What is the balance of DST?

[DVGMedia]

LIke for real. This is something that constantly gets brought up.
What is the balance of dst?
in a group setting most things are not a challenge so balance only really matters in solo play. yet this is supposed to be a multiplayer game.
How can we really take things into account for balance when just having 3 or more players makes makes everything trivial.
So really there is no such thing as balance
The concept of balance is only ever used when trying to build an argument against something.
Talking balance has removed some things that were really dumb to begin with however those were already plain to see.
Balance only really works on what exists currently. And thats why its a problem.  Because really the game is going to go on forever. so long as we keep playing.

And the fact that there is talks about redoing skill trees after everyone is done just shows that none of the actions now really matter.

But it should be noted. that currently the perks that exist are only to combat what is now. They may be worse later once new things come by.
So if there is something you don't like currently don't give up hope.
 

[Cheggf]

There being ways to make the game way too easy does not show that there is no balance or doesn't exist, if anything it shows that those things are problematic and unbalanced. 

[Edible Coal]

dst is mostly a sandbox game, theres no balance in a sandbox game

[Koomin]

The point of balance in games like this is for a few things:
-In multiplayer games it feels bad and makes it less fun when your character choice results in your contributions being worse than others.  People don't like it when it turns out "oh yes that is unfortunate, your character is just weaker than everyone else's"

-Playing a character that is not balanced correctly against the enemies is often not fun for players.  I personally really find the game worse when everything dies way too easily and the challenge is removed.  If I don't even need to try, what am I even doing?  This is the most important one - balance is often being referred to against the enemies, instead of other characters. (Often, not always, as pointed out in other bullets)

-Part of the allure of multiplayer games with character choice is to experience worlds with people all playing different characters and interacting with different abilities.  If some are way more powerful than others, it results in servers where only a few characters are played, and usually the same ones. You can already see this occurring, and I often avoid worlds with low character diversity since it is less fun

-Unbalanced characters also affect challenges and boss rushes and stuff.  It's more fun and interesting for the community when many characters and approaches create valid solutions with their own pros and cons, versus some just objectively being better all the time

[Guille6785]

9 minutes ago, Koomin said:

-Unbalanced characters also affect challenges and speed runs and stuff.  It's more fun and interesting for the community when many characters and approaches create valid solutions with their own pros and cons, versus some just objectively being better all the time

speedruns are a fundamentally different way to play the game so bringing speedrunning into a discussion of general game balance is only ever bound to make things worse for everyone, including the speedrunners themselves

[Koomin]

3 minutes ago, Guille6785 said:

speedruns are a fundamentally different way to play the game so bringing speedrunning into a discussion of general game balance is only ever bound to make things worse for everyone, including the speedrunners themselves

I do agree that often the discussion on that runs off in a weird direction and ends up counterproductive, but also think that it actually is a relevant point of interest in the game for people and important for the game's success and longevity.  It's much more fun when there are many viable options and strategies and to see people trying different stuff. 

Edited my original post slightly though to hopefully make it more palatable for what you said.

[Mike23Ua]

This game has no actual balance.. There is no “preferred Difficulty” and your worlds settings aren’t permanently locked and not change-able after creating your world.

Lets compare DST to the likes of Hardcore Mode on Minecraft, if you pick Hardcore… you can not sleep on a bed to by pass nightfall, nor can you change the settings to revert to an easier difficulty, once you man up for this challenge: Your in it for the long haul.

This is NOT Dont Starve Together, You can at anytime you desire, change your “survival” settings world to “Endless” you can turn off Deerclops before it has a chance to spawn, you can enable Rift content and get Rift Gear without doing any of the prerequisites to obtaining rift gear. And THEN once you have all the Rift Armor and Weapons you want, you can turn off the Rifts altogether and go smack up Dragonfly with your Repairable Brightshade swords.

And if that wasnt enough, you can toggle on Wilderness Mode to change characters each time you die so you can easily stockpile their character exclusive crafts (like Wigfrid helmets, and woodies treeguard idols) to use as someone else.

You can Start Lights Out Mode, disable dying in the darkness… toggle on Midsummers Cawnival build a billion ticket booths or Year of the DepthWorm Light Posts, Toggle back on Dying and live in your lights out world. 
 

sure it defeats the challenge and purpose of the mode, but the fact you can do that at all proves that The game (DST) HAS NO BALANCE.

Unlike Solo Don’t Starve: Where you entered Maxwells Doorway to a RogueLite Adventure, where what you can take with you was limited.

My conclusion is that people get “up in arms” about wanting things like lowered boss health, on screen health bars etc…. But really and honestly? With all the settings we can flip switches for AT ANY TIME WE DESIRE DOING SO, adding a few more settings isn’t going to kill anyone.

If Anything: It would make the game more accessible to people who weren’t skilled enough to enjoy “default difficulty”

You can debate me all you like but deep down you guys all know I’m speaking truths.  

[Jakepeng99]

53 minutes ago, Edible Coal said:

dst is mostly a sandbox game, theres no balance in a sandbox game

Yes there is. Thats made up.

[Captain_Rage]

Does a character rely on the same old mechanic to defeat bosses, enemies in general and sustain itself without any effort and without interacting with most other items and mechanics in the game that require upkeep? If you answered yes and a single mechanic lets you omit most other mechanics in the game it means the character / mechanic is a poorly designed one-trick-pony.

Wendy used to have amazing crowd control abilities compared to the other cast* and weapons which allowed her to take on hoards of spiders. On the other hand Abigail wouldn't do as well against a beefy single target like Deerclops, making it riskier for Wendy to take on a boss since it was possible to lose Abigail and then she would be more exposed to all enemies for a period of time. Now Abigail defeats almost everything single-handedly without any risk of perishing. The balance is not there.

*) which is not even unique or fun anymore since many of the other characters vomit area of effect damage in the current game wherever they go.

[Szczuku]

There very much is a balance in dst in a sense that recent updates are making things trivial even if you are playing without the additional 2 players

[Walrusst]

Really a broad balance is the best we probably can achieve. Not precise, but one that answers a set of goals in a calm manner.

I would lay out a few goals in general.

• Every characters a complete experience.
  • This means you have a selling point that draws a dedicated fanbase.
  • You have some imaginable synergy to completing your goals (Even wes has +30 speed day 1.)
  • Characters level of complexity should vaguely keep a similar general pace as the characters are developed.
    • Not homogeneous complexity roughly speaking, just similar pacing ie they all develop and get more in depth gameplans at rates that at least let you nod and go "Wow this is pretty neat."
  • The things that make the character thematically interesting are made into something mechanically fun enough that the two feel interconnected.
• Every character has some tangible benefit to their team.
  • Most characters should have some reason why they would appreciate someone on a different character being on a world.
  • AOE, being able to move heavy things, big inventory size, speed, valuable resources, shareable good items, gather quirks, toughness, good structures, crowd control, or a viable biome quirk that lets them tackle tasks painful for someone else.
• Certain goalpost features (exceptional characteristics that draw awe) should be treated with respect and the work to do better than these feats should be notable indeed.
  • Teleports more convinient than winowna's or wortox's I would consider alarming if they were cheap.
  • Outdamaging wolfgang without warly levels of cost is eyebrow raising.
  • Being tougher then wigfrids an eyebrow raiser without a resource ccost.
  • All terrain movement thats superior to the goose.
  • Gathering faster than wurt/maxwell.
  • Shipping freight faster than walter.
  • THIS ISN'T DON'T MAKE NEW GOALPOSTS, but to give it a minutes thought before you do.
  • Normal items which approach these goalposts are fine as well so long as the process of getting them and using them is interesting. (Like the eye shield letting more people emulate a small fraction of wigfrids tankyness when you split the damage you are absorbing between three armor sources to make your marble suit last almost forever.)
• Lacking goalpost features is fine! If you have a good median of a lot of features to make you a strong contender regardless.
• Bosses and enemies are interesting to the players knowledgeable enough to logically find them.
• Things that feel like almost bugs in threat behavior should be fixed, like incomplete walls often being a better obstacle than complete ones that the enemy knows to attack.
• Resource drains should be something we usually feel, because you know, its what drives the game to be frantic and fun.

[Popian]

33 minutes ago, Guille6785 said:

speedruns are a fundamentally different way to play the game so bringing speedrunning into a discussion of general game balance is only ever bound to make things worse for everyone, including the speedrunners themselves

Speedruns also already solve this with separate categories if there is enough interest in attaining "perfection" in a certain way.

[shaurun]

I know not a single game which is perfecly balanced, and that's actually not a bad thing. Perfect balance is possibility to do same things at the same rate - damage, harvesting, exploration etc, so it would be boring if all characters were equal. SInce DST has 'survivability' rates like 'grim' etc, it's obvious to me that game was made with 'different characters would have different difficulties' in mind.

The only thing we might call as a balance in DST should relate to: character challange rating should correlate with expierence (e.g. wes is expected to be more challenging), and character disatvantage should be impactful enough for character advantage for it's challange rating. 

Also let's get into account that game is suitable for "together" playstyle, not "alone", but mostly when people talk about balance - they talk about their solo expierence, and often focus on combat part of this expierence. I'm the fan of the idea of nerfing boss hp dependind on number of people in server - I thinks this will resolve most 'balance' questions.

[RexySeven]

Balancing in this game is a bit of a subjective topic and really hard to pin down.

But if I've been asked then game needs dynamic bosses health pool change depending on the amount of players. Playing singleplayer makes everything x2 harder but playing with 3+ people makes everything way too trivial currently and it's kinda funny if you think about it. 

[loopuleasa]

balance in co-op games boils down to balanced fun

people vary wildly in skill level, so "balance" means difficulty balance, and in this game it is balanced by numbers and word of mouth

newer players can see from other players better survival strategies to tackle problems in the world of the constant

the game is balanced when the progression of "survival skills" is not too shallow nor too step compared to the challenges the game throws at you

 

57 minutes ago, RexySeven said:

Balancing in this game is a bit of a subjective topic and really hard to pin down.

But if I've been asked then game needs dynamic bosses health pool change depending on the amount of players. Playing singleplayer makes everything x2 harder but playing with 3+ people makes everything way too trivial currently and it's kinda funny if you think about it. 

it would be interesting to have a server setting called "Boss HP": Normal/PlayerScaling

V Rising bosses are superb, and they have a mechanic there where remaining boss HP is scaled based on how many players are involved in the fight (near the boss)

4 players in boss arena = 4x the hp for instance

[mima_]

for example if you want try fight BQ but there one random char that can kill beequeen with little to no effort at day 3, and need wait 20 days to be able to try it again. and no guarantee there other BQ slayer not eyeing for another kill.

3 hours ago, DVGMedia said:

balance only really matters in solo play

so i think balance is totally not matters in solo play, but in multiplayer, where one should have make a good prep before killing boss solo, or need raid team to kill one because boss only drop one loot and everyone want one as early as possible too. 
having unbalanced char that can slay bosses by no skill or not much prep is such a turn off. 
even tho i can killing one myself, but in multiplayer i usually ask who want to come when its time to kill boss cus i like having raid group kill and gamble the loot with /roll when it is early gameplay. so noone actually feeling left out and actually experiencing the game.

[Steorra]

3 hours ago, Koomin said:

I do agree

You did had mentioned the speedrun champions who used Wendy for proving your balance opinions. It's quite strange to see you change your attitude such easily here.

3 hours ago, Captain_Rage said:

Does a character rely on the same old mechanic to defeat bosses, enemies in general and sustain itself without any effort and without interacting with most other items and mechanics in the game that require upkeep? If you answered yes and a single mechanic lets you omit most other mechanics in the game it means the character / mechanic is a poorly designed one-trick-pony.

Wendy used to have amazing crowd control abilities compared to the other cast* and weapons which allowed her to take on hoards of spiders. On the other hand Abigail wouldn't do as well against a beefy single target like Deerclops, making it riskier for Wendy to take on a boss since it was possible to lose Abigail and then she would be more exposed to all enemies for a period of time. Now Abigail defeats almost everything single-handedly without any risk of perishing. The balance is not there.

*) which is not even unique or fun anymore since many of the other characters vomit area of effect damage in the current game wherever they go.

You seems mocking Walter silently lol.

For the OP -

Balance in this forum is a relativism.

When a welcomed character (for mostly forumites) is imbalance, balance is "not the important thing". Even that characters could easily broken and ignore most bosses' mechanic.

But we did seen many "balance talking" toward Wendy. So for those arguments that "balance is not important" is more like untrue. Or, there's have different "balance" standard based on some forumites' personal interest.

[Steorra]

1 minute ago, Insaginary said:

People see what they want to see, I suppose. 

Samely, people being blind to what they dislike to see.

[Steorra]

5 minutes ago, Insaginary said:

I am glad we can reach a similar conclusion. 

I agree.

If you found there's no other valid forum of your interest game but only 4chan, you have no choice. I do hate what you mentioned here of those forums like 4chan. 

But sometimes here, it's more like ignoring the rational voices intentionally, laterly when they cannot bear anymore, we go to blame them why they're mad. It's just reaction abuse.

[Theukon-dos]

6 hours ago, Mike23Ua said:

Lets compare DST to the likes of Hardcore Mode on Minecraft, if you pick Hardcore… you can not sleep on a bed to by pass nightfall,

Hardcore Mode doesn't prevent you from sleeping through the night. The only changes are that you're locked to hard difficulty, can't respawn, and can't toggle options that make things easier.

 

This is like, the third time I've seen you compare DST to other games while presenting you with explicitly false information about said games. And I'm really starting to wonder what version of said games you're playing.

[WilsonHiggs]

People saying that the game shouldn't be balanced, because for some reason there are only taking into account that has sand box elements, are also saying that a 2000 damage weapon made of 1 grass wouldnt be bad? Or a character with natural 90%armor for free?

Games needs balance. Videogames mechanics, items, enemies, allies and whatever you think about are designed with a balance in mind.

Makes no sense to design a weapon if it wont be used because is too weak, too expensive, etc. The same way, makes no sense to develop a weapon if is too strong, cheap and makes the player ignore other weapons or mechanics

What would be the point of a company paying a developer and an artist to create a boss with different phases, atacks and behavior if can be killed by the player without experiencing anything of that?

What is even the point of playing a videogame if you arent doing anything for beating it?

Games can have different balances like having different difficulty settings, settings to adjust mechanics or having different characters with different levels of power or skill needed to control them.

Having sandbox elements doesnt convert dst into a creative mod building game or a walking simulator or anything that was depeloped for that kind of gameplay.

You dont need to develop a competitive game to know that the mechanics that helps the player needs a certain value of balance versus the mechanics that are made to make the player lose

[Steorra]

6 minutes ago, WilsonHiggs said:

Or a character with natural 90%armor for free?

Woodie: leave me alone

[DVGMedia]

41 minutes ago, WilsonHiggs said:

What is even the point of playing a videogame if you arent doing anything for beating it?

Thing is there are a lot of games that exist that way  DST Is a very social game and if you focus the content instead of  megabasing or rushing it would  take about 2 years for an experienced player to clear it Some who rush get through the games content in about a year. Why do you think ruins rushing is done? It's done cause it's an early challenge. I like to play the game as a resource gatherer so I play Wendy cause she is a nonstandard resource character focusing more on mob drops. I can enjoy the game by purely farming 20 spider nests with Abby every 8 minutes.

This is why the concept of balance is important to identify because for which crowd is the balance for?  Some have given some interesting points about the ease to do objectives.  

 

To some certain characters are stronger because they can do certain objectives faster. But that doesn't really make them fun characters for the majority of players. And I think balance should be focused on fun which is also subjective. 

Especially with the fact that there are arbitrary guidelines that do manage the development of the game. 

7 hours ago, Walrusst said:

Certain goalpost features (exceptional characteristics that draw awe) should be treated with respect and the work to do better than these feats should be notable indeed.

• Teleports more convinient than winowna's or wortox's I would consider alarming if they were cheap.
• Outdamaging wolfgang without warly levels of cost is eyebrow raising.
• Being tougher then wigfrids an eyebrow raiser without a resource ccost.
• All terrain movement thats superior to the goose.
• Gathering faster than wurt/maxwell.
• Shipping freight faster than walter.
• THIS ISN'T DON'T MAKE NEW GOALPOSTS, but to give it a minutes thought before you do.
• Normal items which approach these goalposts are fine as well so long as the process of getting them and using them is interesting. (Like the eye shield letting more people emulate a small fraction of wigfrids tankyness when you split the damage you are absorbing between three armor sources to make your marble suit last almost forever.)

 

I felt like this post was interesting however a lot of characters have stepped on each other  while others were not given this treatment. And it was justified in the act of balance. Which is why I wanted to bring up this  topic of balance 

[Cheggf]

1 hour ago, WilsonHiggs said:

People saying that the game shouldn't be balanced, because for some reason there are only taking into account that has sand box elements, are also saying that a 2000 damage weapon made of 1 grass wouldnt be bad? Or a character with natural 90%armor for free?

Games needs balance. Videogames mechanics, items, enemies, allies and whatever you think about are designed with a balance in mind.

Makes no sense to design a weapon if it wont be used because is too weak, too expensive, etc. The same way, makes no sense to develop a weapon if is too strong, cheap and makes the player ignore other weapons or mechanics

What would be the point of a company paying a developer and an artist to create a boss with different phases, atacks and behavior if can be killed by the player without experiencing anything of that?

What is even the point of playing a videogame if you arent doing anything for beating it?

Game can have different balances like having different difficulty settings, settings to adjust mechanics or having different characters with different levels of power or skill needed to control them.

Having sandbox elements doesnt convert dst into a creative mod building game or a walking simulator or anything that was depeloped for that kind of gameplay.

You dont need to develop a competitive game to know that the mechanics that helps the player needs a certain value of balance versus the mechanics that are made to make the player lose

"Balance doesn't matter" MFs when you tell them that buffing characters is balancing the game

[Frosty_Mentos]

The game's balance goes in many ways in all the little quirks and perks we get as well as the items we use. DST's balance is fundamentally different in comparison because of different amount of content in the game in comparison and the type of content it has, while more polished there's been many things that made the game generally either easier or less tedious to play.

As a sandbox game, if you make the game less tedious and more ways to get around issues - it becomes easier. Giving people solutions to problems is what causes the "loss of balance" as some would say rather being just that there's more quality of life, things and goals to work towards to make it so which is good content imo.

Skilltrees are not balanced in the sense that some things are just given for free far too fast than the rest of the game can keep up with. Though argument could be said same for when Wolfgang goes into the world, or you and friends go as multiple of them and or wigfrids, everything just melts to you in general. Now everyone feels more on Wolfgang's level at some specific points or resource acquisitions, but the path towards those things isn't exactly balanced imo, as either you have consistent damage all through out the game or you literally build a nuclear arsenal like Winona.

I won't say that skilltrees aren't fun because they feel generally very fun. I have no complaints apart me wanting more world generation scenarios with different loot tables or season lengths depending on the world.