How would you feel about balance by encounter instead of balance by class?

[Shikaru.7618]

Been rolling this around my head and wanted to hear what other raiders think. Let's say hypothetically, the balance team ceases work today and no further changes to classes and skills happen for the foreseeable future, how would you design new encounters to give every class something to shine in? Would encounters specifically designed to make a class shine even be desirable or would it just feel bad and raise barrier of entry?

 

Here's some examples:

A boss has 3 adds that constantly orbit him. They are targetable but have infinite hp. When left alone they simply do nothing, but if attacked or condied, they bounce that damage back to the party twofold. Basically a boss that punishes cleave and requires focused single target dps.

 

A boss attack that hits for 101% of max hp, requiring heavy barriers to stay alive.

 

Boss attacks that scales damage with how many boons you have.

 

Boss that can only be damaged if you personally have applied chill in the last 5 seconds.

 

List goes on but hopefully you get the idea.

[Feanor.2358]

Feel bad. No, that's and understatement, such a level of enforcement would feel awful.

[Astralporing.1957]

Have to agree with Feanor on that one.

[Shikaru.7618]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> Feel bad. No, that's and understatement, such a level of enforcement would feel awful.

 

Is any level of enforcement bad here or specifically that its raid wide? Ie. If the same restrictions only applies to 1 add or 1 mechanic would it still feel bad? Let's say that sabetha cannon had the chill effect or the cleave effect. We see sort of an attempt to do this at blue guardian on vg, but conveniently enough chrono has boon strip on auto so most people dont even think about this mechanic.

[Walhalla.5473]

No, just no. Boss fights should be fun and these examples would be really unfun.

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > Feel bad. No, that's and understatement, such a level of enforcement would feel awful.

>

> Is any level of enforcement bad here or specifically that its raid wide? Ie. If the same restrictions only applies to 1 add or 1 mechanic would it still feel bad? Let's say that sabetha cannon had the chill effect or the cleave effect. We see sort of an attempt to do this at blue guardian on vg, but conveniently enough chrono has boon strip on auto so most people dont even think about this mechanic.

 

You can emphasize a mechanic, like boonstrip on VG. But you shouldn't make it so only a single class can handle it and it shouldn't be a random gimmick (like "apply chill yourself").

[Shikaru.7618]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > Feel bad. No, that's and understatement, such a level of enforcement would feel awful.

> >

> > Is any level of enforcement bad here or specifically that its raid wide? Ie. If the same restrictions only applies to 1 add or 1 mechanic would it still feel bad? Let's say that sabetha cannon had the chill effect or the cleave effect. We see sort of an attempt to do this at blue guardian on vg, but conveniently enough chrono has boon strip on auto so most people dont even think about this mechanic.

>

> You can emphasize a mechanic, like boonstrip on VG. But you shouldn't make it so only a single class can handle it and it shouldn't be a random gimmick (like "apply chill yourself").

 

I promise I'm not trying to be annoying, as a hobbyist game designer, I'm genuinely curious. I'll take "sabetha cannons must be chilled case", change it to must be chilled instead of must apply own chill, since I think that's the least egregious on the list. Some points to consider

 

1. Access to chill condition has a broad spectrum where some classes can easily access it (reaper, engi, power rev) where other classes cannot without some investment (warrior, gaurdian with sigil of ice) and some are in the middle where they could access it but would be inconvenient (weaver, ranger). This creates a situation where it accents a class strength/niche without completely shutting out all classes and the ability to plug and play in pugs. It also dehomogenizes certain parts of the encounter so you have to make team comp choices about what dps you want to bring to do cannons, or have a support accompany your cannoner.

2. Gameplay clarity could be a concern, since there's no other precedent for apply chill to deal damage. Would need to communicate it in the subtext underneath the mob hp bar.

3. Gives designers unique power budgets to work with in general on a per encounter basis since now access to chill is now a lever they can pull in the encounter balance and indirectly class balance. Example would be, only apply 2 seconds of chill to make the cannon vulnerable vs apply 10 seconds. The 2 ends of the spectrum would dictate how accessible or grating you want the class choices to be.

4. Creates a moment where teamwork can overcome the obstacle should your cannoner perish since druids also have access to chill, they can accompany backups up if needed.

[TexZero.7910]

I'd be okay with it but you need to balance both.

 

Given the track record that's unlikely because of how much work is involved.

[zealex.9410]

Any non cleave fights would be really hard. Considering 90% of the classes use their aoe skills for st dps.

 

Its not like wow were st and aoe are 2 diff established things.

[Eramonster.2718]

Players will start swapping characters profession based on encounters. Disadvantage to players with limited characters. Creating a barrier for new players and nothing gained for both new and veteran players :frown:.

 

> @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > Feel bad. No, that's and understatement, such a level of enforcement would feel awful.

>

> Is any level of enforcement bad here or specifically that its raid wide? Ie. If the same restrictions only applies to 1 add or 1 mechanic would it still feel bad? Let's say that sabetha cannon had the chill effect or the cleave effect. We see sort of an attempt to do this at blue guardian on vg, but conveniently enough chrono has boon strip on auto so most people dont even think about this mechanic.

 

[zealex.9410]

> @"Eramonster.2718" said:

> Players will start swapping characters profession based on encounters. Disadvantage to players with limited characters. Creating a barrier for new players and nothing gained for both new and veteran players :frown:.

>

> > @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > Feel bad. No, that's and understatement, such a level of enforcement would feel awful.

> >

> > Is any level of enforcement bad here or specifically that its raid wide? Ie. If the same restrictions only applies to 1 add or 1 mechanic would it still feel bad? Let's say that sabetha cannon had the chill effect or the cleave effect. We see sort of an attempt to do this at blue guardian on vg, but conveniently enough chrono has boon strip on auto so most people dont even think about this mechanic.

>

 

Isnt that what ppl do already? Vet raiders would normally have at least a 2 or so classes that they play for diff cases. Theres a decent cjance that players with less characters have invested less time and effort into the game. Why should the content cater around them?

[Feanor.2358]

> @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > Feel bad. No, that's and understatement, such a level of enforcement would feel awful.

> > >

> > > Is any level of enforcement bad here or specifically that its raid wide? Ie. If the same restrictions only applies to 1 add or 1 mechanic would it still feel bad? Let's say that sabetha cannon had the chill effect or the cleave effect. We see sort of an attempt to do this at blue guardian on vg, but conveniently enough chrono has boon strip on auto so most people dont even think about this mechanic.

> >

> > You can emphasize a mechanic, like boonstrip on VG. But you shouldn't make it so only a single class can handle it and it shouldn't be a random gimmick (like "apply chill yourself").

>

> I promise I'm not trying to be annoying, as a hobbyist game designer, I'm genuinely curious. I'll take "sabetha cannons must be chilled case", change it to must be chilled instead of must apply own chill, since I think that's the least egregious on the list. Some points to consider

>

> 1. Access to chill condition has a broad spectrum where some classes can easily access it (reaper, engi, power rev) where other classes cannot without some investment (warrior, gaurdian with sigil of ice) and some are in the middle where they could access it but would be inconvenient (weaver, ranger). This creates a situation where it accents a class strength/niche without completely shutting out all classes and the ability to plug and play in pugs. It also dehomogenizes certain parts of the encounter so you have to make team comp choices about what dps you want to bring to do cannons, or have a support accompany your cannoner.

> 2. Gameplay clarity could be a concern, since there's no other precedent for apply chill to deal damage. Would need to communicate it in the subtext underneath the mob hp bar.

> 3. Gives designers unique power budgets to work with in general on a per encounter basis since now access to chill is now a lever they can pull in the encounter balance and indirectly class balance. Example would be, only apply 2 seconds of chill to make the cannon vulnerable vs apply 10 seconds. The 2 ends of the spectrum would dictate how accessible or grating you want the class choices to be.

> 4. Creates a moment where teamwork can overcome the obstacle should your cannoner perish since druids also have access to chill, they can accompany backups up if needed.

 

Don't worry. It's refreshing and nice to see someone actually interested in the game design aspect instead of trying to defend their "shower thought design" blindly. No offence meant. You actually have some workable ideas here.

 

The main issue is what you pointed out in (2). It is, of course, very easy to create such mechanics. They could even have their place, but you have to realize there will always be miscommunication. There will always be players who didn't read the text, didn't understand your mechanic and got confused by the fight. That's not to say you shouldn't ever do them, only that you should be extremely careful when using game mechanics in a different way than they work in the game. I'd say (in addition to the limitations I put already), you'd want to make your mechanics thematically relevant. For instance, I would consider using your "only vulnerable when chilled" mechanic for some sort of Fire Elemental enemies. It makes it easier to accept, to find it reasonable and remember it. Suspension of disbelief is important.

 

One more point to consider, concerning your "101% hp boss attack". I like how you're creating a situation where Barrier is getting utilized here. But there's a danger is this design - it ends up extremely punishing. Again, that's not necessarily a "no go", it just requires more attention in analysing its impact on the fight and the possible interactions with the other mechanics.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> > @"Eramonster.2718" said:

> > Players will start swapping characters profession based on encounters. Disadvantage to players with limited characters. Creating a barrier for new players and nothing gained for both new and veteran players :frown:.

> >

> > > @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > Feel bad. No, that's and understatement, such a level of enforcement would feel awful.

> > >

> > > Is any level of enforcement bad here or specifically that its raid wide? Ie. If the same restrictions only applies to 1 add or 1 mechanic would it still feel bad? Let's say that sabetha cannon had the chill effect or the cleave effect. We see sort of an attempt to do this at blue guardian on vg, but conveniently enough chrono has boon strip on auto so most people dont even think about this mechanic.

> >

>

> Isnt that what ppl do already? Vet raiders would normally have at least a 2 or so classes that they play for diff cases. Theres a decent cjance that players with less characters have invested less time and effort into the game. Why should the content cater around them?

The content doesn't cater about them, but at the same time it's not balanced _against_ them.

 

The raids are restrictive enough as it is. Don't make them even more so. Especially for no gain whatsoever (because i really don't see how the changes proposed by OP would make the raids better).

 

[Etheri.5406]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"zealex.9410" said:

> > > @"Eramonster.2718" said:

> > > Players will start swapping characters profession based on encounters. Disadvantage to players with limited characters. Creating a barrier for new players and nothing gained for both new and veteran players :frown:.

> > >

> > > > @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> > > > > @"Feanor.2358" said:

> > > > > Feel bad. No, that's and understatement, such a level of enforcement would feel awful.

> > > >

> > > > Is any level of enforcement bad here or specifically that its raid wide? Ie. If the same restrictions only applies to 1 add or 1 mechanic would it still feel bad? Let's say that sabetha cannon had the chill effect or the cleave effect. We see sort of an attempt to do this at blue guardian on vg, but conveniently enough chrono has boon strip on auto so most people dont even think about this mechanic.

> > >

> >

> > Isnt that what ppl do already? Vet raiders would normally have at least a 2 or so classes that they play for diff cases. Theres a decent cjance that players with less characters have invested less time and effort into the game. Why should the content cater around them?

> The content doesn't cater about them, but at the same time it's not balanced _against_ them.

>

> The raids are restrictive enough as it is. Don't make them even more so. Especially for no gain whatsoever (because i really don't see how the changes proposed by OP would make the raids better).

>

 

What OP proposes is the only way to get a varied and balanced meta. It relies upon unique boss design in which some strategies are more effective than others. Obviously some of the examples are a little too restrictive (in my opinion); it's still the only thing that stops you from having a single meta.

Having a tightly balanced meta with several (exchangeable) supports and DPS specs; which each have their favor for certain bosses is much healthier for game balance than the current iteration.

 

Take the benchmarks. Something is on top, for some reason. Perhaps weaver is best. Perhaps holo is almost as good, and easier, so it's better. Those are great balance considerations; but if all you need is DPS then something is best.

If you want balance and a varied meta with healthy gameplay; you need more variation. Which should come from the encounters; which are substantially different. Take KC. KC requires high burst, preferably power, and also likes cleave and CC. So it's clear the ideal specs for this would be a comp with high burst. This is very different from say... VG; where you take more damage pressure, you need some kind of condi and there's different mechanics to deal with. Imagine howmuch more "meta" necros would be without epi or obscene dps if we had more bosses with "high" boon uptime or condi pressure.

 

We already have this to a small extent. Yet still, many mechanics which are very important in wvw / pvp are fully ignored in PvE. And overall the meta is pretty dull. I don't see hugely varied boss design, I see mostly bosses which are glorified DPS golems.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Etheri.5406" said:

> What OP proposes is the only way to get a varied and balanced meta.

No, the meta would become even more restrictive. The restrictions would be different for each boss, but that would only make them worse.

 

 

[Shikaru.7618]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Etheri.5406" said:

> > What OP proposes is the only way to get a varied and balanced meta.

> No, the meta would become even more restrictive. The restrictions would be different for each boss, but that would only make them worse.

>

>

 

You're absolutely right that it would ultimately place more restrictions. The potential gain from this is a wider array of classes feeling more powerful because the special niches of their classes are being utilized as opposed to just filling generic dps slots with chrono druid. A power herald being desired specifically because he has access to chill or scourge because of its unique barrier support feels a lot more impactful to the player.

 

If enough encounters are designed this way I hypothesize that it would bring in more players who were alienated because power reaper is low tier dps than chase away. I would also hazard to say that dps expectations for the utility dps slots would be a lot lower and less hostile specifically because you're bringing them as a utility slot. Eg. Sabetha cannoner or ranger green runner on vg.

 

I acknowledge that this is definitely a trade off though with it's own downsides. Unfortunately anet is the only one informed enough to say definitively which reality is better. You may be completely right and the reality that's created from this is "ping 150 OP for normal dp, ping 300 kp for chill applying dps"

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Etheri.5406" said:

> > > What OP proposes is the only way to get a varied and balanced meta.

> > No, the meta would become even more restrictive. The restrictions would be different for each boss, but that would only make them worse.

>

> You're absolutely right that it would ultimately place more restrictions. The potential gain from this is a wider array of classes feeling more powerful because the special niches of their classes are being utilized as opposed to just filling generic dps slots with chrono druid. A power herald being desired specifically because he has access to chill or scourge because of its unique barrier support feels a lot more impactful to the player.

Herald being utilized at deimos did not make herald users more powerful. Why would you expect the other similar cases would end up somehow different?

 

 

> If enough encounters are designed this way I hypothesize that it would bring in more players who were alienated because power reaper is low tier dps than chase away.

No. It would only underscore to them that their class is not useful outside of some gimmicks _and never would be_. Just like hand kiter on deimos didn't empower herald players. They still had to have a _normal_ raid class for any other boss, after all. But players of such underused classes/especs could at least have hope then (no matter how misplaced) that Anet someday might balance their class/espec correctly. If your proposal were to happen, that hope would be completely gone, because them being useless outside of some niche mechanic on one boss, instead of being an outlier that should be fixed, would become part of the balance.

 

> I would also hazard to say that dps expectations for the utility dps slots would be a lot lower and less hostile specifically because you're bringing them as a utility slot. Eg. Sabetha cannoner or ranger green runner on vg.

Maybe. So what? You'd have to learn to do respectable dps (on a recognized dps class) anyway, if you ever hoped to be able to do all the _other_ bosses.

 

> I acknowledge that this is definitely a trade off though with it's own downsides. Unfortunately anet is the only one informed enough to say definitively which reality is better. You may be completely right and the reality that's created from this is "ping 150 OP for normal dp, ping 300 kp for chill applying dps"

The reality would be that you'd still need to main a "normal", mainstream raid class. Or you would be useless outside that one, specific boss.

Basically, it would help noone. It would only become an additional burden.

 

[Eramonster.2718]

There's nothing to be gained for new and veteran content players from this idea :anguished:. To break the current META(?) just for it to be replace by another. Look at instabilities in fotm.

 

Swapping characters for specifics is not even close to variety.

 

 

[nsleep.7839]

They can design in some of those veins, but there are some things that must be noted, lets take your example.

> @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> A boss has 3 adds that constantly orbit him. They are targetable but have infinite hp. When left alone they simply do nothing, but if attacked or condied, they bounce that damage back to the party twofold. Basically a boss that punishes cleave and requires focused single target dps.

Doesn't work well in GW2, everything cleaves to a certain extent, and almost every single class have AoE in their rotation in some form. You're literally punishing people for merely pressing buttons as the game is currently set.

 

> @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> A boss attack that hits for 101% of max hp, requiring heavy barriers to stay alive.

It works, not new or creative as some games already do this. There aren't enough sources of barrier for a team in the game and many of those sources are locked behind some obscure and hard to achieve conditions, basically, in a real scenario this would be solved by "bring two Scourges." Still a functional idea.

 

> @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> Boss attacks that scales damage with how many boons you have.

Punishing good gameplay never ends well. Players feel cheated when this happens.

 

> @"Shikaru.7618" said:

> Boss that can only be damaged if you personally have applied chill in the last 5 seconds.

Not enough sources of sustained chill in the game, I would be actually surprised if more than one or two classes can meet something like this.

 

Very restrictive mechanics are almost never well received, things like hand kiting on Deimos isn't something people really enjoy doing and many consider it outright a bad designed mechanic.

 

Lastly, many people like to work and specialize in one profession, making fights restricted to them isn't a good move. You gain more achieving good class representation by having the classes balanced well enough that you can fill roleswith multiple prof/specs with builds fitting for that role instead of having a monopoly of a single build, not by alienating people who main a profession.

 

[zealex.9410]

> @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > @"Etheri.5406" said:

> > What OP proposes is the only way to get a varied and balanced meta.

> No, the meta would become even more restrictive. The restrictions would be different for each boss, but that would only make them worse.

>

>

 

Not not necessarily. If all the classes have bosses which excell at it would be better than i is now.

[Eramonster.2718]

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Etheri.5406" said:

> > > What OP proposes is the only way to get a varied and balanced meta.

> > No, the meta would become even more restrictive. The restrictions would be different for each boss, but that would only make them worse.

> >

> >

>

> Not not necessarily. If all the classes have bosses which excell at it would be better than i is now.

 

Big hit box vs small hit box. Power vs condi situations. AoE access etc. What's being put on the table is what we have right now. It's not introducing variety. Merely tuning up the current restriction to a new height. Eg. For KC, mass ele. For barrier spam mechanics as mentioned, mass scourge. Play by the rules, step out of line for a variety or something new; suffer.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"zealex.9410" said:

> > @"Astralporing.1957" said:

> > > @"Etheri.5406" said:

> > > What OP proposes is the only way to get a varied and balanced meta.

> > No, the meta would become even more restrictive. The restrictions would be different for each boss, but that would only make them worse.

> >

> >

>

> Not not necessarily. If all the classes have bosses which excell at it would be better than i is now.

Why? Explain for example how deimos fight makes it better for Heralds? Especially, how it makes the herald players useful for all _other_ bosses?

Because, from the OP post we're talking about _that_ level of specialization, not merely condi/power big/small hitbox differences.

 

[Henry.5713]

Makes me wonder...

Let's assume class X is at the bottom of both DPS and support builds (for argument's sake).

What purpose would forcing us to stack class X on a single encounter serve other than piss off a lot of players by requiring them to gear up something they wouldn't want to play anywhere else otherwise? Neither would this stop all of those mean Pug Commanders from excluding you if you insist on playing your favorite (and not too impressive) build on all other encounters. Nor would this stop static players looking for quick clears from jumping off class X as soon as the boss dies.

There are currently multiple viable options for supports and damage dealers. Some may be close to optimal on all encounters but there are alternatives. The supposed big gaps between specific builds in either of these roles are balancing issues and nothing that should be fixed by lazy class enforcement.

As much as people complain, there is not a single build or class which is a true musthave on any encounter and I'd like for things to remain this way.

 

The "Samarog Door" is a class mechanic done right even if probably meant as a joke or throwback. Always made you feel like "Oh nice, we got a thief - won't have to do this annoying part" and it shouldn't be turned into "Oh, we do not have six thieves and half of your players can't swap to one. Guess we kick them and LFG other people". Does that sound right? Sounds like pugging would be a nightmare. Of course, depends on how these mechanics would implemented in the end.

[Feanor.2358]

Except pretty much every group has chrono, druid & warrior. With all fairness, these are simply too good. Can you do with alternatives? Sure. Is there any point of doing it? Nope.

[Astralporing.1957]

> @"Feanor.2358" said:

> Except pretty much every group has chrono, druid & warrior. With all fairness, these are simply too good. Can you do with alternatives? Sure. Is there any point of doing it? Nope.

 

Then the solution is to introduce alternatives. It's not making some usually underused classes be equally irreplaceable on specific encounters.