Discussion: A Balancing Act

I think the key point here is

There is so much content that I can look at with fresh eyes if the tactics required to approach it change. Emphasis I. Having played with the changes this week and last beta weekend, I think there is more additional interest for me than before. I think I’m not alone in that feeling, though.

I can see from your multiplicity of responses however that I suspect you do not share that optimism.

Well in all these forums, discord and other sources of communication right now your opinion is a minority. Based on the estatic random replying to people and frequent barrage of posts I’d say you probably need to lay of the coffee or whatever your drug of choice is ATM.

Take some time to catch up on the game perhaps since it sounds like you’ve been out of the loop for a very long time. Maybe take a nap, sleep is good. Or a long hot bath and come back with a clear mind.

Or I can just simple say the balance is happening. The majority of people are super excited about this. More content is meaningless without it and have a nice day!

Whenever I read this argument in any game, I’ld just love to see their code…
…there just so few ways “no dungeon” can be superior to “a dungeon for a limited power bracket” or “a way to easy/hard dungeon”

Because you have to get a healer in the first place, hope the one
you get is competent, and then coordinate with him or her.
Other games tried it, increasing the waiting time in the queue for every additional constraint they imposed on the party members.

I like every content in this game.
In fact, the point which drove me out from NWO was shutting down the foundry and killing 90% of the content.
Even it a lot of it was bad, bad to chose from it’s still way better than nothing at all.
Similar: the reason Furcadia always had a special place in my MMO experience is the player produced content; crappy system, but loads of independent ideas and from outside the company.

But I suppose that’s the question of personal preference.

So you agree that the purposed changes impose more restrictions to gameplay?

And about all other games doing something similar!

So we have reasons to be sceptical.

I think for answer to you, I will quote myself. I love so much the story content and I would like to see the next zone coming in next months but…
I love play end-game content during the wait of the new zone’s release but if this content have a problem and that each time between each zone you have never fixe this things, it does not go well. I thing about the relaunch that the game, is release with many defauts in some part and remember that the relaunch was first : save the Durham studio of Funcom (remember that there is two office : Oslo and Durham) and second : give a second chance at the TSW IP. This have work well but the game was maybe “release quickly” about that to make F2P and more accessible. When Nirvelle replaced Tiltly, he wished developped and released a tech for have a more scalable and logic content with the new SWL gameplay and finally…the weapon problem that eveyone know have finally revealed more important (Nirvelle have said in his interview that the tank was reworked at 100% and 25% for healers).
All this optimizations it’s not for end-game content only but for players which play the story of course. And if you have just a part of end-game content which use the new scaling tech, the logic it’s to port everything with that so it’s a just a logic and a wait for everyone which want to see this awesome story.

Maybe, maybe not.
In real life, changing some management procedures and some tools don’t revitalize the devs, if they are still creating the old products.
If you’re still develping just another version of X based on the same processor, placing some ‘agile’ tags on processes doesn’t improve things a lot.

And just the same, I don’t suppose raiding the same dungeon just after waiting longer for a healer to be available won’t increase the experience a whole lot.

It depends on how unhappy the tanks are.
If a lot of those quit or switch to damage, heal or solo, most of those new hopeful healers won’t someone to heal and be unhappy themselves.

current SWL is way more restrictive on tanks/healers than rebalanced SWL is. There’s one pair of weapons that can do it (without being E17 in E9-10 content), anything else is significantly less capable, and healers are fully vestigial. Besides making the 3 tank weapons more even, the rebalance allows tanks to use any primary/secondary weapons they choose without being at even as much of a disadvantage as chaos/hammer has below hammer/chaos in live swl. You could pistol/shotgun tank if you wanted.

Of course, due to how gear works in SWL, noone will be able to use that flexibility, but it does exist.

There’s zero point in arguing about this really.

We aren’t getting a story patch, we’re getting tanking and healing rebalanced. That will upset some people, and it will please a lot of others. There is no purpose in arguing in the discussion about the balance patch that Funcom should have done something else. It’s not constructive, and doesn’t help the developers with any feedback about the changes.


Right, mechanics are used to play content, but are no contnet by themselves.

No balance patch is necessary if you want to even think about adding new group content, just build your new content around the actual situation; easy enough, as long as you don’t change the style of the content (e.g. don’t introduce PVP).

“Doable with any weapon set” doesn’t equate to ‘easy’, just “of a different difficulty for each set and still doable with the weakest one”.

After three years it’s no problem that healers are not required; you still can play them in a dungeon, but you don’ have to get one - that’s just the style of this game.
And nerfing one weapon wouldn’t require such broad changes.

This only hold true up to E8 or so, past that point its getting 1hit,or mitigate the damage into oblivion.

It is very much a problem, nvm that ppl will take 4dps if they can, over 3 dps and a healer.

And No its not the style of the game, trinity is the style of the game, unfortunately the balance ended up making trinity impossible for some group content, and redundant for most of the rest.

In Any case, you have made your displeasure heard. We have made our disagreement clear. Maybe its time to move on to something else?

Haven’t seen that o Megabosses, Talos, etc. much.
Happens, but with two dozen people hitting on the boss there’s little harm in an biobreak or switching the music in the background for a minute.

That all good, but you could have done that already!
There’s nothing stopping you asking for a healer if you tank.
Only know it’s required, and you won’t get your party going unless you in fact find such a healer.
I expect even longer queues now than before.

You don’t need to downrank in solo content, you just need to adapt your build to suit the situation. If you aren’t getting enough heals from CD any more, then add a passive heal, a defensive cd, an active heal or something else. You’ve got plenty of options that don’t require you to just massively overgear the content.

is not wanting to adapt.

This I confirm from my experience in this testlive round.

I initially couldn’t do the E5 version of The Broadcast in shiny E10 gear. Thought about it a bit, adapted to the tactics and it was OK to do. Now I’m currently getting slammed on E10 version in (barely) E10 gear, but I can see that it’s tactics and execution, rather than gear alone.

Feels about right to me, and I am in no way a l33t player.

I’ve also not tried to optimise too much, or generalise in my gear set; I’m wearing what I would expect a healer to be wearing if that was their main set, not a long way from what I had in my bank before I “cleaned up”…

Ok so this player is literally just quoting and replying to as many people as possible to get the pot stirred up. It’s a pretty simple troll move but highly effective as it brings a lot of people into the argument at once. I’ve already fell into the trap but it would be best at this point to just ignore them. As @AWOL mentioned nothing constructive can come of this.

It’s also called “taking part in a discussion” instead of just stating the own point of view.
Maybe that’s unusual here?

If we want to discuss the changes, it’s the way to go.
If funcom just wanted a simple survey, they could have done so.

It’s the other way around: If you rule out arguing, you’ll never get more constructive then counting likes and dislikes.

In fact, you’re mostly right.
(Besides some switching around requires changes in gear requires getting gear requires farming results in new grinding, and some other require talents not every player owns).
But: you are also aware that this forces me to change to adapt to changes, which do nothing for me (maybe Penthouse?); so why should I embrace the change and not criticise it?

I disagree in this regard.
We are kind of the stakeholders here.
Now the devs come to the meeting an showed us what they did.
Our task is to evaluate their work and communicate the amount of satisfaction we feel with what they achieved with the spend resources.

Well, okay, maybe I’m overthinking things, but why do I always miss (in any game) those surveys, where the game developers or sales people ask their customers what kind of change they want and would cherish?