I don't understand why 1vs1 arena is out of the system. Just because of the "balance" factor.
Well, technically when you start with 3vs3 and end up down to 1vs1, isn't this the situation that blizzard is said to be "troublesome?"
1vs1 cant be avoided, the best thing to do is balance to the closest point where there are no real "broken" skills.
For example:
Lets say we start with 3vs3 arena and 2 of my opponents die, and I am a monk and my enemy is wizard. As long as hes damage is not completely off the chart in proportion to my defense and resistance then things should not be as bad as they imagined.
I'm assuming blizzard is worried about some character doing terribly well againts some other characters, but in the end, this will also come down to skill with tiny bit of work on blizzard's side with balance.
Any insights? will we never see another day of 1vs1?
With your logic any competitive game in the world is reduced to a 1v1. What you have to understand is that 3v3 adds more strategy, different combinations, etc.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A Post Concerning The Real-Money Auction House:
"Except real money trading has always been present in Diablo 2. Except now it's going to be officially supported which will reduce scams, prevent the funding of the black market so your kids will no longer be exposed to dangerous life ruining drugs like the cancer causing marijuana."
I think they said 1v1 is still an option, but its not what they're balancing around as its impossible for it to become perfectly balanced.
And as far as you're specific scenario, if an arena comes down to a Wizard built around kiting melee characters against a Monk or Barb, then that just means that the Wizard's team did the better job. The other team should have killed the Wiz first or something like that. Just because scenarios like that are imbalanced in one character's favor doesn't mean the arena as a whole would be imbalanced.
With your logic any competitive game in the world is reduced to a 1v1. What you have to understand is that 3v3 adds more strategy, different combinations, etc.
Yea I understand that 3v3 will scale things larger, more hp more damage and longer games.
But the "balance" factor that blizzard claims to be troublesome still exists within 3vs3.
Isnt there suppose to be some kind of balance that must exist in the first place for anything to work? you cant expect 10vs10 to do any better than 3vs3 just because you increase the number of "strategies and players". What if one team had 10 of the same character that beat every character in 1vs1. You know where this is going. [And assuming this is an arena, many people will do the same build, without sticking to their core character that they've come to love]
Just like you said using my logic every pvp comes down to 1vs1, but shouldn't all pvp build from 1v1 first? This is action rpg, not DotA. we dont have support heroes, all characters are unique on their own and have thier own distinct power that can overwhelm your enemies. Theres no such thing as "healer" or "debuffer" in diablo2, and for this reason, it should be seemingly easier to balance between 5 characters.
Its simply impossible to balance 1v1 because there will always be builds that counter other builds. Its not like every barbarian will be the same. Maybe one will be a WW barb that does super well against other meleers, and another will be a counter-slow barb that owns casters. If you try to balance a 1v1, then you'll somehow have to make every build equal (aka achieve the impossible). A kiting Wizard will always beat a Barb that doesn't have enough counters, and a counter-heavy barb will always beat a Wizard that relies heavily on kiting. Obviously those specific examples might not end up being the case, but you get the idea.
Its simply impossible to balance 1v1 because there will always be builds that counter other builds. Its not like every barbarian will be the same. Maybe one will be a WW barb that does super well against other meleers, and another will be a counter-slow barb that owns casters. If you try to balance a 1v1, then you'll somehow have to make every build equal (aka achieve the impossible). A kiting Wizard will always beat a Barb that doesn't have enough counters, and a counter-heavy barb will always beat a Wizard that relies heavily on kiting. Obviously those specific examples might not end up being the case, but you get the idea.
I think the example you gave is a good example of a "balanced" game.
We know that blizzard "balanced" the teleportation skill so Cool down is 9 seconds.
But the pure high defense and hp of barbarian is brought to an equal point with wizzard's high dps but relatively weak defense and low hp.
So, we're on the equal footing with regards to wizard vs barbarian. At least, in logical terms.
Kiting sorc will have a low dps, and a barb will have high hp and defense. This is where your control shines. We cant forget the individual skills that contribute to these wins. Balance is determined by how we play, so how does blizzard even know what will be balanced or not
It just frustrates me that they just straight off the bat removed 1v1 and said " nope were not doing it, too much work"... really ?
Hire bunch of PH.Ds and balance it out, not that hard, we went to the moon. HELLO 21st century here !
Again, they didn't remove it. Its just not what they're balancing PvP around. You'll still have the option to engage in a 1v1, but its just much harder to keep balanced than a 3v3.
And if a kiting Wiz does their job, the barb would almost never touch them. Or at least the Wiz would be able to slow the Barb at the right points in time to make it so that the Wiz always gets the health globes. In the end we only have theory, but in many many games 1v1 is imbalanced. Which isn't to say its not fun.
Obviously there will be SOME balanced matchups but with 1v1 the probability of an imbalanced matchup is greater, whearas in 3v3 you can still make up for that with strategy.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A Post Concerning The Real-Money Auction House:
"Except real money trading has always been present in Diablo 2. Except now it's going to be officially supported which will reduce scams, prevent the funding of the black market so your kids will no longer be exposed to dangerous life ruining drugs like the cancer causing marijuana."
I agree that most 1v1 games are not balanced to perfection, but they are balanced to a point where its "fun".
All I'm asking is D2 quality 1v1. with inflated hp and deflated damage so nothing does in 1 hit.
Its not that hard, they've done it before, and that was 10 years ago !
Technology has evolved so much, now balancing pvp should be a piece of cake to few. Maybe i'll do my research on this in my spare time.
Well that same advancement has also gone towards making it so theres even more builds, which makes it all the more complicated. Its considerably more complicated than just number crunching, especially considering they can't think of every build thats going to be viable. They could balance it to a razor's edge only to have someone discover a build that completely breaks everything.
Yep, that's one of the reason why starcraft 2 balance is so flawed and so many people have quit playing.
All the hype that was built up wasnt worth the wait when blizzard completely destroyed the balance by introducing newer,fancier units and "skills" that could be performed by each unit.
I hope they keep it simple and remove all the fancy stuff that will cause "imbalance".
I know its cliche but "simple is the best"
Well I hope Diablo3 director is better than Dustin Bowder... he completely ruined SC2 in my opinion by introducing units like colosuss and removing key units that was present in the original.
Well each character with have various traits, upto 7 active skills from a large pool, 5 different runes for each skill, various different armors/weapons, and different customizations such as gems.
You want balance and a 2011 release date?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A Post Concerning The Real-Money Auction House:
"Except real money trading has always been present in Diablo 2. Except now it's going to be officially supported which will reduce scams, prevent the funding of the black market so your kids will no longer be exposed to dangerous life ruining drugs like the cancer causing marijuana."
Yep, that's one of the reason why starcraft 2 balance is so flawed and so many people have quit playing.
All the hype that was built up wasnt worth the wait when blizzard completely destroyed the balance by introducing newer,fancier units and "skills" that could be performed by each unit.
I hope they keep it simple and remove all the fancy stuff that will cause "imbalance".
I know its cliche but "simple is the best"
Well I hope Diablo3 director is better than Dustin Bowder... he completely ruined SC2 in my opinion by introducing units like colosuss and removing key units that was present in the original.
...or people leave the game because they somehow expect a new game to be as balanced as one that has been out for 10 years. Not to mention a game always has the most users when it first comes out, and it'll naturally lose people as time goes on. And if you're expecting simplicity then thats already out the window, seeing as theres 30 skills per class and 5 runes per skill. Same goes for if you're expecting them to take PvP balance as seriously as PvE balance.
Yep, that's one of the reason why starcraft 2 balance is so flawed and so many people have quit playing.
I would have to say a lot of people still play StarCraft...and considering the recent inception of the NASL with a first season prize pool of $100,000 I would also have to say there's a fair amount of people still watching it.
That level of competition and prize (advertising) money doesn't happen for unpopular imbalanced games that no one is watching, sorry.
The learning curve on a game as balanced as StarCraft is huge, that probably has a lot more to do with all of the people you are referring to leaving. There is a giant skill gap between people in the Bronze league and people in Masters, that can be quite discouraging I would imagine.
It is pretty much impossible to have 1v1 balance in any RPG like Diablo. There are too many variables in terms of possible builds, especially throwing in things like runes altering how spells / abilities function.
There will always be 1v1 hard counters, it's just how it is. The only way to prevent something like this is to severely cut back player choice for builds and as such you could make each classes limited builds balanced vs. the other classes. But as stated already you can have a Barb who destroys Melee, or a Barb who destroys Casters, but you can't do both. Because of this dynamic 1v1 Balance doesn't work.
But if what you want is to have them cut back on player choice and have every Barb, Witch Doctor, Wizard, Demon Hunter, and Monk, have the exact same build. Then yes, they could balance 1v1.
You make it seem like they are just throwing 1v1 balance out of the window. That's not really the case. They have said that they'll balance PvP (which includes all aspects of it) as much as possible, but since the focus for PvP is Battle Arenas, and the focus for the game in a whole is more in a PvM direction, 1v1 PvP balance is probably going to suffer.
I expect PvP arenas to be focused on quite a bit in the beta. The battle arenas won't spoil any of the PvM content that they want to hide for release and getting feedback from a large pool of beta tester will help immensely when balancing the classes.
As Force said above 1v1 balance is simply not the focus, but it will of course still be worked on even though it's virtually impossible to achieve.
I can't see them not putting 1v1 in the game. I doubt there will be a ranked 1v1 however, but that doesn't matter cause ladders will be created online to decide that.
All I ask for is that every class has a chance against every class. Much like D2 if you are actually good at pvp then you can stand your own for the most part in every duel 1v1, a few 6/4, 7/3 matchups like trap assassin vs ele druid or melee druid but with the right gameplan you could pull off a win. I don't want it where its a definite 10/0 KO hard counter BS.
I also want the ability to take out higher levels with superior gameplay, just cause youre leveled to 60 doesn't mean my level 20 shouldn't beat you if I play my cards right and you suck.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
TT
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Well, technically when you start with 3vs3 and end up down to 1vs1, isn't this the situation that blizzard is said to be "troublesome?"
1vs1 cant be avoided, the best thing to do is balance to the closest point where there are no real "broken" skills.
For example:
Lets say we start with 3vs3 arena and 2 of my opponents die, and I am a monk and my enemy is wizard. As long as hes damage is not completely off the chart in proportion to my defense and resistance then things should not be as bad as they imagined.
I'm assuming blizzard is worried about some character doing terribly well againts some other characters, but in the end, this will also come down to skill with tiny bit of work on blizzard's side with balance.
Any insights? will we never see another day of 1vs1?
"Except real money trading has always been present in Diablo 2. Except now it's going to be officially supported which will reduce scams, prevent the funding of the black market so your kids will no longer be exposed to dangerous life ruining drugs like the cancer causing marijuana."
And as far as you're specific scenario, if an arena comes down to a Wizard built around kiting melee characters against a Monk or Barb, then that just means that the Wizard's team did the better job. The other team should have killed the Wiz first or something like that. Just because scenarios like that are imbalanced in one character's favor doesn't mean the arena as a whole would be imbalanced.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
Yea I understand that 3v3 will scale things larger, more hp more damage and longer games.
But the "balance" factor that blizzard claims to be troublesome still exists within 3vs3.
Isnt there suppose to be some kind of balance that must exist in the first place for anything to work? you cant expect 10vs10 to do any better than 3vs3 just because you increase the number of "strategies and players". What if one team had 10 of the same character that beat every character in 1vs1. You know where this is going. [And assuming this is an arena, many people will do the same build, without sticking to their core character that they've come to love]
Just like you said using my logic every pvp comes down to 1vs1, but shouldn't all pvp build from 1v1 first? This is action rpg, not DotA. we dont have support heroes, all characters are unique on their own and have thier own distinct power that can overwhelm your enemies. Theres no such thing as "healer" or "debuffer" in diablo2, and for this reason, it should be seemingly easier to balance between 5 characters.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
I think the example you gave is a good example of a "balanced" game.
We know that blizzard "balanced" the teleportation skill so Cool down is 9 seconds.
But the pure high defense and hp of barbarian is brought to an equal point with wizzard's high dps but relatively weak defense and low hp.
So, we're on the equal footing with regards to wizard vs barbarian. At least, in logical terms.
Kiting sorc will have a low dps, and a barb will have high hp and defense. This is where your control shines. We cant forget the individual skills that contribute to these wins. Balance is determined by how we play, so how does blizzard even know what will be balanced or not
It just frustrates me that they just straight off the bat removed 1v1 and said " nope were not doing it, too much work"... really ?
Hire bunch of PH.Ds and balance it out, not that hard, we went to the moon. HELLO 21st century here !
And if a kiting Wiz does their job, the barb would almost never touch them. Or at least the Wiz would be able to slow the Barb at the right points in time to make it so that the Wiz always gets the health globes. In the end we only have theory, but in many many games 1v1 is imbalanced. Which isn't to say its not fun.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
"Except real money trading has always been present in Diablo 2. Except now it's going to be officially supported which will reduce scams, prevent the funding of the black market so your kids will no longer be exposed to dangerous life ruining drugs like the cancer causing marijuana."
All I'm asking is D2 quality 1v1. with inflated hp and deflated damage so nothing does in 1 hit.
Its not that hard, they've done it before, and that was 10 years ago !
Technology has evolved so much, now balancing pvp should be a piece of cake to few. Maybe i'll do my research on this in my spare time.
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
All the hype that was built up wasnt worth the wait when blizzard completely destroyed the balance by introducing newer,fancier units and "skills" that could be performed by each unit.
I hope they keep it simple and remove all the fancy stuff that will cause "imbalance".
I know its cliche but "simple is the best"
Well I hope Diablo3 director is better than Dustin Bowder... he completely ruined SC2 in my opinion by introducing units like colosuss and removing key units that was present in the original.
You want balance and a 2011 release date?
"Except real money trading has always been present in Diablo 2. Except now it's going to be officially supported which will reduce scams, prevent the funding of the black market so your kids will no longer be exposed to dangerous life ruining drugs like the cancer causing marijuana."
Find any Diablo news? Contact me or anyone else on the news team.
DiabloFans: Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Live Chat
I would have to say a lot of people still play StarCraft...and considering the recent inception of the NASL with a first season prize pool of $100,000 I would also have to say there's a fair amount of people still watching it.
That level of competition and prize (advertising) money doesn't happen for unpopular imbalanced games that no one is watching, sorry.
The learning curve on a game as balanced as StarCraft is huge, that probably has a lot more to do with all of the people you are referring to leaving. There is a giant skill gap between people in the Bronze league and people in Masters, that can be quite discouraging I would imagine.
http://www.youtube.c...orceSC2strategy
It is pretty much impossible to have 1v1 balance in any RPG like Diablo. There are too many variables in terms of possible builds, especially throwing in things like runes altering how spells / abilities function.
There will always be 1v1 hard counters, it's just how it is. The only way to prevent something like this is to severely cut back player choice for builds and as such you could make each classes limited builds balanced vs. the other classes. But as stated already you can have a Barb who destroys Melee, or a Barb who destroys Casters, but you can't do both. Because of this dynamic 1v1 Balance doesn't work.
But if what you want is to have them cut back on player choice and have every Barb, Witch Doctor, Wizard, Demon Hunter, and Monk, have the exact same build. Then yes, they could balance 1v1.
http://www.youtube.c...orceSC2strategy
I expect PvP arenas to be focused on quite a bit in the beta. The battle arenas won't spoil any of the PvM content that they want to hide for release and getting feedback from a large pool of beta tester will help immensely when balancing the classes.
As Force said above 1v1 balance is simply not the focus, but it will of course still be worked on even though it's virtually impossible to achieve.
All I ask for is that every class has a chance against every class. Much like D2 if you are actually good at pvp then you can stand your own for the most part in every duel 1v1, a few 6/4, 7/3 matchups like trap assassin vs ele druid or melee druid but with the right gameplan you could pull off a win. I don't want it where its a definite 10/0 KO hard counter BS.
I also want the ability to take out higher levels with superior gameplay, just cause youre leveled to 60 doesn't mean my level 20 shouldn't beat you if I play my cards right and you suck.