[PvMP] Balancing the Curve

[ChaChaLoco]

In the following post I'm going to break players on both sides down into the following categories: fresh, average, and veteran.
These categories are hypothetical constructs designed to make it easier to break both sides down (by gear for Freeps, and ranks for Creeps) and provide some easy-to-use terminology with which to discuss what follows.
Therefore it is essential that we all agree from the outset that these categories are inherently inaccurate.
These models are not true-to-life and they make certain assumptions, including:

• That the hypothetical players are equal in terms of skill, class, traits/skills, legendary weapons, virtues, etc.
• That the only difference between the hypothetical Freeps in these categories is their gear/essences.
• That the only difference between the hypothetical Creeps in these categories is their rank.

Nevertheless, these models are a simple enough approximation and will suffice for my purposes in this post. Note that with the current end-game for Freeps the way gear works doesn't fit perfectly into the following 3 categories because the Northern Strongholds gear is in the mix now.

Fresh Freep = Quest reward gear, purple essences.
Average Freep = T1 raid gear, teal essences.
Veteran Freep = T2 raid gear, gold essences.

Fresh Creep = R0-R4.
Average Creep = R5-R9.
Veteran Creep = R10-R15.

There's really been no design philosophy as to how balance should work in the Ettenmoors, although we all seem to accept that Freeps should have a slight advantage in terms of individual power to make up for Creeps having a numbers advantage, it's always been a case of Freeps being buffed in PvE-land first and then Creeps being buffed later to catch up. But currently, and I'm speaking in very general terms because this model cannot be used for anything else, it seems that there is a huge discrepancy in power/effectiveness between Veteran and Average Freeps, let alone Veteran and Fresh Freeps. From my general observations it seems that Fresh Freeps don't fare particularly well in the Ettenmoors, but Veteran Freeps (particularly if grouped) fare quite well and can shred Creeps. Something needs to be done to normalise these extremes.

In an ideal world, these categories would mirror their opposites more accurately (with a slight advantage to Freeps to accommodate for fewer numbers), e.g. a Fresh Freep and a Fresh Creep (as defined) should be a 'good' hypothetical fight. Obviously balancing Freeps/Creeps is far more complicated than this and there are far more factors at play, but I think steps can be taken to make the task more manageable.

The first thing to decide is whether it is better to balance things by buffing Creeps to be catch up to the PvE-geared/buffed Freeps, or rather to ensure the use of PvP sets on Freep-side and then balance Creeps according to those. I am of the opinion that the latter is better, and will explain how I think it could be achieved.

PvP Freep Gear

The first thing to note is that any system of PvP gear has to include Cloaks and Jewellery. It can't just be the standard 6 gear slots (Helm/Shoulders/Torso/Gloves/Legs/Boots) because jewellery/cloaks with essences would throw a spanner in the works. This gives us 15 slots to work with for PvP gear.

The second thing to note is that if balance is to be maintained as against this system it has to be practically (or actually) impossible to use PvE gear in the Ettenmoors. This is probably best achieved by putting a +300% incoming damage debuff on Freeps which is mitigated by a set bonus achieved by using all 15 pieces of PvP gear, i.e. once you use all 15 pieces of PvP gear (earrings, necklace, cloak, helmet, etc.) the set bonus activates and the debuff is removed/offset, e.g. -300% incoming damage to balance back out to 0% incoming damage. Alternatively, make it such that the only gear that can be used in the Ettenmoors/Osgiliath is the PvP gear (excluding legendary items, off-hand weapons/shields, and class items).

The PvP Jewellery and Cloaks

• There shall be PvP jewellery and cloaks.
• They shall have only stats (no essence slots) and be balanced accordingly.
• There shall be 4 sets of PvP jewellery/cloaks (Light Armour Will set, Medium Armour Might set, Medium Armour Agility set, Heavy Armour Might set).
• There shall be no rank restriction on the jewellery/cloaks.
• They shall cost a small amount of silver (no commendations necessary).
• There shall be no set bonus on the jewellery/cloaks (other than the incoming damage one referred to above if necessary).

The PvP Gear Sets (Helm/Shoulders/Torso/Gloves/Legs/Boots)

• There shall be 2 tiers of PvP Gear Sets.
• There shall be 4 sets at each tier (Light Armour Will set, Medium Armour Might set, Medium Armour Agility set, Heavy Armour Might set).
• They shall have only stats (no essence slots) and be balanced accordingly.
• The first tier (Soldier) shall cost only silver and be usable at any rank.
• The second tier (Veteran) shall cost commendations and be usable at any rank.
• The difference between each tier of gear shall be stats, the second tier should be ~20% more powerful than the first tier.
• There shall not be any class/trait-tree specific set bonuses as that's too much work for SSG in making 3 sets of gear for each class and at each tier (although if SSG wants to make more sets of gear for each class or have set-bonuses, then that's fine as long as they keep them up-to-date).

Note: Differentiation between Freep power according to rank is best handled by battlefield promotions, not gear (hence there only being two sets).

Creeps should then be balanced as against this system. This system would lower barriers to entry for Freeps (insofar as it will be easier to acquire gear needed to PvP and not get slaughtered), and would make balancing PvP in the future an easier task (so we are less likely to get certain updates where the PvP action is desolate because the balance is too far out of whack).

EDIT: While obviously this would remove some measure of customisation that is currently possible (because you can choose what essences to use) it's not particularly meaningful customisation, the most interesting customisation on Freep is choosing your traits and LI legacies and this proposed system does not affect this.

[Giliodor]

Without getting all doom and gloom about the chances of someone listening, I'll just say this:

If the armour sets were made class specific, individual freep classes could be balanced for PvMP by attatching set bonuses to the class specific armour.

[ChaChaLoco]

Without getting all doom and gloom about the chances of someone listening

Yeah, I have no delusions about any of the suggestions actual PvPers have being implemented.

If the armour sets were made class specific, individual freep classes could be balanced for PvMP by attatching set bonuses to the class specific armour.

As I said the only problem with that (and it's not really a problem so much as it is I'm not sure SSG will want to do that much work) is that you'd need 3 sets for each class (one for each trait tree and each with a different set bonus - unless they figured out a way that the set bonus of the gear just changed dynamically to fit whatever trait tree you specialise in) and then make less powerful copies for the 'Soldier' entry-level tier PvP armour. They could do it, sure, but I'm not really sure what set bonuses would add to PvP beyond what I've described above?

[Giliodor]

Yeah, I have no delusions about any of the suggestions actual PvPers have being implemented.

As I said the only problem with that (and it's not really a problem so much as it is I'm not sure SSG will want to do that much work) is that you'd need 3 sets for each class (one for each trait tree and each with a different set bonus - unless they figured out a way that the set bonus of the gear just changed dynamically to fit whatever trait tree you specialise in) and then make less powerful copies for the 'Soldier' entry-level tier PvP armour. They could do it, sure, but I'm not really sure what set bonuses would add to PvP beyond what I've described above?

For example, for burglars, we could have:

-70% CdG damage
-50% Cunning Attack damage
-10% Improved Feint Attack damage

and I think you'd suddenly not see nearly as many burglars in the Moors.

[siipperi]

For example, for burglars, we could have:

-70% CdG damage
-50% Cunning Attack damage
-10% Improved Feint Attack damage

and I think you'd suddenly not see nearly as many burglars in the Moors.

CA isn't even nearly top DPS skill of burglar in their rotation.

[Giliodor]

CA isn't even nearly top DPS skill of burglar in their rotation.

Except in every 1v1 I've ever had with any burglar, that is. Which is entirely besides the point. It was just an example.

[Spilo]

Too much thought put into something that won't be analyzed or applied. Better to spend time elsewhere, OP!

[sapienze]

Is this proposal to balance Arkenstone?

Will this proposed pvp gear and jewellery become enabled for pve?

How does level scaling become involved?

How does Audacity become incorporated?

Trait points, with each new addition to the trait point system balance becomes harder to achieve.

One aspect not mentioned in years is in combat run speed. Many Freeps now can outrun a Creep in combat or out of combat.

Staying within the title PvMp Balancing the Curve,these questions are factors to be considered.

[ChaChaLoco]

Is this proposal to balance Arkenstone?

Will this proposed pvp gear and jewellery become enabled for pve?

How does level scaling become involved?

How does Audacity become incorporated?

Trait points, with each new addition to the trait point system balance becomes harder to achieve.

One aspect not mentioned in years is in combat run speed. Many Freeps now can outrun a Creep in combat or out of combat.

Staying within the title PvMp Balancing the Curve,these questions are factors to be considered.

I'll answer your questions in order:

Not exclusively, it's applicable generally.

Yes, but it'd be useless because the stats of it would be far lower than current PvE gear (that's partly why it's necessary to ensure Freeps have to use it when PvPing so they can't just use PvE gear, and also why Creeps would need to be rebalanced as against Freeps with the PvP gear).

Level scaling isn't involved and I think it should be removed entirely. If not, the PvP gear will require you to be level 115 - too bad if you're level-scaled (people using level-scaling to cheese at the moment anyway apparently).

Audacity should be removed from both sides and if any of the buffs audacity had are deemed necessary to add back in for balance purposes (e.g. the CC reduction) then it can just be given as a general buff everyone gets while out in the Ettenmoors (like the outnumbered buff but active all the time).

That's a problem with trait trees and is not my concern, that's on SSG to ensure the balance of. You're not wrong though.

If I start talking about run-speed then I'll start talking about how I think mounts should be disabled in the Ettenmoors and Creep maps should be removed entirely, and that'll just end in blood and tears.

[Hejazia.Arkenstone]

Too much thought put into something that won't be analyzed or applied. Better to spend time elsewhere, OP!

Mandatory post by player who has ragequit the game but can't stop posting on forums, check.

[Saruman_Of_Numbers]

The proposed solutions are completely unrealistic in the context of the current game. Too many dev hours to implement, test, balance, and maintain gear, scaling, interaction with skills/traits, interaction with PVE gear, population dynamics, etc...


Any proposed solutions need to require minimal dev hours to implement/test and be self-balancing, requiring little maintnence.

Black Appendage of Sauron techs have been working on a computational model to determine PVMP balance, and preliminary results show it can be done in much simpler ways. We will be posting results later this summer

[sapienze]

If I start talking about run-speed then I'll start talking about how I think mounts should be disabled in the Ettenmoors and Creep maps should be removed entirely, and that'll just end in blood and tears.

In-combat run speed has nothing to do with Mounts or Maps.

I don't see how the two were brought into the explanation.

1. A Freep can't mount while in combat.
2. A Creep can't map in or out while in combat.

Freep run speed out of combat exceeds every creeps continued run speed from March.
It may be time to removed the BPE debuff from Creep bonused run speed.

Freeps don't endure an open wound like that when they are on foot running about out of combat.


No intention to derail but you opened up the box. Had you stuck with one specific change and kept all considerations in mind,there might be a chance to see change. A change on a per basis while the continuing development remains on track.

Anyway, after tomorrows update the only Creeps out will be in the lag zerg on Ark. It wont be long after tomorrow the only Freeps out will be Wardens,Champs,Hunters,and Burgs.

[Spilo]

Mandatory post by player who has ragequit the game but can't stop posting on forums, check.

I'm just courteous enough to offer advice to others who, like yourself, still play this game beyond its casual capabilities.

[ChaChaLoco]

The proposed solutions are completely unrealistic in the context of the current game. Too many dev hours to implement, test, balance, and maintain gear, scaling, interaction with skills/traits, interaction with PVE gear, population dynamics, etc...

All of these things you mentioned are things they have to do anyway every time they buff Creeps in response to Freeps running around the Ettenmoors with new PvE gear. I don't know how many hours it would take to implement, but they've made more PvP sets than I suggest in the past. Testing and balancing is something they should do (but don't do) anyway, I think it will be easier in the long-term under this frame-work. It'd be far easier to maintain the gear as they just have to create the sets once and because nothing else but those sets can be used in the PvP zone they won't have to touch them again outside of small balance changes or level-cap increases. Again interaction with skills/traits is something that they should be balancing with respect to the current PvE gear and set bonuses anyway so my proposed method involves no more work on their part. Interaction with PvE gear would be non-existent because PvE gear would be practically (or actually) impossible to use in the Ettenmoors and the PvP gear would either be impossible to use outside the Ettenmoors or incredibly limited in usefulness. I fail to see what bearing "population dynamics" has to this, again that would be something they should be balancing anyway and I don't see how my proposal makes that task any harder.

Any proposed solutions need to require minimal dev hours to implement/test and be self-balancing, requiring little maintnence.

I'm sceptical of anyone that claims their system can be self-balancing because any such system will contain inherent assumptions about what balance means and what is 'good' and 'bad' balance. I'm curious to find out exactly what you mean by self-balancing.

Black Appendage of Sauron techs have been working on a computational model to determine PVMP balance, and preliminary results show it can be done in much simpler ways. We will be posting results later this summer

Don't you just mean yourself? If this is based on your combat analysis tool I'm even more sceptical, as that tool seems limited in usefulness as it fails to give a holistic picture of combat situations. For instance, while it might track the raw healing output of a player, it won't easily track/display the following: whether that healer was actually healing people that needed healing; whether the healer was healing the best possible choice of healing target available (e.g. were their heals focussed on a high-ranked DPS BA that needed heals or a low-ranked Warg that needed heals), whether the healer was also debuffing/fearing enemy targets. I reserve further judgment until I hear more.

In-combat run speed has nothing to do with Mounts or Maps.

I don't see how the two were brought into the explanation.

Yes, my comment was more in jest and was supposed to indicate to you that I don't intend to seriously talk about mounts, maps, in-combat run speed or movement in general. You should make a separate thread if you have concerns about in-combat run speed.

[Saruman_Of_Numbers]

First of all, you don't formally define what balance is, so you no one can really evaluate how well your solution could work because we don't know what the parameters are. You dive into a solution without defining the problem or offering a measurement of balance. There are too many undefined terms and arbitrary numbers, so it's really all up in the air.


Second, you are asking the devs to create at least 4x6 + 2x4x6 = 72 unique pieces of gear that are appropriately balanced for all classes that could use them (IE all the agility gear needs to have appropriate stats for all agility classes, which vary in stat needs due to traits/skills), and requiring them to update all 72 gear pieces if they ever make any changes to stats or classes like they did with Mordor. Half a decade ago this would be realistic, now... not so much

Then, after all of that, you ask that creeps be balanced against these new freeps. You are asking the devs to balance two sides of an equation at the same time, which is not only more difficult, but completely unnecessary.


There is already a very well defined and bounded range in which freeps exist stat-wise using current PVE gear, and their damage/healing outputs and damage:survival ratios and curves are known. You don't need to monkey around with the Freep side of the equation at all in terms of raw stats to get a solid base from which you can balance creeps in comparison.

You seem to be unfamiliar with what a computational model is:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_science




This isn't the new CA... that was just the first step in a larger project. Hard data from the game in terms of stats, cool downs, mechanics etc, is merged with information gathered from the CA and from direct observation to generate a computational model of PVMP. Next we compare the theoretical data generated from the model for a situation with observed data via the CA-generated data folder for given fights. Inaccuracies are corrected and test re-run until the model is accurate.

Once we have an accurate model (or models) for PVP, we can generate a huge amount of theoretical data that would otherwise be impossible to test or parse out.. We can tweak the stats and generate sets of possible outcomes under different strategies, group makeups, and ofc balance schemes.

So far one thing is clear from the models: It is very hard to achieve balance by only tweaking stats, especially freep stats. You either make freeps in general too weak or too powerful, some freep classes are left in the dirt while others become OP, and there's a whole theory and a curve that explains why that is.


However, a much simpler, easy-to-implement, self-balancing solution has shown promise in the models. Self-balancing means that given that the system is implemented once in a balanced way, any change to either side of the balance equation can recalibrate the other side to maintain that balance. This makes it easy for devs to adjust things between updates without needing to extensively test stuff or "feel it out", and can even be done automatically.

More data is required before we can say anything conclusively, but by all indications, "Audacity gear 2.0" is not the best solution, in fact it's probably one of the worst solutions given what could be done with the same number of dev hours.

Full results coming later this summer/early fall

[ChaChaLoco]

First of all, you don't formally define what balance is...

Of course I don't, that would be an exercise in futility (even if I hadn't made several assumptions). The word 'balance' in this context isn't used to mean mathematical balance, it would be more accurate to say 'fun, enjoyable and competitive PvP' (which is why balance is usually prefaced with 'good' or 'bad' in conversation). That is, it involves a series of subjective value judgments about what is 'good', 'bad', 'fun', etc. That's for the developers to work out as informed by the opinions of their customers (the community), so I avoided getting into that discussion very much on purpose. It's not a simple case of balancing the numbers on both sides.

Second, you are asking the devs to create at least 4x6 + 2x4x6 = 72 unique pieces of gear that are appropriately balanced for all classes that could use them (IE all the agility gear needs to have appropriate stats for all agility classes, which vary in stat needs due to traits/skills), and requiring them to update all 72 gear pieces if they ever make any changes to stats or classes like they did with Mordor. Half a decade ago this would be realistic, now... not so much

I have no idea what goes on behind closed doors at SSG, but that doesn't seem like such an insurmountable task to me. In any event if people let their scepticism of SSG reading, or being able to implement, suggestions - then I doubt any suggestions would get posted at all!

Then, after all of that, you ask that creeps be balanced against these new freeps. You are asking the devs to balance two sides of an equation at the same time, which is not only more difficult, but completely unnecessary.

Well, again, they already do this every time they release new PvE content and have to play catch-up to that with respect to the Creeps. I think this system would involve more investment short-term but less long-term (not to mention the other benefits I mentioned about normalising the extremes on Freep and lowering barriers to entry for Freeps to PvP).

With respect to the rest of your post, I've never seen someone on these forums write so much but say so little. I'd caution against putting too much faith in abstract data when it comes to this. Any data you collect will require interpretation, that interpretation will probably be contestable, and any action taken on that contestable interpretation will be underpinned by subjective value judgments.

[Saruman_Of_Numbers]

Of course I don't, that would be an exercise in futility (even if I hadn't made several assumptions). The word 'balance' in this context isn't used to mean mathematical balance, it would be more accurate to say 'fun, enjoyable and competitive PvP' (which is why balance is usually prefaced with 'good' or 'bad' in conversation). That is, it involves a series of subjective value judgments about what is 'good', 'bad', 'fun', etc. That's for the developers to work out as informed by the opinions of their customers (the community), so I avoided getting into that discussion very much on purpose. It's not a simple case of balancing the numbers on both sides.

The title of this thread is "Balancing the curve" so I would think in a discussion about balance you would be interested in defining balance, since the whole point of your suggestion is to "balance" something.

You say now that you are not talking about mathematical, objective balance as shown by the objective measurements, but instead about your personal feelings of good PVP, where the definition of good PVP is wholly undefined, so the reader has no frame of reference as to what you mean.

Balancing numbers is very much what it's all about. If you don't start with a solid, indisputable measure of balance, mathematically defined, you just end up with the usual goggle-wearers flinging insults at each other to "git gud" or the soloers vs the groupers or the casuals vs the elites. That's probably part of the reason why most of the suggestions coming out of PVP land are ignored, they are not objective, but subjective feelings-based suggestions that would result in disaster. It wasn't that long ago a bunch of people were calling for all crit/devestates to be removed from the moors because the big numbers were scary.

[Giliodor]

The title of this thread is "Balancing the curve" so I would think in a discussion about balance you would be interested in defining balance, since the whole point of your suggestion is to "balance" something.

You say now that you are not talking about mathematical, objective balance as shown by the objective measurements, but instead about your personal feelings of good PVP, where the definition of good PVP is wholly undefined, so the reader has no frame of reference as to what you mean.

Balancing numbers is very much what it's all about. If you don't start with a solid, indisputable measure of balance, mathematically defined, you just end up with the usual goggle-wearers flinging insults at each other to "git gud" or the soloers vs the groupers or the casuals vs the elites. That's probably part of the reason why most of the suggestions coming out of PVP land are ignored, they are not objective, but subjective feelings-based suggestions that would result in disaster. It wasn't that long ago a bunch of people were calling for all crit/devestates to be removed from the moors because the big numbers were scary.

How can you mathematically define balance when the numbers on each side fluctuate constantly?

[Noseblood]

In the following post I'm going to break players on both sides down into the following categories: fresh, average, and veteran.
These categories are hypothetical constructs designed to make it easier to break both sides down (by gear for Freeps, and ranks for Creeps) and provide some easy-to-use terminology with which to discuss what follows.
Therefore it is essential that we all agree from the outset that these categories are inherently inaccurate.
These models are not true-to-life and they make certain assumptions, including:

• That the hypothetical players are equal in terms of skill, class, traits/skills, legendary weapons, virtues, etc.
• That the only difference between the hypothetical Freeps in these categories is their gear/essences.
• That the only difference between the hypothetical Creeps in these categories is their rank.

Nevertheless, these models are a simple enough approximation and will suffice for my purposes in this post. Note that with the current end-game for Freeps the way gear works doesn't fit perfectly into the following 3 categories because the Northern Strongholds gear is in the mix now.

Fresh Freep = Quest reward gear, purple essences.
Average Freep = T1 raid gear, teal essences.
Veteran Freep = T2 raid gear, gold essences.

Fresh Creep = R0-R4.
Average Creep = R5-R9.
Veteran Creep = R10-R15.

There's really been no design philosophy as to how balance should work in the Ettenmoors, although we all seem to accept that Freeps should have a slight advantage in terms of individual power to make up for Creeps having a numbers advantage, it's always been a case of Freeps being buffed in PvE-land first and then Creeps being buffed later to catch up. But currently, and I'm speaking in very general terms because this model cannot be used for anything else, it seems that there is a huge discrepancy in power/effectiveness between Veteran and Average Freeps, let alone Veteran and Fresh Freeps. From my general observations it seems that Fresh Freeps don't fare particularly well in the Ettenmoors, but Veteran Freeps (particularly if grouped) fare quite well and can shred Creeps. Something needs to be done to normalise these extremes.

In an ideal world, these categories would mirror their opposites more accurately (with a slight advantage to Freeps to accommodate for fewer numbers), e.g. a Fresh Freep and a Fresh Creep (as defined) should be a 'good' hypothetical fight. Obviously balancing Freeps/Creeps is far more complicated than this and there are far more factors at play, but I think steps can be taken to make the task more manageable.

The first thing to decide is whether it is better to balance things by buffing Creeps to be catch up to the PvE-geared/buffed Freeps, or rather to ensure the use of PvP sets on Freep-side and then balance Creeps according to those. I am of the opinion that the latter is better, and will explain how I think it could be achieved.

PvP Freep Gear

The first thing to note is that any system of PvP gear has to include Cloaks and Jewellery. It can't just be the standard 6 gear slots (Helm/Shoulders/Torso/Gloves/Legs/Boots) because jewellery/cloaks with essences would throw a spanner in the works. This gives us 15 slots to work with for PvP gear.

The second thing to note is that if balance is to be maintained as against this system it has to be practically (or actually) impossible to use PvE gear in the Ettenmoors. This is probably best achieved by putting a +300% incoming damage debuff on Freeps which is mitigated by a set bonus achieved by using all 15 pieces of PvP gear, i.e. once you use all 15 pieces of PvP gear (earrings, necklace, cloak, helmet, etc.) the set bonus activates and the debuff is removed/offset, e.g. -300% incoming damage to balance back out to 0% incoming damage. Alternatively, make it such that the only gear that can be used in the Ettenmoors/Osgiliath is the PvP gear (excluding legendary items, off-hand weapons/shields, and class items).

The PvP Jewellery and Cloaks

• There shall be PvP jewellery and cloaks.
• They shall have only stats (no essence slots) and be balanced accordingly.
• There shall be 4 sets of PvP jewellery/cloaks (Light Armour Will set, Medium Armour Might set, Medium Armour Agility set, Heavy Armour Might set).
• There shall be no rank restriction on the jewellery/cloaks.
• They shall cost a small amount of silver (no commendations necessary).
• There shall be no set bonus on the jewellery/cloaks (other than the incoming damage one referred to above if necessary).

The PvP Gear Sets (Helm/Shoulders/Torso/Gloves/Legs/Boots)

• There shall be 2 tiers of PvP Gear Sets.
• There shall be 4 sets at each tier (Light Armour Will set, Medium Armour Might set, Medium Armour Agility set, Heavy Armour Might set).
• They shall have only stats (no essence slots) and be balanced accordingly.
• The first tier (Soldier) shall cost only silver and be usable at any rank.
• The second tier (Veteran) shall cost commendations and be usable at any rank.
• The difference between each tier of gear shall be stats, the second tier should be ~20% more powerful than the first tier.
• There shall not be any class/trait-tree specific set bonuses as that's too much work for SSG in making 3 sets of gear for each class and at each tier (although if SSG wants to make more sets of gear for each class or have set-bonuses, then that's fine as long as they keep them up-to-date).

Note: Differentiation between Freep power according to rank is best handled by battlefield promotions, not gear (hence there only being two sets).

Creeps should then be balanced as against this system. This system would lower barriers to entry for Freeps (insofar as it will be easier to acquire gear needed to PvP and not get slaughtered), and would make balancing PvP in the future an easier task (so we are less likely to get certain updates where the PvP action is desolate because the balance is too far out of whack).

EDIT: While obviously this would remove some measure of customisation that is currently possible (because you can choose what essences to use) it's not particularly meaningful customisation, the most interesting customisation on Freep is choosing your traits and LI legacies and this proposed system does not affect this.

well lets not forget the most important thing of all, all updates have been freeps, no such updates to creeps. surprising! right? then it seems there us a large pvp aspect but the moor's server isn't truly it's own. shared chaotic ....... much love btw like how you were descriptive. in vet range. I know beta player that would return. im just saying, in the talks of pvp updating next year. serious need to consider putting things on their own server to allow a flawless 40v40 total mayham... not total lag. as with dungeons same thing...
creeps need that long needed long requested upgrade. and upgrade dmg wise. who let the dog's out.......
how bout bonus hour for infamy.renown gains say first 2 hour a player plays.
love the fact it takes long play time to level this game. but needs to be little easier. little bit little. on moor's side.
** make no mistake we all know freeps since u10 op 1 hit 2 hit killing fact..

[pinlu]

well lets not forget the most important thing of all, all updates have been freeps, no such updates to creeps. surprising! right? then it seems there us a large pvp aspect but the moor's server isn't truly it's own. shared chaotic ....... much love btw like how you were descriptive. in vet range. I know beta player that would return. im just saying, in the talks of pvp updating next year. serious need to consider putting things on their own server to allow a flawless 40v40 total mayham... not total lag. as with dungeons same thing...
creeps need that long needed long requested upgrade. and upgrade dmg wise. who let the dog's out.......
how bout bonus hour for infamy.renown gains say first 2 hour a player plays.
love the fact it takes long play time to level this game. but needs to be little easier. little bit little. on moor's side.
** make no mistake we all know freeps since u10 op 1 hit 2 hit killing fact..

Most updates have been to freeps because they are the core of this game. Most stuff is related to raids or quests, making pvp irrelevant to this.
The moors has been laggy forever, simple fix is for people to roam in smaller groups and remove backdoors, as this is the action killer.
Creeps had a balance when people stopped playing,and then a month later we had AOM and raid sets and the good essences, hurting the creep balance.This made their mitigation’s become less valuable as the freeps could have high masteries.— best is to go full glass now,as hunters and burgs gunna burn anyways.Their damage, has always been half decent with the big hitters.
Again moors has always been laggy
U10? Creeps at all level caps bar 105 has balance, and it was fine.Even at 105 it wasn’t impossible,excluding burgs which with your class knowledge can be countered easily.

They Need to nerf down the main dps , on the hunters and burglars and tone down red champions,by approx :
Hunter - reduce barrage and blood arrow CRITICAL DAMAGE by 40%,increase the base damage to compensate.
Champion-just remove emboldening strikes in the moors,Thus fixing the remorseless damage
Burglar - just scrap CDG, and put exposed throat at the bottom of redline.

They need to buff creeps by:
If they equalize the damage,increase the base stat of critical defense and partials.
Increase reavers power pool
Improve finesse on reavers and Bas.
Remove health stacking corruptions , and just add a base lump of 15% to what they have already.
Damage on spider needs to be turned fully to fellwrought, and remove tactical damage from pvp.
Increase the low hitting skills,and nerf vt,dev strike and spider bleeds over the board
Buff warleader damage HEAVILY.

[subadar]

these threads......

SSG cant even be bothered to do the old +morale and +damage updates they used to do for creeps on updates, let alone attempt to balance pvmp out.

i would not hold out much hope for anything to change re: pvmp but the pie in the sky dreaming kills time i guess.

[J-Moneyforever]

Just here to remind everyone that SSG specifically stated that PvP balance would come after class reworks because it was too hard to balance them concurrently and they wanted to see how class power was post-reworks and then adjust PvP accordingly. I'm not holding out hope for massive development resources to be committed to creeps but it's just inaccurate to claim that they won't make any changes at all.

[Saruman_Of_Numbers]

How can you mathematically define balance when the numbers on each side fluctuate constantly?

There are two separate issues: balance between creeps:freeps and balance between two opposing sides with different numbers of people of differing skill and quality.

The balance between freeps:creeps is relatively stable in the sense that it doesn't really change that much within a certain update... Whereas the populations of freeps/creeps can change wildly within minutes, and the quality of those freeps/creeps also varies.


To solve the population/quality balance issue, you need to implement a very automatic balancing system that lets the weaker side actually fight back instead of getting zerged into the ground... The easiest way to do this is to have a well designed map with different tiers of defensive fallback positions where a weaker force has a chance to put up a fight instead of running all the way back to the 1-shots/backdoor. Osgilliath tried to do this with their keeps offering +15% evade chance and beefy NPCs, but those were not tiered in any way and was poorly implemented with the shuffle bridge overshadowing most of the other dev work there.

These fallback positions can be designed around the mathematical balance model between creeps/freeps to buff the weaker side to a appropriate extent while within the fallback area

[Tirn]

Just here to remind everyone that SSG specifically stated that PvP balance would come after class reworks because it was too hard to balance them concurrently and they wanted to see how class power was post-reworks and then adjust PvP accordingly. I'm not holding out hope for massive development resources to be committed to creeps but it's just inaccurate to claim that they won't make any changes at all.

SSG have had numerous opportunities to balance pvp . Instead of reminding us what SSG said why don’t you remind them what they said and keep doing it . I doubt they want to admit the monumental #### up that is the ettenmoors atm . They have their priorities . They can shove them where the sun doesn’t shine .

[searingskitso]

In the interim SSG could just remove the base damage mitigation of -30% from freep audacity and force them back into audacity gear for group pvp.
I would keep it for creeps just because so may freeps come out in mastery capped or near capped raid builds.
It may not be a bad idea to increase the damage mitigation or % damage values for both creeps and freeps.

I am just assuming they dont have the resources for all the new sets of gear and bling.
Audacity was supposed to be a balancing element but the community reacted so poorly they stopped supporting it, and here we are.
The main reason for the complaint is that its such a grind for new players, but how is that a problem when the whole game is a much longer grind than the audacity grind?

The current pvmp freep armor is fine, but given you dont really get anything from the exchange from the raid gear to the pvp gear it is basically useless and you hurt yourself and your group by being in it if you are a main dps. give a few barter-able pvmp essences -- maybe the 337 ilvl.
force freeps into audacity armor by drop the -30% base damage. THEN scale up all of the old sets that do not have broken problems with them(unless i am mistaken, most of those sets work, have been updated atleast once, and would be fully usable if scaled).
I like using the pve stuff in pvp as much as the next guy, but it for sure is not good for balance.
Audacity only providing CC duration is not enough to get people to use the gear....