The Real Issue

[Banditman]

<p>There is a lot of discussion about the recent "fix" that went in to spell resists.  Whether it was needed or not is still a matter of debate.  Whether it was over the top or not is still being debated.  It's all irrelevant to solving the problem at hand.  With things as they stand, the problem simply cannot be fixed.  No, this isn't some snarky shot at the ability of the Developers to do "something", it's a real understanding of the problem.  Let me explain it.In general, there are two "catagories" of mitigation:  Magical and Physical.  They are very, very different in their implimentation, and this is at the heart of the problem.Physical mitigation, what most people refer to simply as mitigation, is largely determined by the class you play.  Fighters generally have a lot of Physical mitigation.  Scouts generally have a really strong Physical mitigation.  Priests run the gamut, but with the buffs they have, generally have good to strong Physical mitigation.  Mages on the other hand have very poor Physical mitigation.  The worst in the game.  Yes, *some* Mage classes can *somewhat* improve their Physical mitigation, at the expense of their ability to do their job.On the other hand, Magical mitigation is something available in largely equal amounts to everyone.  When you look across all classes, you just don't see a large, class based difference in Magical mitigation.  In fact, everyone can take direct steps through gear to improve this.There's the rub that is currently causing so much discussion.  As a Mage, you have absolutely no say in determining your Physical mitigation.  As a Scout, Fighter or Priest, you can take steps to improve your mitgation versus the damage a Mage throws at you.  The Mage has no ability to do the same thing.If you want to "fix" this problem, it's really quite simple.  Give the non-Mages an equivalent Achilles heel.  Make it impossible for them to achieve high mitigation versus Magical damage.Perhaps even work it in such a way that the more Physical Mitigation you have, the less Magical mitigation you can get.  If the best a Mage can do is 40% Physical mitigation, fine.  An Assassin should likewise not be able to exceed 40% Magical mitigation.  That sounds fair, right?  Critical Mitigation, Toughness, Magical Mitigation . . . all that stuff is equally available to everyone.  Physical mitigation is not.Until that is addressed, you'll continue to see discussions like this.  It's unavoidable.  Certainly, I have no expectation that this will ever be addressed or implimented, but that doesn't in any way intrude on the truth of the matter.</p>

[Yimway]

<p><cite>Banditman wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>If you want to "fix" this problem, it's really quite simple.  Give the non-Mages an equivalent Achilles heel.  Make it impossible for them to achieve high mitigation versus Magical damage.</p></blockquote><p>That isn't a fix at all unless you count removing a class role from the game.  I mean how is a tank supposed to 'tank' incoming magic damage if they can not build mitigation to it?</p><p>There have been previous class balance/ game balance discussions that suggested certain fighter classes be the 'magic damage tank', others the 'physical damage' tank, and the rest an 'avoidance tank'.</p><p>However, you can't have a 'tank' class in game unless it has the abilities to soak damage. </p><p>I do understand your arguement and agree that the current system isn't ideal.  But you can't make broad changes like you suggest as there are more nuansces to consider.  Fixing mitigation to actually work was the first step to building a better pvp game, but they've got a long way to go to really ballance it out to something that is fun to play and doesn't under-reward any classes.  Honestly thats what happens when you take a pve game and shoehorn pvp into it, there isn't enough depth and ballance to make it work well.</p>

[Yimway]

<p>Sadly, my expectation is soe will throw in something akin to static crit bonus modifiers except this will be static modifiers to incoming damage types by class.</p><p>Tanks will get an innate 50% reduction in all damage types (perhaps some tanks will get more physical or magical reduction for flavor)</p><p>Scouts will get a 25% reduction in physical damage and -25% effectiveness to magical mitigation.</p><p>Mages wil lget a 25% reduction in magical damage and a -25% effectiveness to physical mitigation.</p><p>etc. etc.</p><p>I don't actually favor these changes, but I'd wager if SoE is to take steps on this issue it will be with similar broad strokes.</p><p>Then of course we'll require further balancing on dps output by class role...  I'm not sure it ever ends.</p>

[Aleste]

Pvp wasnt shoehorned in with the addition of bgs. The stat change and resist bug broke pvp. It was at a good balance before the expansion. If you dont play on a pvp server you wouldnt know that tho and the broken bgs will be your only indication of eq2 pvp. Stop searching for perfect balance with all the classes in game it wont happen. But when a class is stupidly op expect to ge5 "nerfed" then rebuffed. Pvpers are use to this we check each update to see how we were nerfed... then we adjust.

[EverRude]

<p>I think the OP is correct in their assessment of the problem. I disagree with the fix. In PvE THE TANK IS your physical mitigation. In PvP this is true as well but because few people are playing in tight group and the enemy aren't programmed bots, it's not working properly. Even if the caster stays close to his tank he'll still get hit by enemy that are smart enough to stay out of the tank's taunt range. [Edit] Tank taunt should effect all their groups' members within their taunt range. All their taunts not just the AE ones and not just enemies within the range of the tank. If an enemy has a group member targetted, they should loose target if the member is within the range of the tank's taunt. This would help protect players with less physical mitigation. Without further nerfing to player defenses. Provided you play as a group. Go solo and you get your cloth for protection. It's awesome that taunt works in pvp. But it's programmed to apply to dumb npc's that can't decide for themselves that staying out of taunt range is good. Players can do that, making taunt useless against classes with range attacks. So players tend to stray away from the tanks because the tank is no protection from range classes targetting them.Sure tanks could try and target every enemy caster and scout in the zone currently attacking his group but it would be impossible. Few tanks have the ability to taunt many targets outside a single enemy group. None have the ability to stop a ranger 45 meters away from killing anyone he chooses. So tanks are intended to be the group's defender which is why he gets so much mitigation, health, temp survival buffs, death saves... Etc. He doesn't get all that just to be the ultimate flag carrier. Casters aren't being killed because their physical mit sucks. They're being killed because their tank cannot, or will not, do his job. Giving tanks better taunts in pvp BG would also have the benefit of having groups stay together. If a tank's taunt only helps his group members it won't help you to follow just any tank you find. You need to be with a tank in your group. And ofcourse it would help if the match maker actually formed real groups. I may be wrong about how taunts works in pvp so please correct me if I am. </p>

[Zabom]

<p>The real problem is that they are trying to balance classes in a cooperative group based game when they need to be balancing the groups. The matchmaker is the issue that needs to be addressed first.</p>