Great Idea! (few but monumental)

[zasvid]

IIRC someone has an alchemist with ring that gives 238 extra attacks...

[Neil]

That was accomplished by exploiting an overflow bug though.

[zasvid]

Yes, but still a example of overpowering - no other class could exploit it!

[Neil]

No, it's an example of a bug.

Not that the terms "overpowered" or "unbalanced" mean anything around here.

[zasvid]

After all, this class is broken so there's not much of a point to discuss about it.

[MageMuch]

Well the "No"s have it.

[Rubinstein]

Not that the terms "overpowered" or "unbalanced" mean anything around here.

Why don't make this statement sticky?
You could use a shortcut then...
Or even introduce a new abbreviation: TiNb (ToME is NOT balanced)?

[Ravenred]

Possibly adding aNsTiNB..

work it out...

[Neil]

Not that the terms "overpowered" or "unbalanced" mean anything around here.

Why don't make this statement sticky?
You could use a shortcut then...
Or even introduce a new abbreviation: TiNb (ToME is NOT balanced)? :twisted:

You've completely misunderstood me.

What I'm trying to say is that many people here when they say words like "unbalanced" and "overpowered" are using them incorrectly, not that such principles aren't taken into account in ToME development.

Let's use you as an example. What do *you* mean by saying ToME isn't "balanced"? Please clarify or retract the statement.

[Rubinstein]

You've completely misunderstood me.

Seems so, because that

What I'm trying to say is that many people here when they say words like "unbalanced" and "overpowered" are using them incorrectly, not that such principles aren't taken into account in ToME development.

wasn't something I could read behind your short statements about balance.

Let's use you as an example. What do *you* mean by saying ToME isn't "balanced"? Please clarify or retract the statement.

Did I really say that? If so, please show me the lines, probably *you* got *me* wrong here.
I even don't know whether there is an "official" definition of "game balance" but I have my
very own picture of balance, though:
It's not about one race/class combination being easier than another and it's not about fairness.
My personal definition of balance includes little details like prices for instance:
If in the middle of the game you have already so much money, that you don't know what to do with it.
Perfect balance (it's an ideal, I know) would mean that in *all* stages of the game you would have
just enough money as you need, only a little bit more or less.
(probably not the best example: So far I never saw a C-RPG were this was done right)

Or role-playing issues falling under that term (again: my personal definition):
You probably got me wrong after the previous "axemaster discussions".
I don't have a problem if axemasters being harder to play than other warrior classes, but if
an axemaster is doing better with non-axes along half of the game, then role-playing and thus balance
feels just broken to me.
Imagine you choose a spellcaster but your best offensive weapon is not a spell but an x-bow...

I could add some more examples but I hope you got the point...
Since my thoughts about balance are rather subjective I can't imagine that I was arguing about that.
At least not here in t-o-m-e.net.

[Neil]

Let's use you as an example. What do *you* mean by saying ToME isn't "balanced"? Please clarify or retract the statement.

Did I really say that? If so, please show me the lines, probably *you* got *me* wrong here.

I wasn't sure what you were saying. That's why I asked for a clarification.

Thank you.

[Guest]

If in the middle of the game you have already so much money, that you don't know what to do with it.

Maybe thieves may appear while you are in town based solely on your gold quantity (not level). Or groups of 'p' mosnters. Imagine a grand master thief accompanied by some ninjas and a grand mystic or two appearing in town if you have say 1M$. If you are still level 20 or so it won't be very pleasant. Maybe the master thief may ask you something in the lines of "Your money or your live!".

[Teber]

words can be so tricky. if a certain combo fits you like a glove, this would make the game somewhat easier for you. would that be unbalancing?

so far i've got the impression the game follows the TANSTAAFL principle quite well.

[Maylith]

words can be so tricky. if a certain combo fits you like a glove, this would make the game somewhat easier for you. would that be unbalancing?

so far i've got the impression the game follows the TANSTAAFL principle quite well.

Good point, Teber. I'm stil looking forward to seeing what happens to the rune and alchemy stuff in new versions, but aside from that, I'm happy with what I've got, at least as far into the game as I've gotten so far.

[Rubinstein]

I don't think so, Teber.
Even if no one seems to be sure about what "game balance" actually means, it should be at least something provided by the game itself, independent from individual playing style.

(Btw, what is the TANSTAAFL principle?)

Right now something else came into my mind which I unfortunately forgot in my list of examples above:
It's the availability of items in certain game stages.
From my few previous games I've got the impression (assuming that I wasn't just lucky) that I've got too much *superb* items too early, followed by a large gap were all new artifacts turned out to be useless compared to my actual equipment.
As a result there wasn't much left than selling all that newly found artifacts which again resulted in an exploding wealth in the late game.
That IMO is a serious issue according to my conception of "game balance".
Don't get me wrong:
A really lucky find should be always possible but the probability should be much lower.
And what you get should be better syncronized with the danger you have to take for.