Massively

Behind the Mask: What does unbalanced even mean?

Patrick Mackey — Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:00:00 EST

Filed under: Super-hero, PvP, PvE, Opinion, Free-to-play, Champions Online, Behind the Mask

One of the major criticisms of Champions Online is a lack of game balance. People claim that the phrase "your own hero, your own story" doesn't cover the fact that your hero might be a gimp compared to someone else's. Although archetypes have their own balance issues (even among themselves), this complaint most commonly leveled at the freeform game where there are millions of possible characters.

However, I think that most armchair game theorists have a terrible understanding of what "balance" even means. Decades of competitive gaming (yeah, I'm that old) have given me a comprehensive understanding of what the term means, and I think it's worth looking at how CO stacks up.

Continue reading Behind the Mask: What does unbalanced even mean?

Behind the Mask: What does unbalanced even mean? originally appeared on Massively on Thu, 08 Dec 2011 14:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

Lost Pages of Taborea: Balancing vs. viable vs. fun

Jeremy Stratton — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:00:00 EST

Filed under: Fantasy, Classes, Opinion, Free-to-play, Runes of Magic, Lost Pages of Taborea

Thoughts of class-balancing, class-viability and triple-class combinations have been swimming in my head lately. In the wake of RIFT's open beta, Frogster announced that Runes of Magic will be moving to a triple-class system in early April. Along with a lot of speculation on how this will change RoM, there's talk of how badly three-class combos will upset class-balancing where some already feel classes are skewed.

Viable and balanced are pretty subjective terms in the MMO genre that make it hard for any two players to be on the same page. I find it even more confusing when some make it sound like there's a mass exodus to RIFT because of -- in part -- the idea that RoM's classes are more out of tune than yours truly trying to sing Zombie. These ideas are highly speculative. I'd like to throw my own opinions in about what makes a class in RoM viable, what not to look for when trying to find balance, and why we may not want to squeeze every possible class combination into the holy trinity of healer, DPS and tank.

Continue reading Lost Pages of Taborea: Balancing vs. viable vs. fun

Lost Pages of Taborea: Balancing vs. viable vs. fun originally appeared on Massively on Mon, 28 Feb 2011 18:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Permalink | Email this | Comments

WAR's cross-server scenario queues akin to socialism

James Egan — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 16:00:00 EST

Filed under: Fantasy, Classes, Game mechanics, Guilds, MMO industry, PvP, Warhammer Online, Opinion, Races

Warhammer Online, despite a very smooth launch, has a few nagging problems that have cropped up in its first weeks of life. Chief among its growing pains is the problem of scenario queuing issues, both on barren servers and the ones that are practically choking on players. Snafzg over at The Greenskin asks if creating a better situation for all Warhammer Online players must entail some degree of sacrifice made by all through cross-server scenario queues, likening the solution to socialism. A situation where the 'good servers' sacrifice for the benefit of 'problem servers'.

Snafzg writes, "I'm not saying socialism is bad... but I wonder if there are alternative solutions that don't punish (too strong a word?) people on good servers for the benefit of those on bad servers. I don't envy Mythic here... Make one crowd happy only to piss off another?" He also points out that the core issues of server population imbalance impact the game on many levels, and suggests some potential solutions for both overpopulation and underpopulation issues. If you're not happy with the scenario frequency in Warhammer Online, give Snafzg's "Cross-Server Scenario Socialism..." post a read, and let him know if you agree with his views on the issue.

Did you enjoy this? Make sure to check out our Warhammer guides: Massively's Character Creation Guide and our WoW Player's Guide to Warhammer. Plus, don't miss any of our ongoing coverage as Massively goes to WAR!

WAR's cross-server scenario queues akin to socialism originally appeared on Massively on Sat, 04 Oct 2008 16:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments

Which WAR faction favors more mature players?

Chris Chester — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 11:00:00 EST

Filed under: World of Warcraft, Polls, Forums, Game mechanics, New titles, Warhammer Online, Races

It's generally accepted as common knowledge that Horde players in World of Warcraft are, by and large, the more mature of the two factions. Whether or not this is actually supported by hard data is a matter of debate, but the logic says that older players are the ones best able to overlook the stigma of playing races long-perceived to be the "bad guys." There are mouth-breathers no matter what faction you roll, but perception is what it is.

We've been watching a poll over at Warhammer Alliance that sought to identify a specific age correlation between the two factions amongst the hardcore Warhammer Online community. With just over 2100 votes cast at the time of writing this, we did find an interest trend. Although Destruction was more popular than Order in every demographic, the disparity between the two become decreasingly pronounced as you move up in the age bracket. The ratio went from 1.7:1 in the 12-16 bracket to 1.5:1 amongst those 17-25 to 1.3:1 for ages 26-35, finally to 1.1:1 in the 35+ bracket. Does this mean Order will be the faction of choice for older players? Definitely too early to tell, but this early data is intriguing.

Which WAR faction favors more mature players? originally appeared on Massively on Tue, 01 Jul 2008 11:00:00 EST. Please see our terms for use of feeds.

Read | Permalink | Email this | Comments