Sorry what did you mean by this sentence ? ''1) More builds should be viable. I made the example of aoe WL build because I know about that, does SW have a melee aoe dps build? in case should be viable too''farng84 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:23 pmThat is a question that should have been asked the original game developers when they made a 4 classes mix mirror...I cannot give you an exact answer. Why cant' mara jump around too and join the other three club? I have no clue on this either (and I don't care).ActAppalled wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 10:54 am
Dont compare mSH and mSW ? Why ? These 2 careers have the most similarity if you compare them and of all these 4 way mirror classes SH-SW-WL-Mara only ASW is left out without meaningful aoe as a mdps. Destro can have +1aoemds but order cannot ? and aoe is not only king in city its also extremely good in RvR+Most Scenarios as well, how is it fair and balanced while MSH-WL-Mara can have everything: Single target focus, good aoe, utility and ASW cannot because it has good single target ? Edit : If MSH and MSW isnt intended to be mirrored who is the mirror of the SW ?
By the way what you are saying as a counter arguments are exactly the points I made.
1) More builds should be viable. I made the example of aoe WL build because I know about that, does SW have a melee aoe dps build? in case should be viable too (although you cannot expect to retain the same ranged single target power while your melee aoe dps gets powered up...it should always be a tradeoff. Otherwise we could just take a single class, give it best heal,rdps and aoe mdps (but ranged too why not) and lose all variety in favour of immortal juggernauts.
2) I said aoe is more important on RvR due to the amount of ppl, of course is useful in all situation but less for smaller scale battles. Not sure where aoe is king of city came from.
3)I do not think destro should have more viable options, I want to see class variety (and suitable builds variety) on both sides! for example, if WH works awesome on scenario it should have a place in city too (not 10 of them ofc)
Hope I clarified my points
Percieved Bias and Game Balancing
- agemennon675
- Posts: 506
Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing
Destruction: 40-BG / 40-DoK / 40-Chosen / 37-Mara / 37/Sorc / 36-SH / 36-Choppa / 24-Shaman / 16-WE
Order: 40-SW / 40-SM / 40-WP / 40-WL / 39-Kotbs / 38-BW / 33-AM / 22-WH / 16-RP / 12-Slayer
Order: 40-SW / 40-SM / 40-WP / 40-WL / 39-Kotbs / 38-BW / 33-AM / 22-WH / 16-RP / 12-Slayer
Ads
Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing
Im sure bad players will always find something. Destruction winning city 3:1 and still chat is always whine.starness88 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:13 pm Playing both realm too. Destro has reason too but not order. But order whined enough to get destro nerf.
Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing
Sorry but the flaw is in the assumption, not in the observation. The correct idea would have been observing that pug often lacks healers, which is possibly because random players tend to blame them for everything (another direct observation). The issue with observation is that you need a pool, the bigger the pool the better. That is why the bigger numbers provide a more precise statistic and usually do not deny the individual observations (although they might normalise them a little)ActAppalled wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:17 pm
I have leveled melee DPS strictly through scenarios on Destro and almost every instance felt like a lack of healers (or only DPS Shamans) while Order had like at least 4 actual healing classes, leading my direct observation to assume that Destro lacks healers and Order has an over abundance in leveling SCs... until I levelled on Order (where I'm playing now) and my team never had healers (or they were DPS AM) and Destro always had more actual healers. Do you see the problem with direct observation and how flawed it can be? Now consider City and the direct observation of a person that always ques in a 24 premade and some one that solo ques for City each time, those are going to be two starkly different direct observations.
I agree that organization is only part of the problem, balance is another. However, like I said, it is not balance in terms of sheer damage numbers, which might even be in favour of order in many cases, but more about build and utilities linked to class variety balance.ActAppalled wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:17 pm Just for the record, I don't fully disagree or discount the organisational issues on Order, I just don't agree it's the sole reason for the skwed City win rates and as far as I'm concerned, balance (epecially with the melee ball) is skewed in Destro favour, to me it's as obvious as night and day.
Because like you said it's a 4 way mirror, you have to consider 4 classes at the same timeActAppalled wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:17 pm Why not, SW and WL are jointly mirrored by Mara and SH, the point remains that one of those 4 classes is not exactly viable in city when compared with the other 3 (when looking at current melee city meta) and the unviable one happens to be on Order.
Yup, I will repeat ad nauseam, make more builds viable, allow a larger class variety. Also consider this if I know my enemy is WL and WP (1 build each only) either they are completely broken or I can design a counter strategy in no time. If I fight 9 different classes each with 2-3 possible builds? not that easy to counterActAppalled wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:17 pm So we do agree it's a balance issue and not a strictly organisational issue then? Good.
Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing
I mean:agemennon675 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 12:34 pm Sorry what did you mean by this sentence ? ''1) More builds should be viable. I made the example of aoe WL build because I know about that, does SW have a melee aoe dps build? in case should be viable too''
Improve existing build options to make them playable (hope it reads better). In my previous post I made the example of WL aoe build being bad because I am aware of this issue. Does SW also have aoe option for his melee build? if yes and it is bad it should be made playable
Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing
Accusations of bias are just like kids getting mad and claiming that mommy and daddy loves their sibling more.
Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing
During EU prime time Order organisation isn't that bad, playing healer I can get into an organised warband if I want to quite easily, and could probably get in one almost every City if I wanted to. These warbands have discord, main assist, following one leader etc just like you would expect as a basic organised group. During EU prime the realm chat is always full of people asking for members for groups, so while it isn't obviously as good as Destro its not like 80% of instances are pug. Even in the Pug ones you are likely to get some formed 6 man groups. So organisation can't account for the full reason for the discrepancy in win ratio.aardvak001 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 06, 2020 4:22 pm
I'd be interested to hear your experience of how organised order are, specifically around city time. Because if my friend's 20% is in any way accurate, then buffs or nerfs based on city winrate is entirely wrong.
If your main is WH or SW then your experience might be 80% pug but as tank or healer it is probably 80% premade. My experience isn't that Order lack healers either, rather they lack tanks and have far too much rdps and the city instance clearly favours the melee train. Perhaps one city could be reworked so one city favours ranged and one favours melee, big job but could help balance the problem.
One issue is probably that there doesn't seem to be hardly any Order big guilds who can make a full guild warband, maybe only one or two and in most cases probably none. There are probably far too many small guilds where many of the high rr experienced players stick with rather than abandoning them like they should. Some form alliance warbands but I guess that isn't quite the same as playing with a regular leader.
-
- Posts: 9
Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing
cool, that's interesting to hear. That certainly sounds like there are fewer organised groups on order than destro, which is obviously going to give destro an advantage, even if all classes were exact mirrors. This is where i'd try to change the game. Make it more attractive to make a premade and reward sensible setups more. At the moment a 1* only gives 3 more royals to a 100% tryhard side compared to a side that just sits in spawn, because of the way bags are given.Gurf wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:51 pmDuring EU prime time Order organisation isn't that bad, playing healer I can get into an organised warband if I want to quite easily, and could probably get in one almost every City if I wanted to. These warbands have discord, main assist, following one leader etc just like you would expect as a basic organised group. During EU prime the realm chat is always full of people asking for members for groups, so while it isn't obviously as good as Destro its not like 80% of instances are pug. Even in the Pug ones you are likely to get some formed 6 man groups. So organisation can't account for the full reason for the discrepancy in win ratio.aardvak001 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 06, 2020 4:22 pm
I'd be interested to hear your experience of how organised order are, specifically around city time. Because if my friend's 20% is in any way accurate, then buffs or nerfs based on city winrate is entirely wrong.
If your main is WH or SW then your experience might be 80% pug but as tank or healer it is probably 80% premade. My experience isn't that Order lack healers either, rather they lack tanks and have far too much rdps and the city instance clearly favours the melee train. Perhaps one city could be reworked so one city favours ranged and one favours melee, big job but could help balance the problem.
One issue is probably that there doesn't seem to be hardly any Order big guilds who can make a full guild warband, maybe only one or two and in most cases probably none. There are probably far too many small guilds where many of the high rr experienced players stick with rather than abandoning them like they should. Some form alliance warbands but I guess that isn't quite the same as playing with a regular leader.
Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing
It's usually true.
Order: 70 AM / 76 RP/ 72 Knight/ 58 WH
Destro: 82 Sham / 79 Zealot/ 70 DoK /70 Magus /68 Mara
Many alts on both sides now ruined by new currency change
Destro: 82 Sham / 79 Zealot/ 70 DoK /70 Magus /68 Mara
Many alts on both sides now ruined by new currency change
Ads
Re: Percieved Bias and Game Balancing
Spoiler:
Basically you'd need to start at why people CANNOT organize, before you get to why they won't.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 169 guests