balance the player numbers. If one side has maybe a half dozen more people than the other, then that's still a far better setup than the typical open world rvr 'matchup' of fifty people getting ganked by a hundred.

Illiterate.

But team balance isn't as clean as "we need to clear this up by a few percent", team balance (if you played daoc, or PS2, or any other 3 team game with no hard population caps) is:

60% Realm A
30% Realm B
10% Realm C

There is no minor math that fixes it. You either Queue someone, or split someone. You don't just go "B and C are allies magically!" and have anything but a still terribly unbalanced system AND lack the dynamic of a third team spoiling your plans.

[Goreschach]

Where did I ever mention queues? As I said in the first post, this would only roughly balance the player numbers. If one side has maybe a half dozen more people than the other, then that's still a far better setup than the typical open world rvr 'matchup' of fifty people getting ganked by a hundred.

Illiterate.

But team balance isn't as clean as "we need to clear this up by a few percent", team balance (if you played daoc, or PS2, or any other 3 team game with no hard population caps) is:

60% Realm A
30% Realm B
10% Realm C

There is no minor math that fixes it. You either Queue someone, or split someone. You don't just go "B and C are allies magically!" and have anything but a still terribly unbalanced system AND lack the dynamic of a third team spoiling your plans.

Fair enough, if the split is that bad there's nothing you could do about it. But that's an extreme example, and barring some kind of pre-existing balance issues I doubt you'd often see one out of three realms with only 10% population. Not saying it would never happen, just that it would be rare.

And before you tell me that this happened regularly with midgard, keep in mind that this probably had more to do with a smaller starting inequality compounding on itself as more and more people on that team left due to being chronically outnumbered.

edit: Even then, 60/40 is still a far better split than 60/30, 30/10, and 60/10. Because, lets be honest, that whole 'the two smaller factions will team up against the third' is a load of crap believed only by sociology majors, mmo developers, and people who have never spent 5 minutes in an online game, ever.

[Scold]

Unfortunately, there's too many out there who enjoy PvP only as long as it is unfairly rigged in their favour, so too many crappy designers design around that.

[Ingmar]

But that's an extreme example

An "extreme" example that existed on over half of DAOC's servers at its peak. And it wasn't just Midgard.

[kildorn]

I'll try and remember to take a continent screen picture tonight if I log in to PS2. It's really not that extreme an example, players kind of fall into the idea of the least effort required for a reward.

Anywho, I never really believe that a third realm makes things inherently more fair, just a bit more interesting (meaning a third party is out there doing it's own thing). From DAOC experience when you have a 60/30/10 split instead of ganging up against the 60, you have the 30 and 10 basically fucking each other and trying to avoid the 60. A reward system to encourage beating up on the winners would be useful, and the idea in theory of forcing the smaller realm into an adhoc alliance with the other small realm is decent. We're mostly just whining about historical experience with extreme population mismatches and the various ways people tried to avoid that in later games.

It's really hard to try and get the populations matched up without eventually turning players away. And it's really shitty to want to buy the game and be told you can't play on server X with your friends because there's a massive population fuckup on that server. I don't really have a good way to solve that.

[Ingmar]

I don't really have a good way to solve that.

That's because, despite years of armchair designers going "GOD YOU GUYS IT IS SO SIMPLE TO FIX", there is no good way to solve it. You have to cut the baby somewhere.

[Venkman]

I still can't understand why these numbnuts haven't figured out how to balance realms yet. It's so, so simple. Just have two regular and one mercenary faction.

Realm A and Realm B stab each other in the face. When a merc faction group enters a combat area, have the server ally them with whatever side needs more people. As long as one realm doesn't outnumber both the second realm plus all mercs combined you'll always be able to roughly balance things out.

The dissonance is between "match" and "world".

What you describe is fine for a server reset that occurs every four hours. But the promise of RvR was combined with "MMO". You can't have a win condition and a game mechanic that promoted constant fighting and positively-reinforcement constantly-forward character progression and expect a natural balancing of population through equally well-designed content for all races and realms. Shit, fucking bottomless-pit Blizzard couldn't pull that off for launch year WoW.

You either give up permanence for match based fun or you give up the idea of balance in favor of a permanent win condition.

Anything else is a decade long running argument of what could have been if onlies...

[Phred]

Where did I ever mention queues? As I said in the first post, this would only roughly balance the player numbers. If one side has maybe a half dozen more people than the other, then that's still a far better setup than the typical open world rvr 'matchup' of fifty people getting ganked by a hundred.

Illiterate.

If so many people are "illiterate" maybe you should try making the effort to write more clearly.

[Paelos]

PvP thread, unchained.

[Draegan]

So join a combat area with him while you're grouped.



Fucking illiterates.

You'll have to forgive Ingmar. If the game isn't WOW and very very casual, then he thinks you're an idiot and all your ideas are fucking retarded automatically.