test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Balance, wouldn't PVP 'balance' ruin the PVE experience?
phebus75
Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 3 Arc User
Nerfing for the sake of PVP will ruin PVE.
Surely a PVP and PVE build per character including separate equipment make loads of sense.
So called balancing for the sake of PVP will just make the group builds of the future totally vanilla which would be a tragedy.
I feel that PVP is currently imbalanced, every time I go on I see almost no DC's a few GFs and GWF's but loads of different TR's and CW's, which is a real shame.
I hope the devs are considering this, as games like the original Everquest are enjoyable BECAUSE each class had imbalanced strengths and weaknesses in PVE that made the game fun.
No one is willing to go through leveling hell in a nerfed PVE environment just to satisfy a bunch of lvl 60 PVPers. The DC is already hard enough to level solo with current dynamics, where will the game be with no clerics?
Surely a PVP and PVE build per character including separate equipment make loads of sense.
So called balancing for the sake of PVP will just make the group builds of the future totally vanilla which would be a tragedy.
I feel that PVP is currently imbalanced, every time I go on I see almost no DC's a few GFs and GWF's but loads of different TR's and CW's, which is a real shame.
I hope the devs are considering this, as games like the original Everquest are enjoyable BECAUSE each class had imbalanced strengths and weaknesses in PVE that made the game fun.
No one is willing to go through leveling hell in a nerfed PVE environment just to satisfy a bunch of lvl 60 PVPers. The DC is already hard enough to level solo with current dynamics, where will the game be with no clerics?
Post edited by phebus75 on
0
Comments
Usually followed by: Fickle Pvpers leave game for next new shiny game, since PvP time/emotional investment is non-existant, only KD matters. Pvers stuck with <font color="orange">HAMSTER</font> mechanics bequeathed to them by the PvP crowd that doesn't play anymore.
Despite seeing various marketing breakdowns and articles that demonstrably show PvPers as the least profitable demographic, with the shortest loyalty, it never fails to amaze me when Publishers persistently wreck PvE in games primarily designed for PvE (afailk D&D has no real mechanic for pvp, since the whole decades old system was designed for co-op). I guess the profit is made on high churn.
*Just check these forums, some of the pvp-pros here are responsible for huge amounts of posts compared to other players, in fact a couple seem to have made it their mission to reply to every post with PvP as it's subject, mainly in attempt to retain to retain broken/griefing mechanics like spawn camping and Tenelady enchants.
But I think we have a generally different perspective on balance than the devs. Basically all we got are the scoreboards to go on and that's rather limited.
It's also not as black and white as pvp'ers vs pve'ers. The DC got a pve nerf which had nothing to do with pvp, the CW had some skills buffed/corrected for pve, the TR got both a pvp and a pve nerf, the GWF an overall buff and I don't what the hell is wrong with GF's, either they get you locked in that bouncing betty rotation, or it's an even match, so no comment on GF's because I really don't know.
I very much share the OP's concern, especially with all those ridiculous nerf-suggestions floating around.
Or damage and duration of stuns is heavily nerfed only in pvp and left alone in pve.
In another PW game dmg done in pvp is 1/3 or that done in pve and all stun durations are 3 times shorter.
Bottom point: There is no need to balance skills for both.
Rofl. Original D&D is a pen&paper game played without any computer. So, in D&D there is anytime PvP, because you don't play against a KI but a human dungeon master (though, sometimes they also smell like Orcs). Often enough you fight not against monster but antagonists which have class levels like your character.
So real D&D is pure PvP.
I want this class in NW.
Your enlightened perspective is flawed, Life proves this and considering PVP and PVE as the same is like comparing a battlefield, with a peaceful village. Both instances people exist within their environment but attitudes, perspectives and feelings change, moral mechanics change as does acceptable behaviors and you cannot be in both at the same time so I don't agree that PVP and PVE exists in the same context.
If PVE and PVP were within the same context why would PVP changes cause detriment in PVE and why would there be....
A) Classes in the game?
It doesn't really matter if a D&D game is in the MMO genre. If they're using D&D classes and powers, it's unlikely that there will ever be decent balance for direct PvP combat.
This made me laugh thx.
60 GF(14.5GS) Cersei
60 CW(12.4GS) Shadis
60 TR(12.2GS) Dijkstra
60 GWF(12.2GS) Winnowill
45 DC(WIP) Daenerys
The whole bend over who is balanced against whom revolves around the speed at which one dies. And that is really the only measure one has of how well you might be doing. Sure you can point to the red and blue lines there but lets be honest, if you are personally getting farmed by some other class, you are not going to feel like you are doing anything even if your side is “winning”.
You can tie this directly to the fact that the developers do not know what they are doing or they have a product that they just haven’t done anything with as of yet. Adhering to some simple basic precepts would produce some PVP that even the losers would have a hard time calling bad.
PVP’ers want to fight
One shots and instant kills are very, very bad for PVP. Opponents who can’t be hit, found or affected are also very, very bad for PVP. Spending all your time laying on the ground and then dying is very, very bad for PVP. These seem like no brainers but no brain is exactly what has been applied so far.
Players want to mix it up, they want to trade blows and fight. When an engagement is over right away the loser feels like they did nothing at all, like they never had a chance. If you are in charge of designing PVP this is a cardinal sin. If you are in charge of the PVP experience and its perception, this is where you start.
Players appreciate diversion
Players do not always want to stand in front of their opponent and fight. Giving them a chance to do something else beside stand there and wail on each other just like the moment before and the moment before that adds interest. A new way to maneuver adds interest. A teleporter that will send you directly to a random opponent, an on-rails mount that will charge across the battle field and you can ride it jumping off where ever you like, chokepoints, high bridges, tunnels under the battle field, mounted weapons that can be fired along limited fields of fire if you control that weapon.
Give players different ways to get something done rather than same old same old.
Players like less predictability
Knowing how the game is going to go from the spawn in is a terrible feeling. So pepper the engagements with small advantages available to everyone to make gameplay fast and exciting.
Healing a lot can trigger a healing pet that briefly follows your team with aoe heals for you. Steady dps has a chance to trigger a “bloodlust” dps buff for a short time. And getting owned can trigger helpful buff for you as well.
Getting CCed multiple times can trigger a “juggernaught” temporary cc immunity, dying many times can trigger a wave of AI monsters for your side.
Having a fight that goes back and forth quickly keeps a player from seeing a clear winner or loser until the very end, keeps everyone on their toes and guarantees that everyone can be useful by doing their jobs even if they can’t stand up to a 1v1 engagement.
Just some basic thought along these lines can turn PVP from a lackluster griefing session into a fast moving roller-coaster ride requiring skill, reaction and adaptation and providing opportunities for fun even if you aren’t murdering everyone you meet.
It can be done. The question is, does anyone who matters care.
You can balance PvP seperate from PvE by adjusting the damage done to players compared with NPC mobs.
That doesn't always work. Reducing damage done impacts pure DPS players more than any other class, therefore it could be considered a nerf.
Doing less damage to other players would actually be a buff to the healing classes, as it would be to any defensive classes.
What about control spells - should they remain as potent in a game where your damage dealers have to do less damage in PvP?
this is pretty standard in mmorpg pvp, there is no point doing pvp if u can get cc and killed before u can even have a chance to enter in a command.
All of these things can and ARE already tweaked for PvP in this game.
Damage AND healing are scaled. Most forms of CC have their duration reduced significantly.
It's just that they're tweaked so poorly that PvP is in a horrible state in spite of it. In some ways, even because of it.
Anyway... the point is that bringing up PvE balance concerns in a PvP balance topic is a meaningless and unproductive red herring since circa 1998. They can and, for the most part, are balanced separately. When they aren't and the effects of a balance change bleed from one to the other, that is a failure on part of the developer.
Bitter experience has taught me that most MMO's have a very short window of playability (for me at least) before the nerf bat kills the game. I don't think I've ever played any MMO for more than a few months after release.
I'm hoping NW will be different, but I don't have my hopes up. I keep remembering the saying "The squeaky wheel gets the grease".