15 Sep, 2007, Vladaar wrote in the 1st comment:
Votes: 0
Greetings,

I am struggling to achieve game balance with my races/classes - advanced races and multiclass options.

I have publicly posted my formulas for achieving game balance on my forums to get my players and staff opinions.

http://6dragons.org/forums/viewtopic.php...

I am wondering, other then watching a lot of arena fighting to see how class combos fair against one another if you guys have any other techniques for establishing game balance with hitpoint gains, and power distribution?

Vladaar

Edit by Kiasyn: Fixing URL.
Thanks Kiasyn, however the link was incorrect from my part, I fixed it this time though. Vladaar
15 Sep, 2007, Midboss wrote in the 2nd comment:
Votes: 0
How far? I'd say approximately 31.4 miles.

…I like to try and make sure each class/race yields something equally useful at every level. Not useful for the same purposes or even similar ones, of course, and you need to make sure to consider that some abilities will work together to become collectively better than they were alone. Of course, this goes hand-in-hand with wanting every level to yield some sort of ability, even if I have to have fewer levels to do it (assuming levels are a consideration). Quality over quantity, y'know?
15 Sep, 2007, Justice wrote in the 3rd comment:
Votes: 0
Clicked the link, it seems to take me to something that looks like a spammer page.
As opposed to: http://6dragons.org/forums/viewtopic.php...

It seems the formulas you've posted deal mostly with gains, but not the skills themselves. This will likely make it more complex.

What I do for balance is kind of a 3 phase deal. First I'd project what stats I expect the players to have and use that as a baseline. This is where your gains would be handled. Second, I'd keep an eye on the actual stats my regulars have. This will let you know if your first projections are accurate. Finally I'd build a chart of what the skills do in actual combat. It's helpful to emulate the actual players where possible. Sometimes I've moved pfiles to the code port to allow trusted players to assist in this testing. In other cases, I copy the pfiles and change the password so I can do the testing myself. And sometimes I generate my own players to fill gaps. Something like my wear template code may be helpful for this, by allowing you to generate copies of what players are wearing. Note, this uses the indexes and will not represent any modifications made to the objects.

When analyzing heal/damage skills, I tend to keep track of it's total range (min,max,ave) and a normalized version (amount/time). Damage per beat, or gain per beat is usually a nice way to make sure that 2 skills are balanced over time.

How you evaluate these values is of course determined by the aspects of your particular game, but I find that <value>/<time> is a good way to compare most skills/spells.
15 Sep, 2007, Vladaar wrote in the 4th comment:
Votes: 0
I apologize about the link being incorrect at first. I believe I fixed it.

Thanks for your input.

Vladaar
15 Sep, 2007, Scandum wrote in the 5th comment:
Votes: 0
In my opinion there's no need to really balance things if each class has its own unique advantages.
16 Sep, 2007, Conner wrote in the 6th comment:
Votes: 0
Personally, I tend to favor approaching the issue of balance by class, race, skills, gear, etc each individually. So, for classes, in this case, I'd just make sure that each class had it's own things that make it resonably unique versus the other available classes and has as many pluses and minuses as each of the other classes to the same degree. For example, if Warriors get a +3 to strength and a +2 to dexterity then they should get a -3 to intelligence and a -2 to wisdom to balance it out. (Just an example, I'm not saying warriors should be big dumb brutes…) But those totals of +/- 5 should match what all the other classes have too.
16 Sep, 2007, KaVir wrote in the 7th comment:
Votes: 0
Scandum said:
In my opinion there's no need to really balance things if each class has its own unique advantages.


Perhaps for muds where the players are expected to work in groups - although even then it's not particularly fun for the weaker character (even if a group needs a cleric to heal, if the cleric is too weak do so anything else it's not going to be much fun playing one).

But when the game emphasises solo play, particularly in a competitive PvP environment, it becomes increasingly important for the classes to be balanced against each other.

I initially balanced my class powers by assigning values to different bonuses, but over time I've moved towards balancing them more by intuition and play-testing. I've found it's more effective to try balancing entire builds (combinations of stats, powers and talents) rather than the individual parts. I then look at powers and talents that never get incorporated into successful builds, and spend some time thinking over what could be done to make them more appealing.
16 Sep, 2007, Ryanicus wrote in the 8th comment:
Votes: 0
Vladaar said:
I am wondering, other then watching a lot of arena fighting to see how class combos fair against one another if you guys have any other techniques for establishing game balance with hitpoint gains, and power distribution?


Although I have read your forum, I have not (yet?) tried your mud so I don't know how useful these suggestions will be.
If money or time are at all involved in advancement (coded wait times or training costs for skills or levelling) then tweaking the economy can be a subtle, and sometimes more effective, way of balancing in terms of advancement speed overall but also between classes.

Also, many players/admins consider it acceptable/desirable to have some classes with are slightly underpowered compared to other classes at the same level but capable of fast advancement, in which case you must also balance power against time. Some players will want to be hard right away and get things rolling while others prefer the end result of patient advancement. I see no reason not to include this choice.

Scandum said:
In my opinion there's no need to really balance things if each class has its own unique advantages.


I tend to agree. You should strive for a balance of power/opportunities but this is not at all the same as balancing every class/race combo for outright PvP. IMHO attempting this sort of "hard balance" of a diverse race/class/skill system, aside from being all but impossible, tends to defeat to purpose. There are many advantages that may relate to PvP, without involving combat directly. For example, access or ease of mobility in certain zones, stealth, and trap-setting skills. I like to think of it like rock, paper, scissors: each class/race combo will be really good against a certain other class/race combo, task or mob and horrible against others. Each combo should be good and bad at about an equal number of tasks, etc. (or mediocre at everything, for those players who want to do it all). This type of balancing makes much more sense than saying, "Okay, I want every player to have an equal chance of victory against any other player of the same level & eq regardless of class." I'm not suggesting that this is what you were intending, just trying to move through some different definitions of this word "balance."

Also, watching the powergamers/minmaxers/twinks maybe more important than watching arena fights. Cheers.

-ryanicus
16 Sep, 2007, KaVir wrote in the 9th comment:
Votes: 0
Ryanicus said:
This type of balancing makes much more sense than saying, "Okay, I want every player to have an equal chance of victory against any other player of the same level & eq regardless of class."


Only if your goal is to have every PKer playing the same class.
16 Sep, 2007, Ryanicus wrote in the 10th comment:
Votes: 0
Have you ever played rock, paper, scissors? It's an an oversimplification but it easily illustrates a particular balancing strategy. Let's say each of those 3 (rock, paper and scissors) is a class on your mud. No matter which class you play there is one class (assuming the same lvl, eq, etc.) that will defeat you in PK.

Ryanicus said:
each class/race combo will be really good against a certain other class/race combo, task or mob and horrible against others. Each combo should be good and bad at about an equal number of tasks.
16 Sep, 2007, KaVir wrote in the 11th comment:
Votes: 0
Ryanicus said:
Have you ever played rock, paper, scissors? It's an an oversimplification but it easily illustrates a particular balancing strategy. Let's say each of those 3 (rock, paper and scissors) is a class on your mud. No matter which class you play there is one class (assuming the same lvl, eq, etc.) that will defeat you in PK.


I'd rather they defeat me because they're more skilled, or because they surprised me, or because they were better prepared - or even because they've spent more time building up their character. I wouldn't enjoy being defeated simply because they're a Troll and I'm a Womble, and Trolls always beat Wombles.
16 Sep, 2007, Justice wrote in the 12th comment:
Votes: 0
Ryanicus said:
Also, many players/admins consider it acceptable/desirable to have some classes with are slightly underpowered compared to other classes at the same level but capable of fast advancement, in which case you must also balance power against time. Some players will want to be hard right away and get things rolling while others prefer the end result of patient advancement. I see no reason not to include this choice.


The issue I've seen with this strategy is it tends to have an "all or nothing" affect. If the class is underpowered at all levels, then it will not get played, regardless of how fast you advance. If it is balanced at the maximum level for the mud, then they become overplayed due to the ease of achieving that level.

Ryanicus said:
IMHO attempting this sort of "hard balance" of a diverse race/class/skill system, aside from being all but impossible, tends to defeat to purpose. There are many advantages that may relate to PvP, without involving combat directly. For example, access or ease of mobility in certain zones, stealth, and trap-setting skills. I like to think of it like rock, paper, scissors: each class/race combo will be really good against a certain other class/race combo, task or mob and horrible against others. Each combo should be good and bad at about an equal number of tasks, etc. (or mediocre at everything, for those players who want to do it all). This type of balancing makes much more sense than saying, "Okay, I want every player to have an equal chance of victory against any other player of the same level & eq regardless of class."


It really depends on the mud. PvP is a very different beast than PvM. I've found that the total number of classes, races, and whatnot is unimportant. What is important is the role that each class plays and that you be aware of what they are capable of. For example, a healer shouldn't be able to dish out damage like a warrior. They should however be able to survive much more than a warrior, through damage reduction and healing abilities. Magic using classes tend to require more preparation than non-magic users as well, etc. There doesn't need to be an exact balance, but overall, each class should be able to fight each other class. Trying to maintain a "rock/paper/scissors" balance can lead to many issues. In a nutshell, all this does is shift the balance toward how a character is created, and NOT how they are played. It shifts the balance away from your new and average players and toward those who build their characters to take advantage of specific aspects (the power gamers). It also encourages that each player have several different characters, which may or may not be an issue.

Ryanicus said:
Also, watching the powergamers/minmaxers/twinks maybe more important than watching arena fights. Cheers.

I'd say watch all your players. The power gamers will show you the extremes of the system, but balancing to them often makes the rest of your players underpowered. Oh, and in a true pvp mud, arena fights are extremely different from the cat and mouse of in-world combat. Nowhere to hide, nowhere to run, often places the advantage in direct combat reducing the other options.
16 Sep, 2007, Vladaar wrote in the 13th comment:
Votes: 0
I agree with Kavir, I am very much into pvp though, I have peaceful players as well. For reasons of pvp and endgame avatar questing for uber gear, I would like to have them as balanced as possible.

You all have given me some great suggestions though.

Thanks,

Vladaar
17 Sep, 2007, Mister wrote in the 14th comment:
Votes: 0
Ryanicus said:
This type of balancing makes much more sense than saying, "Okay, I want every player to have an equal chance of victory against any other player of the same level & eq regardless of class." I'm not suggesting that this is what you were intending, just trying to move through some different definitions of this word "balance."

Well, I did exactly that. I created a program that simulates fights between any pair of classes, with all their available "tactics", at hundreds of rounds per second, and shows the advantage, in %, of the winner. All of them are now less than 1%; more than 2% is unacceptable for me.
17 Sep, 2007, David Haley wrote in the 15th comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
I am wondering, other then watching a lot of arena fighting to see how class combos fair

While I am not sure what the right answer is, experience has taught me what the wrong answer is, and that is making sure that everybody can evenly face everybody else. Class vs. class in the arena suffers from several problems, the two biggest of which are that it only tests direct combat ability and it tends towards equality by homogeneity as opposed to real interesting combinations.

Note that there is more to combat than direct conflict, which is why this is particularly bad as it significantly hurts classes that could otherwise rely on stealth and surprise (and I don't want to hear about using some 'backstab' skill during combat, that's just another word for 'punch', 'kick', etc.).

As I said unfortunately I really am not sure what the good way to do this is, but I'm almost positive that one-on-one fighting is really the wrong way to go.
17 Sep, 2007, KaVir wrote in the 16th comment:
Votes: 0
DavidHaley said:
While I am not sure what the right answer is, experience has taught me what the wrong answer is, and that is making sure that everybody can evenly face everybody else. Class vs. class in the arena suffers from several problems, the two biggest of which are that it only tests direct combat ability and it tends towards equality by homogeneity as opposed to real interesting combinations.


Assuming each class has its own selection of special tricks, controlled-conditions fights (such as arena combat) can still provide a reasonable way to test the basic relative strength of each class. It's not a bad first step for balancing classes, as long as it is just the first step.
17 Sep, 2007, David Haley wrote in the 17th comment:
Votes: 0
If it's used to establish who beats whom in one-on-one combat, then it's not much of a problem; but if you use the results to tweak classes until everybody is even, you're falling into the traps I mentioned previously.
17 Sep, 2007, KaVir wrote in the 18th comment:
Votes: 0
DavidHaley said:
If it's used to establish who beats whom in one-on-one combat, then it's not much of a problem; but if you use the results to tweak classes until everybody is even, you're falling into the traps I mentioned previously.


You're oversimplifying the issue. The results are one of the factors you should use to determine the relative strength of different classes. Relying purely on those results isn't the answer, but neither is ignoring them entirely.
17 Sep, 2007, Conner wrote in the 19th comment:
Votes: 0
I don't know, but sometimes oversimplification isn't a bad thing, and I agree that balancing your world shouldn't be about making sure the only factor players really need to consider when engaging in PVP is lag either. If that be your goal, why bother to have multiple races/classes since they're all exactly equal anyway? For my world, "balance" means that if your character has a weakness you can count on having a strength to make up for it ..or at least that everyone else will have the same number of roughly equal weaknesses and strengths as you at your given level, assuming you have roughly equal gear and spells on you.. it's not about making every class/race combination identical.

EDIT: Actually, before anyone jumps on me about it, allow me to point out that the above only applies to characters themselves, I also "balance" my world in other ways regarding mobs, gear, etc too.
17 Sep, 2007, KaVir wrote in the 20th comment:
Votes: 0
Conner said:
I don't know, but sometimes oversimplification isn't a bad thing, and I agree that balancing your world shouldn't be about making sure the only factor players really need to consider when engaging in PVP is lag either. If that be your goal, why bother to have multiple races/classes since they're all exactly equal anyway?


Because "exactly equal" doesn't mean "exactly the same". In a solo PvP environment, if one class is better than the others, everyone will play it (or be at a huge disadvantage). To quote your own words back at you, "If that be your goal, why bother to have multiple races/classes" - since everyone will be playing the same race/class anyway?
0.0/49