Class Balance 2018.07-09

Gavner

Hello!

After class balance came up in a topic, I've tried to make an at least somewhat accurate analysis on current class balance using 2 months of data.

You can find analysis here (Please read the Note)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1PmygK7-5EbSzC8eVDGFn8CZDS9Cfc00z/view?usp=sharing

Since I do not have access to many useful data, like solo kills average RR on classes, average hits on a kill / class, I couldn't make it anymore accurate.

I tried to focus on Solo capabilities, since every class capable running in Zerg/Groups, the daily player count on classes that bad at Soloing already should tell if a class is needed in Groups or not.

Any constructive ideas to enhance formulas, or what should we do to improve class diversity is welcome, since fighting same classes might become boring in solo/small groups.

I hope we can keep civil and come up with conclusions that helps overall balance of the game we all love.

See you on the battlefield!

Vrisslar

Personaly i lack a vote option of in between, cause thats where i feel the truth are, so not gonna vote hehe.

Assassins and light tanks i personal feel are way over the top and need a swing with the nerf bat, Vamps could use some adjusting, just to name a few. Hopefully all that solo / duo are aware of what the problems i think of are with those classes.

Gaven

These statistics end up measuring the propensity to solo, with only a dab of solo viability.

according to the data:
Friar: "Very low solo viability"
Ranger, Spiritmaster, Paladin: "medium tier" not even "good tier"?
BD and Mauler: not on your "GOD tier"?

A character being good/useful/needed in group settings does not mean it is a worse solo'er, but that is what you are promoting by simply dividing the total number of players by the solo kills for that class. The minor weight applied using rp/kill does not do nearly enough to isolate solo game-play. Really this only pushes zerg propensity to the other side, little else. Hence why Friar is so far off the mark.

Solo viability might be able to be better derived from the statistics available, but this is not quite the way to do it and will heavily weight the results away from classes that are group-friendly and highlight assassins and other traditionally solo classes.

If you wanted a list of what classes are at all viable solo, sure you got one. However there is little accuracy as to the pecking order.

Gavner

@Gaven
I agree, zerg and the lack of more data can completely falsify middle tier in many cases, as I wrote. Some spot might luckily be accurate, and some far up and far lows data might not be as "corrupted" by these factors. Lots of ways to review data.

Also some classes might be valid only really high RR which it cant account for. The "analysis" can be easily disregarded in cases where its certainly wrong, and look for other data available. Unfortunately this is all I have.

Skywalker

i don't care about solo

BackOfRackhams

I might run zerg or group now and for me until they adjust Mezz poison I wont bother trying to solo. Game as become very rinse and repeat in combat and find even eso has a more of a dynamic nature.

BurkleyRIP

If only thy made inconnu thurgs, their population might be saved

deam0

Yea man this info doesn't look like it translates into actual game play, just starting to look at the list and we have SM as medium, WL as low (big lolz), Valk low, Friar very low, shaman low... I don't think you'll ever be able to truly take numbers and translate it into a viable solo tier. And there is no numbers for 1vX kinda thing which would really bring up a "rating", example just from personal play, my inf which is labeled "God Tier" has a harder time with multiples than my Ranger does labeled as "Medium."