Lost in translation (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Artix Entertainment Games] >> [EpicDuel] >> EpicDuel Balance



Message

One Winged Angel1357 -> Lost in translation (6/2/2014 10:00:22)

So I have been sitting around looking at the evolution of classes from their planned play style to the style we have today and basically I have come to the same conclusion that many others have or did. The defining feature of a class was the passive skill(s) and I'm starting to think some of the inbalance we have had since the shift from passive to active is simply giving the wrong skill to act as that passive.

My focus is many on TLM, TM, and BM because I think they got the armors, SA, and blood lust right. Now TLM's were tankish with the ability to passively gain small amounts of energy every round and the same could be said of some of the more prominent TM builds. BM's, on the other hand, were glass cannons meaning they were built to deal high amounts of damage very quickly but also take heavy damage.

Then when passive to active came we gave the slow energy tanks instant energy and the glass cannon very slow energy. Even on paper this doesn't seem right.

I know I avoid this section like the plague because I don't understand balance like some of you but the change we have had for a long time doesn't seem correct, it feels more like the dev's got the translation from passive to active a tiny bit backwards in those regards. Frankly I don't even know if changing that translation will fix anything balance wise but hey it's only an idea



Mother1 -> RE: Lost in translation (6/2/2014 10:33:57)

@ OWA

The biggest problem I have seen is not the passive to active change (Yes this hurt variety a lot but still isn't the biggest problem) No the problem I have seen is the following. The content complaints about X class can do this better than Y class, or people being unhappy with the weaknesses with their classes and wanting them covered up without giving up their advantages.

The other problem I am seeing is that with most suggestions for balance I have seen most want all classes to be exactly the same which in itself is a contradiction since classes are suppose to be different.


There are other problems I have seen as well but I won't go on about them.



One Winged Angel1357 -> RE: Lost in translation (6/2/2014 11:13:47)

I don't see how it hurt variety because before it was you had to 7+ your passive for every build for it to work. That thinking is actually false as I made a point to make a 60+% win rate without passives but that is a different story.

The whole every class needs to be exactly the same is the enemy of defining traits for a class. Mages are defined by energy control, granted they really messed up the energy control with the change, hunters are big on debuffs, mercs are "tanks". Every class can be played as each style but lack the skills designed for that play style.

we can ignore the whole I want all the advantages and none of the weaknesses because that is typical lust to be all powerful in a PvP game



lionblades -> RE: Lost in translation (6/3/2014 11:59:12)

quote:

The defining feature of a class was the passive skill(s) and I'm starting to think some of the inbalance we have had since the shift from passive to active is simply giving the wrong skill to act as that passive.

I agree with this.

quote:

I don't see how it hurt variety because before it was you had to 7+ your passive for every build for it to work. That thinking is actually false as I made a point to make a 60+% win rate without passives but that is a different story.

The thing is, you could get 85+ win ratios USING passives. So there was no point in not using them. And I don't mean using the best copycat build. All classes could make new builds (maybe except CH at that time). Then comes the new update...Passive to Active did hurt variety albeit indirectly. The implementation was so bad that there was so many nerfs and uneeded buffs to the skills. It made a couple of perfectly fine skills before the Passive to Active update near useless (Plasma Bolt) because of nerfs. It was almost like the beginning of Omega when almost everything got nerfed .
The Passive to Active change was a big factor into this:
quote:

complaints about X class can do this better than Y class, or people being unhappy with the weaknesses with their classes and wanting them covered up without giving up their advantages.

But I don't blame them since some Passives got arguably useless such as Shadow Arts



Combatoid -> RE: Lost in translation (6/30/2014 23:33:39)

Yup. Passives need a revival.



ScarletReaper -> RE: Lost in translation (7/1/2014 9:45:31)

They changed the passives to active's because they were required for almost every build, thus lowering build variety. Now here is food for thought.... When was the last time you saw a mage who didn't use high level battery charge and assimilation? Or a tac merc who didn't have high battery charge? Or a bounty hunter without mark of blood that wasn't a dex build? The change didn't do anything for build variety, in fact I'd say it might have made it even worse.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition
0.09375