Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Spazmatic · 02-09-2006, 01:41 PM

That depends on your definition of balance.

I would define the process of balancing as minimizing the probability that class is a necessary precondition for victory and maximizing the probability that higher player skill is a sufficient precondition (with the caveat that you may want some randomness). Thus, optimal balance (factoring out randomness) would be achieved if a player with more skill would win regardless of class.

Obviously, this is a) impossible, and b) most muds do want some randomness. However, as an asymptotic optimal, it's basically fine.

In such a case, removing all classes does achieve balance - to an extent. However, you are still left to balance any game-relevant customization that players can perform. Equipment has to be balanced, for example. Unless no customization is possible, you've simply left yourself with a subset of the earlier problem.

Further, it also means a system with functionally different classes can be balanced.

Does that mean classless systems are stupid? Nah. Nor vice versa. Neither system is inherently superior from a technical balance standpoint, and thus the argument reduces to other issues and values and preference.

02-09-2006, 01:41 PM	#128
Spazmatic Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Posts: 103	That depends on your definition of balance. I would define the process of balancing as minimizing the probability that class is a necessary precondition for victory and maximizing the probability that higher player skill is a sufficient precondition (with the caveat that you may want some randomness). Thus, optimal balance (factoring out randomness) would be achieved if a player with more skill would win regardless of class. Obviously, this is a) impossible, and b) most muds do want some randomness. However, as an asymptotic optimal, it's basically fine. In such a case, removing all classes does achieve balance - to an extent. However, you are still left to balance any game-relevant customization that players can perform. Equipment has to be balanced, for example. Unless no customization is possible, you've simply left yourself with a subset of the earlier problem. Further, it also means a system with functionally different classes can be balanced. Does that mean classless systems are stupid? Nah. Nor vice versa. Neither system is inherently superior from a technical balance standpoint, and thus the argument reduces to other issues and values and preference.