Just read this post on the official EQ message boards, an excellent post
from Brian Hook regarding how weapons are balanced in EQ:
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Brian Hook"
Since Greg brought it up, I thought I'd write up something about the issue
of weapon balance and design, specifically for melee weapons. NOTE: a lot of
this is obvious.
CLASS HIERARCHY
The melee classes are arranged such that, from greatest damage to least
damage, the ideal layout is as follows:
1.) monk
2.) warrior/rogue
3.) shadow knight/paladin/ranger
4.) bard
5.) cleric/shaman/druid
6.) pure casters
Obviously the monk should do the most damage since the monk has no spell
casting ability and lacks armor and HP. In addition, the monk must contend
with lack of racial bonuses (infravision, stats, etc.). After the monk the
warrior and rogue should do the next most damage since they lack the spell
casting capability of hybrids. Finally you have the hybrids that make up for
their reduced pure melee capabilities by having useful spells.
Any weapons that allow one class to move up a rank is, by definition,
unbalanced. If a ranger could dual wield weapons capable of outdamaging (or
even approaching) a monk then you have, effectively, a superclass -- a monk
with armor and spell casting powers. The early experimental weapons that
Mathin was referring to were, in fact, woefully overpowered, but it took
some experimentation to determine to what extent.
DUAL WIELD
If a class is going to be dual wielding a weapon, you have to keep in mind
that there will be TWICE as many weapons for procs, stat bonuses, etc. to
take effect. So while a Sword of Wonder may have +5 STR and a Halberd of
Wonder may have +7 STR, if you can get another Sword of Wonder then the dual
wielding class has a slight advantage. Dual Wield SHOULD be better than 2HS
(rangers gave up plate to get dual wield, so in theory if you're giving up
one thing you should be gaining something, right? =) ), but not so much that
2HS isn't really viable unless you're forced into it (SK/PAL).
Also, some weapons that seem overly powerful for 1HS (e.g. Ghoulbane) are
not as powerful as some think because they can't be dual wielded either
because they're a Lore Item or because the class restriction is on a
non-dual-wielding class. Then again, GB is also more powerful than some
think if you're in Unrest or Lower Guk.
SPELLS
To some extent, when balancing a weapon amongst melee classes you must keep
in mind the offensive spell capability that the hybrids classes possess. For
pure offensive spell capability a ranger rules -- Careless Lightning is
woefully underutilized, isn't resisted much, doesn't cost much mana, and
does 99 pts of DD. And it has a casting time of 2.8 seconds. Now, this
doesn't justify giving the ranger worse weapons than, say, an SK or a
paladin, but it's always something to keep in mind.
BUFFS
When weapons (or any type of adjustments) are considered, appropriate buffs
MUST be considered at all times. This means ATK buffs, STR/DEX buffs, damage
shields, and haste buffs. While this tends to put soloers or melee types in
groups with no buffers (bard/shaman/enchanter) at a disadvantage, the other
option would be to make the weapons good for soloing but immensely powerful
in the hands of a buffed melee class. Unfortunately, you can't make weapons
that are weaker in groups and more powerful solo =/
HOW UNBALANCED IS IT?
This brings up a slightly related issue -- "how unbalanced is it?" If you
have a very powerful weapon -- say, a 20/20 -- how unbalanced is it? Will a
ranger dual wielding 20/20 daggers be able to solo Lower Guk? No. Not even
close. Will 6 rangers dual wielding 20/20 daggers be able to eat Lower Guk
alive? Quite possibly. The difference is that in the best case you have a 3x
damage gain, but with a single ranger you have made him into a party of
three (modulo lack of mana and stun effects that have a greater effect than
in a party). That's a BEST case.
But say you have 6 rangers dual wielding 20/20 daggers....uh oh, that's like
having up to 18 rangers running amok in a single group but with the size of
6. THAT is unbalancing.
So a lot of times you'll see someone (like Mathin =) ) complain that a
weapon got nerfed on test server. And yes, that weapon was PERFECT for him
in a three person group without a buffer. But if that weapon had been
allowed to exist on a live server you WOULD see packs of groups consisting
of 3 rangers, a cleric, a shaman, and an enchanter taking over an entire
zone. So we have to consider mass propagation of the item and how it affects
the world and groups.
WEIGHT
If you make a weapon lightweight, then that affects its power, even if only
slightly. It causes fatigue, especially if dual wielding. However, a weapon
that is too heavy may be unrealistically heavy for some of the weaker races
(e.g. a WT: 12 2HS may be a bit much for an erudite paladin). Once again,
it's a balancing act -- make it accessible to small races (if that's your
goal), but not so light that it imposes no burden on your stamina (unless
that's your goal).
STAT BONUSES
You have to be careful with stat bonuses...a DEX bonus on a weapon with a
powerful proc may be a little overly dangerous. In addition, some stats are
perceived to be more relevant than others: CHA is a "don't care", whereas
STR/DEX/AGI are a big thing. Gameplay aspects aside, this is an issue since
it affects the perceived value of a weapon. Which is better, a 7/22 w/ +4
STR or a 7/21 that's "normal"? The 7/22, duh. But what if it was a 7/22 w/
+10 CHA? +1 DEX? +5 AGI? +9 STA? Decisions, decisions...and note, these
decisions are what give the world a sense of richness in items, we don't
want everything to be a no brainer. So if a no-brainer shows up, then it had
better be on purpose, otherwise the "weaker" of two items will never be
quested/looted, which then tends to concentrate players on the "stronger" of
the items.
No brainer: 7/21 or 7/22 w/ +10 STR
Questionable: 7/21 or 6/19 w/ +2 DEX
EFFECTS ON CAMPING
If an item is dropped, the more people that can use it, the more camped it
will be. This is what causes problems for some of the most camped items in
the game: GZ, rubicite, Ykesha, Barbed Whip, Dragoon Dirk, Manastone,
JBoots, etc. You start finding items that aren't as generally useful:
Bullsmasher, Dark Reaver (SKs are rare), SBD (rogues are rare), bard only
items, etc. then you'll see that they're not as camped.
A CLASS: MAG item that is very powerful still won't be as camped as a much
weaker item usable by all pure casters.
PROCS
When designing a proc, you have to keep in mind that depending on the class,
race, and buffs, the proc may never happen or it may happen all the time.
For example, any weapon that can be used by a rogue MUST have its proc
considered carefully, since you can expect rogues, with appropriate buffs,
to have DEX that approaches 250 at high levels. So a proc that is fine for
an ogre warrior is probably WAY too powerful for a wood elf rogue.
You can't count on procs to occur -- the odds can be tilted for or against
you, but either way, you still can't rely on it -- so rarely will you want
to put in a proc that you are hoping will balance out poor weapon stats.
That's a fine line...what's better, a 7/21 weapon or a 7/26 with a 150 pt DD
proc? The answer? It depends.
The most reliable procs are self-only buffs and direct damage procs.
Self-only buffs that stack are very nice, or if they do something like heal,
cure disease, invigor, etc. they are even better. Direct damage procs
obviate the need to be concerned about stacking. Some procs, such as DoTs or
damage shields or hastes, etc. are problematic because if they are castable
then will likely not stack with a higher level party member's better spell
in that same line (Ensnaring Roots comes to mind...). Since
movement-altering spells don't stack, any proc (castable or proc-only) that
affects movement may be inordinately resisted.
Procs that help you and hurt someone else must also be balanced carefully.
Soul Leech comes to mind -- a 50 point DD is less powerful than a 50 point
Lifetap.
Now, if you're looking at the weapon as a soloists weapon, any proc at all
(except AoE) is considered a good thing.
RACE
Given equal weapons, a gnome warrior will be constantly outdamaged by an
ogre warrior. So if a weapon feels balanced in the hands of a gnome
warrior, then it is probably too powerful in the hands of an ogre warrior.
You can use one of two philosophies that address this issue:
- ogres will always outdamage a gnome, so too bad. That was a choice the
player made when creating their character. The downside to this is that at
higher levels the "non-ideal" melee class (from a pure statistical basis)
feels that they've been screwed and you see a lot of "I should've been a
[different race/class], and if I had known that I would have sucked at this
level, I wouldn't have gone this far". This is a fairly common complaint
for, say, human SKs and erudite paladins. And unfortunately for these
players, a lot of them didn't figure out they were powergamers until after
they started playing EQ =)
- create weapons that are balanced assuming they are going to be given to an
appropriate race. For example, a 7/19 in the hands of a gnome may be about
the same as a 7/21 in the hands of an ogre. So you make a Gnomish Blade that
is 7/19 and RACE: GNM. The downside to this is that you see a homogenization
of the race/class combinations where everyone does about the same damage at
high levels regardless of race or class. Bullsmasher is an example of this,
but it is not unbalanced since A.) there aren't that many DWF/HLF/GNM melee
types; B.) it's non-magic; and C.) 1HB isn't commonly used by melee types.
In some excessive cases I think that some class/race combinations should get
questable items that make them not completely underpowered versus another
race, especially at mid to high levels. But once again, this should be, at
most, to achieve parity, and in some cases just to make sure that one race
doesn't suffer so much that they're not perceived as non-viable.
SKILL
Sometimes you can make a weapon that is slightly better than you'd expect
simply because it uses a rarer skill -- 1HB and piercing come to mind,
specifically for classes that traditionally use 2HS and 1HS like rangers,
SKs, paladins, and warriors.
DIFFICULTY TO ACQUIRE
Unfortunately, difficulty to acquire an item can rarely be used to balance
an item's power, unless you make it a rare drop off a rare mob (which
frustrates players that feel they MUST have that item, even if that item is
too good given the level). The main reason for this is that you have to
assume that on a mature server that the item will have propagated to
everyone that can use it. As much as people complain about how hard it is to
get JBoots, rubicite, etc. you still see an awful lot of people running
around with JBoots and rubicite.
In some cases, however, you may wish to make a pair of quested 1HS slightly
more powerful than a quested 2HS since it took twice as long to get the pair
of 1HS (in theory). This is fair, so long as the difference between the two
isn't such that it's a no-brainer to dual wield the weapons and thus
everyone ignores the 2HS quest altogether.
DIFFERENTIATION
As you see, a lot of the art comes down to making things different but
equally viable. This is a very tough thing to do, be it weapons, spells, or
character class design. The smallest difference may, over time, become a
huge issue with regards to gameplay or balance. You take an item as innocent
as the Guise of the Deceiver, JBoots, or the Manastone that, at first
glance, don't seem to be THAT big a deal, then you see how their effects are
used to bypass a lot of the challenges (or requirements to group with
others) in the game, and then you realize how broken something is.
Same thing with resurrection and leaving corpses around for a week so a
cleric could res you for teleportation; res you to regain experience; etc.
Things like this come into play all the time with weapon design. For
example, on a blank piece of paper Dismiss Summoned and Dismiss Undead are
pretty much equal. In Norrath, however, undead are far more prevalent than
summoned creatures. So a weapon with Dismiss Summoned isn't nearly as
powerful as a weapon with Dismiss Undead. And by the same token, if
Ghoulbane proced an anti-EVERYTHING proc, it would be very powerful.
Sometimes something is provably better or worse than something else, but
conventional wisdom ("Norrathian legend") will tell you otherwise. This
hinders us since we'll balance something knowing that there's a "secret" to
unlocking its full potential, but people may not have discovered it yet. For
example, you'll see someone saying "this skill/spell/item sucks!" and what
you want to say is "But you don't get it, if you simply do THIS, that
skill/spell/item is twice as effective!" But we can't do that because then
we're in the position of providing spoilers.
CONCLUSION
Hopefully this gives you some insight into how tricky designing some items
can be. It's both an art and a science -- you have to have an intuitive feel
for the interactions between everything (race, procs, stat bonuses, classes,
skill caps, etc.) and then you have to back up your gut instincts by running
simulations so that the numbers do, in fact, add up to what you expect. Then
you have to see how it all fits into the world with regards to real world
usefulness (is that proc really relevant? Do these races really use this? Is
there another weapon that's similar and easier to get?) and hope you made
the right decision.
Brian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Rokenn Swiftsong - Karana server
EQ Bard Song Analysis
http://rgonzalez.net/EQSongs/