Trending Games | ArcheAge | Dragon Age: Inquisition | Elder Scrolls Online | World of Warcraft

  Network:  FPSguru RTSguru
Login:  Password:   Remember?  
Show Quick Gamelist Jump to Random Game
Members:2,645,618 Users Online:0
Games:686  Posts:6,082,328

Show Blog

Link to this blogs RSS feed

MMORPG.com Staff Blog

The staff of MMORPG.com gets together to bring you some behind the scenes insights on stories, the industry and the site itself.

Author: staffblog

Contributors: BillMurphy,MikeB,garrett,SBFord,Grakulen,

Community Spotlight: Is PvP Balance Really Needed?

Posted by MikeB Thursday June 2 2011 at 3:15PM
Login or Register to rate this blog post!

This week's Community Spotlight focuses on the thread "Does PvP have to equal Everything can beat everything?" by Swollen_Beef. In the thread, Swollen_Beef observes that developers have trended towards allowing all classes to be on even footing with each other in the PvP found in today's MMOs and polls the MMORPG.com community on their thoughts on the matter:

Should a cloth wearing healing class be afforded the same chance to beat a chain wearing DPS class?

Or should a developer flat out refuse to allow the everyone can beat everyone mentality?

in EVE you wont see a logistics ship roll up on a HAC and stand toe to toe with one. 

But in WoW.....

Slapshot1188 is equally disturbed at the trend towards balanced PvP play:

The quest for PvP "balance" has ruined the vast majority of PvP games.  PvP has turned into an E-Sport.. with scoreboards and timers.  I don't want to play CTF or deathmatch or king of the hill.. if I did I'd do it in a FPS.   I just want any PvP to be a natural part of the world in which I am playing.  With real repercushions.

Balance between classes is not only something that I don't feel has to exist... but it shouldn't even be a development goal.  I don't care if Johnny Fireball can kick my ass one on one.  That just means I should bring a friend.  It adds variety to the game and an element of the unknown instead of everything being cookie-cutter.

Edit to add: If we want balance in a game we shuld just remove levels and skills.. and equipment.  Everyone is even...   doesn't sound like I game that I would personally want to play though.

Reizla feels quite strongly about the ability for support classes to play an offensive role in PvP:

Short answer: NO

Seen it happen in Aion too where a healer (me)  kicked a tank, only because of the healing... Lame IMO. healer = support and certainly no PvP class.

Look at Lineage II (odly enough same developer as Aion). I think there they've graped the concept of healers & buffers as they should be - 100% support class. No main PvP but keep the actual PvPers alive.

Cernan appears to be the lone voice of dissent in the discussion so far:

Short answer:  Yes.

As another poster said, the question isn't always that simple.  The cloth wearing healer shouldn't be able to beat the chain wearing melee in melee combat.  The healer should also be forced to heal more than damage making the combat long and drawn out.  The melee should ideally just give up because of the length of combat.  Oh how I miss thee DAoC.

To use DAoC references, I believe they did a lot of things right in this regard.

Wardens - awesome support class.  They could cast "bubbles" to negate one source of damage every few seconds.  They also had some minor healing.  However, their own damage was extremely weak.  You could literally fight a warden for 3 to 5 minutes.  Do they run out of mana or do you eventually die a slow death to them.  Solution - bring a second person.  The bubble only negates one damage source.  Bring two and the warden goes down.

Bolt casters - The longest range magic in the game.  Most bolt casters had 2 bolts on long recast timers with some weak DDs.  The bolts could be blocked by shield wearers.  They were extremely damaging.  Most classes would die if hit by both.  However, if you could block the bolts or get into melee range then the caster was dead.

I also miss how DAoC had crowd control classes.  Everyone didn't have stuns, silences, fears, or mezzes.  You had classes that specialized in crowd control.  They weren't much good at anything else, but they were great at controlling entire groups of other people.  Now you have games like in Rift were melee plate wearers have AE fear.  You also have plate wearers with leaps and rogues with teleports to close the distance to casters.  The point is supposed to be that the caster is strong from far away.  You shouldn't be able to instantly close the distance.  Don't get me wrong.  I'm not just blaming Rift.  I still play it.  Other games do this as well.

I'm definitely a bit more "progressive" on this front. I don't like the rigidity of class roles in PvP, I'm definitely a fan of the way the lines have been blurred over time. For example, I loved the Archmage revamp in Warhammer Online as it allowed me to drain heal, damaging enemy players while supporting my team with heals. I was still healing, but I was also contributing offensively. I'm not a fan of the idea that "healers" should just sit in the back and play whack-a-mole with healthbars and never get any action themselves. However, that doesn't mean I want to see developers strive to put everyone on equal footing without a conscious effort being made in a character's build and/or equipment and a resultant trade-off for doing so. My Archmage could heal well as a hybrid offensive/support spec, but probably not as well as an Archmage specialized purely for healing, and that trade-off was fine to me.

hayes303 writes:

I think its perfectly fine to have some classes better than others at certain things. I always hate how pvp balance in so many games train wrecks the pve side of it. 

Thu Jun 02 2011 4:07PM Report
Kendane writes:

I honestly feel that sometimes, maybe that class A is just outright going to beat class B, however, they may always lose to class C.  If nothing else they should have a much harder chance.  Take the RTS Shogun 2 Total War for example.  Archers, who make make a dent, are generally going to get mowed down by calvery.  However, they do quite a number on melee guys.  The calvary on the other hand will get torn apart by spear users.  I may have missed a few things, still new to that game, but its a sort of rock, paper, scissors, and personally, I think that works rather well. 

Thu Jun 02 2011 4:33PM Report
Athcear writes:

This kind of need for balance is more and more necessary the closer you get to 1v1 deathmatches.  With bigger groups, the addition to the group's power is more important than direct combat ability.  The same is true with objectives beyond simply killing your enemies.  If you need to capture control points, or capture a flag, then mobility is important, too.  Subterfuge and stealth can factor into this, as well.

In short, bigger groups and more different objectives remove the need for this "balance".

Thu Jun 02 2011 4:37PM Report
Mykell writes:

People clamour for balance because they solo queue up for whatever pvp instances the game has where hardly anyone works as a team. Because the sides are of equal numbers they assume that pvp will be fair and balanced. Hence when they are killed by some class they barely hurt they trot off to the forums to complain.

Instances are also great places for hard hitting dps lone wolves to play in as they just use the rest of the team as a distraction while they rack up kills. Leaderboards also contribute to this behaviour.

Remove instances and bring back proper open world pvp and maybe there will be less cries of unbalanced pvp (thou i somehow doubt it).

Thu Jun 02 2011 5:40PM Report
Kyleran writes:

I think as much as possible Developers should make it so that if a particular class is played correctly, it has a chance of defeating an equal opponent, but its OK if some classes just flat out can't beat a particular one (rock, paper, scissors approach).

Crowd control should be drawn back to specific classes again, and not spread around the board. 

Someone else said it before, DAOC was the closest I've seen to a great system in MMORPG PVP, because in the end, MMO PVP isn't about fairness, its about gaining (unfair) advantage over your opponent and winning.

Keep e-sport combat in FPS games where its belongs.

Thu Jun 02 2011 5:46PM Report
Sensai writes:

The lone dissent is not actually a dissent if you read it correctly.  The warden reference was the only attempt at dissent and the warden is far from a cloth caster.  Along with pulsing blade turn, the warden came with endurance regen, self haste, buffs, and stuns via melee and shield styles to go along with heals.  So comparing a tank with a huge amount of tools to a cloth healer is not really accurate.  The rest of his post actually argues in favor of a rock, paper, scissors approach.

Just as real life military units have strengths and weaknesses, pvp units should follow suit.  There are already too many people calling for "god" toons that can beat anything they come across.  MMORPGS were never really designed to be twitched based pvp games.  At least in the old days, you were expected to have at least a minimal amount of intelligence so that strategy was actually involved.  Knowing what classes matched up against others, which targets to attack first, and how to counter others was the name of the game.  Now, it is just a matter of who has better gear. 

Being a good player should always matter, but it should never result in the cat beating the lion.

Thu Jun 02 2011 6:35PM Report
TheCrow2k writes:

You cannot ever achieve 1v1 PvP balance in class based games, not gonna happen.

 

Besides its an MMO, the goal should be closer to creating group PvP balance not 1v1.

Thu Jun 02 2011 8:18PM Report
ZoeMcCloskey writes:

Paper Rock Scissors is better than any setup of everyone should be able to compete with everyone

It has always been my view that every single class in a game should have at least SOMETHING else they fear.  Assassins(stealthers) are far too often easy mode who can dictate if/when/how a fight starts and dominate all classes.  Healers are far too often able to just outlast and survive and kill things they never should be able to.  Things are better whent here is some class interdependency and if everyone has some form of achilles heel so that they are forced to play smarter and not just assume they are OP and going to autowin against anything.

Thu Jun 02 2011 8:25PM Report
BarCrow writes:

I brought this up in a blog I made here a very long time ago. I think  not.  This is only to appease arena style pvp. Same classes in 1vs1 should be balanced. Anything other than that is  debateable imo. That's why you should need groups to begin with..each one complimenting the other in any situation..PvP or PVe....not just a holy trinity.  In Old PnP ..AD&D for example..you'd be hard pressed to find a 15th level thief that could beat a 15the level warrior( with comparable magic items) unless the thief got a major backstab in ahead of time. It is very unlikely that either of them could beat a 15th level Mage ...or even a 15th level Cleric. The mage and cleric would be better matched but I'd give it to the mage most times.

Thu Jun 02 2011 9:42PM Report
sonoggi writes:

yes, pvp balance is very much needed. pvp balance does not exist in any current MMO (EVE comes closest) because pvp is an aftertought. it took blizz 5 years to learn that every class needs: CC, CC escape, mitigation and burst to be worth anything in pvp. what i love about Anet is that theyre ensuring everyone is on equal footing right off the bat in GW2. theyre the only devs right now who pay pvp the respect it needs.

Thu Jun 02 2011 11:17PM Report
sonoggi writes:

oh and regarding rock paper scissors and 1v1 balancing: you can go either way, but each has to be done properly.

with rock, paper, scissors, there needs to be an environment that allows the scissors to survive or escape rock's attacks. in LoL for example, there are champs that own face in 1v1, but the ones on the receiving end can either run under a tower or into the bushes. Global Agenda has a similar system in which you can either take cover or take flight with a jetpack.

the other way to balance a game is around 1v1. GW2's classes will all be balanced around 1v1 thanks to the many possible loadouts for each class. many of EVE's ships were balanced for 1v1 encounters.

Blizz failed and continues to fail because the devs simply dont know which way theyre swinging. first they tried the 1v1 balancing, then they realized half of their specs were not viable, then they enforced the whole 5v5 and rated BG to make up for the fact that most classes are actually balanced around rock paper scissors so that scissors can hide in the crowd from rock's attacks.

whichever approach you take, you better know which way youre swingin as youre designing the game, otherwise youre not really a professional.

Thu Jun 02 2011 11:26PM Report
NeVeRLiFt writes:

WoW has shown trying to balance classes around pvp/arena can hurt pve, even ruining classes and what once made the class what it was and fun.

Blizz should have implemented skills that only worked for pve, Guildwars did this and it worked great and kept each their classes fresh and great for pve while not unbalancing pvp.

 

GG Blizz... long live pole humping!

Fri Jun 03 2011 1:48AM Report
ZoeMcCloskey writes:

Agreed, LoL has a good system setup, I play Sona main and can run and run and run away! hehe

Fri Jun 03 2011 2:39AM Report
paroxysm writes:

The problem with "balance" is the missconception of how it "has" to be.  Too many companies take the worst approaches to trying to achieve balance and destroy what makes the classes/specs/etc unique.  Which, is why someone chose them to begin with.  If you take that role away in the pursuit of what you think is balance, you become the same as everyone else.  Which, is boring.  Why make the choice when it's barely even an illusion of choice.  Homogenization never makes balance better.  It just makes all classes feel bland and unoriginal with very few differences that end up being the catching points on balance anyway.

 

I tend to think of balance in terms of relativity.  There will always be a best and worst if you ask someone their opinion.  That rank will also vary with the person you ask and at what time in the game timeline you are at.  The balance question is by how much.  The question is, does that worst class have a chance against the perceived best class.  In a lot of games, which the developers claim "this game is more balanced now than ever", that worst has little to no chance against the best even if the person manning the worst is a better player.  The question is also, how does the role you play give you a way to win.  The answer to that, which most overlook, is balancing PvP and PvE encounters.  If you build them with completely different goals for damage/control/health/etc, how can you ever expect the class to be balanced in both.  Making things and gear different for both only magnifies that their goals are not the same or even similar.  Which, never helps balance at all.

Fri Jun 03 2011 8:24AM Report
paroxysm writes:

I forgot.  To the point of not balancing for one on one and only balancing for group play...  Trying to balance only one aspect is a sure fire way to fail.  Using multiple player interactions as a basis for balancing is just another cheap try at hiding problems in balance.   It adds more variables, but it's not the only way PvP happens.  Even in the largest of wars there are one on one encounters.  What about duels?  What about specific amount of players bracket matches.  Why even have a bracket for something you say you can't balance?  How silly does that make you look?  What's the point of the competition it has if it's not balanced to give acceptable results?

You have to have balance for all possible encounters that you support.  If you ignore one, it will be a problem guaranteed.  If you actually take it all into consideration, it will actually turn out to compliment other things you are trying to balance. 

Game makers need to start looking at the ENTIRE picture. 

Fri Jun 03 2011 8:30AM Report
LhynnSaint writes:

what can i say that hasnt already been said, mostly that PvP should be something minor compared to PvE, as long as all clases work equally well in PvE you dont need to concern yourself with PvP.

DDO does this rather well, its not quite there yet but its close.

When you balance PvE you keep everyone useful, when you try to balance PvP you make everyone the same.

Being useful is GOOD - Being the same as everyone else is BORING

You do not want "BORING" in a game

Fri Jun 03 2011 9:54AM Report
Tanemund writes:

Short Answer : NO.

 

I've always thought that if a ranged damage dealer catches a tank in the open field, the ranged damage dealer should have an excellent chance of winning that fight.  Visa Versa, if a tank catches a caster in a broom closet then the tank should hack that caster into little bite sized pieces.  Class balance should mean if you can catch the enemy in the right environment and situation, you've got a good chance to win.  If you keep putting yourself in a bad position for your class, you should lose. 

 

However most MMOs play like a card game.  I play my card of sword!  Ok then I use my magic shield card!  Well then I pull out my can-opener card! etc etc until someone runs out of cards. 

 

People can't stand to lose, even if they're behaving stupidly and should lose.  If you're a ranged damage dealer and you keep putting yourself into little boxes, well then you should die repeatedly until you LEARN to go somewhere else OR get some help.  However getting help in an MMO these days is derided as "Zerging" or "AJing" or choose any term you like.  In order to be a true PvP er you have to solo and so that means that you role that class which allows you to win the most as a soloer.

 

Class balance rears its ugly head in a game when people lose and decide that "there is no way that n00b should be able to beat me, even if I'm wearing pajamas and standing in a little room where I can't avoid sharp pointy sticks.  Class balance is now code for "Must Pwn All."  However we play in a world where people would rather log out or LD themselves than lose, so get used to Class Balance.

Fri Jun 03 2011 12:51PM Report
UsulDaNeriak writes:

class balancing based on pvp 1v1 ruins every game which is not purely arena pvp.

such simple.

Fri Jun 03 2011 1:16PM Report
Slapshot1188 writes:

Real PvP systems will self balance.  If "Johnny Fireball" is the DPS king class... guess who is going to get group targeted first?

 

Like I said in the quote.. if I want balance I will play an FPS.

 

MMOs need character.. they need differences.  This is why DAoC was incredible.  Each realm had unique classes that weren't mirrored in the other realms.   Yeah the fact that Minstrels could stealth, climb keep walls, wear chain armor and insta stun folks drove me nuts as a Hibernian.  that just made me hate the Albs more!

 

Will today's generation of gamer flock to a DAoC 2 type game?  I'd say probably not, as a huge amount are really looking for a "balanced" type PvP system.

 

That's fine.. there are plenty of games out there that offer, or attempt to offer "balanced" PvP.   I'm confident that there are enough people that are looking for old-school (non E-sport) PvP that would make DAoC 2 a success.  Surely not a challenge to WoW, but one doesn't have to dethrone the champion to be successful.  

I think companies would be much more successful trying to create games that play differently from WoW than just reskining it with a few slight changes (ie.. we will call our instaced E-Sport battlegrounds Warftronts!) and expecting millions of WoW players to switch.

Fri Jun 03 2011 9:40PM Report
paroxysm writes:

I think there is a very too common mistake being said here.  Not all FPS games are balanced.  They only seem it because the differences from one character to another are so small.  This will never work in an MMORPG.  Yet, some MMO makers are trying it anyway.  And yes, they are failing hard at it.    Like I said above, they are destroying the reasons people chose their class/spec to begin with. 

Instead of all the homgenization that is trying to turn an MMORPG into an FPS  in the name of balance, they need to put the uniqueness of each class/spec in the spotlight.  Everyone needs a role and it needs to be needed.  Build the encounters to actually test and use those roles instead of every encounter being a dance and dps test.  Like I said, you need to keep PvE and PvP goals close.  You can't take a defensive class and give it equal dps to a pure dps class while not giving the pure dps class equal defense and expect PvP to be ok.  But, soon as you do that, you kill identity.  That's why it's futile.  They are working from the wrong end of the scale.  It's the encounter that needs to take their role, use it, test it, and embrace it. 

"I've always thought that if a ranged damage dealer catches a tank in the open field, the ranged damage dealer should have an excellent chance of winning that fight.  Visa Versa, if a tank catches a caster in a broom closet then the tank should hack that caster into little bite sized pieces.  Class balance should mean if you can catch the enemy in the right environment and situation, you've got a good chance to win.  If you keep putting yourself in a bad position for your class, you should lose. " - Tanemund

That's sort of the point I'm trying to make.  But, it has to go a step further. 

Fri Jun 03 2011 10:31PM Report
paroxysm writes:

"Real PvP systems will self balance.  If "Johnny Fireball" is the DPS king class... guess who is going to get group targeted first?" -Slapshot1188

Yeah, but that doesn't really do anything about balance.  If a class is ignored because of how underpowered it is, that doesn't mean automatically if you ignore it that somehow it will be able to do much to any group that is "tunneling Johnny Fireball".  Depends on just how underpowered it is or broken it is.  Also, it depends on the game.  In some games tunneling a player only takes a few seconds.  With some underpowered characters, it would take minutes to make a difference.

Fri Jun 03 2011 10:53PM Report
Mufflo writes:

This might seem like the threads that complain about the complainers, but remember;

Blizzard - wow devs are the guys who made a game that brings so many people together for the PvP. When you read this you maybe think about how bad it is, but no, its the gamers who are bad. 

If the crowd asked for something, they got it. thats simple, still, this thread is just a small complaint. Classes are tried to be balanced so that more and more people can enjoy the game. If you want that team-inspired, rock-paper-scissor kind of challenge, it lies in heroic dungeons, 5v5 arena tournaments and other stuff. The battlegrounds are some kind of mash-up where anyone can come and play. 

I love playing healer. What i love about it in PvP is my ability to be there in the heat of battle, throwing dots and fear close up, and whenever I feel for it, I can just take a few steps back and start throwing heals around to keep my teammates up.

I might do it, but really, how many does it? Think about it. All those healers in the games, who originally were very divided by different classes. Ever think they might get bored with healing all day? It's a great relax to just quickly change into DPS. 

This most of the common gamers feel, and it is what has changed games, through all those complaining threads you mention. 

Remember, the game becomes what the general gamer wants it to be. Nothing will change this. This might not matter to those a little bit smaller games, but all AAA mmorpgs will or have felt it. Even GW2 who speak of being the winds of change, will slowly tilt towards being able to heal eachother a little bit more over time.

Just to mention TSW, (which i actually look forward to) they will have an amazing lot of hard work trying to balance those 500 skills. This might give opportunity to what you speak of, difined classes. They won't be official, but certain combinations of spells and skills, creating the most efficient class, will be known to everyone who plays the game.

remember, the player makes the game.

Sat Jun 04 2011 3:50AM Report
paroxysm writes:

If you really think Blizzard listens, then why do they constantly ignore players in beta of every expansion of late.  They constantly tell Blizzard which classes/specs will be overpowered and underpowered in the Beta.  Those that are overpowered go live and then get nerfed later.  The underpowered stay that way for long periods of time.  Why do they not listen to people on the PTR?  Bugs constantly go to live that are found and documented on the PTR.  If Blizzard listened to the players, Frost Mages would not be where they are right now.  Why has Enhancement been such a hotly discussed by players spec for every single expansion without much fixing going on? 

I don't seem them listening or commenting.  Even the very one sided blog from Ghostcrawler PHD never really covers anything that's controversial.  Even if it lightly touches a hot subject, it's only with a spin on it that shows they are improving on everything.  Yet, those same statements (less instacasts, less powerful instacasts, and more hard casting for example), result in exactly the opposite thing happening in game.  Actions speak way louder than words.

As to TSW, my feeling for the origninal team from FUncom working on it is pretty obvious.  Will not bother.

Sat Jun 04 2011 4:28AM Report
Slapshot1188 writes:

paroxysm writes:

"Real PvP systems will self balance.  If "Johnny Fireball" is the DPS king class... guess who is going to get group targeted first?" -Slapshot1188

Yeah, but that doesn't really do anything about balance.  If a class is ignored because of how underpowered it is, that doesn't mean automatically if you ignore it that somehow it will be able to do much to any group that is "tunneling Johnny Fireball".  Depends on just how underpowered it is or broken it is.  Also, it depends on the game.  In some games tunneling a player only takes a few seconds.  With some underpowered characters, it would take minutes to make a difference.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

That's just it.  It doesn't MATTER.  There are no underpowered characters.   A character is going to be played according to his strengths.  Maybe his strength is buffing other classes so that THEY are better.   Can that character (and should it) be able to take on most other characters one on one and win?  HELL NO.  But that character is still an important part of the group and helps the group win.  If that's not a group role you are interested in.. then choose another one.  Don't expect to always have the best of both worlds and don't be obsessed with "balance".

Sat Jun 04 2011 5:37PM Report
paroxysm writes:

"That's just it.  It doesn't MATTER.  There are no underpowered characters.   A character is going to be played according to his strengths.  Maybe his strength is buffing other classes so that THEY are better.   Can that character (and should it) be able to take on most other characters one on one and win?  HELL NO.  But that character is still an important part of the group and helps the group win.  If that's not a group role you are interested in.. then choose another one.  Don't expect to always have the best of both worlds and don't be obsessed with "balance".-Slapshot1188

Yes, there are horribly underpowered classes/specs in game.  Poor scaling is often the culprit.  Even pure dps classes can end up this way from poor scaling.  If all you do is dps and you do barely half of the top class, you are underpowered because you can't compete in your role with other players with the same role.

A pure support class is not always a good 1 on 1 class.  You can offset that in multiple ways though.  You can make them very defensive to soak damage, you can make them super mobile so they can escape, or you can give them debuffs to match their buffing so they can reduce others to their level if played properly.  There are ways.  You just have to stop and think a little.  Use a little imagination.

Sat Jun 04 2011 9:41PM Report
Meleagar writes:

The more balanced a game is, the more boring it is.  Period.

Tue Jun 07 2011 12:11PM Report
paroxysm writes:

"The more balanced a game is, the more boring it is.  Period." -Meleagar

 

I disagree.  The reason the game get's boring is because of how they try to balance the game.  Homogenization in an RPG is going against the very nature of what an RPG is about in my opinion.  

Fri Jun 10 2011 4:51AM Report
kjempff writes:

For me to be interested in pvp, the pvp has to consist of cooperation between players. Balancing generally urges players to go one on one, instead of promoting teamplay.

One on one for me is boring and doesn't give much, while doing something as a group where tactics and teamplay is the key to success is much more satisfying.

I assume pvp'ers want balance and one to one play, and that is fine with me.. I am just telling what it takes for me to find it interesting.

Mon Jun 13 2011 8:00AM Report
Skiper writes:

I thnk the best way to approach this subject is by clearly expressing what one dislikes or likes about PVP senarios.

I i like to PVP, I really hate to PVE. A lot of games currently are geared towards team PVP, and do not  put much enphasis on class balance.Even though class balance is very dificult to achieve, I think MMOs could do a lot better (IMO].

I hate situation where the class i am playing stance no chance at all against a particular class, becuase even when your playing in a team, there is always the chance of 1vs1 encounters, and there's also world PVP, PVP areas, duals etc., where you will encounter 1vs1. And we all know, too well, that those playing classes that can pawn a particular class will make a B-line to that particular class in most pvp senarios.

I ive been on both sides of this, where I know the class I am playhing can faceroll another, and am guilty as well of taking full advantage of it, lol, Because its either that or that other class, that i'l give it all i got and get no where.

Situations where a Class can keep you CCed throughout the fight where you can't do anything because the mechanics just aren't there. This situation is extremely frostrating and not to mention humiliating. And when this happends after you have just spent countless hours grinding for Gear, mats for enchantments, geming etc.., makes matters so much harder to bare. In group PVP it's sometimes harder to notice this,  , its those 1vs1, or duals, where you really know where its at, specially aftar many attemps at overcoming a particular class.

I also feel that games are making it harder and harder on melee classes on 1vs1, as they benefit from other class' CC in group battles and do so well, that they get nefed to the ground to the point that in 1vs1 its a chase battle, where the melee has to work several times harder than the caster/range class and not make a single mistake or they are doomed easily. Casters and range on the other hand, can quickly die in group battls that they are now bolstered with CC and damage mitigating abilities that totally make armor types insignificant at all, and with so much CC that it take great skill just to get in melee range of them. I don't even want to get into healers, they have screamed so much about being targeted and killed quickly in organized PVP, that now it take several ppl to kill one. Also casters have been QQ-ing about not having suficient burst, or no burst, that they have been given a burst they have to build up, but it builds too quickly, that coupled with their CC, is exactly what is making the fight for melee so dificult.

Look, Classes have their roll in a team. Caster/range are not supose to burst, they have range advantage and Control so they are the CC classes. Healers should make a significant difference in groups but not make all the difference like they currently do. They shouldn't be so hard to kill, they should depend on their team mates to CC the enemies off of them, and melee shouldn't be thougtht of as OP becuase they get the most kills in most battles, that is their roll, to burst for and get kills for their team

Games are trying to balance classes and group battles by giving every class at least two strong CCs, this is making large group battles horrible as one can go through an entire fight completely CCed and just visiting the graveyard. The solution is to go back to making classes unique, taking out all the extra CC and just make team activity, what it's supose to be, every class depends on their team for survival, be that for heals or CC.

Right now I am looking for a game that does best at reaching some kind of fair senario for all classes, no OP classes, with no great amount of grinding, good luck, right, lol.

Sat Feb 02 2013 2:14PM Report

MMORPG.com writes:
Login or Register to post a comment