Slashdot Mirror
Jumpgate Evolution Dev Talks Class Balance
Hermann Peterscheck recently made a post on the Jumpgate Evolution developer blog about NetDevil's strategy for balancing the various classes of ships in the game. They seem to be taking a different approach from most MMOs in letting the PvP side of the gameplay set the baseline, rather than allowing PvE concerns to override that. From the section titled Combating Combat:
"Early on our lead systems designer, Jay Ambrosini, came to the correct conclusion that all of the preliminary balancing was best done in a PvP context. The reasoning is that in PvE, the player needs to feel powerful, but in PvP the fight needs to feel balanced. Once ship classes are balanced in PvP, its not as hard to make the player feel powerful in PvE, but the opposite is not true. We spent many weeks playing just the first class of ship, the light fighter, in teams of 5 or 6 in order to evaluate what it was that made those ships fun to fly and fight. After daily battles, you begin to see what makes those ships work. We also started with the mid level ships as opposed to the low or high level ships. This is primarily because you can find the center point and then work upwards and downwards from there. ... It's very tempting to just throw a bunch of classes of ships together in order to say things like "our game has 15 classes of ships!" but this, we believe, is the wrong direction. People want meaningful and strong choices and not lots of meaningless, empty choices. Currently we plan to have 4-6 classes, but they will each have nearly endless possible configurations within those groups."
I have no idea what any of those words mean. Can someone explain TFS?
I think they're thinking in the right direction here.
It's all nice and well to be all powerful, but there are only a few thnigs that piss off (more or less serious) PvPers more than the 'gank' mentality. I hope they manage to balance it in such a way that actual skill makes a difference as well.
I've been looking forward to this game for quite a while, and most of what I've heard actually sounds promising and well thought out. I hope they can live up to our expectations, though.
I know that a lot of us have played Elite in the past, and there's always some sort of 'could-it-be' feeling when news about these sort of games come out.
Splut.
ps. No 'The One' jokes please :)
Coz eternity my friend, is a long *ing time.
That looks like a good idea, and many people are already expecting Jumpgate Evolution as something fresh and new. However, every single MMORPG to date, has claimed before release to have new ideas, good balance between classes, interesting PvP and PvE. Most of them failed one of theses areas, and many failed all. That's why I take theses new claims with a big grain of salt.
So i say let's wait till the game is released and thoroughly tested by everyone...then we will see if this is more than marketing talk.
EVE is good at what it does, but there's a reason it doesn't have more players and that's not because of the scifi theme. I pull this opinion out of my ass, but consider for a moment the plethora of MMOs (or even single player games) with a fantasy background. Any style of MMO fantasy gameplay that you could possibly want is covered. PvP, PvE, free, paid, large group, small group, free-for-all, instanced...
Now what about a space sim MMO? Aside from a few no-name indie offerings or a Freelancer hack to play multiplayer on a server with a few other people, your only option is EVE. One shard, PvP centric, click-orbit-wait navigation, learning curve like an overhanging cliff - love it or leave it.
Now maybe I give the JGE team too much credit, but I fully expected for them to deviate from this. It would only make sense that they not go for the exact same niche that EVE fills. Duh. So we get collision detection and some sort of real navigation - great. But now they're balancing around PvP? C'mon, seriously? So now we'll have EVE with point & click navigation and EVE with something else. And you can play the former in a universe already several years old with many bugs worked out or you can start in a fresh universe that's completely empty. This is seriously the most retarded thing I've heard from JGE to date.
And no, I don't believe JGE can properly balance PvP and PvE. It's never been done. You either focus on one or the other and whatever you don't focus on becomes some half-assed wannabe minigame that players will complain about until the end of time. See PvP in WoW and PvE in GW as examples...
mmmm...forbidden donut
Jumpgate Evolution is going to have its own balance considerations that are not necessarily related to balance issues in other MMOs, but stating that balancing classes in PvP makes PvE balance "easy" (when the goal is making the player "feel powerful" in PvE) is nonsense.
Take a look at what Blizzard is going through with WoW patch 3.2. One of the changes in the upcoming patch is that Seal of Blood/Seal of the Martyr (Paladin abilities) are being pulled from the game. For those not familiar with WoW Paladins, those seals (identical seals with different names for the Horde and Alliance respectively) caused all melee and melee specials of Paladins to inflict a boatload of extra damage that can not specifically be resisted and is not eaten up by armor (some things can reduce it, but generic armor/resists can not). Paladins using those seals also eat some of the damage their seal dishes out (10% under most circumstances), though usually it is not hard to cope with that "recoil".
Seal of Blood/Seal of the Martyr were fingered as a culprit when non-Paladins complained that their damage in PvP environments was "too bursty", even though few players with credible opinions ever bothered complaining about Seal of Blood/Seal of the Martyr in PvE. When they decided to pull SoB/SotM, they attempted to compensate Paladins for their loss by changing two seals often neglected by Retribution Paladins (the sort fond of using SoB/SotM): Seal of Vengeance/Corruption (same seal, different names for Alliance and Horde respectively) and Seal of Command.
Seal of Command they revamped entirely to be nothing but a weak version of SoB/SotM with no recoil. For reference, it does 36% of weapon damage on strikes as opposed to 48% for SoB/SotM. This change has not thrilled Retribution Paladins at all since it costs a talent point to even learn Seal of Command (all Paladins learned SoB/SotM automatically regardless of talent ditribution) and since the new Seal of Command will be weaker than the old SoB/SotM were. Of course, Seal of Command has always been weaker, which is why any Retribution Paladin worth his/her salt stopped using it once they could learn SoB/SotM.
Seal of Vengeance/Corruption, both of which applied "damage over time" (DoT) effects that could stack up to 5 times, will stay the same but provide a 33% damage bonus and improve critical damage from 150% to 200% once the target has 5 effects stacked on them. Applying the DoT effects is not difficult, and it has been pointed out that the new SoV/SoC actually improves overall damage-per-second vs. SoB/SotM in any fight lasting longer than about 20-30 seconds, but this only applies if the Paladin is not forced to switch targets. The problem is that the DoT effects themselves do not last longer than . . .12 seconds, I think, which means that if the Paladin is stuck in any boss fight with a gimmick that forces the Paladin to attack a new target, he/she/it is now forced to establish another "5-stack" on the new target before he/she/it can once again enjoy the 33% damage bonus plus the boost to critical damage, and after that, if he switches back to his previous target, the old "5-stack" will probably be gone, forcing the Paladin to apply yet another "5-stack" to his/her/its initial target. In fights which require such behavior from a Paladin, some of them have taken to switching to Seal of Righteousness, a relatively low-damage seal that just happens to outdamage Seal of Command provided said Paladin has 5 talent points in Seals of the Pure (see below).
As an added point of frustration, those hoping to maximize their damage per second using the new SoV/SoC will need to put 5 talent points in a talent found in the Holy tree called Seals of the Pure, which means Retribution Paladins will have to pull 5 points off something else. Such a change to their talents will reduce their overall utility.
But wait! There's more. Another change they've made to reduce Paladin "burst" damage in PvP is to change a Retribution talent, Crusader Str
I'm seeing a lot of negative comments on this story. I don't know if this game will fail or not (it probably will), but at least we'll have a new space sim until it does. I'd like the chance to actually fly my internet spaceship with a joystick and out maneuver missiles while engaging full afterburners. They've already added a "Descent" style arena for those that remember that game. My hope is this will end up being a very good multi-player version of X-Wing or Wing Commander.
i hope to get to try it. i also hope it doesn't have a Gygaxian power curve. Steep power curve = ganking/n00b st0mping. i hope the run player trade such that it doesn't cause gold farming and twinking.
As for niches, you're right on. EVE filled or created a niche, and did it well. It might not be as big as WoW, but it has a loyal base. The description of it never appealed to me, personally. WoW and it's ilk turn me off with the problems mentioned above. Once again i'll brag on my favorite niche game: PlanetSide.
Shallow Power Curve - My 6 year character gets the same Lasher rifle as your one day character. We have the same HP and amount of Stamina. The difference is that my high level character has more choices. We can both have a Lasher, but i switch to a tank. You could switch to the tank too, but you'd have to give up your Lasher.
No Grinding - You play to play. Leveling just happens as you go along. What you're doing has some bearing on the global battle, you don't have to go kill stuff just to get the next widgets. If you want to make levels... play. Join a squad/outfit and start a fight.
No Inane Quests - You might have to capture a remote tower, but once you have it, it's yours. It stays yours until an enemy comes and takes it. You can defend it if you want. But there's no one telling you to bring him Five Golden Rat Spleens.
Player Skill Matters - Eye hand coordination is a major factor. Most gamers have better coordination than i do, and i found my niche in the game. So even if you aren't an uber twitcher, you can still be competitive. Skilled players can hold their own against several n00bs. But the experienced player can still fall to the n00bs if their get their shit together. The shallow power curve means that no one is god like in relation to anyone else.
Pure PvP - There are a few automated turrets that shoot at you, but they are relatively ineffective. More of a deterrent really. Otherwise, if it's moving, it's another player.
No Gold Farming - There is no economy, no gold, no Chinese guys in sweatshops. If you want something, you go to the free vending machine. i suppose you could buy a high level character, but i've never heard of anyone doing that in 6 years. It wouldn't buy you much that you couldn't get on your own.
No Twinking (No player trade) - There's no player trade worth mentioning. Since you can get anything for free (if you have the certification for it), there is no economy. Supply is infinite, so price is 0. The only trading that happens might be for enemy equipment. Even so, it's a minor thing. "Oo, look i have a chain gun."
Team Work Rules the Day - Organized teams can beat larger disorganized teams. My outfit (guild/clan) isn't the biggest, but by using team speak and having a command structure, we can defeat enemy zerglings most of the time.
Strategy Rules the Day - Having the twitch will win the battle, but not the war. The empire that allocates its power wisely usually wins. Knowing where to attack or defend is the other half of the battle.
No Gygaxian Straitjacket Classes - You can unlearn one certification per 6 hours. If you don't like the sniper rifle, unlearn it, and buy something else.
Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
What is this, a game company making a game fun, first?
They must be Indy, yes no?
I like Eve, but the biggest misconception I see people make when seeing the game is that they think they'll be flying the ship like a sim game and they're not. It turns a lot of people off because they think it is going to be an action game and its more of a strategy game. Jumpgate sounds like it is going to be more of an action/sim game and I think that'll work in its favor.
Though Halo obviously wasn't concerned with balancing classes, they iterated on their single-player maps and combat design through multiplayer gameplay. At GDC a few years ago they said that their basic process was to rough out a campaign level, get a bunch of people to jump into a multiplayer game there, and see what developed. After they would group up and discuss where the natural choke points are, spots with great vistas or cover for sniping, and just generally where a fun battle develops. Tweak the level to emphasize those areas, throw some AI in, set them up to do that really cool thing Bob did that one time, and you've got a hit game.
I don't think techniques like this are really all that uncommon. I've worked on a number of FPS titles, and while we were never clever enough to test out the SP levels in MP, most other balance decisions were made there. There are a lot of reasons this makes sense. First off (and Bungie mentioned this as well), you often have your multiplayer up and running well before you have your AI written. (If you don't build the MP in from the beginning, it will usually be a nightmare to work with for the rest of the project.) Also, many of these decisions are made, or at least informed, by a consensus. When we were balancing weapons, we would usually get the whole team to play multiplayer for a few rounds, group up and get some quick impressions, modify and distribute new config files, then repeat. Those discussions are more useful when everyone is coming from the same context.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SubSpace_(video_game) This game + 3d graphics and joystick controls + newtonian physics ( as in, once you start spinning, you keep spinning and once apply thrust, you keep moving ) would be spend-money-worthy. Actually any space game with newtonian physics would buy spend-money-worthy. There was something like this made by the guy who made X-Plane that you can download for free but that isn't really a game although you can fly around and shoot asteroids with a ship that handled like the space shuttle. With a joystick the setup would be your joystick 3d movement ( the 3rd "d" being twist / rudder ) would control the rotational thrusters, meaning that if you thrust in one direction you'll keep going in that direction until you thrust in the opposite direction to stop rotating. The " " axis would control rotational thrusters meaning if you push the joystick -----> you would spin clockwise and ---- would be counterclockwise. Pushing and pulling the joystick would control attitude, the rudder / twist would do the same thing that an airplane does, turning left and right. The hat-switch would be used to control lateral thrusters. I played the above mentioned game made by the guy who made X-Plane ( Austin Meyer I think? ) with this setup and it was quite a robust and awesome way of controlling a space ship. It's a little more complicated than controls for a plane like vehicle since you now have the option of using lateral thrusters to control the way you move, an analogy would be like saying a plane gives you 3 degrees of freedom but this setup gives you 6 degrees of freedom, well the analogy is not entirely correct but if you play that game mentioned by Austin Meyer or "Orbiter" or any space-flight simulator you will notice the difference. I think this kind of physics / control system would be just pure awesome in a multiplayer combat environment as there are pretty much boundless diversity in ways you could maneuver such a space ship. Also realistic weapons the behave like real lasers and gatling guns found on fighter jets with realistic spread would be cool. Also the fact that the velocities of the bullets would be added to relative velocities and that kind of realism, also the fact that moving fast through a debris field would make relative velocities of debris fast enough to damage the ships etc etc blah blah blah you get the idea...
I played the original Jumpgate and found it mostly PvP orintated. I liked how I could jump into combat and, while your ship did matter, player ability was the main factor. Killing Krakken (PvE) was a secondary goal when no action was taking place. My favourite thing to do was baiting greifers in my scout and taking them right to a waiting trap. Ah the memories.
What's a Sig?
There is a game that's managed to balance these things, IMO. It's Vendetta Online:
http://www.vendetta-online.com/
The developers went for an FPS style game rather than a more click-based method of playing and they focused on ship balance so that PvP would be the best experience. Additionally, because it's more skill based, a relatively new player with talent can quickly become competitive with players who have been around for years. No single ship loadout exists for serious PvP.
on the PvE side of things, there are a series of missions available that one can take with different levels of difficulty. I agree with the original summary where if one person wants more challenge to a PvE setting, throw in more things shooting at you. It really is the PvP that's hard to get right.
It can be done and, I think, has been done. (and they're having a 2 week trial key giveaway right now).
***I'm not a dev, but I'm a player of the game***
I can tell you exactly why I don't play EVE, because there is no way I can compete with guys how have been there for a year. It isn't just the learning curve, it is how the character gain abilities/skills/etc. EVE is based entirely on how long you have been there with no upper cap, which means guys how have been there will ALWAYS be more powerful then you, no matter WHAT you do. At least in WoW or other MMORPGs, after being there for a while (3-4 months), you actually have a chance to compete with people who have been there for years. It is reverse age-ism on EVE. You will always be a subordinate. While I have to say I liked the idea of removing the ability of some class of players who do nothing but play the game all day every day from completely dominating the game (as is the case in most MMORPGs), in the long run, the method used is very bad for allowing new people from joining due to a permanent "level gap" between new players and old players.
We were all warned a long time ago that MS products sucked, remember the Magic 8 Ball said, "Outlook not so good"
Every new MMOG seems to think that they will be the ones to make PvP "work" at long last. But it's not likely to happen, for one simple reason: most people don't want PvP. Those who like PvP really, REALLY like it, and there's nothing wrong with that... but it's a small subset of the population. 46% of World of Warcraft's servers are PvP (or RPPVP) by default, which is pretty impressive... but when you look at the server populations, you see that doesn't translate into nearly half of the players preferring a PvP environment. On the "Normal" servers, 63% have a "Medium" population, and 29% have a "High" population; the plain RP servers are only slightly less populated, with 59% "Medium" and 17.6% "High." The PVP servers (and here I've just looked at the straight PVP servers... there's only 6 RPPVP servers, and they sorted to a different part of the spreadsheet, and I'm lazy) have the lowest proportion of "High" population servers, at 17%, but only 41.5% are "Medium". More than 40% of the PvP servers are "Low" population.
And that's a game that has spent a lot of effort on PvP. Granted, PvE is the first emphasis, but there's a lot of specifically PvP content. There's also a lot of PvP activity on the "Normal" and "RP" servers on an opt-in basis, but it operates almost like a separate game-within-a-game.
I don't think it's a coincidence that every game that's put PvP first has had relatively low adoption. I don't doubt that it's fun if that's what you like, but it's just not what most people like, and MMOGs do need a pretty large customer base to succeed.
There's a lot more to PvE class balance than "Making the player feel powerful." Truth is, people will ALWAYS bitch about class balance; if every class is bitching pretty equally, you've done it right. ;-) But if player characters are overpowered to the environment, the game isn't fun... and it sorta sounds like they're leaning that way.
I'd love to be wrong... I'm still waiting for a really good sci-fi genre MMOG to come along. I'm not a dragons-and-fairies type. But so far, they've all disappointed me. :-(
Don't you wish your girlfriend was a geek like me?
The problem with PvP is that developers haven't come up with a non-exploitable positive sum game for it. When it is a zero sum game people get very annoyed with the winner and the game and want to leave; therefore PvP tends to be a negative sum game. You can't have an economy based on a negative sum game.
Proof: If I get more than you lose when I beat you in PvP then we take turns beating each other rapidly and both advance quickly.
If every time I lose to one of the better PvPers he gets all of my loss thats angering. Its to much like theft and not like a game OR there is no real loss or gain and so where is the thrill?
If the game is only or mainly PvP and every time someone loses they lose more than the winner gains, the net assets in the game economy rapidly decrease.
Someone comes up with a positive sum game of PvP on an MMO that isn't exploitable and they'll be bigger than WoW.
> "It's very tempting to just throw a bunch of classes of ships
> together in order to say things like "our game has 15 classes
> of ships!" but this, we believe, is the wrong direction. People
> want meaningful and strong choices and not lots of meaningless,
> empty choices. Currently we plan to have 4-6 classes, but they
> will each have nearly endless possible configurations within those groups."
Is there something wrong with Eve's model? Shuttle, tiny, small, medium, large, extra large, etc., with just minor variations for each of four races for flavor? Are they having a "healer" ship and a "caster" ship and a "melee" ship, :)
I was two-boxing dual battleships -- Tier 3 Minmatar Maelstroms -- and got ganked in 0.0 space. It wasn't by two other battleships, but by a swarm of little popcorn.
One Eve guy's .sig is: If you find yourself in a fair fight, you haven't done your homework.
Note: Just like real war.
Just what kind of silly PvP are they expecting to develop in this game?
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Balancing for PVP vs. PVE wouldn't be an issue if they made the AI sufficient that PVE mimics PVP. EVE has started this direction with "sleeper" npcs in w-space. Eventually someone will get to a point where NPCs foes aren't easily discernible from players foes - hopefully then the whole PVP vs PVE nonsense will settle to a dull roar.