"Overpowered" classes and player skill levels

[Omega Blue]

For this discussion, let me classify players into three skill levels:

1. Newbies - anybody who hasn't win a game
2. Accomplished players - anybody who has won at least one game
3. Power players - those who think nightmare is too easy...

Okay. What I have been seeing are threads asking certain "overpowered" classes be nerfed, invariably by power players. However, for us newbies, "overpowered" classes are probably what we need to win a game (finally!)... but unlocking these classes can post a challenge in itself.

What I like to point out to the power players are you don't have to play these "overpowered" classes. There are also classes with less power available. Or if you choose to, you can always go with an unconventional build, like a melee solipsist. Or give yourself some form of challenge, say not using up the full allotment of stats and/or talent points.

There are always something you can do yourself to decrease the power of a particular class, instead of asking it be nerfed and make it tougher for us newbies.

[HousePet]

I disagree.

Rare Solopsist or Oozemancer critters are the biggest problem with overpowered classes, and 'power players' know how to deal with them.
Its the less experienced players that are getting slaughtered and asking for nerfs.

[Darkmere]

I don't think the OP was referring to monster types.

I do agree with the OP, that if a person is concerned with how someone else plays a single player game, there might be other, more worthy topics to fret over.

As long as there is some sort of balanced-within-reason option available to the majority of players, class selection is working as intended.

[ohioastro]

In TOME the enemies of the player use the same rules that the players do. So if, for example, there is a new overpowered class, it will also be an overpowered opponent for players. I lost toons to the solopcist and oozemancer when introduced, regardless of how they were played. This aspect is, I think, a legitimate reason to want class balance.

There are also some complaints that don't focus on AI opponents, as the AI doesn't take advantage of all of the quirks of all of the classes. Calls to eliminate quirks that don't impact other players are ones where I agree more with the OP. If there is a clever edge that you can get by being creative then the burden of proof for removing it is higher.

I think the experienced players do tend to favor mechanics that make the overall game harder (or, to them, more interesting); and that this can be a problem. I'd like to see the various difficulty levels introduce new levels of challenges and think that this is a better direction to grow into, especially for the longevity of the game.

[SageAcrin]

Things like this are why I generally don't push for player side nerfs, unless there's a trait that can overly simplify the game.

There have been some powerful classes(I generally say the top end is Archmage/Corruptor/Berserker/Alchemist. Dunno if Solipsist still falls into this, after all the nerfs. Oozemancer currently sounds like it's up there though.), and they haven't been nerfed. They, however, are generally powerful in ways that allow you to see and understand how the game functions normally, without overreliance on a few skills(Except for Alchemist, but that's Alchemist's designed, actual point.).

Solipsist was a matter of both them being overly powerful enemies, but it was also a case, in part, of how they were overpowered-their life system was very experimental, and it turned out that they had the effective HP of a Berserker or so, despite being a caster type, in practice, as well as great passive defenses...the net result was a class that was crazily defensive. Not representative of the rest of the game's handling of defenses at all and a very good way to make a player be unable to clear with anything but Solipsist.

I think Oozemancer only has about half a dozen nerfs in SVN right now and actually has gained some through bugfixes. They'll still be good, I think.

"Overpowered" classes aren't going anywhere, I think. What ToME tries to avoid is classes with unintentionally powerful single skills, that overly focus playstyles-which is a fine line between that and merely a good skill, and one hard to define. Alchemist is meant to be a beginner class, and it has some weird forms of depth in golem wrangling, so it works out as a good exception, but for the most part, classes aren't very simple-it's a design philosophy ToME goes for, to be complex on skillsets, really.

Balance is hard. Somewhere in there, there's a line between balanced but powerful/interesting class and class that is basically a cheat code way to get through a hard game-or, worse, a really boring cheat code, something like "Infinite Life" or "Instantly kill enemies with one skill". And finding that line is not easy at all.

Edit: As a disclaimer, I probably fall into power player(Nightmare isn't that easy, but I'll work on it some time soon-been beating up DoomRL lately.).

But personally, I enjoy having variable difficulty. It's satisfying to beat the game with a weaker class, but it's a lot of fun to be able to casually play a Roguelike, for me, as well. Not everything has to be intense and kill me thirty times to be enjoyable, for me.

[wobbly]

Okay. What I have been seeing are threads asking certain "overpowered" classes be nerfed, invariably by power players. However, for us newbies, "overpowered" classes are probably what we need to win a game (finally!)... but unlocking these classes can post a challenge in itself.

I wouldn't consider myself a power player, yet I also dislike when a class is "overpowered". Easier & harder classes I'm fine with (actually I like), it's when the difference is extreme that it bothers me.

What I like to point out to the power players are you don't have to play these "overpowered" classes. There are also classes with less power available. Or if you choose to, you can always go with an unconventional build, like a melee solipsist. Or give yourself some form of challenge, say not using up the full allotment of stats and/or talent points.

Yes they don't have to play the "overpowered" class, but what if you like the idea/style of solipsists & oozemancers (both thematically interesting) & still want a challenging/interesting game? Not everyone likes the idea of adding additional artificial restrictions to create a "challenge game".

There are always something you can do yourself to decrease the power of a particular class, instead of asking it be nerfed and make it tougher for us newbies.

Do you read what particular nerfs they ask for? Often it's stuff like: "on a solipsists I can reduce my damage to nearly zero". Unless you are managing to reduce damage to zero, making that impossible isn't necessarily going to change how it plays for you. Most of the changes I've seen proposed are about changing the extreme end of the build, not the overall play of the class.

[Niegy]

In TOME the enemies of the player use the same rules that the players do. So if, for example, there is a new overpowered class, it will also be an overpowered opponent for players. I lost toons to the solopcist and oozemancer when introduced, regardless of how they were played. This aspect is, I think, a legitimate reason to want class balance....

If it's that was that simple then just met two opponents well balanced with the player and it means a player underpowered because it's like if he plays against two players teaming.

Common the game can't be that simple. Computer leaded enemies will never be as smart than most humans and have opponents as close than possible to humans is a myth that fails abruptly to the simple equation, face multiple opponents, and beat the game only if you have always win 10 000 deathmatch, lol.

The point is more how many pointless skills and skills sets the game has.

[Niegy]

Things like this are why I generally don't push for player side nerfs, unless there's a trait that can overly simplify the game.

There have been some powerful classes(I generally say the top end is Archmage/Corruptor/Berserker/Alchemist. Dunno if Solipsist still falls into this, after all the nerfs. Oozemancer currently sounds like it's up there though.), and they haven't been nerfed. They, however, are generally powerful in ways that allow you to see and understand how the game functions normally, without overreliance on a few skills(Except for Alchemist, but that's Alchemist's designed, actual point.).

Solipsist was a matter of both them being overly powerful enemies, but it was also a case, in part, of how they were overpowered-their life system was very experimental, and it turned out that they had the effective HP of a Berserker or so, despite being a caster type, in practice, as well as great passive defenses...the net result was a class that was crazily defensive. Not representative of the rest of the game's handling of defenses at all and a very good way to make a player be unable to clear with anything but Solipsist.

I think Oozemancer only has about half a dozen nerfs in SVN right now and actually has gained some through bugfixes. They'll still be good, I think.

"Overpowered" classes aren't going anywhere, I think. What ToME tries to avoid is classes with unintentionally powerful single skills, that overly focus playstyles-which is a fine line between that and merely a good skill, and one hard to define. Alchemist is meant to be a beginner class, and it has some weird forms of depth in golem wrangling, so it works out as a good exception, but for the most part, classes aren't very simple-it's a design philosophy ToME goes for, to be complex on skillsets, really.

Balance is hard. Somewhere in there, there's a line between balanced but powerful/interesting class and class that is basically a cheat code way to get through a hard game-or, worse, a really boring cheat code, something like "Infinite Life" or "Instantly kill enemies with one skill". And finding that line is not easy at all.

Edit: As a disclaimer, I probably fall into power player(Nightmare isn't that easy, but I'll work on it some time soon-been beating up DoomRL lately.).

But personally, I enjoy having variable difficulty. It's satisfying to beat the game with a weaker class, but it's a lot of fun to be able to casually play a Roguelike, for me, as well. Not everything has to be intense and kill me thirty times to be enjoyable, for me.

Well ok, agree with all, but you forget a point, not about balance but about pointless skills and pointless mixes of skills. It's impossible to reach in perfection, neither in class balances nor in skills and skills mixes utility. But I got the newbie feeling that some skills was rather weird and close to be pointless and that the apparent large choice for the character management is in fact quite more reduced when it's about stuff that is working. Yep as a newbie I'm not well placed to evaluate that, not at all, it's just a feeling.

[darkgod]

I'd rather you list all the talents you find lacking than throw a blanket "some are bad"
Talents are constantly being monitored for fun & usefulness and your feedback as a "noob" is invaluable.

Thanks

[Niegy]

I'd rather you list all the talents you find lacking than throw a blanket "some are bad"
Talents are constantly being monitored for fun & usefulness and your feedback as a "noob" is invaluable.

Thanks

There's necessarily some skills that are pointless. When I posted that I was still under the influence of some attempts to play at Normal difficulty and got the feeling to have nothing to do but some fights where my character seems pointless. This lead me to the feeling that choose very carefully the set of skills and characteristics is quite delicate. Now I just play at easier and it's fine for me and a fun challenge anyway. But I still got that feeling that the original design goal was Normal difficulty.

From a more concrete point of view:
- I felt Stealth and related skills was pointless, I already posted about that in the rogue section.
- I also haven't found much use of the first summon of the summoner but I have to admit that I haven't played enough the class (level 8 perhaps 9 and with only one char). But the summons 2 to 4 are rather interesting. The class seems rather difficult to play from a survivability point of view, but I need investigate more.

About fun, I already posted about that in warrior section, the Ranger beginning is very tedious (other classes tried are Shadowblade, Rogue, Summoner, Cursed, Arcane Blade, Bulkwark). The ranger would benefit to get one skill more tactical since the beginning. Not sure what will work but perhaps some limited piercing through targets ie hit more than one target in a row, at first perhaps only two targets and later more. Or a skill that stun or even push pack with a longer cooldown. I don't know what will work but I think it should be improved.

From a more general point of view the game requires going through first steps and at this point it seems half interesting, and after 2/3h when the set of skills is better it shows much better its quality. I suppose that most players trying it are persistent and won't give up the game after only few level up. But few will probably give up after a quick try. Also if for some reason more players will want try the game, I bet that the proportion of those giving up because of the first steps will be bigger.

Each class should start fast with a set of skills already providing some tactics diversity. I know that a feeling of progression is important and its also important to discover more features and possibilities as the game progress and the character level up. But I felt some more effort to try grab the player very soon would be better.

That's just feeling, for sure I'll try feedback more after more play (about 30h for now I suppose) and obviously overall I'm very positive about the game but don't play it with the Roguelike spirit, more like a general RPG. I'd be curious to know but the point the game reached I suspect it could fits much better players of indie general RPG than fans of Roguelike. And honestly if I knew Tales of Maj'Eyal was Tome4 I bet I wouldn't have tried it.

[tylor]

World of Tanks developers like to say "player's whine is just a reason to check statistics". That is, check if some tank types has too big or too low win percentage and decide if rebalance is in order.

We have a character vault, why not run it through some program to see which skills are barely used on winning toons?

[Niegy]

World of Tanks developers like to say "player's whine is just a reason to check statistics". That is, check if some tank types has too big or too low win percentage and decide if rebalance is in order.

We have a character vault, why not run it through some program to see which skills are barely used on winning toons?

That's pragmatic but it's going against the idea that the players has to find tricks and some could be harder to find than other. With such stuff two class could be roughly balanced but but one has series of tricks easier to find, then in statistics one class will seems quite more powerful despite they are in fact balanced.

I agree with people arguing that classes don't need be very well balanced and that it's better that some classes are more difficult than other. My feeling is the focus should be on not having skills that are pointless. And ok perhaps there's none in the game, that would be the first RPG like that then. I mean it's not about reaching the perfection but have the goal to have a maximum of skills really useful and a maximum of skills sets that are enough efficient, but not necessarily balanced. And I don't mean i have any lists like that.

[SageAcrin]

As someone that dug through a list someone else created from various winners(About a hundred winners, in fact, for the current version at the time.), and highlighted literally all the problem skills/classes I could find that were never/rarely used on winners, back about a year ago, I can assure you that there's lots of work being done/that has been done, on that front.

(I then proceeded to clear as many classes as possible to figure out some of those less obvious ones through experimentation, as I agree on that too. Also, because I wanted to. I'm still a few from a full spectrum clear, but that's because I've taken a break to beat up DoomRL.)

I'm not the only person that makes skill suggestions, either, nor do all of my suggestions get instantly taken or anything; You don't have to worry about my personal bias too much that way. But I still do look at winners to get a picture of how well balanced things are, and you'd be surprised how many different builds work.

(I think the Afflicted are the main classes with skill issues right now-notably the later two Cursed Form skills are kinda bad, and the Fears tree has issues. But Benli, the person that has been maintaining that part of the code, has been busy, and at last check he was working on overhauling Fears anyways. And I still think Two-Handed Maiming needs a bit of a buff, and I'm working on some ideas for upping the unique niche of Marauder but haven't really felt up to coding lately.)

And yeah, I don't feel like classes should be balanced in a single player game. It makes too good of a sliding scale difficulty, to have different classes be different levels of good, and there's more than enough classes so that you can get by. Just as long as they're not really out of place good/bad, it's fine, to me.

[Niegy]

Some games rate their class, easy, medium, hard, expert. It's an engagement but well if it's on design it could be mentioned. After if the players find some exploit making easy a class supposed to be expert, this is a different problem.

[phantomglider]

I'd rather you list all the talents you find lacking than throw a blanket "some are bad"
Talents are constantly being monitored for fun & usefulness and your feedback as a "noob" is invaluable.

Thanks

From a more concrete point of view:
- I felt Stealth and related skills was pointless, I already posted about that in the rogue section.
- I also haven't found much use of the first summon of the summoner but I have to admit that I haven't played enough the class (level 8 perhaps 9 and with only one char). But the summons 2 to 4 are rather interesting. The class seems rather difficult to play from a survivability point of view, but I need investigate more.

About fun, I already posted about that in warrior section, the Ranger beginning is very tedious.

Stealth is awesome once you get up to around level 20 - that's when it gets powerful enough to be pretty reliably, about when you can expect to max Unseen Actions if you are going for that early, and about when caster enemies (who will often randomly blast their friends if they know you're around but can't see you) start becoming pretty common.

War Hound does quite good damage, though it's fragile past the early game, and once you get Master Summoner comes with a big physical resist debuff to make all your other melee summons better. Ritch Flamespitter is also pretty good damage and is absolutely amazing for scouting.

Ranger, I am pretty sure, is an addon class. If you're talking about Archers, they are pretty simple by design.