I don't understand the nerfing paradigm

[cocopufff]

I've played this game off and on for a long time, but every time I come back, I feel like there have been new nerfs made to obliterate builds, and it's... honestly discouraging. I don't understand why there's so much emphasis on nerfing in updates, especially since balance updates are so infrequent, and buffs to underperforming trees are so rare. There are so many decisions in this game where it feels like the optimal choice is so obvious, and picking anything else just means being less performant for very little (or no) benefit.

For example, when I returned recently, I found
-Heavy nerfs to Draconic which literally gutted the damage output of its SLA, applying a blanket nerf to most every caster since there are very few trees which actually support them.
-Huge nerfs to FVS, including removing MCL buffs from their tree and nerfing Holy Smite hard
-The weirdest nerf ever to bards, where their early leveling as a caster was hurt badly by making Sonic Blast a single-target spell... again, why? Who was this hurting?
-Nerfs to Arcane Archer (their imbue went from 5-8 damage down to 1-6, which is... a lot of loss)

And then I sit there, and look at it, and
-Archmage is still an enhancement tree that there's almost no point taking.
-Arcane Archer is still functionally useless beyond a dip.
-The best way to run FVS right now is as an inquisitive rather than a caster
-Necrotic Clerics/Wizards are still so hampered by negative energy having such poor usability as to render them inferior to running Sorcerers who get free energy strips on every spell or Light Clerics

And that's just the classes I've been personally interested in. I'm sure there's others. It's extremely discouraging, and I genuinely just don't understand why so much emphasis is placed on nerfing things into oblivion. I can understand the need for nerfs if things are out of line, but so many of these feel like big, red, "You are now going to be worse than other options," buttons instead of "this is overperforming so we're going to bring it in line with other options."

 

[Shear-buckler]

There is no "nerfing paradigm". The game is shaped almost entierly by constant buffing and the occassional overpowered new release. If they reverted every nerf you mentioned it would barely, if at all, move the meta.

 

[woq]

There is no "nerfing paradigm". The game is shaped almost entierly by constant buffing and the occassional overpowered new release. If they reverted every nerf you mentioned it would barely, if at all, move the meta.

That's the point isn't it? The nerfs make no sense when they release stuff that is as good or better than what was "op" before only to leave those styles/spells/slas dead in the water.

That said I think Draconic was in fact op, but the other caster stuff doesn't make sense alongside the adjustment to that overperforming epic strike.

At the end of the day there's been a lot of talk about casters in the past [since epic destiny revamp / high reaper magic damage nerf] and we can only wait until a new patch where, as the devs put it, the pendulum swings the other way. or a new hip kid hits the block to be the new op. Just a shame it comes at the cost of every some old classes/playstyles.

I'd wager that wizard will see their light in the sun when an archetype is released for Wizards and their trees are looked at at that time since that will be the time for best time/cost effectiveness to do so.

 

[SpartanKiller13]

Over time the game gets easier - this can be due to player skill, better builds being found, and the most obvious: power creep. New expansions bring not just new gear, but also new enhancements/reworks, new permanent buffs (like bigger racial tomes or universal tomes), new mechanics (like Dark gifts, or sentient gems, or perfect artifacts - some of these matter more than others) etc.

There are also buffs, reworks, and nerfs to classes/builds/ED's etc. Like Quick Cutter went from one of DDO's worst epic strikes to by far the best melee strike. Dragonbreath went from by far DDO's best caster strike to a bit below average. Inquisitive & Repeating Crossbow were catapulted through the stratosphere by a series of changes designed to help game performance by reducing attack speed (balanced by giving them a lot of Doubleshot lol - like a ton).

Why does this happen? If there are no changes, people get bored and stop playing. This causes there to be no income, and DDO to die. This is not ideal lol. Thus, they keep releasing stuff. But for new content to be worth getting, there has to be cool stuff in it. "Wow, I'd love another stacking Destiny tome! Let me buy the supreme edition!" which means all my characters now have +2 DC's or +10 RP etc etc.

Monk just got reworked and buffed in nearly every way - yes, there were a few things removed and a few players are very unhappy about those, but the class is both more accessible and significantly stronger. That's good! But now it needs more challenging content otherwise it'll be too easy.

Archmage is bad because the devs haven't figured out how to balance casting. Blast-casting is incredibly strong in heroics and fine in epics and legendary outside of high skulls. It's pretty mediocre in raids, especially if not built for it. When blast-casting is too strong (like pre-Dragonbreath nerf) a lot of blast-caster questing is walking into a room, pressing 1-3 buttons, and walking out the other side. But when blast-casting is too weak you walk into a room and run out of spell points as you die. Contrast DC casting, where if you can CC a mob until it dies (or IK it) it's uhhhh very easy. Instakills feel great but trivialize content when applicable, so they keep adding more immunities and otherwise resistant mobs (and pushing the required DC's through the roof). Years ago I had an instakiller in WGU with 186 of the full party's 216 kills - this is not exactly ideal either, but going into a quest where half the mobs are immune or a raid where every mob is immune to you also feels terrible. Archmage is fine for heroic leveling, and even received small buffs at some point (bonus CL/MCL in C5/6). It's pretty terrible past that lol, but it's easy to see how difficult it would be to properly balance. Like Evocation, what SLA would be worth casting at endgame? It would probably have to be Arcane Tempest. But is that *too strong*? What about Transmutation? There aren't even higher level offensive Transmutation spells lol. Arcane Supremacy is one of DDO's biggest caster buffs; should it be nerfed to balance out other strength being added to the tree?

If Master of Knowledge was slightly easier to stack & maintain, Archmage would suddenly be in a much better state. Should they then balance around that? What about Archmages who don't take MoK? Or dip builds that go /3 Wizard with the new buffed MoK?

When you say "The best way to run FVS right now is as an inquisitive rather than a caster" that's largely because the best way to run nearly every class is as an inqusitive right now. Inquisitive is very overtuned, very obviously, and works great on a variety of platforms. Sorta like how Dragonbreath was, before the nerf. "This thing is too strong, you know it and I know it; can either avoid it or play it until it inevitably gets nerfed" similar to Quick Cutter (and probably SDK chains).

Not sure if you saw the rest of the Imbue change (like how you can get bonus Imbue Dice for your AA imbue from other sources), but it's likely a net gain for Arcane Archer; unfortunately AA is in a pretty eh spot particularly because of Inquisitive.

 

[kmoustakas]

I've played this game off and on for a long time, but every time I come back, I feel like there have been new nerfs made to obliterate builds, and it's... honestly discouraging. I don't understand why there's so much emphasis on nerfing in updates, especially since balance updates are so infrequent, and buffs to underperforming trees are so rare. There are so many decisions in this game where it feels like the optimal choice is so obvious, and picking anything else just means being less performant for very little (or no) benefit.

For example, when I returned recently, I found
-Heavy nerfs to Draconic which literally gutted the damage output of its SLA, applying a blanket nerf to most every caster since there are very few trees which actually support them.
-Huge nerfs to FVS, including removing MCL buffs from their tree and nerfing Holy Smite hard
-The weirdest nerf ever to bards, where their early leveling as a caster was hurt badly by making Sonic Blast a single-target spell... again, why? Who was this hurting?
-Nerfs to Arcane Archer (their imbue went from 5-8 damage down to 1-6, which is... a lot of loss)

And then I sit there, and look at it, and
-Archmage is still an enhancement tree that there's almost no point taking.
-Arcane Archer is still functionally useless beyond a dip.
-The best way to run FVS right now is as an inquisitive rather than a caster
-Necrotic Clerics/Wizards are still so hampered by negative energy having such poor usability as to render them inferior to running Sorcerers who get free energy strips on every spell or Light Clerics

And that's just the classes I've been personally interested in. I'm sure there's others. It's extremely discouraging, and I genuinely just don't understand why so much emphasis is placed on nerfing things into oblivion. I can understand the need for nerfs if things are out of line, but so many of these feel like big, red, "You are now going to be worse than other options," buttons instead of "this is overperforming so we're going to bring it in line with other options."

I know I'm beating a dead horse here but they ruined runearms too in anticipation of macrotechnic

 

[Jasparius]

I've played this game off and on for a long time, but every time I come back, I feel like there have been new nerfs made to obliterate builds, and it's... honestly discouraging. I don't understand why there's so much emphasis on nerfing in updates, especially since balance updates are so infrequent, and buffs to underperforming trees are so rare. There are so many decisions in this game where it feels like the optimal choice is so obvious, and picking anything else just means being less performant for very little (or no) benefit.

For example, when I returned recently, I found
-Heavy nerfs to Draconic which literally gutted the damage output of its SLA, applying a blanket nerf to most every caster since there are very few trees which actually support them.
-Huge nerfs to FVS, including removing MCL buffs from their tree and nerfing Holy Smite hard
-The weirdest nerf ever to bards, where their early leveling as a caster was hurt badly by making Sonic Blast a single-target spell... again, why? Who was this hurting?
-Nerfs to Arcane Archer (their imbue went from 5-8 damage down to 1-6, which is... a lot of loss)

And then I sit there, and look at it, and
-Archmage is still an enhancement tree that there's almost no point taking.
-Arcane Archer is still functionally useless beyond a dip.
-The best way to run FVS right now is as an inquisitive rather than a caster
-Necrotic Clerics/Wizards are still so hampered by negative energy having such poor usability as to render them inferior to running Sorcerers who get free energy strips on every spell or Light Clerics

And that's just the classes I've been personally interested in. I'm sure there's others. It's extremely discouraging, and I genuinely just don't understand why so much emphasis is placed on nerfing things into oblivion. I can understand the need for nerfs if things are out of line, but so many of these feel like big, red, "You are now going to be worse than other options," buttons instead of "this is overperforming so we're going to bring it in line with other options."

Nerfing core components because the extra stuff brings too much power is fine but SSG have been terrible at balance.

They say they are looking at balance but simply dont care.

There are a dozen simple things they can do but they do none.

And because they do nothing for so long thry end up going way overboard, people dont trust them.

If they were going to buff casters and bows a little and nerf melee, Inq, and repeaters a little and give throwers a bit more aoe and a bit less single target would anyone really genuinely be upset?

Other than doomers who see any change as the end of things ?

 

[Shear-buckler]

That's the point isn't it? The nerfs make no sense when they release stuff that is as good or better than what was "op" before only to leave those styles/spells/slas dead in the water.

That said I think Draconic was in fact op, but the other caster stuff doesn't make sense alongside the adjustment to that overperforming epic strike.

At the end of the day there's been a lot of talk about casters in the past [since epic destiny revamp / high reaper magic damage nerf] and we can only wait until a new patch where, as the devs put it, the pendulum swings the other way. or a new hip kid hits the block to be the new op. Just a shame it comes at the cost of every some old classes/playstyles.

I'd wager that wizard will see their light in the sun when an archetype is released for Wizards and their trees are looked at at that time since that will be the time for best time/cost effectiveness to do so.

The nerfs make sense, it's the buffs that doesn't make sense. The point is that there is no "nerfing paradigm" but rather a "buffing paradigm".
It is popular on the forum to frame the DDO development as just a long series of nerfs, but it is simply not true.

 

[Seppi Pearlsmith]

They nerf:
- to sell new things,
- to appease whinging people,
- to lose players because there are too many apparently.

 

[Shear-buckler]

They nerf:
- to sell new things,
- to appease whinging people,
- to lose players because there are too many apparently.

They buff:
- to sell new things,
- to appease whinging people,
- to lose players because there are too many apparently.

 

[Xgya]

Buffs are usually more welcomed than nerfs, but we get nerfs because buffing everyone to get to the same level as those outliers would trivialize content.

 

[Smokewolf]

I've played this game off and on for a long time, but every time I come back, I feel like there have been new nerfs made to obliterate builds, and it's... honestly discouraging. I don't understand why there's so much emphasis on nerfing in updates, especially since balance updates are so infrequent, and buffs to underperforming trees are so rare. There are so many decisions in this game where it feels like the optimal choice is so obvious, and picking anything else just means being less performant for very little (or no) benefit.

For example, when I returned recently, I found
-Heavy nerfs to Draconic which literally gutted the damage output of its SLA, applying a blanket nerf to most every caster since there are very few trees which actually support them.
-Huge nerfs to FVS, including removing MCL buffs from their tree and nerfing Holy Smite hard
-The weirdest nerf ever to bards, where their early leveling as a caster was hurt badly by making Sonic Blast a single-target spell... again, why? Who was this hurting?
-Nerfs to Arcane Archer (their imbue went from 5-8 damage down to 1-6, which is... a lot of loss)

And then I sit there, and look at it, and
-Archmage is still an enhancement tree that there's almost no point taking.
-Arcane Archer is still functionally useless beyond a dip.
-The best way to run FVS right now is as an inquisitive rather than a caster
-Necrotic Clerics/Wizards are still so hampered by negative energy having such poor usability as to render them inferior to running Sorcerers who get free energy strips on every spell or Light Clerics

And that's just the classes I've been personally interested in. I'm sure there's others. It's extremely discouraging, and I genuinely just don't understand why so much emphasis is placed on nerfing things into oblivion. I can understand the need for nerfs if things are out of line, but so many of these feel like big, red, "You are now going to be worse than other options," buttons instead of "this is overperforming so we're going to bring it in line with other options."

The game is being developed by a group of people that only understand melees.

 

[Geezer]

Its the same old thing. They come out with a new class, race, universal tree etc and make them op so people will buy them, then around a year or so later they nerf them to "balance" the game. Doesnt matter that people are having fun with these things , they still do it. Then, after the nerfs, people simply jump on the latest meta build and then something else is op. Same old, same old.

 

[Teh_Troll]

The game is being developed by a group of people that only understand melees crossbows.

FTFY

 

[The Narc2]

The key is dont stream, dont talk about the peak performer abilities you enjoy and dont post your builds. Make small/moderate sized cliques and share your gaming info within those out of reach of SSG’s perusal, even sharing between cliques if necessary. SSG isnt going to spend the time or resources to try and figure out the best way to do things on their own so stop providing easy resources for them to do such. Let them muck thru all the speculation of OPness that goes back and forth here on the forums, trust me they will get it wrong and we will all benefit.

And ……

The final rule is to know that there is no club that exists that nobody talks about

 

[Lotoc]

The game is being developed by a group of people that only understand melees.

the fact that quick cutter is even in the state it is in relative to every alternative is pretty much evidence that the change was not understood by even the playerbase.

 

[Br4d]

SSG releases OP content because it sells. They nerf stuff that might interfere with that effort.

Every now and then they do a balance pass on a class and mostly it goes from underpowered to overpowered. However if it occurs when they are trying to change the meta it sometimes goes from overpowered to underpowered.

It's kind of a unique approach to the MMO power paradigm.

 

[Blunt Hackett]

There is no "nerfing paradigm". The game is shaped almost entierly by constant buffing and the occassional overpowered new release. If they reverted every nerf you mentioned it would barely, if at all, move the meta.

Maybe it's not a nerfing paradigm, but there sure is a lack of class balance or at least skill tree balance.

Imagine if a regular pnp game had several players dual-wielding crossbows. DMs would rage quit before they even started.

The classic RPG party balance does not exist in this game anymore.

 

[Shear-buckler]

Maybe it's not a nerfing paradigm, but there sure is a lack of class balance or at least skill tree balance.

Imagine if a regular pnp game had several players dual-wielding crossbows. DMs would rage quit before they even started.

The classic RPG party balance does not exist in this game anymore.

I agree. We need more nerfs, not less.

 

[Kryxal]

I always figured, if there were 2-3 nerfs that should have close to the desired effect alone, they just used all of them to make sure. Besides, I think one metric they might use is "how many people are playing this?" and just nerfing to even with other things probably won't get many people to change right off.

 

[l_remmie]

Balancing the game makes it better. Nerfing is a heavy balance down and is basically an admittance that the devs f'd up with balance in the first place. It's still the best option though.
Instead of big nerfs they'd need to up balance EVERYTHING else every time. That is extreme powercreep.

In DDO sadly they use mostly "fire" design to massively pushs things for sales then nerf later.

And they seldomly balance things up because it costs time and effort. Something week doesnt create new problems.