Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

A single berserk reached us yesterday, after having come all the way over the mountains from the city of Willow, fourteen hundred miles away. He delivered to Alric a single package the size of a man's fist, wrapped in rags, and refuses to talk with anyone about events in the West.
par73
Posts: 3016
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:33
Contact:

Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by par73 »

Image

is myth balanced? hard to say bros. what i am talking about is the developmental balance in the game, and not the user created balance such as captains trading and distributing units. asmodian, dac and rabican will help me reach my point.

i think on it's own, myth is fairly unbalanced. two quick examples: one team gets a mid tag at a different times despite starting from the opposing spawns; barb valley tourney's middle ground.
i guess you could argue here it was the map makers failing to balance the maps, yet we still choose to play them and pick them in competitions as if they are balanced. i guess it's fun to live in the illusion.
Asmodian wrote: I'm not sure why paris thinks Moba's (dota) are more balanced than myth. Moba's have 100 + champions with all different abilities. That in itself already makes the game less balanced.
from the get go, the majority of myth 2 games are played on user servers while those mobas are hosted by neutral servers. "hosting" players used to be a huge source of imbalance in gaming, one that has since found balance through unified fast-speed internet connections and dedicated neutral servers.

asmo seems to think all of his tournaments were balanced, a great ode to a great tournament organizer; but alas he picked every map and unified the fallback systems.

Image

and so the subtle illusions that the myth 2 we play is fair and balanced, even in our most cherished times and events, begins to fade.

i believe while dac is talking more about developmental and balance, the idea that the amount of different user-choices a player can make when selecting their hero has more to do with user influenced balance.
let's not confuse the two, as you could compare hero selection to unit trading. in the way the same units are 'available' to every team, so are the heroes/champions. even more balance in moba is the fact in competitive tournaments the professionals can ban opponents picks.
building your team composition is similar to choosing your unit trade, do you want extra disables with a 4-disable character and max puss? pick/trade for it. i'd say the wide variety of characters actually provides more balance because there is even more ability for counters, where as on myth some UT's are far superior to others and the only counter is to pick the same fucking trade whether you or not have confidence your team could play it. despite having over thousands of different potential unit combinations; some are OP, some are not. there is seldom any change in this. heroes respawn, our choice in myth 2 gameplay is no respawn.

This is left unchecked, unit trading points are never altered. While it seems like it would be a simple quick change, the way some plugins were created would cause a rework and re-release of that plugin; a massive effort really to cover all of the content we enjoy. Arguably on symmetrical maps such as grilling grounds (are there others with near-perfect symmetry?), you could say there is more balance than less. but, the balancing effect here has everything to do with user control. the trades which become staple strategies never become the default unit trades, and the game never develops to become more balanced.
the deathmatch mode could be the next best way to balance pvp games, but this community would never know because it values tradition and holding onto the past. this includes accepting the current meta as the 'end all be all' way to have played myth, "it's so balanced it's perfect, it doesn't need any updates". so be it, if it's your choice of belief and lens while examining the same substance.

but let's see, i think the simple fact that the mobas one speak's of get updated with meta changes every 2-3 months pretty much changing the game and restructuring the balance IN ITSELF makes those games more well balanced. as dac stated, myth is left relatively untouched. perhaps you look at those mobas as one game, maybe it's the LoL effect or just the way one percieve MOBAs, but they're not. the game the professionals in dota 2 were playing in their 4th Tournament International (mwc for dota) was a different game than they played last year in TI5. meanwhile, we constantly play the same game for some 2-3+ years at a time.

when a hero/champion becomes OP or irrelevant because they are suddenly useless or unbalanced, the hero/champion gets experimental nerfs/buffs until the developers are satisfied with hows its being used in the meta.
i guess from this point of view the developers of the mobas are unbalancing the game with each patch? perhaps, maybe they are doing both.

i'm not sure how long it's been since myth was truly dev balanced, if ever, but even meticulous shit like fetch remaining 6 points UT from TFL to M2 all-the-while they can suddenly shoot above melee and cancel projectiles (rather than deflect) is pretty major shit, not to mention the game switched from melee battles to artillery fights.


in fact more evident than the game having balance itself is the user input to balance the games, if we truly wanted balanced 2team/ffa casual/tournament games, NO UNIT TRADING would always be chosen.

perhaps it's the fact we have less 'known' players than those MOBAs have selectable heroes/champions are you put under the guise that myth is a balanced game.
trying to compare games who are constantly being developed to one that's development is now relatively stagnant seems like a poor choice.

and so y' see,
dac wrote: All the units are available to every team, so it's self balancing.
all units are not available to every team, a captain chooses their teams picks and bans creating a shift in balance starting in planning time (and going back to what i said before, a shift in balance can begin starting with the team's starting positions).
if all units were available to every team, there would be no unit trading; you would be getting what unit trading defaults to, OR perhaps as you say, ALL units would be available beyond the default trade.
There is no in between I can see there in regards to a balance, a large part of the strategy and tactics in this game goes into giving your team an advantage and your opponents a disadvantage. it is all about creating an imbalance, which does not always come from what is truly balanced.

the greatest balance change/update m2 ever experienced was when project magma updated the melee system to be eerily reminiscent of TFL's, i can remember will -n- and shaister picked the changes in the patches apart piece by piece in the forums over 10 years ago.

and so y' see,
dac wrote: The pvp is actually perfectly balanced without any need to maintain it. It's why it's still so good with no dev input all these years later.
but there was dev input to change the pvp in myth 2 (of course we all know magma had their eyes on pve). ignoring these major changes to how units path find and respond, and saying the game was perfectly balanced all these years is most definitely hearsay to the reality.

one of the most enjoyable parts of this game for me is the lack of balance and absolution in the pvp gameplay. i could start in a mid spot on pg-bc, downhill in 1v1 on web and have to trade differently, go back door a player in gimble ctf breaking 'gimble r us' user-created rules meant to balance the game. i could trade for all dwarves and get all duds, all bounces, all direct hits; or something in between. one of those dwarves could be dropping a satchel and it suddenly decides to go off... so much for all starting with the same units.

to me, this game is broken; it always has been, and it has always kept it exciting and me coming back since age 7. one of the reasons myth never picked up competitively beyond it's original company losing the rights is that it had definitive balance issues. we play a game now that was what you could say completely unintended. is a game designed to be played for a market of delayed dial-up users to be balanced for a generation of high speed internet users?

one company tried to recreate the vision and instead created one of the most unbalanced and quickly-forgotten pvp games of all time: myth 3. meanwhile on m2, east on if i had a trow continues to reach mid in 35 seconds with a larger defensive hill mid, and west reaches mid in 38 seconds, featuring a waterhole north with impassable practically on the flag, and better defensive positions for assassin and captures.
R@bic@n ~Np~ wrote: par73 ez25: yo
par73 ez25: is myth 2 a balanced game ?
rabocan: mmm kinda .. not
rabocan: raid is basic map, some of the ffa starting positinos are really fuckedup
perhaps thinking that myth is a balanced game becomes something to take pride in following winning the most sought after competitive events, its difficult to rationalize pride over something that could have been unbalanced from the get go unless you indulge in the sadistic; yet even then, we've been stacking the teams for years. lets not get into competitive balance, we don't even play the same map and gametype combos in the same match anymore.
the games we play and speak of are never released perfect, they are always updated; their developers are always looking to seek a balance in the game they are providing their players, so that it comes down to 'skill'.
myth 2 is somewhat unique in the sense that following initial developmental release and updates, the users and players themselves updated and released their visions of 'myth balance'. what we play now is more our creation, our vision, than what the developers had originally sought after. Our, as in, the myth community. at the same time, we don't all trade the same, we aren't all distributed the same units; my dwarf duds, yours duds not.

everything that makes myth chaotic and unbalanced is what i love about it, and why it's so good all these years later.
myth is perfect in it's imperfections. that is why it is my favorite game of all time. one can choose to look at this game through whatever lens one chooses.
you could say, i differ.

grim
Posts: 331
Joined: 22 Oct 2012, 17:33
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by grim »

Paris, I have a confession to make. I have read next to none of your posts over the years. It's not because I wouldn't want to know what you intend to say, but I just can't stand the poor formatting of your posts. I mean, really dude. You are like, 26 years old now or something? Does your keyboard NOT have a shift key or caps lock or why do you never capitalize your letters? Did you/do you write this way in your college papers? I'm not the biggest grammar nazi out there nor do I get stuck on typos people make (unless they're REALLY funny) and I'm sure I made some in this post as well, but just god damn it Paris. Do you intentionally also avoid using spacebar at correct times as well? If so, why?

Don't get this the wrong way though, I mean you no disrespect by saying this. I don't like you and I never will, but that's not because of this.

par73
Posts: 3016
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:33
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by par73 »

grim wrote:Paris, I have a confession to make. I have read next to none of your posts over the years. I just can't stand the poor formatting of your posts.
grim confirms he is in fact reading my posts

see? i can play illusion games too :)
grim wrote:Did you/do you write this way in your college papers?
my liberal choices in post primary education hAVE nOT required to ddo such outlanish schemes?

m2 most balanced game ever, worth the highest regards when it comes to grim's grammatical attention


a finnish teacher who's limiting the potential to be grammar nazi? no wonder the japan have US WIGHTS BEAT

thx4ur suport! grime'

argos
Posts: 103
Joined: 24 Aug 2013, 18:54
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by argos »

There is a reason almost no one plays deathmatch: it takes the fear/excitement of losing/killing units out of the game. Units become grist for the mill instead of highly specialized soldiers, which is one of the things that makes myth so damn epic and awesome. The anxiety of committing units to a push or defense, the give and take between two players dueling on the flank, this would lose it's excitement if they knew their units would come right back.'

I definitely agree with you on chaos = a good time. Myth accurately simulates the utter chaos and randomness of a battlefield with it's chance of failure for almost EVERYTHING, which is so awesome; this has yet to be properly replicated in almost any other game. This is why something like deadhold looks so lame to me (so far with what I've seen), because everything is so cookie cutter in terms of how it lands. Also, there are no hero units in myth with stupid buffs and little auras surrounding them, who can resurrect units or give all melee a boost. That shit doesn't belong in the gritty world of myth and I'm very happy to not have it.

par73
Posts: 3016
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:33
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by par73 »

the idea is myth 2 deathmatch is an entirely new meta to explore entirely different levels of fear/excitement in losing/killing units. we play in a very suspenseful meta where the best way to play is slow-steady-scouted.

deathmatch is constant motion. again, completely different game, completely different meta of myth.

we choose to use observer on instead of off. why? the idea is it provides more balance, the teams can get the same information. unit's have similar or 'balanced' lines of sight.

it also causes everyone to be lazy with their scouting and communication; losing habits are losing habits.

Giant Killer General
Posts: 1625
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 13:46
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by Giant Killer General »

A for effort, F for writing and content.

I only skimmed it, but that is mostly because I don't think hardly anyone can read Paris' writing. It reads like a long incoherent rambling.

It is a rather signature style that has remained consistent over the years though, so I guess there's no point in complaining about it now.


Pogue
Posts: 1218
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 16:26
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by Pogue »

This is such a random thread. I mean honestly, we're on what? Version 1.8? Myth has always been unbalanced, always will be. Having said that I do wish duds didn't exist. They have fucked me over WAY MORE TIMES than they've ever helped me. Only thing I'd change.

dac
Posts: 593
Joined: 24 Feb 2013, 02:40
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by dac »

I had a lot of shit written out and lost it so here's the tldr version:

1) access to units at plan time is what I meant by same units. Captains can change it but it's not like one person has access to trow and the other team only has access to brigands.

2) devs not needing to balance or alter gameplay is NOT the same as the gameplay not being touched. the devs are gonna fuck with whatever they want and it doenst matter if its necessary or not. You're confusing ideas there too. One player does not get superior pathfinding versus the other player, the units follow the same algorithm regardless.

Edit: I did say that it wasnt messed with after all these years, and I was wrong about that. That said, what I was trying to say is that all players are on the same engine so there are no balance issues to worry about there, whether or not the devs actually do anything to it.

Chohan
Posts: 326
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 11:01
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by Chohan »

Myth is far more balanced than Dota - HoN - League ever could hope to be.

If anyone has ever played any of the DOTA style games at any relatively high ranking they wouldn't need it explained, hence I won't explain it.

par73
Posts: 3016
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:33
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by par73 »

It is a pretty random thread huh pogue, but dac and asmodian sparked some thoughts about discussions i've had with others; i figured i'd do some brainstorming and jot down ideas while i prepped for my sunday morning and turn it into a thread of its own (as the discussion does not belong in meta server issues).

I figured anyone who was ever interested in the discussion of whether myth 2 is balanced or not could find themselves responding to the first question located in the first sentence of the article, and need not read anything further in regards to my rough ideas on this discussion unless they were actually interested in hearing that perspective.

We can already see that some players take the perspective that myth is a balanced game for a variety of reasons while others take the perspective that myth is imbalanced for their reasons.

it's interesting to hear cruniacs quick dismissal of the topic and pledge that myth is far more balanced than dota and league, mostly because the intial thoughts of this discussion were planted when I was talking to someone who has played dota at the 'relatively high ranking' skill level.
Yet players who play those games at the highest levels, higher than those who believe their high ranking is relative, play for millions of dollars in competitions and you don't hear any of them publicly stating that the game they play is unbalanced. Although you will see the veteran players who lost their fire and ability quit playing and reference "the current state of the meta is not true to the game" and either move on or return in a future update.
Again, I think it's inappropriate to try to scale myth 2, which has had little to no patch work done in relation to the frequency of the patch updates and meta changes in league and dota games.
Not to mention, they are a completely different style of game. Myth 2 is not a moba and seldom played 5v5, Dota 2 is not a RTS/RTT.



I think Pogue brings up a great point that taking out duds from myth 2 could provide a more balanced game. however playing devils advocate with my own ideas i also believe that it is with the knowledge of the unit and how it's
primary attack's function works creates the identity of the unit. in fact, the entire identity of the unit is built upon its unpredictability; it is not a unit such as a warlock or fetch who's primary attack always functions (except in the case of adrenaline's warlock, not sure if that was fixed).
back to my perspective on how the game lacks balance, a dwarf costing 6 points to me makes little sense when a fetch costs 6, these are old TFL trading points that were never updated or balanced with the introduction of myth 2's mortars and warlocks. a fetch can solo each of these characters with precision, a nod to how the game was designed to play on dial up and not high speed internet. yet it costs 2 points less than a warlock or a mortar? a mortar, keep in mind, can dud as likely as the dwarf. ideally dwarves would be 5, mortar dwarves 6, warlocks and fetch 8. we would be taking units off the map in some cases while maps would suddenly have more units available. these changes seem subtle but can have a large enough effect to consider it a whole new way to play myth 2: see patch updates, territories changes, the additions of deathmatch and king of the map.
but unfortunately it's attempting to balance something that's already broken, that people have already spent trying to master what they've played for so long that the popular vote is that the change is too drastic and unnecessary.





it's unfortunate your lengthy response was deleted dac, as i would have enjoyed reading through it. my hand has a habit of resting where my touch pad

in response

1) i knew what you meant by access to units at planning time, and yes I'm also not referring to vivid frenzy scenarios
We choose to not use No Unit Trading, therefore causing a change in balance before the game even begins as soon as there are differences in the trade and the number of units.
albiet, NUT games may be the closest games to achieving what one could consider "perfect myth balance", but they are still often the least games played.
As you can see, the community itself has embraced the imbalance in this way.
Being able to trade has everything to do with the current meta and what works where. If the devs suddenly made artillery/trow/melee units beefier or lowered their values, who's to say we wouldn't be playing a more balanced game?
Some maps field outrageously overpowered units with few to little counters (even worse, you can opt to trade for zero of these counters). Having noted the game play has been touched before, is most certainly at least one way to have a map find better balance.
While some of these maps are perfect in their own imperfections, subtle changes in terrain which have come to be accepted as standard and unique positions on maps no doubt effect the balance of the game play. It seems we as a community choose to play unbalanced maps and games, except in the cases when we pick a symmetrical map such as grilling grounds.


2) good catch, as most definitely are we playing a different game these days than what myth 2 originally was.
you say all of the players are on the same engine sure, and that one player does not get superior pathfinding versus the other player, the units follow the same algorithm regardless.
This is not to be true.


to make my response as simple as possible:
you're forgetting the simple fact we don't use universal formations, each player uses their own and some players use the same.
hence in response of the imbalance, most players will choose to update their formations; but at the end of the day, those differences in formations, however small, can most definately provide advantageous pathfinding.
I can't help but mention this may point to the idea that the early days of tfl and myth2 being more balanced than the later days, which reminds me of another discussion the myth 2 community never really agreed upon.

edit: unbalance is not imbalance ;)

CheezeFist
Posts: 70
Joined: 15 Sep 2016, 13:46
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by CheezeFist »

Myth is not balanced.
Any trades but the "standard" trades meet with hostility and or dropping.
Par is horrible at typing.
Grim is funny.

Pogue
Posts: 1218
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 16:26
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by Pogue »

CheezeFist wrote:Myth is not balanced.
Any trades but the "standard" trades meet with hostility and or dropping.
Par is horrible at typing.
Grim is funny.
How about you get off your ass and do a OMGWTF!? about this..

CheezeFist
Posts: 70
Joined: 15 Sep 2016, 13:46
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by CheezeFist »

Pogue wrote:
CheezeFist wrote:Myth is not balanced.
Any trades but the "standard" trades meet with hostility and or dropping.
Par is horrible at typing.
Grim is funny.
How about you get off your ass and do a OMGWTF!? about this..
I am not your dancing monkey.
Also, this is not a funny topic.
Also also, why make something for a community of 20 "salty" people. Myth is dead.

Pogue
Posts: 1218
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 16:26
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by Pogue »

Your honesty and logic almost made me cry :(

User avatar
BIG KROK V8 SS
Posts: 1708
Joined: 06 Jun 2013, 04:29
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by BIG KROK V8 SS »

Pogue wrote:This is such a random thread. I mean honestly, we're on what? Version 1.8? Myth has always been unbalanced, always will be. Having said that I do wish duds didn't exist. They have fucked me over WAY MORE TIMES than they've ever helped me. Only thing I'd change.
C'mon pogue you know duds only affect adrenaline and nobody else in this game. Pathfinding too.

wwo
Posts: 849
Joined: 13 Dec 2012, 14:35
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by wwo »

except in the case of adrenaline's warlock
We need a gif of this for the Myth archives. And that (was it 1 or 2?) mortar shot on Acts that hit a bird.

Pogue
Posts: 1218
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 16:26
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by Pogue »

BIG KROK V8 SS wrote:
Pogue wrote:This is such a random thread. I mean honestly, we're on what? Version 1.8? Myth has always been unbalanced, always will be. Having said that I do wish duds didn't exist. They have fucked me over WAY MORE TIMES than they've ever helped me. Only thing I'd change.
C'mon pogue you know duds only affect adrenaline and nobody else in this game. Pathfinding too.
Clearly you never played on Garrick's host. I dunno what it is but I dud there all the time. I think had a series of four games in a row where at least 80% of the bottles my duffs threw were duds. So weird...and infuriating. Pathfinding though? Yeah, just Adren.

par73
Posts: 3016
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:33
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by par73 »

CheezeFist wrote: Any trades but the "standard" trades meet with hostility and or dropping.
this is why we play tournaments :)

dac
Posts: 593
Joined: 24 Feb 2013, 02:40
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by dac »

well let's make sure we both agree on what unbalanced means here.

to me, when i hear unbalanced i get flashbacks of blizzard going in and fundamentally changing a game to "fix" some problem, thus throwing the meta for a curve. or in mtg, wotc would deify themselves to alter card text to something other than what was printed on the card. shit like that, that's what i think of when i hear unbalanced - some guy going through and changing shit around otherwise the game has no competition.

this is incorrect. myth is a series of soft counters with a couple of hard counters (stygs/arrows) so yeah, that's unbalanced i guess, but the trade is what makes each game different.

if unbalnaced means that after pt the teams and players and squads are not redistrubuted under some bernie style equality, then yeah, absolutely, but that's not how i define unbalanced.

Phos
Posts: 49
Joined: 24 Nov 2016, 14:48
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by Phos »

CheezeFist wrote: Also also, why make something for a community of 20 "salty" people. Myth is dead.
We'll all be dead some day. Audrey Mclendon is dead. However, Myth is still alive, and who knows, we might even find a way to get new gamers into it. Even if we don't, I think you'll still see multiplayer games for another 5-10 years, assuming that gateofstorms stays around...

par73
Posts: 3016
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:33
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by par73 »

i'm pretty sure those OMGWTFs posted before were when myth was dead, could have fooled me. i suppose it's all perceptual, like game balance which is the topic at hand, let's get back to that after.

mr. cheezefist, i'm still waiting for a hair cut from the greatest PB-J Otter contributor of all time.

sounds more like the 20 "salty" people are just the ones who stopped playing, stop by to say hello, realize they aren't relevant anymore, "gee guys what are you doing, how can you still have fun here?" if only borrowed time was plentiful.
i suppose cheeze is one of those people; although the demographic for his OMGWTF cartoons always for those people as well as those who were still enjoying themselves "actively" playing more than once a week.

it's hard to say the target demographic would not appreciate his contributions as they have in the past, i don't believe that really. CF was just another character in a place everyone said was dead yet still had so much life, look no further than the contributions of myth's resident comic.
rather than his rationalized statement of denial that objectively myth is dead, i'm more inclined to believe cheeze simply doesn't have the time for this anymore: most of his buds are gone, he's out of touch with the current state of myth affairs. who can be bothered with that unless they are actually playing the game? besides his remaining salty friends who either use dummy accounts or view forums rather than play, i mean, said people are the exception; it's tough to break bad behaviors.

subjectively, myth is currently dead to cheezefist; perhaps in a similar way to how myth was dead for Phos for over a decade until he returned to play some games and meet some new people who have spare time to enjoy the game for what it is.

par73
Posts: 3016
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:33
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by par73 »

par73 wrote:Image

is myth balanced? hard to say bros. what i am talking about is the developmental balance in the game, and not the user created balance such as captains trading and distributing units. dac will help me reach my point.
dac wrote:well let's make sure we both agree on what unbalanced means here.

to me, when i hear unbalanced i get flashbacks of blizzard going in and fundamentally changing a game to "fix" some problem, thus throwing the meta for a curve. or in mtg, wotc would deify themselves to alter card text to something other than what was printed on the card. shit like that, that's what i think of when i hear unbalanced - some guy going through and changing shit around otherwise the game has no competition.

this is incorrect. myth is a series of soft counters with a couple of hard counters (stygs/arrows) so yeah, that's unbalanced i guess, but the trade is what makes each game different.

if unbalanced means that after pt the teams and players and squads are not redistributed under some bernie style equality, then yeah, absolutely, but that's not how i define unbalanced.
i love semantics. how does the definitions of 'unbalanced' apply to myth. well the game play, it's unbalanced; it's a broken game.

very appropriate to establish our definitions of what's unbalanced or what is balanced moving forward as i think you've caught me in error. indeed we are talking about two separate things and i've neglected to address them. i've meant the term imbalance and said but unfortunately said unbalanced in bold for your quick viewing pleasure, so one may have become confused; if only i could get some better critique from more myth professors and we could have caught this sooner, but thank you. I've kept it vague to truly break this down from the start, we needed some meat.

i think your flashbacks are referring to imbalance, while 'unbalancing' or 'balancing' happens during the game play (as a result of an imbalance).

to me, when i hear unbalanced i think that one time on grave lmoth where i killed 4 armies with my one after high tailing it away from the mid-flag. balancing or unbalancing is subjective, while myth's state of imbalance is objective; you are correct in thinking some choose to continue to confuse this to this very day.


overall, with this thread's discussion and my approach in point of view, people have pointed various out scenarios of myth in where the balance in the Broken Scale is upset; but it stems from an imbalanced base game itself (hereby referred to as, the "broken game")

what is imbalanced about myth 2 here? these situations at their basic level are:
fundamentals
gameplay

gameplay imbalance cannot happen until the fundamentals are set so let's start there,

when one first plays a new game, as we all have done with this one and many others, our brains work to organize and make sense of how the pieces we have been given work within their virtual plane.
like solving a puzzle, the fundamentals are the pieces. what do i mean by myth 2 fundamentals?

the fundamentals of myth is the engine and what you are provided by that engine; source of the imbalance, the game itself, even in light of what original and 3rd party developers have done to change it's original release.
if significant changes to a game's meta are meant to bring/alter competition, these developmental choices are done with the idea it will bring a better balance to the game.
the question: if the game was already balanced, why would it need to be balanced again?
simple answer: it was never balanced to begin with.
fundamentally, myth is a state of imbalance. this is objective.

bungie switching the myth platform from melee dominance to artillery dominance in myth 2 is a different ballpark than the company losing rights/interest further develop the game. additionally, one could say project magma's updates helped produce a more balanced relationship between artillery and melee importance. project magma's myth has some beefed up control over melee fights, and if you don't think differences in formations can effect unit pathfinding or usage then why do so many alter formations beyond the default?

that is why you and i differ to think that we all play on the same engine, whether or not the devs do anything about it. i don't think its necessary either to make changes either, i like my privatized formations available for $2.99 on paypal order today. and something to worry about? no, just something to think about.

the gameplay of myth is the balancing/unbalancing of a, a broken scale; a different state of affairs coming as a result of broken "fundamentals", the game we know and love. our subjective mything experiences.
the players are handed broken situations and must adapt accordingly, some are similar some are not.
we turn on unit trading, we turn on overhead maps. is it that it makes each game different, or that we seek to balance/unbalance each game?
one could say we seek to balance here as we provide opportunity to scout and have unique trades.

yet outcasted raid and ww2 were often played with no overhead and you had to scout for yourself (sounds more balanced); as well, a true balance for teams/players would be to play no unit trading with identical units.
these are different metas of the game, made available by the fundamentals; i'm not sure if someone is more likely to play a game they believe to be balanced or imbalanced but no doubt some believe their preference to be the better choice in the matter.

at the very core of the game, you are the dwindling light forces which need to do great things with the odds stacked against you in order to conquer the dark
even the lore written by the original developers supports the notion that myth was never meant to be a balanced game, and never was.

in light of this, most adaptations in the gameplay are not to seek balance, but to seek to shift the balance against their opponents.
the 10 unit co-op team conquers 250k enemies.
one team/player trades better, outsmarts or out-body-counts their opponents, sometimes all three. these choices all play a role into making each game different.
one player updates their formations, one player has better formations. the list goes on

and like fireflies drawn to the light, in the broken scale we chose to unbalance or seek balance. this was however we chose to perceive it.
perhaps more so than others were those who sought perfect maps, perfect strats, perfect trades, perfect traps.
popular vote of the forums alienated those who played raid or gfgg,
ww2 players unintentionally balanced basic formation differences and abuse by playing a unified one-unit controlled map,
some players who chose to have multiple accounts did this to play in the best games, some did it simply to troll.

yes, through the behaviors, thoughts and choices the players have made for over their 20 years playing or what have you, one can see some choose to embrace the imbalance and some chose to fight against it and shift balance.
the game is as broken as the idea you can legitimately compare 'mything eras' when players played with different equipment, different population and versions of the game.
i saw some people discussing this on multiple occasions in the lobby last year, and 'i get flashbacks' to magne proclaiming to me how he killed civil/bmf when he beat casual players on team lame in 2004. everyone has their own perspective.

also
"the bernie style" equality np and bme trades can be done when you have the means to do so, but also situational depending on map, gametype, players, communication etc. quite honestly that's more fun in my choice of preferred meta, its funny to me when ffa players refuse to play 2team because they feel bad they likely lose the team their game (believe it or not happens to this day)
this is a captain/team choice rectifying imbalance in an attempt to achieve perfect balance in order to best equip their players and cause imbalance in their opponents. there is quite the relationship between balance and unbalance in the state of imbalance when you trade units in that respect.
hehe rekt-uh-fy

one could say the attempt to balance the game by the original developers was complete the moment they set sail for new horizons, but we don't even play that game.
the original game is in the grave yard and we hang out with it's modern relative. and that game had fire arrows taken off of the desert map not to improve it, but because no one's wooden box pc's could handle the fire animation without lagging to shit at the time.

no doubt a little tlc or a few meta changes could help approach the state of balance never truly achieved, even if you claim to perceive now as being the 'perfectly balanced pvp' because you've found your own comfort zone and equilibrium within the imbalance (but correct me if i'm wrong if you haven't realized it).

i think people can perceive balance where there is not, it could be nothing more than comforting to their perspective.



it is what it is, and what have you. myth 2 soublighter, the broken game, the broken scale.
embrace the chaos, embrace the carnage.


Lord---Scary Owl
Posts: 971
Joined: 12 Dec 2014, 01:53
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by Lord---Scary Owl »

That is amazing cheeze.... Perfectly magnificent. Par73 still has some curly hair but shorter though.

wwo
Posts: 849
Joined: 13 Dec 2012, 14:35
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by wwo »

Myth is fairly incredible, in that the "balance" can be altered simply by how the map is designed and populated.

Want to emphasize clicking and reaction speed? Put in more types of high-maintenance units.
Want to emphasize the necessity of strategy/teamwork? Select a particular game type, and place objectives accordingly.
Etc

When you ask, "Is Myth balanced", you need to define from which perspective first.

dac
Posts: 593
Joined: 24 Feb 2013, 02:40
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by dac »

everybody has access to the same units before UT.

there are terrain advantages but sides of maps tend to be mostly fair, otherwise they dont get played often.

there is no inbalance in myth that is not in every other game, this isnt a sanders utopia where skill is redistributed equally, this is reality where some people fail and some people succeed.

Renwood
Posts: 493
Joined: 13 Jan 2013, 10:16
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by Renwood »

The maps being unbalanced is certainly a thing, but I would not count 3rd party maps as "myth" Certainly PG/KG are super unfair if you get the side with no free pus on the map in a 1on1. And starts are not equal distance from the flag or other objectives. This is not what I would call "Myth being unbalanced" You could make new versions of these maps with some new starts with equal distance from important objectives. Like everybody gets to the KOTH flag withing the same exact second if everybody clicks as soon as the game starts.

Myth has organic battlefields and terrain. There are few that are truly symmetrical like Grilling grounds is. But again, this is RANDOMness at work. One game in a 1on1 you get the side with NO pus on KG then the next game you DO get that pus filled side. It evens out over the number of games played.

The CORE of myth itself is balanced. Other then the fetch thing from TFL fetch vs M2 fetch. Where TFL fetch need a CLEAR path to shoot through (lest you blast a hole directly THROUGH your own units) TFL fetch can deflect projectiles mid air. Myth 2 fetch are overpowered with them now being able to shoot OVER a wall of their own units, and being able to detonate or stop projectiles in their tracks mid air.

There are very few exceptions as to what could be tweaked to make it less unfair at times. Most of those issues are map based. And the map we choose to play on IMHO is not in fact the "Myth Game". If it was in fact the Game of myth ITSELF that was unbalanced it would not matter which map you played on as these problems would persist on every single map played, which they do not.

We are working on an UBER map pack currently. It has some of these MAP BALANCE fixes in it! Like new PG/KG starts and less pus on it and starting positions equal distance from the KOTH flag, in the form of ADDITIONAL MESHES.
All the maps in the UBER map pack will have their ORIGINAL creator intended unit trades and meshes included plus NEW ones made by us on extra meshes. We aim to put at least 100 of the finest myth maps ever created in this Multiplayer UBER map pack. I will post a list of the maps we have seleted so far.

I hope people will tell us if we missed any of their favorite maps. Because if we have it may be maps we have never heard of before. If we can fit all the maps we want in it before we hit the CURRENT myth plugin size limit, it will contain FFA and 2 team maps. If not we will split them and release an FFA UBER map pack and a 2 TEAM UBER map pack.

Also a NEW Myth HD Total Conversion v1.32 is coming out with a few fixes. We (with the addition of HMP) are also making the Largest myth map ever created with the addition of Tharsis. It will be a COOP map with 2 team and FFA meshes included. Some of you have already seen an older version of this map. It has since then grown to be about 8x bigger then what had been seen before.

User avatar
Zak
Posts: 984
Joined: 06 Feb 2013, 01:26
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by Zak »

Sounds like a poor mans zak pack

par73
Posts: 3016
Joined: 15 Nov 2012, 15:33
Contact:

Re: Myth II Soulblighter: The Broken Scale

Post by par73 »

when i asked is myth balanced, i let the perspectives and scenarios develop on their own, i was less sure about those perspectives then than how i am now. i know nothing.
dac wrote:everybody has access to the same units before UT.

there are terrain advantages but sides of maps tend to be mostly fair, otherwise they dont get played often.

there is no inbalance in myth that is not in every other game, this isnt a sanders utopia where skill is redistributed equally, this is reality where some people fail and some people succeed.
ill presume you meant "imbalance" not "inbalance"

tldr version:
Yea coz every strategy game lets you alter your units pathfinding in a side-utility, rather than giving everyone sanders utopian pathfinding equality.

Except no, they don't.

this is the reagan trickle down utopia where having advanced formations gives you a competitive advantage.

vlwtfdiwt version:

I can't think of one modern or original strategy game that gives it's players a "competitive" edge for utilizing a program meant to edit the base units/tags in the game (perhaps someone has come across one they can bring up).
unfortunately, or perhaps fortunately, this causes an imbalance to take place in myth that is not in every other game; as you can see it's fundamentally flawed before a unit is traded. it is not that we are given different tools through unit trading, it is that we make the choice of unique tools to direct our units on the battle field. pogue's tight box beats your loose default box, every time.

Talking about skill, how it is distributed in the community, and how to redistribute it is a much different discussion entirely, and not one i'm trying to have in this thread as it's probably deserving of its own.
I've already made suggestions to how to redistribute it above in regards to updating the game with unified formations between players but we're 13 years too late; updating the shit default formations would suffice.

My approach has been about the broken imbalanced game itself. 'Skill' in myth is just a product of coming to understand and balancing/unbalancing within the imbalance. Just like upgrading your formations.
We've established unit trading does nothing but further tip the scale, and that the trading itself is nothing but the balancing/unbalancing effect experienced through user input.
Playing maps perceived as fair is also our human input as myth players to make sense and balance the game we've enjoyed for so long, whether we found it to be broken or not.

i agree with what you said, that there are imbalances in myth that are in other games. the more obvious it became how pathfinding can be broken with simple changes in what we use for formations, is just one of the ways the myth engine was uniquely broken. i too used to think we were all playing the same game. we are not.


@ socialist sanders prod- the individuals would share the burdens and triumphs of risk and reward together. not always the most pleasant experience in zero-sum games for everyone, :)

Post Reply

Return to “Eblis Stone”