5+ years without any new Sigils or Runes...are new ones on the way? (or at least rebalance of the old ones)

[Virtuality.8351]

• First edit: for how exactly the rebalance could be done, I have proposed my idea in the comment below.
• Second edit: DO CHECK OUT the excellent write-up by Asum.4960 in the comments below. This is the best proposal I've seen so far. I have also provided an excerpt for those who do not wish to read long articles.

-

Looking into the lists of  Sigils and Runes on wiki, it suddenly hit me that, the last time we got new Sigils and Runes was from the release of Path of Fire, back in September, 2017.

That's been almost 5 and a half years.

Both Heart of Thorns and Path of Fire introduced Runes associated with new Specializations (Rune of Weaver, etc). Heart of Thorn, additionally, adds Sigils that proc upon interrupting or disabling foes, and Runes that provides huge Boon Duration or Poison Duration buffs.

The End of Dragon release introduced none. It only seems appropriate that at least new Runes associated with EoD specs will be made up in future patches or paid mini-expansions.

Meanwhile, we are already provided with a huge variety of options. There are a total of 81 different kinds of Sigils and 127 kinds of Runes available in PvE. The problem is just that the majority of them never see use. Some of them follows dated design, such as stacking bonus attribute points upon killing an enemy (which was meta eons ago). Others just provides buffs that are not meaningful under any circumstances whatsoever (e.g., Sigil of Chilling, barely seen use after Reaper's Chill damage was removed and not even available or useful in PvP), and/or so niche that they are outshined by more generic ones (e.g., Malice Sigil vs condition-specific ones for builds rely on more than one or two types of damaging conditions).

With professions and elite specialization update already made "a higher priority" and next balance patch coming in May 2, upgrade components could really use some love too. The first Rune and Sigil balance patch was done in 2014, followed by the second (and also the latest) one in 2018. No major overhaul has been done ever since, and the second half of 2023 seems to be a good time for another round.

Edited February 26, 2023 by Virtuality.8351

[Swagger.1459]

not every rune and sigil will be made equally useful, that's just how it is. also, there are far more important issues that need attention, so just be grateful that the devs did an overhaul before. 

[Virtuality.8351]

15 hours ago, Swagger.1459 said:

not every rune and sigil will be made equally useful, that's just how it is. also, there are far more important issues that need attention, so just be grateful that the devs did an overhaul before. 

There we go. Another guy goes by "your priority does not count as long as it is not my priority". Classic.

How about be grateful that whatever you feel more important is as it is ❤️

Edited February 26, 2023 by Virtuality.8351

[Asum.4960]

Runes as a whole are outdated/dead design space. Back in the day there used to be at least some interesting Rune buildcraft there with combining different Runes (like 2 Trapper and 4 Nightmare for 25% Condi Duration increase), but after the last changes made Runes far more top heavy that's all gone too. Now I think designing and balancing around running complete Rune sets only is fine, but at the same time the Rune Capstones aren't particularly interesting, unique or build defining either, in order to make that compelling. 

 

It's kind of sad that for some builds you can test like 8+ different Runes and realise they are all within <200 DPS of each other, while offering near to no gameplay difference whatsoever. Just differently shuffled passive stats that amount to pretty much the exact same result. 

Whichever Rune is marginally ahead becomes the meta which then everyone uses, and much of the rest might as well not exist. 

Now ofc there will always be a best option for x activity, but I'd wager they could delete a good 70% of Runes and it wouldn't change a thing. If Runes don't offer any meaningful gameplay differences or build defining perks/capstones, there really isn't any room for personal preference. 

 

I was really excited for the EoD Elite Spec Runes, especially with all the pre-expansion talk of thinking outside of the box and breaking the rules with the Specs. I really wanted to see what a new generation of proper modern Runes attached to that would look like. But obviously that, and much else, didn't happen. 

 

As the system stands, I can see why there haven't been any additions to it, since there really isn't a point to adding into the current framework which is already utterly bloated with redundant at best, if not largely objectively just bad options. 

For an update they probably would have to massively cull the Rune pool first (and taking things away from players, no matter how niche in use, is a delicate undertaking), and then rebuild the remaining worthwhile options to be more unique and defined second. 

Then it could become a design space worth adding to again.

[Batalix.2873]

Runes should be retooled to give higher stat bonuses for fewer while keeping the full six bonus.

 

At least that way players would have a decision to either match 6 for a powerful effect or run a more diverse mix of runes for their desired stats. Would put more runes in rotation, keep them relevant, while making a fairly boring and static aspect of the game feel a bit more unique and expressive.

[crosknight.3041]

i think a lot of the runes we have need to have their actives improved and cooldowns reduced. probably add actives to some of them.
for example, Rune of the Citadel 6/6 is +20% fury duration; call in an artillery strike when you use your elite skill (45s) cooldown. Artillery strike uses a lesser version of the charr racial elite skill (half the strikes, 66% of the damage, and 1/4th the duration). would change the artillery strike clause of the trait to "25-50% chance of calling an artillery strike when you critically hit a foe" on a 15s cooldown. being on crit makes it have synergy with the fury bonuses on the rune.

as for adding actives to some runes, using Superior rune of Vampirism as the example here. personally i think it should be reworked into a healing type rune. it provides power/vitality so i'd change it to heal-power/vit. the 6/6 bonus is +10% hp and heal 10% hp when you kill foe. would keep the +10% HP bonus but swap the 10% heal when killing  foe to "when healing an ally with less then 50% hp, cast lesser well of blood on them" with a cooldown of 20s. (if you play ESO im using the Earthgore set as influence here)

[Infusion.7149]

The problem with adding so many runes that are strong is that the balance becomes out of whack quite easily. I would rather they shave down scholar bonus (and possibly eagle bonus as well as golemancer) so that there are other power options ; thief rune is essentially for PvE only. Condition builds generally do not use one rune.

With sigils the majority are not used because they do not have a damage bonus or healing/boon duration bonus.

edit: oh and you can basically forget about every toughness rune in PvE unless you are tanking

Edited February 26, 2023 by Infusion.7149

[Virtuality.8351]

12 hours ago, Asum.4960 said:

It's kind of sad that for some builds you can test like 8+ different Runes and realise they are all within <200 DPS of each other, while offering near to no gameplay difference whatsoever. Just differently shuffled passive stats that amount to pretty much the exact same result. 

Whichever Rune is marginally ahead becomes the meta which then everyone uses, and much of the rest might as well not exist. 

This is spot on.

However, it also presents a dilemma: if the Runes vary from each other too much in terms of DPS (or other capability in concern), people could be further discouraged to take the off-meta alternatives.

On the other hand, the lack of gameplay difference provided by different runes can potentially be addressed by letting Runes provide access to features you would not be able to access otherwise.

Take Trapper Runes for example. The set provides, upon deploy a trap, Stealth and Superspeed, both of which are otherwise difficult or impossible to access for Ranger or Dragonhunter. The set provides a significant mean to disengage and drastically changes how you would play.

I'd say we could use more designs like this.

Edited February 26, 2023 by Virtuality.8351
Grammar fixes.

[Yasai.3549]

We're overdue for a Rune rework tbh. 

 

The whole "Rune set" mechanic doesn't vibe well with the average Gw2 player who doesn't have a Legendary set and changing them every time the devs balance something that requires some rune switches is very problematic for most, and down right annoying for everyone.

 

I'd be pretty happy if the devs could consider:

 

1. Condensing the Rune Set mechanic into a single Rune 

2. Have Runes be installed into Amulets.

3. This frees up Upgrade slots on armor pieces for players to once again slot bonus stat giving Gems and Jewels. 

[Asum.4960]

3 hours ago, Infusion.7149 said:

The problem with adding so many runes that are strong is that the balance becomes out of whack quite easily. I would rather they shave down scholar bonus (and possibly eagle bonus as well as golemancer) so that there are other power options ; thief rune is essentially for PvE only. Condition builds generally do not use one rune.

With sigils the majority are not used because they do not have a damage bonus or healing/boon duration bonus.

edit: oh and you can basically forget about every toughness rune in PvE unless you are tanking

I honestly think Power Runes need to be better across the board, rather than tuning down Scholar. Not as a means to buff Power Builds, they would have to be balanced accordingly, but to increase build and gear variety, creating slightly more parity with condi options. 

Power Runes kind of sucking is part of the reason Power is so incredibly inflexible - both in terms of Gear as well as Trait lines. 

When you think about how Condi builds can get a whopping 50% Duration increase to their main damaging Condition - it's kind of silly how Power builds lacking Crit Chance have to run some janky flanking condi hybrid Rune like Thief Runes, just to get a measly 14% Critical Chance Bonus. 

Even general Condition Duration Runes like Nightmare come with 20% all Duration increase, while also featuring the proper main damage stat, without any awkward flanking requirements or such. That's a big part of why Condi/Hybrid builds can take more defensive Traitlines or stat sets, without completely obliterating their damage.

If Power had some decent Rune options (like Power/Ferocity Main Stat Runes with >+15% flat Crit Chance), it would open up a whole lot for Strike Damage in terms of being less forced to always take "the Critical Chance Trait line" or to always go Berserker, Assassin or for solo Marauder - while specs that do get plenty free Crit Chance would still be happy with Scholars and co.

 

 

42 minutes ago, Virtuality.8351 said:

This is spot on.

However, it also presents a dilemma: if the Runes vary from each other too much in terms of DPS (or other capability in concern), people could be further discouraged to take the off-meta alternatives.

On the other hand, the lack of gameplay difference provided by different runes can potentially be addressed by letting Runes provide access to features you would not be able to access otherwise.

Take Trapper Runes for example. The set provides, upon deploy a trap, Stealth and Superspeed, both of which are otherwise difficult or impossible to access for Ranger or Dragonhunter. The set provides a significant mean to disengage and drastically changes how you would play.

I'd say we could use more designs like this.

That's what I mean, yea. With Rune Capstones I'd less so focus on just passive damage increases, but different types of Utility or gameplay modifiers. 

 

I like Runes like Fireworks, which is a go to for OW/Solo Strike Damage builds without innate movement speed for me, offering distinct Utility there in addition to filling Boon gaps. Pack Runes being somewhat similar there, minus the movement speed but plus group Utility. 

Nightmare is a decent Condi option, for example offering some nice synergy with Plagueland's self-inflicted Conditions for condi Necro's in particular (although it really should transfer 2 Condis). 

Something like Dwayna Runes with it's Regeneration Boon enhancement Capstone could be neat if the Rune as a whole was better, featuring some general Boon Duration, rather than just Regen, as well as maybe a slightly bigger bonus - so it's not just an objectively worse Monk Runes. 

Then there are also options for Runes to hook into specific Utility skill sets, maybe reducing CD's and therefor enabling different rotations, or adding extra effects, akin to Chronomancer Runes for Wells, or Reaper and Trooper Runes for Shouts.

They just need to be stronger/more meaningful and supported by better stats on the whole (if Runes need extra stats to begin with is another question). 

 

The old Torment Runes, while indeed in need of a nerf, were genuinely unique and build enabling with their sustain - and even now with just Regen that's still pretty neat for a lot of builds. Capstones don't have to be about damage.

 

I think Runes have massive potential as design space for being a core component of build craft, in which a huge array of different options can be meta for different builds at once - depending on what gaps they need to fill (be it lacking a certain boon as support, needing more Boon/Condition Duration or Crit Chance, etc.), what special interactions they have (such as Plaguelands + Nightmares Condi Transfer after Elite usage) or what Utility type they predominantly run (such as Shouts or Wells, etc., being enhanced). 

 

I think changes like increasing Fury to 25% and dumping ~+5% Crit Chance in all the already mandatory Crit Chance Trait lines and the like is about the most boring way to fill these holes in Professions - just so everybody can keep blindly running Berserker's + Scholars. Giving different specs different holes they need to fill, and providing different proper options to do so (Traits for some, different Runes or Sigil's for others, maybe even active skills like Burst of Strength, but for things like Crit Chance, for some) is imo far more interesting and engaging (and probably also healthier game economy wise). 

 

Ofc it's far easier in terms of balance to just give everybody the same boring mandatory Traitline with the same amount of Traits with passive Crit Chance bonuses and passive Damage modifiers, so everybody runs the same Attribute combination and the same passive damage increase Rune Set and Sigils - so I get why it is the way it is.. but it's also incredibly boring and samey. 

 

Imo Professions are more and more becoming just differently themed Skill and Trait names and Colour Schemes. Offering players genuinely different pathways and tools to reach similar efficacy on different Professions and Specs adds much more character to them. Much more than I think most realise. 

This is imo a big part of what many misdiagnose in their discontent of new Elite Specs, where I see more and more people proposing that Anet is running out of things to do with them. This couldn't be further from the truth, there is sheer endless potential in the system - but not as long as every new spec needs to run the same Traitlines, the same Runes, the same Sigils and largely the same Utility skills (unless forced in an unfun way to use the ones of the new Spec). 

Ofc every new spec is going to feel kind of samey, boring and redundant if they are all built the same way, using the same tools. Elite Spec mechanics can only do so much. 

They need to facilitate different Core Trait, Rune, Sigil and Utility Synergies as well in order to genuinely feel new and refreshing. 

That's just not possible with the current save, easy to balance and lazy design of Runes and co.

 

TL;DR:

There is no TL;DR, sorry.

[Virtuality.8351]

I just could not agree more with you. Excellent write-up.

For those who really feel like TL:DR, please at least check out the couple points I excerpt down below.

On 2/26/2023 at 4:21 PM, Asum.4960 said:

I think Runes have massive potential as design space for being a core component of build craft, in which a huge array of different options can be meta for different builds at once - depending on what gaps they need to fill (be it lacking a certain boon as support, needing more Boon/Condition Duration or Crit Chance, etc.), what special interactions they have (such as Plaguelands + Nightmares Condi Transfer after Elite usage) or what Utility type they predominantly run (such as Shouts or Wells, etc., being enhanced). 

At first glance, the underlined part seems to be potential balance hazard. Although this indeed could help some support builds that are considered not 'compressed' enough (meaning to be able to singlehandedly take up the responsibility of multiple roles, thus 'role-compression').

The difficult part would probably be how to prevent the existing highly 'compressed' support builds from accessing these boons way too easily that they just do not invest any attribute points into Concentration. And the 'special interactions' and 'utility types' you mentioned here really provide a neat solution.

Overall, this definitely looks implementable.

On 2/26/2023 at 4:21 PM, Asum.4960 said:

Imo Professions are more and more becoming just differently themed Skill and Trait names and Colour Schemes. Offering players genuinely different pathways and tools to reach similar efficacy on different Professions and Specs adds much more character to them. Much more than I think most realise. 

This is imo a big part of what many misdiagnose in their discontent of new Elite Specs, where I see more and more people proposing that Anet is running out of things to do with them. This couldn't be further from the truth, there is sheer endless potential in the system - but not as long as every new spec needs to run the same Traitlines, the same Runes, the same Sigils and largely the same Utility skills (unless forced in an unfun way to use the ones of the new Spec). 

Ofc every new spec is going to feel kind of samey, boring and redundant if they are all built the same way, using the same tools. Elite Spec mechanics can only do so much. 

They need to facilitate different Core Trait, Rune, Sigil and Utility Synergies as well in order to genuinely feel new and refreshing. 

kitten it man, this is exactly what needs to be done after the multiple-year-long trend of standardization of unique buff effects. I can only hope the developers do find this.

Just imaging Rune of Necromancer has some unique features proc upon entering shroud, or Rune of the Minion Master that provides functions that synergize with active minions. The sheer possibilities are immense. For Christ's sake, this is the kind of design that we NEED.

Edited February 27, 2023 by Virtuality.8351

[Infusion.7149]

Asum, what I mean is it is far easier to tone down scholar as a starting point than to buff every power rune in the game. If people wanted a consistent rune then I would think something like eagle rune, spellbreaker rune (when bosses do not have boons or in openworld), infiltration (missing 225 ferocity but has the 10% <50% hp on target), flame legion on hybrid weaver/firebrand (7% mod), golemancer, ogre rune (4% mod , missing 125 ferocity) , rage rune (5%), or strength rune (5% but zero ferocity , remember when it was bugged ?) would be more popular. You could possibly see things like ranger rune on untamed (+7% with pet) although unlikely.

Some runes could have toughness swapped out to vitality such as daredevil rune or scrapper rune. Holosmith rune could have a better trigger such as weaponswap or kit use.

In addition, the power builds we have now are pushing over 38-39K DPS on average.

Personally I would like to see privateer be competitive in DPS ; most of the runes that do not have a damage stat could possibly be WvW runes.

It is important to note some runes create a balancing nightmare for devs such as trapper rune, radiance, speed, or antitoxin. To a lesser extent that is true for durability rune , altruism when used with mortar, and mercy runes.

[Virtuality.8351]

8 hours ago, Infusion.7149 said:

It is important to note some runes create a balancing nightmare for devs such as trapper rune, radiance, speed, or antitoxin. To a lesser extent that is true for durability rune , altruism when used with mortar, and mercy runes.

I mean, yeah Runes deeply integrated with certain skills (Trapper) or mechanism (Radiance with Tempest Aura share), while being the most interesting or even gameplay defining ones, are just hard to balance particularly for PvP/WvW.

However, with the developers embracing function splits between PvE and the competitive scenes, and on top of that, limitation to access potentially troublesome Runes, which is a countermeasure already in place for PvP, it could not be all that bad?

Edited February 27, 2023 by Virtuality.8351

[Infusion.7149]

44 minutes ago, Virtuality.8351 said:

I mean, yeah Runes deeply integrated with certain skills (Trapper) or mechanism (Radiance with Tempest Aura share), while being the most interesting or even gameplay defining ones, are just hard to balance particularly for PvP/WvW.

However, with the developers embracing function splits between PvE and the competitive scenes, and on top of that, limitation to access potentially troublesome Runes, which is a countermeasure already in place for PvP, it could not be all that bad?

PvP runes are split, WvW ones are not.

[Asum.4960]

9 hours ago, Infusion.7149 said:

Asum, what I mean is it is far easier to tone down scholar as a starting point than to buff every power rune in the game.

Ofc, I know that. I mentioned it in one of my paragraphs. 

I don't have any actual insight into the company structure or team sizes, but it at least always felt like that they never even remotely had the resources/manpower to make the necessary adjustments, while also designing Elite Specs, while likely also being called on to help out with other matters. 

Anet desperately needs to invest more into the Skills and Balance Team - should have done so years ago. 

 

GW2 was very fortunate to have come from the minds of some incredibly talented designers in many ways, but even with such a good foundation -  there are only so many years of being able to "make the easy change" before things kind of start falling apart and lose their charm, identity and appeal. 

The Game has been on that road for quite some time now, and I do believe it's quickly catching up to them now (and looking at more recent hires and restructures, I do think, or at least hope, they are well aware of that too). 

 

I don't think nerfing the "strongest" of the boring and bland Runes to create a form of diversity in everything now being equally bad, boring and bland, is particularly satisfactory.

 

I genuinely think they can't keep making the easy changes, no matter the reasons, if they want to go ahead and succeed with GW2 long into the future, with this new content model and the like. 

The design of current and future player tools is being suffocated by band-aid's, placeholders and the quick and easy.

 

Quote

In addition, the power builds we have now are pushing over 38-39K DPS on average.

I touched on that too in saying that I didn't mean my suggestion in a vacuum/as a means to buff power builds, mentioning that specs would have to be balanced accordingly. Again, it's not an easy change, I know that and I don't make such suggestions flippantly. But regardless, I do think that's what needs to be done for longterm prosperity/player satisfaction. 

 

I can only hope the responsible devs see that too, and that crucially, they receive the necessary resources to do so.

[Virtuality.8351]

4 hours ago, Infusion.7149 said:

PvP runes are split, WvW ones are not.

I know. I just really wish that WvW inherents the entire PvP Build system and give us WvW specific attribute combo and Sigils/Runes for balance sake.

(Irrelevant to the topic, but maybe also remove all the loot drops like in PvP as well, and instead reward players by bouncy chests based on how many players they've defeated.)

[The Boz.2038]

We need new runes and sigils, and we need the ones we have looked at, too. Otherwise, the game has had a total of, like, seven runes and nine sigils for the past five years, and it'll just stay that way...

[Serephen.3420]

19 hours ago, Virtuality.8351 said:

I know. I just really wish that WvW inherents the entire PvP Build system and give us WvW specific attribute combo and Sigils/Runes for balance sake.

(Irrelevant to the topic, but maybe also remove all the loot drops like in PvP as well, and instead reward players by bouncy chests based on how many players they've defeated.)

Keep that nasty spvp system out of wvw please.

[Doggie.3184]

I want a condi DPS variant of the Golemancer rune. 🙂 Lich has vitality and the pet isn't as good.

[Bunny.9834]

Kinda sucks we dont have corresponding runes with the EoD specs.

[zeyeti.8347]

i too thought they would add a bit more runes/sigils out of eod  (new stats too) 

We have the firebrand rune who is great on condi/quickness , adding the same variations to quickness/power , alacrity/condi and alacrity/power could help some e-specs .

Dps alacrity are often asked in the lfg , as not many ppl like to play those (i personnaly don't like any alacrity/dps except mirage)

Runes could go like that :

+25 power or condi / +10% alac. or quickness / +50 power or condi / +10% boon duration /+100 power or condi / +20% alac or quickness and +125 expertise or precision . Mating a bit from firebrand and pack runes.

[SleepyBat.9034]

On 2/26/2023 at 12:19 AM, Virtuality.8351 said:

Take Trapper Runes for example. The set provides, upon deploy a trap, Stealth and Superspeed, both of which are otherwise difficult or impossible to access for Ranger or Dragonhunter. The set provides a significant mean to disengage and drastically changes how you would play.

I'd say we could use more designs like this.

It's funny that you used Trapper Runes as an example considering that it's one of the most unbalanced runes in the game. I will say I agree with your point, I like runes that give substantial bonuses to your build, they just need to be properly balanced.

[Virtuality.8351]

On 3/1/2023 at 11:30 PM, SleepyBat.9034 said:

It's funny that you used Trapper Runes as an example considering that it's one of the most unbalanced runes in the game. I will say I agree with your point, I like runes that give substantial bonuses to your build, they just need to be properly balanced.

Sorry for necromancing the thread, but I have been reflecting on this for a while.

I think the problem with this rune design paradigm—to provide additional functions otherwise inaccessible—is that it is fundamentally difficult to balance.

Runes that simply offer attribute points or boons are easier to bring in line with their peers by adjusting the numbers for they are comparable.

Runes that provide additional functions, however, are more tricky. You are no longer comparing numbers, but instead comparing how each function perform in open world, instanced PvE contents, WvW and PvP, with other runes providing some complete different functions in the same varied scenarios.

That is not to say balance is impossible. There are still a few means available. Take Trapper's Rune for example, you can just add a 5 s internal cooldown to prevent players from stacking Superspeed in PvP.

As for in PvE, I am not sure if one would consider Trapper's Rune unbalanced as being overpowered. In fact I would even argue that it is underpowered in general PvE settings, instanced or open world.

This leave us to the most difficult part: WvW. Currently WvW inherits everything in PvE except skills. The lack of competitive split between PvE and WvW gears make it highly problematic to make proper balance decision.

On 2/27/2023 at 4:49 PM, Virtuality.8351 said:

I know. I just really wish that WvW inherents the entire PvP Build system and give us WvW specific attribute combo and Sigils/Runes for balance sake.

On 2/28/2023 at 12:09 PM, Serephen.3420 said:

Keep that nasty spvp system out of wvw please.

And hence my unpopular yet crucial proposal to implement something similar to PvP Build system but separated in WvW.

That is the only way to truly make balance possible.

Edited March 30, 2023 by Virtuality.8351

[Jski.6180]

It is an shame at least anet could of made an rune set for the new elite spec that only realty worked with just that elite spec. The sigils could of been something as simple as dmg +% vs new mob types.

[JusticeRetroHunter.7684]

On 3/30/2023 at 6:42 AM, Virtuality.8351 said:

Sorry for necromancing the thread, but I have been reflecting on this for a while.

I think the problem with this rune design paradigm—to provide additional functions otherwise inaccessible—is that it is fundamentally difficult to balance.

Runes that simply offer attribute points or boons are easier to bring in line with their peers by adjusting the numbers for they are comparable.

Runes that provide additional functions, however, are more tricky. You are no longer comparing numbers, but instead comparing how each function perform in open world, instanced PvE contents, WvW and PvP, with other runes providing some complete different functions in the same varied scenarios.

That is not to say balance is impossible.

Hey Virtuality (your name looks familiar, and I'm pretty sure we are old friends) I have looked into the balance problem for many years now on a rigorous academic level and you are at this moment stumbling on the same issues I had gone through when thinking about the problem.

 

And the intuition that you were building In this quote is correct. Balance is impossible.

 

That is not only true for things like the rune system it is true across any and all skills, and is a problem that extends into the real world…because it turns out this issue of balance is a fundamental paradox.
 

I often encourage people, who disagree, to do the exact exercise of perfectly balancing two skills and proving it true...as in the attempt to do so reveals that it is indeed impossible. I’d encourage you to maybe read through some of the older  comments I made on the subject (can't be bothered to search for them right now, so I'll maybe link them later)…But here is basically how the explanation goes:

 

1st Problem

You start simple with two skills and the idea is you want them to be perfectly balanced:

 

Skill A: 50000 Damage

Skill B 500 Damage

the first thing to notice, and this basically invalidates arguments like Infusions right off the bat…is that you can use any arbitrary nerfing or buffing procedure to balance these two skills. You could -45000 from A….or you could -40000 from A and +9500 to B…or you could +1000 to A and +46000 to B…there is an infinite number of procedures to choose from on the number line, and they will all lead to the same result of being the same.

So let’s say you just chose one of these arbitrary nerfs or buffs to get them perfectly balanced….where here we nerfed skill A and buffed skill B

 

Skill A: 10,000 damage

Skill B 10,000 damage

 

You are now introduced to the second issue… which is that perfectly balancing these skills makes them in effect…just copies of one another…so why actually bother making them two different skills…if they do the same thing.

2nd Problem

You tell yourself that oh well maybe the skills just need to be more complex…with more than 1 kind of parameter so you could produce a power budget like distribution. And so you try this.

 

Skill A:

Damage = 10,000

Range = 500

Radius = 300

 

Skill B

Damage = 5000

Range = 1000

Radius = 150

 

You’re now confronted with the 2nd problem in the attempt to balance the skills…which is the fallacy that one can make an equivalence statement between two different parameters like “damage” or “range” or “radius,” with something as simple as a power budget. The reason you can’t make an equivalence statement…to prove that they are balanced is because they aren’t actually the same things that you are comparing…and that’s intuitive…1000 damage = 1000 radius is not a sound statement so why would budgeting them to be halves of one another actually work if they were equivalent, but that’s the thing…they aren’t equivalent…the two things exist in different regimes for what they even mean to us…and for anyone that looks at the two skills it’s clear that anything with 150 radius will be practically useless to most of anyone, where as something with 300 radius might be disproportionally more useful. 
 

The 2nd thing you are confronted with on this second problem…is that as you try to do a similar balancing practice as done earlier in the first problem… just do nerfing or buffing procedures till they are all the same…but then realize you get something like this:

 

Skill A:

Damage = 6000

Range = 900

Radius = 360

 

Skill B

Damage = 6000

Range = 900

Radius = 360

 

the problem arises once again…the more you attempt to perfectly balance the skills…the more you squeeze out of them the things that actually make them different skills. This is the homogenization problem…where the attempt to balance skills is simultaneously stripping the game of its identity.

 

So looking at the two possibilities you have in changing numbers around, is that you are either stripping the game of its identity…or you are purposefully not balancing the game since you fail to make sound equivalence statements and therefor any operation you do has no real satisfactory meaning in the effort to perfectly balance these two skills let alone the game. 

 

3rd Problem

The attempt to perfectly balance these two skills is getting extremely hard…but that’s not even the worst part. You could pose the following hypothesis…that if only you had a super computer that could calculate the objective value for things like “radius” or “range” in order to make an equivalence statement to things like damage…then we could develop a parametrization where the numbers would be balanced right…

so now there is problem 3… where we make the complexity of skills to be on par with what they are like in the game:

 

Skill A:

Damage = 7500

Radius = 360

Effect : Immobilize for 1s

 

Skill B

Damage = 3000

Radius = 180

Effect: Stability for 6s

 

So, the two skills above are now more obviously abstract...and obviously different from one another…is it possible that a super computer could take these skills above and somehow calculate them to give us "objective values” we could use to parametrize them for balance…is it possible to build a super computer that can figure out and balance 6s stability against 1s immobilization and be a true statement? And The answer is no.

 

the reason for why the answer is no is because the difficulty (the computational complexity) of the that procedure scales with the number of elements in the game, that then scales with the number of elements of the players playing that game, which then scales with the number of elements of the causal events that effect the players that are playing that game…and this buck goes all the way back to the beginning of time. The skills here are abstract enough that they can’t be meaningfully parametrized by an equivalence in numbers alone but rather can only be parametrized as a function of players themselves playing the game and exploring their meaning to the game that is being played.

In other words… the only way to efficiently parametrize skills is players playing the game…we already are this super computer…
 

in more formal terms, the space in which this problem exists is in the same space as the halting problem, which is infinite, unbounded and computationally maximal . It’s a hard statement that the computation is undecidable, requiring infinite computational power even when confined to finite initial conditions…So there is no hope for balance, it’s dead in the water and you should just straight up drop the idea that you could ever think balance can be done in any mathematically rigorous or human way.

 

But just because we humans can’t construct with mathematics a way to perfectly balance the game doesn’t mean that something akin to balance that we can replicate doesn’t exist. Nature is itself the perfect example for what balance is and could be…in fact that is often what people should think of when they think of a balanced system. How nature achieves balance is in complete contrast to how humans believe it should work and for good reason; it’s because humans are wrong and stupid and are focused on the wrong things and red herrings: numbers.

There is a video I’m linking here of this computer scientist that quite literally studied this exact same problem and in my own journey to the end of the rabbit hole of this stuff I found that everything led to his theories around physics that could explain this paradox, and itself provides incite into how nature achieves the things that it does…which is another comment in and of itself.

 

more casual explanation

 

more formal explanation

Edited April 9, 2023 by JusticeRetroHunter.7684