Cognito

Firstly, and again repeatedly, I have argued that a constantnerf cycle is just as bad. So you cant say we would get an ever decreasing cycle. You have missed my point there. Its nerfs and buffs. Buffs and nerfs.

Secondly, just as perfect balance would never be acheived, perfect nerfs and buffs wont either. However, if the NET gain from a power change is ON AVERAGE good, one has a victory.

Lastly, and again, I feel im repeating myself, it is entirely possible to target specific combinations - if you need too. Clearly some sets are going to be overpowered, and you just need to nerf the set. Some combinations are going to be overpowered, and, again, it is entirely possible to target those combinations.

Please note (again, Im repeating myself) that I would argue for exactly the same process for buffing. Some sets need buffing, some poor combinatinos could have targetted buffs.

[ QUOTE ]
I got an idea...
Nerf it playerwise instead. So for those who want to be nerfed, nerf them, and leave those of us, who think the game is fine as it is, intact

[/ QUOTE ]

Which solves precisely nothing, whilst a lovely idea in spirit.

Just a comment to the proposition that you couldnt, hypothetically, nerf WP/SS without nerfing the individual sets.

Im sure that possible; well, perhaps with a minimal collateral damage

E.g.

Rage crash changed to [x] seconds where Toons regen and recovery is reduced to zero. A differnt crash for everyone else, but hurts WP by far the most (small effect on Stone unfortunately)

Rise to the Challenge gets aggro/taunt buff, but does not supply +regen to knockdown foes. (Less accurate, but spares Fire Melee, Dark Melee, Energy Melee, and minimal effect on Mace)

KO Blow / Foot Stomp, decreased end cost/recharge/whatever, but cost of the attack halves all +recovery buffs for [x] seconds as it takes so much out of you (Specific to Will Power)

Strength of Will causes such focus that you ignore all +damage and damage debuffs (change for most toons, but nerf for the rage of superstrength)

Just examples.

With you there, I would never advocate "Nerf" in its original context.. As I said, I was talking about minor shaving off of power, maybe 10% or something.

I have also refrained from calling for nerfs on specific powersets. I have picked a few purely random examples which have been mentioned by other people, im sure. Ill stick my neck out and say Jump Kick should specifically NOT be nerfed, though .

You actually seem to be of the opinion that I'm in the majority. Odd, lots of posts here seem to indicate they have no wish for balancing to occur at all. Not that it really matters, the devs of every single MMORPG are of the opinion that it does.

And, as I have said, that point is irrelevant. If FoTM build goes from 10% overperformance and, when people swap to the next FoTM, its only 9%, you have acheived something.

Unless you are proposing that the next FoTM combo is equal to or surpasses the first FoTM, which is unlikely as it is by definition "second choice".

[ QUOTE ]
balance is needed yes i dont think you'll get a argument there but to use the SS/WP brute as a example you cant just balance it so this combination is less powerfull what you must do is balance SS and balance WP independantly of each other because they can be paired with more than just each other the same go's for fire control and kinetics they may work well togeather (some would say to well)but hows about as indevidual sets?

If you look at them as indevidual sets fire is actually pretty low in the control stakes so perhaps it should be buffed?

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, it is entirey possible to target specific combinations with minimal impact on the constituent sets.

Bearing in mind I am forbiden to call for nerfs to specific sets, so choosing the excellent and balance-challenged SS/WP purely at random, one could suggest, for instance, that Rage crash was included a cancellation of all +regen and +recovery. Whist this would have a small effect on SS, it would specifically target SS/WP the hardest.

This is only one example. To pick another purely random example, the hugely effective and game-straining fire/kin could have fire imps immune to recharge buffs/debuffs, Hotfeet damage unbuffable/un debuffable, or make containment only take controller damage to cap (rather than double cap).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Gently, accurately, buff underperforming sets
Gently, accurately, Nerf overperforming sets.

[/ QUOTE ]
The problem is its easy for us to say the powersets should be more balanced, but the reasons for them being unbalanced in the first place are numerous. You have different damage categories, different resistances, different types of mez or holds. If you balance too much, you render different types useless in the long run because they'll all function exactly the same.

[/ QUOTE ]

never said it was easy. But that shouldnt stop us trying. If fire blast did 10 times as much damage as every other blast, would you say its not worth nerfing, because "you cant ever acheive balance"?

It is perfectly right to aim for balance whist creating differences. That what has been done so far. Perfect balance wont be acheived, but every timethe gap is closed (by either buffs or nerfs), something is acheived.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
And yet it seems some people think I was screaming for collosal nerfs to everything in order to upset people. Read the original post.

[/ QUOTE ]

See, I disagree with you there, I think people have read your original post. If I put all of your premise in to a list for example:

<ul type="square">[*]im not calling for a nerf on any particular power set[*]Im talking about nerfs as in power balancing[*]im working on the proposition that the game is too easy[*]Even if you crank this up to invinicble, most end game team, even if poorly equipped SO toons, end up going on autopilot[*]THIS GAME MUST NOT GET ANY EASIER[*]THE SETS ARE NOT PERFECTLY BALANCED[*]STRIVING TO ACHEIVE BALANCE IS A GOOD THING[*] We need Nerfs. Given how easy this game is at the moment, we need them AS MUCH (if not slightly more) than Buffs [/list]
Now, nobody here has said that game balancing shouldn't continue. It's happened for as long as I have been playing and I am sure it will happen again.

The problem with your original post is that you are working from the premise that the game is too easy. Your whole premise for calling for said nerfs is that the game is too easy, as is summed up in the phrase: We need Nerfs. Given how easy this game is at the moment

What others have been trying to say to you is that even though certain people with a certain level of experience find this game easy, there are others who do not.

Your very argument has invited people to counter you on those points alone where as what I think you are trying to say (and please correct me if I am wrong) is that we still need power balancing within the game, a sentiment with which I actually agree. I don't thing there will ever be a point when the game is perfectly balanced.


[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent post, squire, you have actually put my position better than I did myself. Please allow me to further clarify:

I am of the veiw (and this is shared by every MMORPG I know of) that power balancing is a good idea. Our opinions on this are pretty irrelevant, barring some major shift in veiw, the devs are going to try and do this. We may persuade them to expend more or less resources on it, we may argue how to do it, or, most constructively, how to do it most efficiently.

As you say, absolute balance will clearly never be acheived. However, the argument that this fact means one should not balance is irrefutably invalid. Balancing attempts will (if done competently, of course), close the spread / gap between the underpowered and overpowered. That is the aim, not acheiving a perfect balance.

If civilization had taken the veiw "If we cant acheive perfection in this endevour, we wont do it", we would be in the stone age, perhaps without fire.

Anyway, my argument is, at its core, this:

If you ONLY balance by buffs, then you end up with a never ending cycle of buffs - this is, in fact, BECAUSE you can never acheive indefinite perfection.

No matter how easy you think the game is or isnt, or how much more challenging you can set it, a contant buff cycle will eventually catch up with you.

Please note: EXACTLY the same argument can be made for a constant nerf cycle without buffs. I would argue JUST as strongly that buffs are needed with Nerfs.

In summary:

Gently, accurately, buff underperforming sets
Gently, accurately, Nerf overperforming sets.

Otherwise, in the long run, you end up with a game that spirals out of control.

Nobody wants to play a game that is childishly simple. An endless buff cycle will get there. YOu can debate how soon it willget there, but given enough time, it will.

The only alternative is to engage in an arms race by an endless power buff of mobs. This is, of course, acceptable, but a) In essence, I beleive this just another way of nerfing every set slightly, and b) strikes me as less efficient use of resources.

[ QUOTE ]
I love it how people always claim the opposing view is the minority in these debates, with magical invisible statistics on this pulled from their backsides.

[/ QUOTE ]

Excellent Point. Ive looked through my posts and dont think I have ever claimed to be in a majority or minority. I have only presented an argument.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Of course nobody agrees, cause noone likes their chars get weaker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I disagree that we need more nerfs, we've had more than enough already and some of my toons have been on the receiving end of them. One of them got hit harder than most by ED and IO's haven't made up the shortfall. No more of my toons would be affected by the changes you proposed because I don't use any of those power sets in any of them. I still don't like the idea though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didnt say we need to increase the rate of nerfing, but that some nerfing is required. But only in conjunction with buffing.

I think many people just read "NERF" and stop there.

This thread was allways about nerfing only in conjuction with buffing, only to overperforming sets, and only shaving off the excess power (back to AVERAGE, not underperforming sets).

And yet it seems some people think I was screaming for collosal nerfs to everything in order to upset people. Read the original post.

Or just shave 10% of its resistance / defence / andor regen.

No need to add a hole, just deplete slightly what it is has.

NB: Providing of course its is unequivical WP requiresmerfing. I stongly suspect so but it must be beyond reasonable doubt.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Add an extra level of difficulty, dont keep [censored] up peoples chars.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is the literal answer, all the fiddling with powers ends up with one thing, more imbalance and more upset players..... there needs to be pressure to increase NPC AI, to involve more dynamic effects and variables that allow different powers to offer different biases on circumstance, to increase the variety not simply of what the powers can do but how they are applied....to expand the game in a manner that players percieve as exciting positive and prgressive and not be bound by the same heavy handed knee jerk reaction to one scenario that occurs wayyyy too often.(a direct result from the lack of variety) that has consistently failed from day one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Id disagree there. If this game handnt fiddled around with ED, burn nerfs, etc, it wouldnt be here today.

Ive nothing against anoterdifficulty level, little to be lost by it. However, its on the understanding thats it just engaging in arms race. Endless buff cycles will lead to endless difficuty raises. Its a dead end.

Ive been reflecting when I started playing the game (prioor to ED). Did I experience face plants? Sure, a lot.

But they all had one phrase in common

"Mega xp"

i.e. people racked up difficulty to far, or had uneven team profiles. In other words, the bulk of the team where fighting +3/+4s pre Single Origins.

If that team had just had a sensible difficulty and reasonable team split, we would allhave done fine. Not auto pilot, we would have had to have worked and there would be deaths, but it would have been a totally acceptable difficulty.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Londoner, you seem to be implying that there is some sadistic pleasure people get from nerfing a toon that is overpowered. I think the usual feeling is regret.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont know what you get out of it mate, it's not me calling for more un needed nerfs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im not either, Im calling for needed nerfs. And, once again, in conjunction with needed buffs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I seem to remember your last cause to champion because it was going to totally flatten the game was farming.

What happened to that?

I can see a pattern forming here, maybe we should just get on and let people play how they like, how someone having a well performing char (except in pvp) is effecting you is beyond me, they have been here from day dot, they aint killed the game, leave things alone.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, we just have to disagree then. I see effects of changes on the game as a whole, you say if it doesnt individually bother you,or I,or one individual, let it be. Cant see we are going to resolve this one.

However, would you concede that every MMORPG strives to balance sets / ATs? They may allocate different levels of resources to this process of course. YOu may wish to construct an argument that no (or less) resources should be spent (going against the veiw of every MMORPG, but if thats your corner you should fight it), or you may wish to say state how you would like this process to occur (in my veiw, both nerfs and buffs).

[/ QUOTE ]

Me, id like to see 90% of resources spent on new content and the rest fixing bugs.

I just dont think that what you are putting forward as a reason for a major power revamp is worth the expense this late in a games life. I dont think that many people care about some chars doing better than others.

[/ QUOTE ]

Firstly, a "nerf"isnt a mahor revamp, Simplt shaving off 10% of recharge or damage from something is extremely simple in terms of resources.

Secondly, what you and I completely agreeon is resources should be spent on new content. WIth you entroiely there. If you dont, game dies.

However, am of the opinion (shared I think by every other MMORPG) that investing small amounts of resources in balancing garners greater amounts of resources in the long term. i.e. by balancing you maintain or increase player base, and hence increase available resources.

Thats a fair point. Which is why I am so fond of Positron, for instance, I can actually get a challneg out of it!

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Londoner, you seem to be implying that there is some sadistic pleasure people get from nerfing a toon that is overpowered. I think the usual feeling is regret.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont know what you get out of it mate, it's not me calling for more un needed nerfs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im not either, Im calling for needed nerfs. And, once again, in conjunction with needed buffs.

[/ QUOTE ]

I seem to remember your last cause to champion because it was going to totally flatten the game was farming.

What happened to that?

I can see a pattern forming here, maybe we should just get on and let people play how they like, how someone having a well performing char (except in pvp) is effecting you is beyond me, they have been here from day dot, they aint killed the game, leave things alone.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, we just have to disagree then. I see effects of changes on the game as a whole, you say if it doesnt individually bother you,or I,or one individual, let it be. Cant see we are going to resolve this one.

However, would you concede that every MMORPG strives to balance sets / ATs? They may allocate different levels of resources to this process of course. YOu may wish to construct an argument that no (or less) resources should be spent (going against the veiw of every MMORPG, but if thats your corner you should fight it), or you may wish to say state how you would like this process to occur (in my veiw, both nerfs and buffs).

I would never be in favour of either:

a) A solo toon/A team being unable to find someting suitably challenging.

b) A solo toon/A team being unable to find something which is relatively straightforward (not completely risk free, but relaxed)

Unfortunately, the game, as it stands, has far more of a problem with a) than b) (Im not sure that b is a problem at all except for some defenders soloing on heroic - everyone else can always find something to do).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Londoner, you seem to be implying that there is some sadistic pleasure people get from nerfing a toon that is overpowered. I think the usual feeling is regret.

[/ QUOTE ]

I dont know what you get out of it mate, it's not me calling for more un needed nerfs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Im not either, Im calling for needed nerfs. And, once again, in conjunction with needed buffs.

Agree with you there. At the end of the day, that is consistently what every MMORPG strives for - balance.

Londoner, you seem to be implying that there is some sadistic pleasure people get from nerfing a toon that is overpowered. I think the usual feeling is regret.

I, for one, would like someof my overpowered toons nerfed (Im getting tired of repeating the addage that i dont mean made underpowered,just brought into line, so that will be the last time).

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
After playing an Elec melee / Shield Brute, i'm not so sure super strngth is the best aoe damage. Lightning Rod and Shield Charge are both awesome on their own, and together it's just crazy.

[/ QUOTE ]

Elec Melee / WP! Im lovin it!! Cant wait till the later lvls!

[/ QUOTE ]

Cant have you enjoying your char, nerf it!

[/ QUOTE ]

I would enjoy a few of my toons more if they were nerfed (Cant say which - couldbe interpreted as calling for nerfs on them).

I certainly wouldnt advocate nerfing just because a player is enjoying his toon. Would anyone?

Also note, I specified Nerfs as subtle effects, not ham fisted blundering changes that make things useless.

Whilst possibly amusing, things like "Lets just have brawl as a power" would not be a possible outcome.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is practically nothing in the game you can fail now

[/ QUOTE ]

Those of us who are not gaming gods or don't have stupidly expensive builds or don't play one of the powerful combinations of power sets find it quite easy to fail at some things!

The problem with nerfs is that the way this game was designed simply doesn't lend itself to changes of individual power sets. Take the fire/kin controllers for instance, those tw together make an extremely powerful combination but if either was nerfed, it would wreck that set for other combinations.

If you find the game too easy, try it with a different AT. Don't go around assuming that just because YOU find the game easy on invincible, everybody else is in the same boat. Remember there are lots of 'casual' players, if you make the game ridiculously difficult they'll be stuffed.

[/ QUOTE ]

I just thought this was agood post and worthy of specific reply.

Are you implying that if set on heroic, inexperienced teams find things to hard? That has not been my impression (LRSF, STF, and possibly ITF/Sewer Trial excluded).

Also, it is perfectly doable to nerf particular combinations with minimal effect on individual sets. Fire/Kins, for instance (if one was inclined to nerf them - as per forum rules Im not asking to nerf this highly effective and powerful combination) could have hotfeet damage unbuffable, fire imps immune to recharge modification, or make containment give a +100% damage bonus (or something other than the mechanic which allows you to double the damage cap). If you were inclinded to do so, of course. I pick this extremely powerful combination purely at random.

A few clarifications:

Firsly, Im not arguing against buffs. Just as you cant buff contantly (it feedbacks into ever increasing power), you cant nerf contantly (this error is actually more problematic in consequence). Im arguing for BOTH.

Secondly, I appreciate the problem of difficulty and the solution of raising it. I dont really want to get sidetracked by making this a difficulty thread (perhaps someone should start a seperate one for that)

Two things spring to mind:

Raising difficulty works in the short term, but it just delays the ineveitable as endless buff cycle will mean another difficulty raise later on. It may have virtue as a "Sticking plaster" measure of course.

Im an altaholic. Whist I frankenslot with IOs, I dont farm or uberslot my alts (maybe 1 in 5 has a purple set, normally a cheapo like sleep or confuse). OK, so Im experienced. But even so, the game cant set the difficulty high enough for SOME of my alts in SOME teams (how often is irrelevant) this is a problem. HOwever, NOTHING is to difficut for a toon on Heroic, with the exception of a few specifically built toons like empaths with one attack power (its actually doable,but dull as ditchwater).

Anyway, please not lets get sidetracked into a "Raise difficulty". Its just participating in an arms war (and will again, speed up levelling, as a side effect).

And please, Im not arguing for nerfing toons in isolation. I would like the AVERAGE power of toons to stay the same. Im arguing for NERFING in conjuction with BUFFS, As opposed to the road to hell that is endless BUFF cycle.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As long as it doesn't have an effect on PvP, then I don't see any problem with have some sets stronger/weaker than others.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to you directly, but it does overall effect the game: e.g:

1. New player "accidentally" picks up a "gimp" set. Level sit up, sees how bad he is. Gives up and leaves game. Resources lost.

2. Specific Trials stanrt to favour / select only specific sets / builds / ATs. These become operationalised, less variety. Playes with underpowered sets get excluded, fed up, leave game, resources lost.

3. People will naturally gravitate towards more powerful sets (dont even try to deny it). Less variery, diminshed variation in team play and (for some) playable sets. Reduces longevity of game for some. Resources lost.

4. Lack of balance in itself causes biterness and loss of faith in game. Bad karma in community and despair at lack of action causes players to leave. Resources lost.

WHilst you may not care, it affects the game.You coud I suppose construct an argument that having unbalanced sets is a good thing for the game, but thats not the veiw I take, or indeed an MMORPG I am aware of.

[/ QUOTE ]

What a load of [censored], thats the most rubbish argument to support nerfs iv ever seen.

Every one of those arguments is just pure jank.

People dont up and leave over a bad char they make another.

If what you were saying had a grain of truth in it, this game would have a population of 0 by now.

If you want nerfs think of real reasons.

At this stage of this games life nerfs big or small are going to lose more subs than any of those reasons you just trumped up.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ill fully admit those are speculative.

However, I wasnt arguing for Nerfs, I was pointing out to Golden Girl that whist unbalanced sets / ATs may not be a probem for her directly (For me, its a minor irritation directly but Im concerned about its long term effect on the game), it still has wider effects on the game overall.

It may be bunkum, I dont really care. At the end of the day, every MMORPG I know of strives to acheive balance between sets and ATs (The wiser ones would know this can never be absolutely acheived but you should strive to minimise the difference).

So I just *shrug*, in the face of such a unanimous veiw in MMORPGs, pragmatically, it means resources will be expended on acheiving balance.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
3. People will naturally gravitate towards more powerful sets (dont even try to deny it).

[/ QUOTE ]

They gravitate towards sets they think are more powerful, because they see other people playing it and ask about it, or they read threads on the forums whining about how overpowered a certain set is.

Don't try to tell me that /WP is defensively stronger than /Stone, or has better aoe damage than fire/fire, and how many have noticed that with the issue 13 buffs to Dark Melee just how powerful Dark/SR can be?

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point, I stand corrected. People will gravitate towards sets they think are powerful.

Not "people" meaning you specifically. Or me, come to that. But the population as a whole will tend to grvitate towards perceived powerful sets (other factors come into play too of course)/