Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="justanobody" data-source="post: 4519853" data-attributes="member: 70778">No balance does not mean uneven one one side for one reason or another. You are claiming game balance, rather than class balance to prevent having to play through every level to find that balance, but the balance is still artificial since it requires some arbitrary restraint in the form of using a specific combination of classes rather than allowing for every possible combination of classes.It doesn't solve the old problems, just masks them with a new one that is overlooked. So balance was not truly reached between the classes and thus the reason focus was shifted to classes to obscure this fact.Can a party of all defenders compare to a mixed party? How about all strikers? controllers? all leaders?The balance is artificial because you have to achieve it through some complex means rather than a natural one.Until the classes are balanced against each other so that each class can hold its own against a mixed group then you have not reached a state of balance and are relying on the balance of functions of the group at each level, which still causes specific classes/roles within the party to work better that others at certain levels. You have just taken wizards overpowered at higher levels to make them overpowered in the odd levels* and underpowered in the even ones to make it more spread out.*Odd and even used as quick concepts rather than actual dissection of the levels for simplicity's sake of the argument.This goes for all other classes as well.Having them unbalanced for lower amount of time before they are overpowered again, doesn't make for balance, but for less focus to be on who is overpowered/underpowered and when.I will not say better, but the unbalance is more evenly distributed throughout the classes at various levels. As opposed to having large instances of unbalance that become more readily noticeable.</blockquote>

Verification