Problems & Solutions, by yours truly.

[Snowrose]

I would not like to roll back permasaves, i like them, but if they did, keep permasaves on minor stuff you can just buy in shops like jars, and easy to get ammo.
maybe herbs and food as well, for quality of life.
it looks like more people like perma saves anyhow so um good.

I do like the idea of matching dwarf to goblin if we were to want to avoid nerfing them (for now). or just keeping them a tad superior in phys stats. keep people happy, though I do not think it will logically happen,

as far as myself honestly even if elves were humans with pointed ears id probably stay an elf. any balancing you do to elves is likely gonna be a str and or con buff.

i like the idea of magy elves and bow elves a lot the one reason i was boo to +wis - dis is i felt bad for magy elves. but if we had a choice +dex - dis for us timid tree huggers or +wis -con for the wize elven sages that would be more choices are typically a good thing. but i understand that could be tough to do. (high elves/eladrian vs wood elves)

Though i do understand the wizard will do what the wizards will do, ill live and thrive with whatever happens. I'm not gonna leave anytime soon.

[Cherek]

TripleM/Dan/Nils/Etc: Since I started mentioning in public that I wanted to change race balance, I have probably been sent at least 50, probably more, different solutions by players. I saved all the ones I thought was interesting in a file, and as I said in my original post (that I later locked), I went through all ideas that had been sent by mortals wizards, and of course my own ideas. I discussed some of the ones I liked best with Arman, and then we narrowed things down further. We have discussed many of them in detail and I eventually decided on four main ideas. Nils idea was not one of them.

I am not saying it's necessarily a bad idea, but there are MANY different ways we could do this, but we have to make a selection at some point. We can't say yes to every idea every player proposes. As I said before, Nils and I have discussed his dwarf counter idea before, but we decided to go in another direction. Simple as that. That said, Nils has fleshed out/adjusted his idea a bit, and since he always is very honest with me, I'll be honest too. I don't think it's a very good idea this time either. The core issues remain, and it just became more complicted. Here are some issues:

- Countering goblins with an equally strong dwarf fighter will just give us two races that are "overpowered". Sure, it'll be better balance between good and evil characters, but it means that if you want to play a fighter you are still "locked" to two races, which is exactly what we are trying to change. Yes, I get there will be "physical elves" and "physical humans", but if I understand Nils idea right, the goblins and dwarves should remains superior fighters, and then what's the point of the physical elves and humans, if they are still worse? Same with gnomes and hobbits.

- Giving humans and elves different "classes" creates a completely new system for Genesis. It's a bit unclear exactly how this will work from Nils idea, but I assume you get to select from three different elves and human classes when creating a character / at death? Basically this creates three additional races that need to be balanced with different modifiers, making it even harder to balance all 10(!) races against each other. I also find it rather confusing if two of our races come with three different classes, but the others four races does not. I think it's a confusing and very unclear game design. I'd understand if it all races had classes, and we had a class system (an idea that has also been discussed in detail), but adding classes to just two races feels odd to me.

- Nils solution for hobbits is to just leave them as they are. The argument as I understand it is that because Kvator happens to be on the top 10 list, which is some sort of proof that hobbits do not need to be changed? This isn't true at all. Hobbits are weak fighters and weak casters because their high dex does not make up for their drawbacks at all. Just because Kvator likes playing a kender and is good at grinding doesn't mean hobbits are a good race. Cassius could play a gnome gladiator and still be top 5. Is that proof that gnomes are good fighters?

The Secrety Society guild has enjoyed a boost after the white hits change, as their weak special is less of a drawback, which was exactly what we hoped for with that change. Weaker non-DPS guilds getting a boost. TBut the main boost is because evade became (too) important, which brought the guild from being a very weak guild to a pretty good tank guild. Not sure how it is now after the recent changes. However, Kvator the goblin FK probably would be bigger and higher on the top list had he not loved being a kender so much that he is accepting the drawbacks of the race, and many many years of playing in a very weak guild as well. Some people do decide to play a race/guild despite it being a weaker option, but I would like all races to be roughly equally strong options so more people feel they can play the race they want. Leaving hobbits as they are does not fix this, and nor does creating another hobbit occupational guild, which is a massive undertaking of it's own, and not really a realistic idea to suggest as a solution to race stat balance issues I think.

- Nils solution for gnomes is to make them become the best mentals race. Okay, sure. We can do that. However, the goal we have with races is to _not_ create caster/fighter races, and instead make all races possible choices regardless if you want to play a caster or fighter. We can of course argue about if this is a good idea or not, but that is the goal we have set, so therefore this solution for gnomes does not align with our goals. Also, in today's genesis, I really doubt that a race with very weak physicals and high mentals actually is a good choice for a caster? You need more than high mentals to be a successful caster, unless you always have a tank in front of you (which is pretty unrealistic for most). So, creating a mentals-only race does't feel like it'll really work or be a very appealing choice. I mean gnomes are that today, but I am not sure we have _any_ gnomes in EC or MM (the only caster guilds who allow gnomes I think?).

There, now I have given a very detailed answer to why I do not think this idea will work. That said, there are some interesting stuff in there, but overall I think there are just too many moving parts and too many things that I don't think will work. I know I sound a bit dismissive, but like I said, Nils has been trying to convince me of his race balance idea many times before, and I have explained why I don't like it before. Nils decided to post it here, and now I have given a reply in public as well. I do welcome people presenting their ideas, but we can't make every idea that is presented to us, and it's a no for this idea.

[nils]

Just to be very clear, I have no skin in the game regarding elves, hobbits or gnomes. Take the suggestion "in spirit" rather than as a fully detailed suggestion.

To continue on the chess-analogy, instead of looking at the colors, look at Genesis as the chessboard and the races as pieces. We've been playing chess for 30 years, making races equal moves us away from chess and towards checkers (ie a different game).

[Cherek]

Just to be very clear, I have no skin in the game regarding elves, hobbits or gnomes. Take the suggestion "in spirit" rather than as a fully detailed suggestion.

To continue on the chess-analogy, instead of looking at the colors, look at Genesis as the chessboard and the races as pieces. We've been playing chess for 30 years, making races equal moves us away from chess and towards checkers (ie a different game).

“In spirit”? Pff, that’s not how this works. You get judged based on the exact idea you pitched, exactly as you wrote it. Those are the rules that clearly apply when I present ideas, and I think we should be playing with the same set of rules here

[Quantum]

I think Nils is on to something when he says that it will be hard for some players to take more "nerfs" or negative changes.

I think we need something positive. Instead of nerfing goblins, how about boosting everyone else? Count out how many % goblins are ahead and give everyone more. Which means humans end up +20 or 30% in all stats? I didn't do the math.

It is crystal clear that Cherek wants all races to be equal, or close. That he wants all races to have all options. And I am not trying to take that away from him. He is 100% allowed to have his opinion and policy for the game.

But, I also think it is equally clear that a large/small? portion of the Genesis player base, based on input on forum threads, want races to be different. That one or two races are better fighters. That one or two are better mages. Etc.

Please give us a positive experience. It may not make us even, but it will balance us.

[zelie]

I think Nils is on to something when he says that it will be hard for some players to take more "nerfs" or negative changes.

I think we need something positive. Instead of nerfing goblins, how about boosting everyone else? Count out how many % goblins are ahead and give everyone more. Which means humans end up +20 or 30% in all stats? I didn't do the math.

It is crystal clear that Cherek wants all races to be equal, or close. That he wants all races to have all options. And I am not trying to take that away from him. He is 100% allowed to have his opinion and policy for the game.

But, I also think it is equally clear that a large/small? portion of the Genesis player base, based on input on forum threads, want races to be different. That one or two races are better fighters. That one or two are better mages. Etc.

Please give us a positive experience. It may not make us even, but it will balance us.

First, I admire Cherek for being so up-front about things, and taking time to post point-by-point responses to players' concerns and suggestions. This is generous of him.

Second, unless I'm mistaken, no race is getting "nerfed." Haven't wizards been explicit about this, that everyone will be experiencing a buff of some kind?

Third, Quantum, you seem to be conflating "difference" or "sameness" with having stats balanced or not. You say a lot of players "want races to be different." But no one is proposing that they should be the "same." The proposed changes seek to rectify long-standing imbalances with respect to stats, not to make all races "the same." Maybe, if stats are all that you care about, I guess you could argue that "difference" is equivalent to imbalanced stats. I don't know how many players see it that way, but certainly not all.

Thanks for reading.

[Quantum]

Second, unless I'm mistaken, no race is getting "nerfed." Haven't wizards been explicit about this, that everyone will be experiencing a buff of some kind?

Clearly you have misunderstood something. Please go read up on all the forum posts. This is your first post so I'm not sure if you're trolling or just haven't read it all. Whatever the case, I'm not biting.

[Draugor]

I mean, I dont even play anymore, forum is funny tho, but why not just let people pick the statset they want?

Say I make a gnome, I choose gobbo statset I am now a goblin... but shorter, with a bigger nose and not as green. Wont be a nerf to anyone and it will make all races viable depending on what you wanna play. Joining more for a magic guild as a human go elf stats cause gnomes wisdom is just... bleh. So in short, as much freedom as possible for as many people as possible

[zelie]

Second, unless I'm mistaken, no race is getting "nerfed." Haven't wizards been explicit about this, that everyone will be experiencing a buff of some kind?

Clearly you have misunderstood something. Please go read up on all the forum posts. This is your first post so I'm not sure if you're trolling or just haven't read it all. Whatever the case, I'm not biting.

I do not see how you could interpret my post as "trolling." Here is how Urban Dictionary defines that term: "Trolling – (verb), as it relates to internet, is the deliberate act, (by a Troll – noun or adjective), of making random unsolicited and/or controversial comments on various internet forums with the intent to provoke an emotional knee jerk reaction from unsuspecting readers to engage in a fight or argument." What I wrote is not controversial, nor is it intended to provoke emotional knee jerk reactions. What I wrote is accurate given what the wizards have publicly stated here.

On page 2 of the "Racial Stats Rebalance" thread, Cherek wrote this: "if we do not boost humans, and use their current modifiers as baseline, we'd be "balancing down", meaning many players would end up slightly _smaller_ with the new system, and we figured nobody would like that." Here you can clearly see that the intent is not to nerf anyone.

On page 5 of the same thread, Ckrik wrote, "All races will get buffs vs NPCs to around the same magnitude. The non-human races just have slightly different buff distributions to preserve some thematic continuity." Here you can see that the proposed changes will result in all races getting some kind of buff.

So your response to me is perplexing. I'm not trying to get you to "bite" on anything. I am not trying to provoke a fight. I am responding rationally and clearly to what you wrote. It is true that this is only my second post, but your assumption that I have not read others' recent posts is inaccurate.

[Quantum]

If you wish to discuss my post then please point out individual statements.

The entire discussion was about lowering all non-human racial stats to human levels. That constitutes a nerf to all non-human races. The only race that is being buffed is humans.