Yes, it was an attempt to improve the balance that was poorly executed, resulting in a very unbalanced game.

Vanilla Oblivion lacked balance as it was generally either too easy or too hard as your character advanced but the enemies began to outlevel your equipment, not to mention some ridiculously overpowered rats and bandits along the way.

Ultimately, with respect to "balance" I think we are all hoping for the same thing in Skyrim - a fun game that is challenging and rewarding, with multiple difficulty settings. The dev team has spent a lot of time trying to perfect the level of challenge in the game, not only in combat but with respect to the puzzles and other quest elements, etc., and I'm pretty confident they are going to deliver on this.

Perfection is unattainable. There will never be a "Perfect balance", as one person's idea of perfection is different than another.

Generally, balance in an RPG means "No cheap tactics" such as camping on a ledge and shooting 100,000 Arrows into Umbra's face before she goes down. Oblivion wasn't balanced, it was a failed attempt to balance it, which destroyed the element of Exploration. Nobody (At least no sane person) complained that they found the Crysamere too early, what most of the "Balance" complaints stemmed from in Morrowind, was being able to do things like Chug 20 Sujammas and 1 shot Vivec, Almalexia and Dagoth Ur at once (Assuming you spawned them all in the same room!)

This.

lol. Thank goodness I was able to explain myself. I thought I was just talking poopie there for a while. :celebration:

Agreed. But its nice to know they listen to us, and they do try. There is incremental improvements in the TES/Fallout franchise. So I really cant complain. BUT I WILL ANYWAY! :chaos:

I agree, and it's not just true with RPGs. FPS's have been too balanced lately too.l

Oblivion is awful in terms of balance, why? Because my lv 1 can kill enemies easier than my lv 30.

My main gripe with Oblivion was that instead of feeling more powerful and more epic as you leveled up it actually just took you longer to kill people. It was awful.

I agree. Balance also makes for a more believable world, when I find cheap exploits like jumping on a rock for example it just breaks my immersion, it reminds me I am playing a game and the designers screw up on the AI.

Its not like I think your a poopie head or something. I just disagree. I know what you are saying, but I think of it a different way and thus have a different opinion.

Scaling mainally deals with challenge. Ballance on the other hand deals with character progression.

Oblivion's scaling was a rollercoster. There was no reward for getting stronger. There was no way to gain stronger weapons earlier with harder work. The enemies kept getting stronger and stronger.

However, the ballance was and is uneffected by that. The player was able to get stronger and hit harder. Get sneakier and be quieter. Be more magicy and cast more magic. The player had to work for it all.

It just felt kinda stale cause the scaling tried to keep that challenge constant. It did its job...but by doing its job it felt like the ballance was off.

Jumping on a rock knowing full well the NPC with a dagger cannot address the situation is an exploit.....

Purely comes down to opinion. I LOVE balance and I usually get tons of balance mods if I notice something is badly tuned.


Why "MODS" and not just "DON'T USE IT"? Well cause sometimes I WANT TO USE IT, just don't wanna blow the whole world up with it

i dont want to get "lucky and nuke the vampire lord in one shot" i want to know i earned killing that b@stard. i want the fear in knowing that the cave i went into may be to strong for me and i may die trying to get out. and when i go up and b:tch slap some thing that killed me 9 lvls ago and it gets slammed into a cave wall and dies i want to know i did it because i earned it and my character is one bad mother (watch yo mouth) because of the hell ive put him through.

that to me is balance. to have to actually work and strive to become a stronger character. to die and say "maybe i should come back later" or see something and know that there is no way you can beat it at your current lvl. to not have things handed to you or have the game hold your hand and tuck you in at night and tell you everything will be alright it will just scale that mean boss a few lvls down so you can beat it.

if you have fear going some place new because you dont know what might be around the next corner and if it will end with it using your dagger as a tooth pick, if you know that there are things out there that can kill you by sneezing in your general direction at your current lvl, if you actually have to plan out how to take something down then to me the game is balanced.

im not saying that the game should bend you over and r@pe you, but it should actually be a challenge. if im going to pay over $50 for the game and all dlc then i want my money's worth.

Things like vampire lords should be difficult to kill. Your every day highwayman shouldn't be decked out in daedric armor with awesome weapons though.

Enemies should have a max level they scale to.

Rats: 1->5

Highwayman: 5->15

Or something like that. Don't make them 100% static in difficulty, but at the same time level 45 bandits are just silly.

Yea, i agree with this.....Its this kind of additude that made me love Morrowind so much

When i go up to the Blade in Balmorra, the first thing he tells me is that i'm a Cheesecake and should go get some
experience before i do any assignments from him.

It was a cruel world, and almost anything was able to pummel me into the ground. It's Hard Knocks and you have
to learn how to survive.

Actually, I find "balance" often takes away from the immersion. It's like in F:NV when they're patches try to balance the guns. Well, guess what? In real life, they're NOT balanced. Some are distinctly superior to others. Same with edged weapons and armor.

Jumping on a rock exploits breaks my immersion. Same with magic exploits, why don't the npc's do this? I always wonder.

When is comes to weapons,etc that just makes the game better for me. For example Daggers always svcked in past games, I liked playing an assassin type characer but I never used a dagger because I knew they were weak. Now Skyrim is giving daggers a big sneak attack bonus, which presumably other weapons will not have. I think this is a good thing. I don't want a linear armor/weapon progression were on thing is stricly better than the next. I would prefer it if leather armor had some advantages over glass for example. With all that said, balance weapons has little effect on immersion for me. As I wonder around town some swords stats don't don't really come into play as far as me feeling I am part of a real world.

Is this a Balance discussion or exploits discussion.....


Balance can be controlled, Balance is intended, Balance with work can be exploited.


Exploits are unintended, exploits cannot be controlled in them being present in a game, exploits however are purely up to the player to take advantage of and is not initially addressed by balancing....

Jumping on a rock and killing things is an exploit. By making some AI tweaks that issue can be controlled. I am unsure though what your tying to say.

That is an exploit and not related to balance. I think.

yes I did say Jumping on a rock is an exploit.....but the thread isnt about exploits..>_>


Must have missed the memo or something.

You said things that can't be controlled, that can be. I was confused by your post and gave an example that could be fixed.

"Exploits are unintended, exploits cannot be controlled in them being present in a game"

The biggest problem I had with Oblivion, and why I no longer play it, is that advancement didn't seem to mean much - if anything.

In most games, as you advance, you become more powerful. You notice this when you confront an enemy that once bested you, and in some cases, dropped you like a sack of potatoes, and now you can defeat them. Eventually, you kill them for sport, and finally, you just don't even bother with them.

For example, when you first start Ultima Underworld (either one), rats and spiders kick your behind. As you level up, they become less and less of a threat (with certain exceptions). Some areas you had to avoid purely because you would get your a** kicked open up, as you can now take on the bad guys there.

The same is true of most games in the genre that I enjoy. Take Baldur's Gate, Durlag's Tower. At the beginning of the game, the guards near the bridge can drop you before you even see them. As soon as they see you, you die - almost instantly. Come back about 5-6 levels later, and it's an even challenge. Wait a few more, and they become (almost) a non-issue.

In Oblivion, leveling up was almost counterproductive, and most people seem to prefer not leveling up at all - and for good reason. That, IMHO, was a severe issue. I just never got into the game, and thus, never got into the mods for Oblivion. I'm hoping Skyrim isn't a repeat.

I understand the goal, but the implementation stank. I want to occasionally find a bad guy I can't defeat, and have to go back from time to time to test my skills against. The satisfaction from defeating a certain enemy is much greater.

yes....you don't stop exploits from appearing in a game, you can address them -afterwards-. and if the A.I can already address a player going on a rock...is that still an exploit?

The problem with 'balance' is people misunderstand it, they think it means everything should be equal, wich is very, very wrong. Balance should mean there are things that are weak and things that are strong, they 'balance' each other out.

A good example of misunderstood balance can be seen in alot of RTS games, where EVERY faction has an equivilant unit that is basicaly the same thing with a different skin.
A correct use of balance would have each faction have a unique stragegy with units that fill that role.

in a RPG it means that there should always be weak and strong oponents present in the game from the beginning. There should be pathetic worn our weapons and earth shattering powers existing at the same point in time.
A level 50 mage should face the bandits who plagued him at level 1, and be able to incinerate them with a click of his fingers, not find they suddenly have become incarnates of the hulk!

For balance to work strong and weak must co-exist from the beginning.
Balance is not preventing someone from obtaining a power item or spell because they're level is too low, Balance is make said item realy hard to get, or said spell require more magicka than a lower level character may have.

If you manage to grab the item and run screaming out of the cave from it's guardian, then you deserve it. If you find a way to augment your magicka (without cheating =P ) so that you can pull of one use of a powerful spell, then you should be allowed to.
The balance is in the trials and consequences, not in arbitary numbers and levels.


Another thought based on what kefka said;

Weapons should not have a linear progression of damage...
There should be more elements to weapons, and it shouldn't just scale up in wieght and damage.

For example; an Iron sword should be weaker (hp's) and heavier than a steel sword. Why? Because steel is an alloy of iron and carbon (and sometimes other elements) that can create a stronger, lighter weapon for less mass.

Things like weapon health, wieght, speed, damage ect. should not just go upwards with higher tiers, it should match the material. Sure, make glass do more damage but make it brittle and wear down faster.

I love the quote about the player getting the weapon he expected, at the level he expected, and having it do 10% more damage to his enemies who in turn have 10% more hitpoints/health. Perfectly Stated!

As to the rocks. . . well. . . it could be more exploitable. . . you COULD be capable of climbing trees!!! Realistically though, if you get to a hard to scale high ground ahead of a pursuer, and in your desperation manage to scale it before they can snatch you from behind. . . then unless they are using magic or a projectile weapon, you do have a distinct advantage over them. This is the case in real life as well. It is why people in battles, at least old school pre-sniper riffle battles, preffered to have the high ground. Because, aside from having to fight you, a foe has to work to scale the terrain to get to where you are. And if you are have loose rocks, arrows, throwing knives, or lightning bolts at your disposal, you can both do harm to your assailaint and make it extremely difficult for them to get to where you are (on top of said rock, in said tree etc.) Every time they try to scale the obstacle, you get a clean opportunity to crack them in the head with something. And some foes won't be expert climbers. Consider the scene from the Hobbit where the wicked Wargs chase the companions into the forest. What do they do to escape? They climb trees. A clear advantage, because wolves cannot climb very well. From the relative saftety of the trees Gandalf throws pinecones which he has set alight with uncanny magical fire, down onto the wargs. An exploit, or merely making the best out of a bad situation? Is the game going to get rid of rocks just to keep you from using them to avoid being eaten by bears???

*Applause* :tops:

Perfectly stated and summized.