Why:

Warhammer Online suffers from class favoritism, and a development team that is hesitant in providing sweeping changes and overhauls after receiving backlash from such changes early after release. The theory is that a simple, minor change might completely throw the RvR schema off-balance. However, due to current implementation, some classes are left marginalized, and the RvR experience is dominated by the fallout generated by a select few classes.

The easiest way to obtain balance in a factionalized environment is to provide the same choices to each side, but this is not the case in WAR. Understandably, the development team has chosen to provide each side with a different flavor of class selection with a “similar but equal” policy. Unfortunately, the “equal” part is still lacking.

The theory is that if each set of classes, and in particular, each “mirror” pairing, is to be “similar but equal,” then there must be some sort of scale which the classes can be compared to; some sort of metric system that can add up the benefits and disadvantages of a class to produce, essentially, a number that all classes should be balanced against. Ideally, all classes equate to the same number.

Unfortunately, such a system does not seem to exist for WAR, and the sorry state of several classes leads to unbalanced and disinteresting gameplay.

Proposal:

A set of metrics each class can be rated on; a condensed, abbreviated version of what a class is good at and what a class lacks. These metrics cannot cover every possible use for a class, but work as a general census for how a class is performing vs. its peers, in order to generalize what aspects of a class need improvement (or nerfing, as the case may be).

Using the Metrics:

The system is not meant to compute by adding the abilities of each associated “tag” a class owns, and then sticking that number in the associated field. While such a method could be used with a different metric system to objectively compute what a class has the potential to be good at, this metric system is somewhat more subjective. It is meant to measure the perception of how a class is performing.

In a game such as WAR, perception becomes reality. The developers cannot teach or tell us how to play a game, or how a class is ‘meant’ to be played. If a class is underperforming regardless of the tools provided or the potential yet to be reached, the design of that class is flawed. There are many reasons why this may occur, mechanics that do not facilitate the goal or intent of the class being a consistent one, as well as abilities within a class that do not synergize well, or run counter-productive.

Essentially, the metrics act as a survey. Adding up each category reduces the results to a single number, which can be averaged across a large field of input. A large source of possible input is the WAR forums, which generally appear to be under-utilized for gathering player feedback.

After gathering a number for each class, it is possible to compare the perceived effectiveness of the classes against each other. The goal, in the end, is to make the perceived value for each class as close to equal as possible.

The Metrics:

Melee Damage…(0 – 15)

• Single Target / Burst (0 – 5)
• DoT / Sustained (0 – 5)
• AoE (0 – 5)

Ranged Damage… (0 – 15)

• Single Target / Burst (0 – 5)
• DoT / Sustained (0 – 5)
• AoE (0 – 5)

Healing and Buffing …(0 – 15)

• Single Target / Burst (0 – 5)
• DoT / Sustained (0 – 5)
• AoE  (0 – 5)

Debuffing… (0 – 10)

• Single Target (0 – 5)
• AoE (0 – 5)

Crowd Control / Utility…(0 – 10)

• Single Target (0 – 5)
• AoE (0 – 5)

Survivability… (0 – 10)

Mobility…(0 – 5)

Useful Masteries…(0 – 5)

Useful Tactics…(0 – 5)

Useful Mechanic…(0 – 5)

RvR Impact…(0 – 5)

Ideally, every class has Useful Masteries (5), Useful Tactics (5), a Useful Mechanic (5), and good RvR Impact (5).

Mobility is the ability to move around while affecting battle. Many instant cast, or moveable-while-casting abilities improve Mobility. Short cast times for non-mobile abilities can improve this metric as well. As an example, Magic RDPS classes have very low mobility (1-2), and Physical RDPS classes have higher mobility (3-4). MDPS classes have supreme mobility (5), but no Ranged Damage (0-1).

Survivability, in a way, is a composite of multiple other metrics, including Crowd Control and Mobility. In the end, it measures the capability of a class to survive against death, firstly through resisting the damage, and secondly through avoiding and otherwise mitigating the damage

The other metrics are self-explanatory.

Measuring the Metrics:

The ‘god-class’ would score the highest rating in every attribute, netting 100 points. No class should ever net this many points. By the same notion, this means 50 points should be an ‘average’ class. In this context, average implies optimal for creating a balanced play space.

Since ideally, every class should score optimally for Masteries, Tactics, Mechanic, and RvR Impact, this leaves 30 points to distribute among: Melee Damage, Ranged Damage, Healing and Buffing, Debuffing, Crowd Control / Utility, Survivability, and Mobility (in an optimal, balanced system).

However, many classes in WAR are not going to match the ideal metric. This is fine, if all the classes generally score in the same area. For example, if all classes scored around 35, this would be acceptable in terms of game balance, although not necessarily a fun player experience.

The problem is that there will likely be a large gap between a handful of classes and the remainder. Hopefully, this metric system will allow Mythic to see, on a broad scale, what needs to be done to improve class balance to close the gap. After a broad notion is developed, multiple ideas can be run through community feedback and focus testing to come to a good solution.