What is the Devs Vision of Arena PvP

#0 - Dec. 16, 2009, 8:09 p.m.

Q u o t e:
Bring the player" is a philosophy for PvE that has to do with sharing buffs and debuffs among other classes so that groups have much more flexibility in their raid comps. It has almost nothing to do with making viable Arena teams. One of the most important strategies in building an Arena team is making sure you have synergy with the other classes on the team. We don't want Arena to ever devolve into grabbing three random people.

Players tend to have very specific visions for how they think Arena should work and then seem surprised when we don't always follows those. Some players think that any team that doesn't use layered CC is faceroll. Some players think every team should be caster, MS-provider and healer and any viable team without that combo is somehow leveraging an exploit that needs to be fixed. Some players want a return to the mana-drain battles of BC and if anyone ever dies from burst dps that something is broken.

I appriciate this post GC. I agree that everyone seems to have a different view on what arena should be.

If the Devs dont want the "bring the player not the class" to apply to arena then what exactly is the vision?

What kind of balance are the devs going for, if the current policy maintains keeping class synergy important. In my opinion this reads as some classes by design just wont work together, and some classes by design simply will.

I know its easy to open a can of worms for trolls to chew on by going in to any specifics, but if u can please share some insight on the goals devs have when looking into balancing arena.

I feel like alot of the qq over burst comps, control comps, mana drain and class synergy could be alliviated if we all got on the same page and got some idea of the actual design intent of how arena should work in terms of class synergy and ability.

Ghostcrawler

#23 - Dec. 17, 2009, 5:09 p.m.

Q u o t e:
What kind of balance are the devs going for, if the current policy maintains keeping class synergy important. In my opinion this reads as some classes by design just wont work together, and some classes by design simply will.

I know its easy to open a can of worms for trolls to chew on by going in to any specifics, but if u can please share some insight on the goals devs have when looking into balancing arena.

We think one of the problems is that we've spent too much effort balancing around specific specs instead of teams. But it's actually the comp that is super important. In the past we've given a spec with presumably low survivability more survivability or a class with marginal CC better CC. Increasingly though, we think that's a shotgun approach. What we are doing now is looking in terms of a, typically 3-player, team. What does a Balance druid bring to the table? Why would you want a warlock instead of a Frost mage? Those types of questions. We want to make sure there is at least one viable comp for each spec and then we can adjust those specs by answering the question: Okay, why is A being brought more than B?

The flip side of that is why you'd want to be spec A of your class when spec B is more attractive to the other players. Whenver you buff A, you risk B falling off though.

Too often the forum discussions (and not just our forums) rally around very specific questions, such as: how do I beat this guy? Or, why do I get blown up so fast? Those can be useful at identifying weaknesses, but ultimately it's the synergy with the other players on the team that is more important. (I'm only talking about Arenas here. Coordination in BGs is still important. It's just very different.)

P.S. Too often the forum discussions also focus too much on what the best players are capable of doing. Many players would get more information by looking at what the average Arena players are doing. The best players are where they are because they just really know what they're doing. PvP balance for them is going to be different than it is for the average player. (Not more or less important. Just different.)

Ghostcrawler

#28 - Dec. 17, 2009, 5:27 p.m.

Q u o t e:
And what about those of us who just want to play with our friends regardless of what class they are?

So much for bring the player not the class. I guess I should kick out my real-life DK friend and recruit some MS warrior I never heard of.

"Bring the player" refers to the way we shared more buffs and debuffs for PvE purposes so that building a raid isn't so restricted.

I'm not sure there's ever going to be a way you can just grab random people and expect to accomplish much in a competitive Arena. Part of our focus on BGs in Cataclysm is to let players PvP without having to worry so much about their comp. We're not necessarily trying to encourage any player with interest to step into Arenas in the same way we are with raiding in LK.

Ghostcrawler

#69 - Dec. 17, 2009, 8:27 p.m.

Q u o t e:
One of the main issues I have with the "Balancing the Team Comp" rather than the class is the eventual migration towards a "perfect comp", which will force Arena down both a incredibly boring and static road once players figure out what the optimal comp is. In short, if people find out that RMP is the best team to go with you will see all the top teams being RMP and the rest just struggling to get by.

I don't think that has to be eventual outcome. For example, a counter comp that beat the first comp might keep the first comp's numbers under control.

I think RMP is probably too dominant, but I don't think that means there will always be a single "the best" team.

Q u o t e:
May I ask why, especially if PvP gear rewards as so tightly tied into arenas?

A better way to pose that question is to ask why offer the best rewards only for Arena? The answer is that we are changing the way we do that for Cataclysm and allow players to earn the same epic PvP gear for rated BGs. This does not mean you can grind your way through BGs. You'll have to win. It should feel roughly equivalent to those guilds capable of beating the most difficult encounters getting the best PvE gear.

Q u o t e:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but from your new directions in pvp balance, it seems like we're all going to end up pigeon holed into a handful of comps where you design us into (see RMP) and not be able to play competitively otherwise.

I would argue that's where we are today. To improve that, I think we need to look at what is keeping other comps from being competitive and not just buff individual talents to affect individual survival or burst damage for example.

Q u o t e:
So hunters, warriors and rogues are guaranteed to be on 33% of arena teams, each healing spec (minus holy cuz priests have disc) is guaranteed at least 25% of all teams, and everyone else is SOL.

You are saying here "So, you're not going to change a thing," when the whole point of the thread is talking in general about what we want to change. Specifics will have to wait until closer to beta.

Ghostcrawler

#138 - Dec. 18, 2009, 5:36 p.m.

Q u o t e:
2. You're approaching this with the wrong philosophy. Pvp is a dynamic system as opposed to Pve's static system. One poster went over this earlier but I'll do so again. Your opponents in Pve do not get better each week. If bosses improved health, armor, damage, etc. by a few percentages each week regardless of whether you were playing or not, you'd be creating a ridiculous block for new players entering the system. Its a problem for arenas currently, it'll be a problem for rated BG's. You're not really solving any problems by taking the same overall philosophy with rated BG's as you already have with Arenas.

The PvP gearing system is actually pretty similar to the PvE gearing system. If you're awesome, you have access to the best gear. If you're not as awesome, *or* if you're new, then you don't have access to that gear, but you have access to the gear just a tier behind. Next season you'll have access to the new gear, but the better players will have access to even better gear, and so on.

Yes, you're going to have more of a challenge competing against players with the best gear, but it's not an insurmountable advantage and the system won't completely starve you of the ability to get the best gear even if you lose a lot.

Rated BGs are not designed to give players who just want to lose their way through a bunch of battlegrounds Gladiator-level loot. They're designed for players who don't like the small, short, duel-ish feeling of Arena but still like coordinated, competitive play. (I also expect there will be a lot of overlap between the two.) If rated BGs aren't for you or you just can't compete for some reason, you still have access to the previous season's gear (and you can even get it through PvE progression).

Ghostcrawler

#139 - Dec. 18, 2009, 5:39 p.m.

Q u o t e:
- There are hundreds or thousdands of possible comps each spec could be part of. How are you choosing which ones are being balanced? Are they the more popular ones? Do the other comps not deserve balance too?

We don't need to solve for every possible comp in the matrix. We just need for e.g. the Balance druid or Beastmaster hunter to have more than zero or one options (and ideally a few more than that).